|
---|
Category:CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS
MONTHYEARML20217D5211999-09-30030 September 1999 Informs That Remediating 3D Monicore Sys at Pbaps,Units 2 & 3 & 3D Monicore/Plant Monitoring Sys at Lgs,Unit 2 Has Been Completed Ahead of Schedule ML20216J3981999-09-29029 September 1999 Submits Comments for Lgs,Unit 1 & Pbaps,Units 2 & 3 Rvid,Rev 2,based on Review as Requested in GL 92-01,rev 1,suppl 1, Reactor Vessel Structural Integrity ML20212J6561999-09-29029 September 1999 Informs of Completion of mid-cycle PPR of Limerick Generating Station on 990913.Identified No Areas in Which Licensee Performance Warranted Addl Insp Beyond Core Insp Program.Historical Listing of Plant Issues Encl ML20212H6401999-09-24024 September 1999 Forwards Revised Epips,Including Rev 11 to ERP-101 & Rev 18 to ERP-800.Copy of Computer Generated Rept Index Identifying Latest Revs of LGS Erps,Encl ML20212E7941999-09-22022 September 1999 Requests Authorization for Listed Licensed Operators to Temporarily Suspend Participation in Licensed Operator Requalification Program at LGS ML20212E8081999-09-22022 September 1999 Provides Notification That Listed Operators Have Been Permanently Reassigned to Duties That Do Not Require Maintaining Licensed Operator Status,Per 10CFR50.74 ML20212F5481999-09-20020 September 1999 Forwards Response to NRC Administrative Ltr 99-03, Preparation & Scheduling of Operator Licensing, for Pbaps,Units 2 & 3 & Lgs,Units 1 & 2 ML20212F8991999-09-17017 September 1999 Provides Written Confirmation That Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barrier Corrective Actions at Lgs,Units 1 & 2 Have Been Completed 05000353/LER-1999-010, Forwards LER 99-010-00,re Manual Actuation of Esf.Main CR Ventilation Sys Was Placed in Chlorine Isolation Mode Due to Rept of Faint Odor of Chlorine in Unit 2 Reactor Encl1999-09-16016 September 1999 Forwards LER 99-010-00,re Manual Actuation of Esf.Main CR Ventilation Sys Was Placed in Chlorine Isolation Mode Due to Rept of Faint Odor of Chlorine in Unit 2 Reactor Encl ML20216F7821999-09-16016 September 1999 Forwards Insp Repts 50-352/99-05 & 50-353/99-05 on 990713-0816.One Violation Noted & Being Treated as NCV, Consistent with App C of Enforcement Policy.Violation Re Inoperability of Automatic Depression Sys During Maint ML20212A8751999-09-13013 September 1999 Forwards Safety Evaluation of First & Second 10-year Interval Inservice Insp Plan Request for Relief ML20211N5061999-09-0909 September 1999 Forwards TSs Bases Pages B 3/4 10-2 & B 3/4 2-4 for LGS, Units 1 & 2,being Issued to Assure Distribution of Revised Bases Pages to All Holders of TSs ML20212A0091999-09-0909 September 1999 Provides Notification That Licenses SOP-11172 & SOP-11321, for SO Muntzenberger & Rh Wright,Respectively,Are No Longer Necessary as Result of Permanent Reassignment ML20211P8571999-09-0808 September 1999 Forwards Reactor Operator Retake Exams 50-352/99-303OL & 50-353/99-303OL Conducted on 990812 ML20211P3891999-09-0303 September 1999 Informs That During 990902 Telcon Between J Williams & B Tracy,Arrangements Were Made for NRC to Inspect Licensed Operator Requalification Program at Plant.Insp Planned for Wk of 991018 05000352/LER-1999-009, Forwards LER 99-009-00,providing 30-day Written follow-up Rept Re Performance of Maint That Affected Safeguard Sys for Which Compensatory Measures Had Not Been Employed1999-09-0101 September 1999 Forwards LER 99-009-00,providing 30-day Written follow-up Rept Re Performance of Maint That Affected Safeguard Sys for Which Compensatory Measures Had Not Been Employed ML20211H2571999-08-26026 August 1999 Informs of Individual Exam Result on Initial Retake Exam on 990812.One Individual Was Administered Exam & Passed ML20211E9191999-08-24024 August 1999 Forwards fitness-for-duty Program Performance Data for Jan-June 1999 for PBAPS & LGS IAW 10CFR26.71(d).Data Includes Listed Info ML20211E9731999-08-23023 August 1999 Forwards LGS Unit 2 Summary Rept for 970228 to 990525 Periodic ISI Rept Number 5, Per TS SRs 4.0.5 & 10CFR50.55a(g) ML20211D6761999-08-20020 August 1999 Forwards non-proprietary Revised Emergency Response Procedures (Erps),Including Rev 29 to ERP-110, Emergency Notification & Rev 17 to ERP-800, Maint Team & Proprietary App ERP-110-1.App Withheld Per 10CFR2.790(a)(6) ML20210T4271999-08-13013 August 1999 Informs That NRC Revised Info in Rvid & Releasing Rvid Version 2 as Result of Review of 980830 Responses to GL 92-01 Rev 1,GL 92-01 Rev 1 Suppl 1 & Suppl Rai.Tacs MA1197 & MA1198 Closed ML20210U2211999-08-10010 August 1999 Forwards Insp Repts 50-352/99-04 & 50-353/99-04 on 990525-0712.One Violation Occurred & Being Treated as NCV, Consistent with App C of Enforcement Policy.Violation Re Late Performance of off-gas Grab Sample Surveillance 05000353/LER-1999-005, Forwards LER 99-005-00,re Actuation of Primary Containment & Reactor Vessel Isolation Control Sys,Esf.Fuse Failed Due to Mechanical Failure of Cold Solder Joint1999-08-10010 August 1999 Forwards LER 99-005-00,re Actuation of Primary Containment & Reactor Vessel Isolation Control Sys,Esf.Fuse Failed Due to Mechanical Failure of Cold Solder Joint ML20211B7881999-08-10010 August 1999 Transmits Summary of Two Meetings with Risk-Informed TS Task Force in Rockville,Md on 990514 & 0714 ML20210M7571999-08-0404 August 1999 Forwards Response to Requesting Addl Info Re Status of Decommissioning Funding for Lgs,Pbaps & Sngs. Attachment Provides Restatement of Questions Followed by Response ML20210P4191999-08-0404 August 1999 Forwards Initial Exam Repts 50-352/99-302 & 50-353/99-302 on 990702-04 (Administration) & 990715-22 (Grading).Six of Limited SRO Applicants Passed All Portion of Exam NUREG-1092, Informs J Armstrong of Individual Exam Results for Applicants on Initial Exam Conducted on 990702 & 990712-14 at Facility.All Six Individuals Who Were Administered Exam, Passed Exam.Without Encls1999-08-0303 August 1999 Informs J Armstrong of Individual Exam Results for Applicants on Initial Exam Conducted on 990702 & 990712-14 at Facility.All Six Individuals Who Were Administered Exam, Passed Exam.Without Encls ML20210L2011999-07-28028 July 1999 Forwards Final Personal Qualification Statement (NRC Form 398) for Reactor Operator License Candidate LB Mchugh ML20211F2641999-07-27027 July 1999 Forwards Three Copies of Rev 12 to LGS Physical Security Plan, Rev 4 to LGS Training & Qualification Plan & Rev 2 to LGS Safeguards Contingency Plan. Without Encls 05000352/LER-1999-008, Forwards LER 99-008-00 Re 990623 Failure of Plant HPCI Sys to Start Due to Failure of HPCI Turbine,Hydraulic Actuator1999-07-23023 July 1999 Forwards LER 99-008-00 Re 990623 Failure of Plant HPCI Sys to Start Due to Failure of HPCI Turbine,Hydraulic Actuator 05000353/LER-1999-004, Forwards LER 99-004-00 Re 990701 Discovery of Pressure Setpoint Drift of Thirteen Mss SRV Due to Corrosion Induced Bonding within SRVs1999-07-23023 July 1999 Forwards LER 99-004-00 Re 990701 Discovery of Pressure Setpoint Drift of Thirteen Mss SRV Due to Corrosion Induced Bonding within SRVs ML20210E6211999-07-22022 July 1999 Submits Rev to non-limiting Licensing Basis LOCA Peak Clad Temps (Pcts) for Limerick Generating Station (Lgs),Units 1 & 2 & Pbaps,Units 2 & 3 ML20216D3081999-07-19019 July 1999 Requests Renewal of OLs for Listed Individuals,Iaw 10CFR55.57.NRC Forms 398 & 396,encl for Applicants.Without Encl ML20216D8041999-07-19019 July 1999 Submits Summary of Final PECO Nuclear Actions Taken to Resolve Scram Solenoid Pilot Valve Issues Identified in Info Notice 96-007 05000352/LER-1999-006, Forwards LER 99-006-00 Re 990614 Discovery That Grab Sample of Plant Offgas Sys Was Not Obtained within Time Limit Required by TS 3.3.7.12,Action 110 Due to Personnel Error1999-07-12012 July 1999 Forwards LER 99-006-00 Re 990614 Discovery That Grab Sample of Plant Offgas Sys Was Not Obtained within Time Limit Required by TS 3.3.7.12,Action 110 Due to Personnel Error ML20209F6341999-07-0909 July 1999 Submits Supplemental Response to GL 94-03, Intergranular Stress Corrosion Cracking of Core Shrouds in Bwrs, for Unit 2.Rev 0 to 1H61R & GE-NE-B13-02010-33NP Repts & Revised Pages to Summary Rept Previously Submitted,Encl ML20209G9121999-07-0909 July 1999 Informs That Ja Hutton Has Been Appointed Director,Licensing for PECO Nuclear,Effective 990715.Previous Correspondence Addressed to Gd Edwards Should Now Be Sent to Ja Hutton ML20209C9041999-07-0808 July 1999 Forwards Monthly Operating Repts for June 1999 for Limerick Generating Station,Units 1 & 2 & Revised Monthly Repts for May 1999 ML20210B4441999-07-0808 July 1999 Forwards Preliminary NRC Form 398 & NRC Form 396 for Reactor Operator for License Candidate LB Mchugh.Candidate Failed Category B Portion of Operating Exam Given at LGS During Week of 990315.Tentative re-exam Has Been Scheduled 990812 05000353/LER-1999-003, Forwards LER 99-003-00,re Bypass of RW Cleanup Leak Detection Sys Isolation Function on Three Separate Occasions.Bypass of Safety Function Was Caused by Inadequate Review & Approval of Change to Procedure1999-07-0707 July 1999 Forwards LER 99-003-00,re Bypass of RW Cleanup Leak Detection Sys Isolation Function on Three Separate Occasions.Bypass of Safety Function Was Caused by Inadequate Review & Approval of Change to Procedure ML20209D8821999-07-0707 July 1999 Submits Estimate of Number of Licensing Actions Expected to Be Submitted in Years 2000 & 2001,as Requested by Administrative Ltr 99-02.Renewal Applications for PBAPS, Units 2 & 3,will Be Submitted in Second Half of 2001 ML20209D2671999-07-0202 July 1999 Responds to NRC 990322 & 0420 RAI Re GL 96-05, Periodic Verification of Design-Basis Capability of Safety-Related Motor-Operated Valves ML20196J6301999-07-0101 July 1999 Requests Addl Info Re Status of Decommissioning Funding for Limerick Generating Station,Units 1 & 2,Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station,Units 1,2 & 3 & Salem Nuclear Generating Station,Units 1 & 2 05000352/LER-1999-004, Forwards LER 99-004-00,re Inoperability of Automatic Depressurization Sys Portion of Eccs.Condition Resulted from Incomplete Impact Review of Isolating Portion of ADS Nitrogen Backup Supply on Operability of ECCS Sys1999-07-0101 July 1999 Forwards LER 99-004-00,re Inoperability of Automatic Depressurization Sys Portion of Eccs.Condition Resulted from Incomplete Impact Review of Isolating Portion of ADS Nitrogen Backup Supply on Operability of ECCS Sys ML20209B7001999-06-30030 June 1999 Responds to GL 98-01,Suppl 1, Y2K Readiness of Computer Sys at Nuclear Power Plants ML20212J5401999-06-28028 June 1999 Discusses Completion of Licensing Action for NRC Bulletin 96-003, Potential Plugging of ECC Suction Strainers by Debris in Bwrs. Bulletin Closed for Unit 2 by NRC ML20207H8271999-06-24024 June 1999 Informs NRC That Util Has Completed Core Shroud Insps for LGS Unit 2.Proprietary Rept GE-NE-B13-02010-33P & non-proprietary Rev 0 to 1H61R,encl.Proprietary Rept Withheld,Per 10CFR2.790(a)(4) ML20196G7041999-06-24024 June 1999 Forwards Insp Repts 50-352/99-03 & 50-353/99-03 on 990413- 0524.No Violations Noted.Nrc Concluded That Licensee Staff Continued to Operate Both Units Safely ML20196A5641999-06-15015 June 1999 Provides Info Re Util Use of Four Previously Irradiated LGS, Unit 1,GE11 Assemblies in Unit 2 Cycle 6.Encl 990518 GE Ltr Provides Objective of Lead Use Assemblies Program & Outlines Kinds of Measurements That Will Be Made on Assemblies ML20195J6831999-06-11011 June 1999 Provides Proprietary Objectives for Lgs,Units 1 & 2,1999 Emergency Preparedness Exercise Scheduled to Be Conducted on 990914.Licensee Identifies Which Individuals Should Receive Copies of Info.Proprietary Info Withheld 1999-09-09
[Table view] Category:INCOMING CORRESPONDENCE
MONTHYEARML20217D5211999-09-30030 September 1999 Informs That Remediating 3D Monicore Sys at Pbaps,Units 2 & 3 & 3D Monicore/Plant Monitoring Sys at Lgs,Unit 2 Has Been Completed Ahead of Schedule ML20216J3981999-09-29029 September 1999 Submits Comments for Lgs,Unit 1 & Pbaps,Units 2 & 3 Rvid,Rev 2,based on Review as Requested in GL 92-01,rev 1,suppl 1, Reactor Vessel Structural Integrity ML20212H6401999-09-24024 September 1999 Forwards Revised Epips,Including Rev 11 to ERP-101 & Rev 18 to ERP-800.Copy of Computer Generated Rept Index Identifying Latest Revs of LGS Erps,Encl ML20212E7941999-09-22022 September 1999 Requests Authorization for Listed Licensed Operators to Temporarily Suspend Participation in Licensed Operator Requalification Program at LGS ML20212E8081999-09-22022 September 1999 Provides Notification That Listed Operators Have Been Permanently Reassigned to Duties That Do Not Require Maintaining Licensed Operator Status,Per 10CFR50.74 ML20212F5481999-09-20020 September 1999 Forwards Response to NRC Administrative Ltr 99-03, Preparation & Scheduling of Operator Licensing, for Pbaps,Units 2 & 3 & Lgs,Units 1 & 2 ML20212F8991999-09-17017 September 1999 Provides Written Confirmation That Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barrier Corrective Actions at Lgs,Units 1 & 2 Have Been Completed 05000353/LER-1999-010, Forwards LER 99-010-00,re Manual Actuation of Esf.Main CR Ventilation Sys Was Placed in Chlorine Isolation Mode Due to Rept of Faint Odor of Chlorine in Unit 2 Reactor Encl1999-09-16016 September 1999 Forwards LER 99-010-00,re Manual Actuation of Esf.Main CR Ventilation Sys Was Placed in Chlorine Isolation Mode Due to Rept of Faint Odor of Chlorine in Unit 2 Reactor Encl ML20212A0091999-09-0909 September 1999 Provides Notification That Licenses SOP-11172 & SOP-11321, for SO Muntzenberger & Rh Wright,Respectively,Are No Longer Necessary as Result of Permanent Reassignment 05000352/LER-1999-009, Forwards LER 99-009-00,providing 30-day Written follow-up Rept Re Performance of Maint That Affected Safeguard Sys for Which Compensatory Measures Had Not Been Employed1999-09-0101 September 1999 Forwards LER 99-009-00,providing 30-day Written follow-up Rept Re Performance of Maint That Affected Safeguard Sys for Which Compensatory Measures Had Not Been Employed ML20211E9191999-08-24024 August 1999 Forwards fitness-for-duty Program Performance Data for Jan-June 1999 for PBAPS & LGS IAW 10CFR26.71(d).Data Includes Listed Info ML20211E9731999-08-23023 August 1999 Forwards LGS Unit 2 Summary Rept for 970228 to 990525 Periodic ISI Rept Number 5, Per TS SRs 4.0.5 & 10CFR50.55a(g) ML20211D6761999-08-20020 August 1999 Forwards non-proprietary Revised Emergency Response Procedures (Erps),Including Rev 29 to ERP-110, Emergency Notification & Rev 17 to ERP-800, Maint Team & Proprietary App ERP-110-1.App Withheld Per 10CFR2.790(a)(6) 05000353/LER-1999-005, Forwards LER 99-005-00,re Actuation of Primary Containment & Reactor Vessel Isolation Control Sys,Esf.Fuse Failed Due to Mechanical Failure of Cold Solder Joint1999-08-10010 August 1999 Forwards LER 99-005-00,re Actuation of Primary Containment & Reactor Vessel Isolation Control Sys,Esf.Fuse Failed Due to Mechanical Failure of Cold Solder Joint ML20210M7571999-08-0404 August 1999 Forwards Response to Requesting Addl Info Re Status of Decommissioning Funding for Lgs,Pbaps & Sngs. Attachment Provides Restatement of Questions Followed by Response ML20210L2011999-07-28028 July 1999 Forwards Final Personal Qualification Statement (NRC Form 398) for Reactor Operator License Candidate LB Mchugh ML20211F2641999-07-27027 July 1999 Forwards Three Copies of Rev 12 to LGS Physical Security Plan, Rev 4 to LGS Training & Qualification Plan & Rev 2 to LGS Safeguards Contingency Plan. Without Encls 05000352/LER-1999-008, Forwards LER 99-008-00 Re 990623 Failure of Plant HPCI Sys to Start Due to Failure of HPCI Turbine,Hydraulic Actuator1999-07-23023 July 1999 Forwards LER 99-008-00 Re 990623 Failure of Plant HPCI Sys to Start Due to Failure of HPCI Turbine,Hydraulic Actuator 05000353/LER-1999-004, Forwards LER 99-004-00 Re 990701 Discovery of Pressure Setpoint Drift of Thirteen Mss SRV Due to Corrosion Induced Bonding within SRVs1999-07-23023 July 1999 Forwards LER 99-004-00 Re 990701 Discovery of Pressure Setpoint Drift of Thirteen Mss SRV Due to Corrosion Induced Bonding within SRVs ML20210E6211999-07-22022 July 1999 Submits Rev to non-limiting Licensing Basis LOCA Peak Clad Temps (Pcts) for Limerick Generating Station (Lgs),Units 1 & 2 & Pbaps,Units 2 & 3 ML20216D3081999-07-19019 July 1999 Requests Renewal of OLs for Listed Individuals,Iaw 10CFR55.57.NRC Forms 398 & 396,encl for Applicants.Without Encl ML20216D8041999-07-19019 July 1999 Submits Summary of Final PECO Nuclear Actions Taken to Resolve Scram Solenoid Pilot Valve Issues Identified in Info Notice 96-007 05000352/LER-1999-006, Forwards LER 99-006-00 Re 990614 Discovery That Grab Sample of Plant Offgas Sys Was Not Obtained within Time Limit Required by TS 3.3.7.12,Action 110 Due to Personnel Error1999-07-12012 July 1999 Forwards LER 99-006-00 Re 990614 Discovery That Grab Sample of Plant Offgas Sys Was Not Obtained within Time Limit Required by TS 3.3.7.12,Action 110 Due to Personnel Error ML20209F6341999-07-0909 July 1999 Submits Supplemental Response to GL 94-03, Intergranular Stress Corrosion Cracking of Core Shrouds in Bwrs, for Unit 2.Rev 0 to 1H61R & GE-NE-B13-02010-33NP Repts & Revised Pages to Summary Rept Previously Submitted,Encl ML20209G9121999-07-0909 July 1999 Informs That Ja Hutton Has Been Appointed Director,Licensing for PECO Nuclear,Effective 990715.Previous Correspondence Addressed to Gd Edwards Should Now Be Sent to Ja Hutton ML20210B4441999-07-0808 July 1999 Forwards Preliminary NRC Form 398 & NRC Form 396 for Reactor Operator for License Candidate LB Mchugh.Candidate Failed Category B Portion of Operating Exam Given at LGS During Week of 990315.Tentative re-exam Has Been Scheduled 990812 ML20209C9041999-07-0808 July 1999 Forwards Monthly Operating Repts for June 1999 for Limerick Generating Station,Units 1 & 2 & Revised Monthly Repts for May 1999 05000353/LER-1999-003, Forwards LER 99-003-00,re Bypass of RW Cleanup Leak Detection Sys Isolation Function on Three Separate Occasions.Bypass of Safety Function Was Caused by Inadequate Review & Approval of Change to Procedure1999-07-0707 July 1999 Forwards LER 99-003-00,re Bypass of RW Cleanup Leak Detection Sys Isolation Function on Three Separate Occasions.Bypass of Safety Function Was Caused by Inadequate Review & Approval of Change to Procedure ML20209D8821999-07-0707 July 1999 Submits Estimate of Number of Licensing Actions Expected to Be Submitted in Years 2000 & 2001,as Requested by Administrative Ltr 99-02.Renewal Applications for PBAPS, Units 2 & 3,will Be Submitted in Second Half of 2001 ML20209D2671999-07-0202 July 1999 Responds to NRC 990322 & 0420 RAI Re GL 96-05, Periodic Verification of Design-Basis Capability of Safety-Related Motor-Operated Valves 05000352/LER-1999-004, Forwards LER 99-004-00,re Inoperability of Automatic Depressurization Sys Portion of Eccs.Condition Resulted from Incomplete Impact Review of Isolating Portion of ADS Nitrogen Backup Supply on Operability of ECCS Sys1999-07-0101 July 1999 Forwards LER 99-004-00,re Inoperability of Automatic Depressurization Sys Portion of Eccs.Condition Resulted from Incomplete Impact Review of Isolating Portion of ADS Nitrogen Backup Supply on Operability of ECCS Sys ML20209B7001999-06-30030 June 1999 Responds to GL 98-01,Suppl 1, Y2K Readiness of Computer Sys at Nuclear Power Plants ML20207H8271999-06-24024 June 1999 Informs NRC That Util Has Completed Core Shroud Insps for LGS Unit 2.Proprietary Rept GE-NE-B13-02010-33P & non-proprietary Rev 0 to 1H61R,encl.Proprietary Rept Withheld,Per 10CFR2.790(a)(4) ML20196A5641999-06-15015 June 1999 Provides Info Re Util Use of Four Previously Irradiated LGS, Unit 1,GE11 Assemblies in Unit 2 Cycle 6.Encl 990518 GE Ltr Provides Objective of Lead Use Assemblies Program & Outlines Kinds of Measurements That Will Be Made on Assemblies ML20195J6831999-06-11011 June 1999 Provides Proprietary Objectives for Lgs,Units 1 & 2,1999 Emergency Preparedness Exercise Scheduled to Be Conducted on 990914.Licensee Identifies Which Individuals Should Receive Copies of Info.Proprietary Info Withheld ML20195G4591999-06-10010 June 1999 Forwards MORs for May 1999 & Revised Repts for Apr 1999 for LGS Units 1 & 2 ML20195H0531999-06-0909 June 1999 Forwards Revised Bases Pages B3/4 10-2 & B3/4 2-4 for LGS Units 1 & 2,in Order to Clarify That Requirements for Reactor Enclosure Secondary Containment Apply to Extended Area Encompassing Both Reactor Enclosure & Refueling Area ML20195E7701999-06-0707 June 1999 Provides Notification of Change to NPDES Permit PA0052221, for Bradshaw Reservoir Facility Which Supports Operation of Lgs,Units 1 & 2,per EPP Section 3.2 ML20195C7631999-06-0101 June 1999 Notifies NRC That PECO Energy Has Completed Installation of New Large Capacity,Passive Strainers on RHR & Core Spray Sys Pump Suction Lines at Lgs,Unit 2,in Response to Ieb 96-003 ML20195D5381999-05-26026 May 1999 Forwards 1998 Occupational Exposure Tabulation Rept for LGS Units 1 & 2. Encl Is Diskette & Instructions.Rept Is Being re-submitted to Reset 12 Month Time Period.Without Disk ML20195B2821999-05-24024 May 1999 Requests That NRC Distribution Lists for LGS Be Updated. Marked-up Distribution List Showing Changes Is Attached ML20196L2891999-05-20020 May 1999 Provides Status Update of Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barrier Corrective Actions,Iaw Commitments Made in ML20195B2951999-05-20020 May 1999 Forwards Rev 0 to LGS Unit 2 Reload 5,Cycle 6 COLR, IAW TS Section 6.9.1.12.Values Listed Have Been Determined Using NRC-approved Methodology & Are Established Such That All Applicable Limits of Plants Safety Analysis Are Met 05000352/LER-1999-003, Forwards LER 99-003-00,re Rps,Pcrvics Actuations.Ler Contains Special Rept Info for HPCI & Reactor Core Isolation Cooling Sys Injections Into Rv1999-05-19019 May 1999 Forwards LER 99-003-00,re Rps,Pcrvics Actuations.Ler Contains Special Rept Info for HPCI & Reactor Core Isolation Cooling Sys Injections Into Rv 05000353/LER-1999-002, Forwards LER 99-002-00,automatic Actuations of Primary Containment & Reactor Vessel Isolation Control Sys & Other Common Plant ESF Due to Loss of Power to a Rps/Ups Power Distribution Panel on 9904191999-05-18018 May 1999 Forwards LER 99-002-00,automatic Actuations of Primary Containment & Reactor Vessel Isolation Control Sys & Other Common Plant ESF Due to Loss of Power to a Rps/Ups Power Distribution Panel on 990419 ML20206E2001999-04-28028 April 1999 Forwards 1998 Annual Environ Operating Rept (Non- Radiological) for Limerick Generating Station,Units 1 & 2. Rept Submitted IAW Section 5.4.1 of App B of Fols,Epp (Non- Radiological) & Describes Implementation of EPP for 1998 ML20206D8801999-04-27027 April 1999 Forwards Rev 2 to LGS Unit 1 Reload 7,Cycle 8 COLR, IAW TS Section 6.9.1.12.COLR Provides cycle-specific Parameter Limits for Noted Info ML20206A5461999-04-21021 April 1999 Responds to Conference Call Between Util & NRC on 990420,re TS Change Request 98-07-2,revising TS Section 2.0 to Incorporate Revised MCPR Safety Limits.Attached Ltr Contains Info Requested ML20205T0441999-04-17017 April 1999 Forwards 1998 Annual Radiological Environ Operating Rept 15, IAW TS Section 6.9.1.7.REMP for 1998,confirmed That LGS Environ Effects from Radioactive Release Were Well Below LGS TSs & Other Applicable Regulatory Limits ML20205Q7581999-04-15015 April 1999 Forwards Response to RAI Re ISI Program First & Second 10-Yr Interval Relief Requests.Revs to Identified by Vertical Bar in Right Margin 1999-09-09
[Table view] Category:LEGAL/LAW FIRM TO NRC
MONTHYEARML20235T8911989-01-18018 January 1989 Forwards Endorsements 130 & 131 to Nelia Policy NF-164, Endorsements 107 & 108 to Maelu Policy MF-44,Endorsements 94 & 95 to Nelia Policy NF-107,Endorsements 110 & 111 to Nelia Policy NF-220 & Endorsements 97 & 98 to Maelu Policy MF-73 ML20196L5401988-07-0505 July 1988 Confirms 880705 Telcon Re Updated Antitrust Review for Facility.Nrc Agrees That Company Has Until 880815 to Respond to Request ML20235B2741987-02-19019 February 1987 FOIA Request for Documents Indicated on Encl Docket Sheets. Request Does Not Encompass Matl Already Available in PDR or Lpdr Denoted by Three or Four Asterisks on List ML20209G1461986-09-0909 September 1986 Requests Issuance of Subpoena for Rt Brown to Testify at Hearing Re Adequacy of Communications Sys Used to Mobilize Manpower Necessary to Evacuate State Correctional Institute in Graterford,Pa ML20214M6501986-09-0909 September 1986 Advises That Licensee Will Not Respond to Air & Water Pollution Patrol 860826 Response to Testimony Re Remand Hearing on Bus Drivers for Oj Roberts & Spring-Ford School Districts,Per Clements .Related Correspondence ML20214M6961986-09-0808 September 1986 Recommends Denial of Rl Anthony 860821 & 25 Petitions for Relief Per 10CFR50.100 & for Ofc of General Counsel Review of NRC 10CFR2.206 Decisions ML20205C4711986-08-0808 August 1986 Forwards 860808 Testimony of Vs Boyer & R Bradshaw Re Remand Hearing on Availability of Bus Drivers for Oj Roberts & Spring-Ford School Districts.Related Correspondence ML20212A7241986-07-24024 July 1986 Notifies That Testimony Presented at 860818 Hearing Will Reflect Revised Number of Volunteer Bus Drivers in Event School Evacuation Necessary ML20211Q1601986-07-21021 July 1986 Advises of Attempts to Deliver Volunteer Sheets of 570 Util Employees Agreeing to Drive Buses in Event of School Evacuation to Limerick Ecology Action (Lea) Headquarters. Related Correspondence ML20206P7421986-06-27027 June 1986 Forwards & Revised Proposed Stipulation in Response to PEMA Request for Changes to Stipulation Re Remanded Issue.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20206P9031986-06-26026 June 1986 Corrects Proposing Resolution of Remanded Issue Re Availability of School Bus Drivers for Oj Roberts & Spring-Ford School Districts.Correct Date of Stipulation Re Medical Svcs Is 860616 Instead of 851115 ML20206P7801986-06-25025 June 1986 Responds to AR Love,Counsel for Graterford Inmates,860618 Ltr Accusing Author of Providing ASLB Chairman H Hoyt W/ Trade Publications Re Emergency Planning Requirements. Attempt to Influence Chairman Denied ML20199E5131986-06-19019 June 1986 Forwards Affidavits of AL Bigelow & Vs Boyer Re Availability of Volunteer School Bus Drivers for Oj Roberts & Spring-Ford School Districts in Event of Evacuation,Per ML20199E6881986-06-18018 June 1986 Responds to Re Ex Parte Filing of Offsite Emergency Planning for Nuclear Power Plants:Case of Govt Gridlock. Ex Parte Filings by Rader Seen as Contributing to Lack of Impartiality.Related Correspondence ML20206D7631986-06-16016 June 1986 Forwards Licensee Proposal for Resolution of Remanded Issue Re Availability of School Bus Drivers for Oj Roberts & Spring-Ford School Districts,Per ASLB 860522 Order, Supporting Affidavits & Proposed Stipulation ML20211E7421986-06-11011 June 1986 Forwards Graterford Inmates Response to Aslab 860603 Order. W/O Encl.Related Correspondence ML20198E3721986-05-19019 May 1986 Advises That Excess Flow Check Valves,Described in Dec 1985 License Amend Application Can Be Tested During Plant Operation Using Addl Personnel & Special Procedures.Need for Amend Unaffected.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20197G7961986-05-13013 May 1986 Forwards,For Info,Delaware River Basin in Commission 860427 Revs 5 & 6 to Docket D-69-210 CP Re Dissolved Oxygen Limitations for Temp Constraints & Consumptive Use Allocations.Related Correspondence ML20203P9401986-05-0505 May 1986 Informs That Unit 1 Shut Down on 860502 for Approx 6 Wks During Which All Tests on Excess Flow Check Valves & Other Containment Isolation Valves Will Be Performed.Related Correspondence ML20203E4851986-03-12012 March 1986 FOIA Request for Effluent Rept 3 Submitted Under Encl Ltr. W/O Ltr ML20154L1531986-03-0606 March 1986 Forwards Appeal Board 850805 & Board 831115 Orders & Util to Nrc,Cited in 860219 Answer to Anthony late-filed Petition for Leave to Intervene,Per 860305 Request ML20140D9111986-01-28028 January 1986 Requests Denial of Rl Anthony 860117 Request for Suspension of License & Finding That Util Violated Conditions of License NPF-39 Due to Pending Application for Supplemental Cooling Water Supply ML20154B9491986-01-24024 January 1986 Forwards 851216 Application for Approval of Temporary Substitution of in-stream Monitoring of Dissolved Oxygen Levels in Place of 59 F Constraint on Withdrawals,Filed W/ State of DE River Basin Commission.Related Correspondence ML20138R4571985-12-24024 December 1985 Forwards Procedure M1-18, Decontamination & Treatment of Radioactively Contaminated Patient at Montgomery Hosp. Related Correspondence ML20138R4701985-12-24024 December 1985 Forwards Procedure M1-18, Decontamination & Treatment of Radioactively Contaminated Patient at Montgomery Hosp. Related Correspondence ML20137T2381985-12-16016 December 1985 Advises That 851213 Encl Figures May Be Illegible.Figures Taken Directly from Fsar.W/O Encl.Related Correspondence ML20137U1981985-12-0505 December 1985 Submits Correction to Transcript of Author 851204 Oral Argument on Fourth Partial Initial Decision.Substantive Changes on Pages 47 to 70 Should Be Made ML20136J1971985-11-20020 November 1985 Notifies That Author Will Appear to Present Oral Argument on 851204 on Behalf of Util Re Appeals of Fourth Partial Initial Decision,In Response to 851024 & 1106 Orders.Related Correspondence ML20133L7261985-10-22022 October 1985 Forwards Commonwealth of PA Court Decision Finding Bucks County & Neshaminy Water Resources Authority Obligated to Complete Point Pleasant Project.Related Correspondence ML20133J0491985-10-16016 October 1985 Lists Misspellings & Errors in Transcript of Author 851011 Oral Argument Before Aslab Re Third Partial Initial Decision ML20136C8271985-10-0404 October 1985 Forwards Delaware River Basin Commission 851002 Emergency Certification Granting Application for Use of Schuylkill River Whenever Flow at Pottstown Gage Over 415 Cubic Ft/ Second.Related Correspondence ML20133B0821985-09-30030 September 1985 Informs of Appearance to Present Oral Argument on 851011 Re Appeals of Third Partial Initial Decision in Proceeding,Per 850829 Order.Related Correspondence ML20136A8171985-09-23023 September 1985 Forwards Util Application W/Delaware River Basin Commission for Approval of Withdrawal of Water from Schuylkill River for Consumptive Use & Revised Application Permitting Release from Beachwood Pit.Related Correspondence ML20137Q4971985-09-18018 September 1985 Responds to Mi Lewis Request to Lift or Retract Cp.Petition for Relief Under Section 2.206 Should Be Denied.Puc of PA Recommended Decision Only Basis for Petition ML20137P9411985-09-17017 September 1985 Comments on ALAB-813,including Issuance of Final Findings Not Prerequisite to Authorizing Full Power OL & Error in Curtailing cross-exam Insufficient to Warrant Appellate Relief.Related Correspondence ML20137L4591985-09-0909 September 1985 Advises That Author,Atty for Graterford Inmates,Will Be Unavailable Until 851001.Related Correspondence ML20136A9731985-09-0404 September 1985 Forwards 850813 Notice of Commission Action Approving Application to Delaware River Basin Commission for Approval of Use of Consumptive Water Saved by Curtailment of Listed Plants,Per .Related Correspondence ML20133L8931985-08-0808 August 1985 Forwards Notice of Appeal Re Denial of Stay & Accompanying Memorandum of Law.W/O Encl.Related Correspondence ML20132E3341985-07-30030 July 1985 Informs That Applicant Will Not Respond to Air & Water Pollution Patrol Brief Until 30 Days After Svc of Appeal Brief to Be Filed by Graterford Inmates,Per 850725 Notice of Appeal,Unless Otherwise Directed by Appeal Board ML20126K7831985-07-26026 July 1985 Forwards Comments of Intervenor Graterford Prisoners,Per 850723 Order.W/O Encl.Related Correspondence ML20126L0031985-07-25025 July 1985 Forwards Graterford Inmates Notice of Appeal.W/O Encl. Related Correspondence ML20129C3171985-07-25025 July 1985 Advises That Delaware River Basin Commission Withholding Action on Addl Supplemental Water for Unit 1 Until NRC Authorizes Issuance of Full Power Ol.Requests Action on Full Power License as Soon as Possible ML20137S4861985-07-17017 July 1985 Forwards Util 850603 Application Under Section 3.8 of Delaware River Basin Compact for Use of Water from Beechwood Pit.Related Correspondence ML20128H1591985-07-0303 July 1985 Forwards Testimony of Jd Case.Related Correspondence ML20128F4121985-07-0303 July 1985 Advises of Return of Subpoena to Rl Morris Signed by ASLB on 850628.Morris Gave Deposition Voluntarily at Ofc on 850703 as Result of Arrangements Among Counsel Rather than at Time & Place Listed in Subpoena.Related Correspondence ML20128A2831985-06-28028 June 1985 Requests That ASLB Issue Subpoena Directing Rl Morris to Appear on 850702 in Philadelphia,Pa for Deposition.Rl Morris,Principal Witness Identified by Love on Contention Re Evacuation Time for Graterford.Related Correspondence ML20127L8131985-06-20020 June 1985 Forwards Revised Page 11 to Correct Typo in Applicant Renewed Motion for Exemption from 10CFR50.47(a) Requirements Per Two Contentions Admitted on Behalf of Graterford Prisoners During Litigation Period ML20126J8711985-06-10010 June 1985 Forwards Notice of Delaware River Basin Commission Action Re Temporary Mod to Increase Frequency of Water Withdrawn from Schuylkill River.Some Copies May Have Been Incorrectly Reproduced.Related Correspondence ML20126J7801985-06-0606 June 1985 Forwards 850603 Notice of Commission Action Re Temporary Mod of Delaware River Basin Decision for Facility,As Followup to .Related Correspondence ML20129A6121985-06-0303 June 1985 Forwards,For Info,Application Filed W/Delaware River Basin Commission for Approval for Use During 1985 of Consumptive Use Water Allocations of Titus Units 1,2 & 3 & Cromby Unit 2.Related Correspondence 1989-01-18
[Table view] |
Text
'*~
g@ CORRESPONDENCE LAW OFFICES GONNER & WETTERHAHN. P.G. Ni 1747 PENNSYI.VANIA AVENUE. N. W. .
MAnu J. watTzRirAn's WAS HINGTON. D. C. 2 00 06 .,3}
3@DERT M. RADER * ~
A2CU A. M OO R E. J R.
- cO= = Rr u. r e R t. February 3, 1983 ercocusst
'WSt ADMItt3D 74 D c ...
,, p 20,S,1, M*J-3SCO
.no , a-
/ t' u ~
(AaYzIdboRess: AroMt.Aw Judge Lawrence Brenner Judge Peter A. Morris Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclcu Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Judge Richard F. Cole Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission In the Matter of Philadelphia Electric Company (Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2)
Docket Nos. 50-352 and 50-353 Gen'_lemen :
Enclosed for the Board's information is a copy of the Opinion of the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania dated January 27, 1983, in support of its Per Curiam Order dated December 16, 1982, reversing portions of an August 27, 1982 order of the Public Utility Commission concerning Limerick Unit 2.
Sincerely,
'u. ,Q.52n . &rtV} .\ -
Troyh r, Jr.
Counsel fbr the Applicant TBC:mwm Enclosure cc: Service List w/o enclosure DR O
- . I s.. -
I IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT I 1983 OF PENNSYLVANIA PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY, :
Petitioner :
- v. : NO. 2365 C.D. 1982 PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY :
COMMISSION, Respondent :
BEFORE: HONORABLE JAMES CRUMLISH, JR., President Judge HONORABLE THEODORE O. ROGERS, Judge HONORABLE GENEVIEVE BLATT, Judge HONORABLE DAVID W. CRAIG, Judge HONORABLE JOSEPH T. DOYLE, Judge ARGUED: December 14, 1982
l .
OPINION OPIhION BY a PRESIDENT JUDGE CRUMLISH, JR. FILED: January 27, 1983 The Philadelphia Electric Company (PECO or Company) appeals an August 27, 1982 order of the Public Utility Commission (PUC or Commission) which in part required PECO to notify the Commission of the Company's decia on either to suspend or cancel construction at the Limerick Unit 2 Nuclear Generating Plant. This Opinion is in support of the Per Curiam Order of this Court, dated December 16, 1982, which reversed those portions of the appealed order.1 PROCEDURAL HISTORY In August 1980, the Pennsylvania Consumer Advocate 2
filed a petition requesting the PUC to investigate the need for and the fiscal wisdom of the construction of the Limerick Nuclear Generating Station. By its order entered October 10, 1980, the Commission initiated a fact finding investigation and, at its conclusion, following eleven months of explorative discovery and hearings,4 Administrativa Law Judge Joseph J.
Klovekorn (ALJ) issued his Initial Decision,0 reporting that:
After reviewing the extensive record in this proceeding, I can come to but one I that at the present time conclusion --
there is no alternative available that can replace Limerick at a lower cost to the consumer. The record shows that the timely completion of Limerick Units I and II is in the best interest c '- PECO and its i ratepayers. Since the generation produced l l
l l
at Limerick will replace expensive oil-fired generation either produced by the company itself or purchased from the PJM system, these plants must be brought on line as soon as possible.
It is essential, therefore, that this project be completed as close to the 1985/1987 projected commercial operation dates as possible, and as close to the ,
company's projected costs as possible....
/
All parties filed exceptions to his Initial Decision.
The PUC resolved these exceptions in its August 27, 1982 order, rejecting, in part, the ALJ's recommendations. The order, in pertinent part, provides:
IT IS ORDEREDi
- 1. That the Philadelphia Electric Company inform us of its decision to suspend or cancel construction at Limerick Unit 2, in light of the conclusions of this Opinion and Order, within 12 0 days of the entry of this Opinion and Order and provide an explanation thereof.
Those conclusions include, inter alia: (1) PECO's financial instability;6 (2) prospective unfair and unreasonable rate increases and (3) deterioration of future service resulting from inadequate funding.
PECO, upon filing in this Court a Petition for Review i requesting the August 27th order to be set aside, simultaneously petitioned the PUC for an Order of Stay or l Supersedeas. The Commission denied the supersedeas. We, by Opinion and Order dated October 26, 1982, granted the t
company's applicat. ion for a supersedeas. On November 8, 1982, by Order, the Supreme Court vacated the supersedeas.8
F .
DISCUSSION AND THE LAW This Court is mindful of both the controversial nature of the nuclear energy question and tne penchant for articulation of the subject. Although the issue before us is not presented in the posture of political or moral dichotomy, we are neither unduly naive of nor oblivious to its potential for aggrandizement. But we are ever mindful of our circumscribed duty to interoret the will of the people as expressed by our legislature and to avoid our creating er sanctioning the creation of its will by administrative regulations.
PECO contends, among other things, that the PUC was without either the express or implied statutory authority to order the Company to cease or suspend construction on Limerick Unit 2. This is the sole determinative issue presented for our ,
consideration and is a case of first impression' in this Commonwealth.
Once again, we are called upon to examine the expanse and limitations of the PUC's authority. The Commission is a unique creation of government conceived in the proposition that public utilities in our Commonwealth are monopolistic public corporations owned by indiv.iduals and operated for profit; but the public utilities are necessarily tempered in their objectives by the common interest so that all citizens receive adequate service at fair and reasonable rates. Free enterprise is the prime distinguishing characteristic of the capitalistic
I -
system upon which our republic is founded and has thrived.
History teaches us, however, that free commercial exercise in this unique area of public service must be bridled and restrained by a resconsible arm of government, whose muscle is flexed in direct proportion to the stimulus supplied by expressed authority of the legislative organ of government. In our view, unfettered regulation is as self-destructive as unfettered laisse: faire.
The Courts in this Commonwealth have, in varying instances, reviewed the Commission's decisions and have fcund excesses imposed by i~t s mistaken notion of its legislative mandate. See Western Pennsvivania Water Co. v. Pennsvivania Public Utilitv Comn'ssion, 10 Pa. Commonwealth C t. 533, 538, 311 A.2d 370, 373 (1973); Pennsvivania Railroad Co. v.
Pennsvvania Public Utility Commission, 187 Pa. Superior C t.
587, 146 A.2d 360 (1958), Pitrsburch v. Pennsvivania Public Utility Commission, 157 Pa. Superior Ct. 595, 43 A.2d 348 (1945). When our Courts have found a want of power and authority, this holding invariably has been bedrocked on the prindiple that, absent expressed authority, there is no authority ro support a commission's order. N.A.A.C.P. v.
Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission 5 Pa. Commonwealth Ct.
312, 290 A.2d 704 (1972).
'If the commission were allowed to exercise authority not conferred on it, either in specific words or as necessarily compcehended in some o the r power expressly granted ... all the contracts and the-4
~
-6 general management of the business of the public utilities of Pennsylvania might, in course of time, be subjected to the control :
of that body, although no such condition. of l affairs is contemplated by the act. In other words, the evil effects of not adhering to the rule, that the authority of all extra-judicial bodies must clearly appear, soon would reach beyond the confines of this controversy and might invade the whole field of public control.
The only safe and proper roads for admiaistrative bodies like the present commission to travel are those plainly marked by the acts of assembly defining their duties, and to these the courts must confine them, if the system represented by such commissions--to which our body politic socms committed--is to work out as intended by its creators, the legislature.
' (B] ut it is for the legislature (and not the courts or the Public Service Commission) to declare the public policy of the state in this regard...and, when it sees fit to designate the instruments to carry out its declarations, neither the courts nor the commission possess the right to expand or abridge a declaration or grant of power so made.'
M. at 320, 290 A.2d at 708-09 (cuoting Swarthmore Borouch v.
Public Service Commission, 277 Pa. 472, 478-79, 12 1 A. 488, 489-90 (1923)).
Today we, in this action, again subscribe to this philosophy and pronounce it to be the law of this case and hold that the Commission lacked the authority to intrude upon PECO's managerial decision to continue with the construction of Limerick Unit 2.
The legislature, in enacting the Public Utility Code 9 conveyed bread grants of regulatory and supervisory powers to l
b the PUC.10 In addition, that authority has been extended in certain circumstances to examine the operation, condition and management of a utility whenever it deems it,necessary to the performance of the Commission's duties.1*1 Although the PUC has already conceded l2 that the decision to cease construction of Unit 2 is within the managerial prerogative of PECO, thus acknowledging that it lacks the expressed authorit'y to mandate such a choice, it now argues that it may issue such an order in the public interest if it determines that PECO has " abused its managerial discretion." It claims to derive this nebulous power from decisional law, e.c., Metrooolitan Edison Co. v. Pennsvivania Public Utilitv Commission, 62 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 460, 437 A.
2d 76 (1981). The Commission misreads its authority in attempting to remedy PECO's alleged abuse of discretion.
Traditionally, and properly so, the PUC has protected the public from abuses of managerial discretion by exercising its catemaking powers.13 When an abuse has been found, our Courts have agreed that a utility's "custcmers are not recuired to reimburse the utili ty through rate changes, for expenditures imprudently made." Park Towne v. Pennsvivania Public Utility 1
Ccmmission, 61 Pa. w Common'ealth Ct. 285, 295, 433 A.2d 610, !
615 (1981). Never has our Supreme Court, nor this Court for that matter, countenanced the extension of this remedial power i to thwart utility construction by a review of the exercise of discretion in daily, in-house managerial decisions."4 l
l
U ^
i 1
1
\
Our law gives to the PUC-severely limited powers in l l
reviewing a utility's internal management decisions. The Commission has not been given power to exercise such limited review whenever it so chooses. Accordingly, this Court cannot accuiesce in the Commission's exercise of powers when such powers have not been provided by the legislature. This conclusion is buttressed by our Supreme Court, which -has held tha t the PUC, in non-ratemaking cases, is without authority to disapprove "the expansion or extension" of existing facilities.
In so doing, it reasons " tha t such a decision is in the discretion of company' management." Ducuesne Licht Co. v.
Uccer S t. Clair Townshio, 377 Pa. 323, 3 3 7,- 10 5 A. 2 d 2 8 7 , 293 (1954); Lower Chichester Townshic v. Pennsv1vania Public Utility Commission, 180 Pa. Superior. Ct. 503, 119 A. 2d 674 (1956).
Recognizing, as we do, that it is without the expressed autaority to order directly the cessation or suspension of the construction of Unit 2, the PUC alternatively relies on 51903 (a) of the Code for implied authority.
Secticn 1903 (a) of the Ccde provides in pertinent part:
(a) General Rule.--Upon the ,
submission or completion of any securities i certificate ... the commission shall !
register the same if it shall find tha t the issuance or assumption of the securities in the amount, of the character, and for the purpose therein proposed, is necessary or :
proper for the present and probable future capital needs of the public utility. ...
1 1
otherwise it shall reject the securities certificate. The commission may consider the relation which the amount of each class of securities issued by such public utility bears to the amount of other such classes, the nature of the business of such public utility, its credit and prospects, and other relevant matters....
The Commission, by here attempting to enforce its order by prospectively denying the right to issue securities certificates to PECO,15 attempts to do indirectly what it cannot do directly, i . e. , suspend or cancel the construction of Unit 2.
In a similar factual situation where the Oklahoma Corporation Commission 16 attempted to disapprove a securities issuance intended to finance a nuclear power plant because the Corporation Commission was unconvinced of the need for the plant, the Oklahoma Supreme Court rejected that order, holding that "the Commission does not have the statutory authority to refuse the issuance of securities based on a requirement to demonstrate th e necessi ty or need of the underlying purpose...." Public Service Co. of Oklahcma v. State, 645 P.
2d 465, 466 (Okla. 1982).
The Oklahoma statute,'7 1 upon which the Commission relied, provides that:
A public utility ... may, when authorized by order of the Commission ... issue securities when necessary for the acquisition of property, the construction, extension or improvement of its services, or for the discharge or lawful refunding of its obligations, or reimbursement of money actually expended from income from any source, or for any other corporate purpose authorized by the commission.
_a_
The Commission then contended that the appropriate interpretation of the term "necessary" empowered it to inquire into the necessity of the underlying purpose of the issue.
That Court disagreed, reasoning that:
Had the Legislature intended the Commission's interpretation it would have drafted the statute to read, " issue securities for the necessarv accuisition of crocerty..." or words of like import.
Id. at 467. (EE2phasis in original. ) Instead, that Court held that the utility securities issue need merely be deemed necessary to accomplish its project, with no evaluation of the underlying purpose required by the public service commission.
18 Section 1903 (a) of our Code requires 'that "the issuance ... of securities ... (be] necessary or proper for the present or probable future capital needs of the public j utility...." We agree with the Oklahoma Supreme Court in Public Services Co. and hold that the PUC may merely inquire into the necessity of the securities issue in the amount, character and purpose proposed; it may not inquire into the necessity of the project it purports to support.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court also held, as we do today, that:
The ... Commission does not have the power to regulate, supervise or control the internal management of a public utility to the extent that it could prohibit the construction of the proposed project by the j power company even though it was alleged
- that the power company's project was not j necessary for it to supply electricity to l its customers.
g i
l
)
5 Public Service Co. at 466 (citing 0. G. & E. v. Corporation Commission of Oklahoma, 543 P. 2d 546 (Okla. 1975)).
In Michigan, the Public Service Commission refused to inquire into the reasonableness of a nuclear power plant in considering the financing proposal for the plant's continued construction. The state attorney general and a citizens' group challenged the Commission's refusal to examine the reasonableness of the project. The Michigan Supreme Court held that in a proceeding under the utility securities act, the inquiry is limited to whether there is a need to issue securities to obtain funds for a lawful purpose of the utility and does not extend to whether, to accomplish that purpose, there is need for the project to which the funds will be devoted. The incuiry is whether funds are recuired to construct the oroject -
the need for funds, not the need for the cro1ect.
Kellev v. Michican Public Service Commission, 412 Mich. 385,
, 316 N. W. 2d 187, 190 (1982). (Zaphasis added.) In reaching its conclusions, that Court relied on these facts:
(1) the Michigan statute 19 does not empower the Commission to approve situs and/or construction cf new plants, M. at ,
316 N. W. 2d at 193;20 (2) the Commission's approval of l
securities does not create a presumption that the plant's cost or the property purchase price will be included in the utility's rate base. M. at , 316 N. W. 2d at 197; and (3) the authority to examine the purpose of the securities issue does not include a determination of the merits of the l
- e unddelying project, but is' limited to a datormination of whether the securities are being issued for a layful corporate -
objective. M. at , 316 N. W. 2d at 192. Similarly: (1) the Pennsylvania statutory authority does not empower the PUC to approve the siting and/or the construction of new plants; (2) the PUC is not obligated to include the proceeds in the utility rate base; (3) and Section 1903 merely empowers the PUC to simply establish the issue need.
Our Courts have held that the PUC may not sit as a super board of directors, Bell Tele _chone Co. v. Driscoll, 343 Pa. 109, 118 , 21 A. 2 d 912 , 916 (1941); Metrocolitan Edison Co.
- v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, 62 Pa. Commonwecith Ct. 460, 466, 437 A.2d 76, 80 (1981), second-guessing ordinary business management decisions; to hold otherwise would be to ignore the wisdom of the parameters of government influence and
- control which have been imposed by longstanding tradition and statutory authority.
Date: Januarv 27, 1993 __
4= h )
- James Crumlish, Jr. /j President Judge Judge Rogers concurs in the result only.
l l
FOOTNOTES 1
The second portion of the PUC order on appeal IT IS ORDERED:
- 2. That the Philadelphia Electric Company pursue an aggressive conservation program designed. to substantially offset the suspension or cancellation of Limerick Unit 2 in consultation with our Bureau of Conservation, Economics and Energy
, Planning. The Company shall submit an initial conservation program plan within 120 days of the entry of this Opinion and Order.
We need not address paragraph two of the order since the conservation plan would not be implemented unless Limerick Unit 2 were suspended or cancelled. Since we rule today, as discussed in the text of this Opinion, that the PUC is without the authority to order such suspension or cancellation, any discussion of a conservation plan or the Commission 's authority to require one is unnecessary.
2 The Consumer Advocate is empowered by law to represent the interests of the consumer before the Public Utility Coimmission. Section 902-A of the Administrative Code, Act of April 9, 1929, P. L. 177, as amended, added by Section 1 of the Act of July 9, 1976, P.L. 903, 71 P.S. 5 309-2 (a) .
3 As a result of a projected need for additional generating capacity, PECO's management in 1968 approved the construction of the Limerick Nuclear Generating Station. A 4
contract was awarded to Sechtel Corporation in 1969 to design and build the Station. PECO gave formal capital authorization for the construction of two units (Units 1 and 2) in 1971. The units were initially scheduled for completion in 1975 and 1977, respectively, but, due to various delays, construction did not begin until mid-1974. Further construction delays and a l company decision to match the growth in capacity additions with '
a lower load forecast resulted in PECO's rescheduling Unit 1 to commence operation in 1985 and Unit 2 in 198 7.
4 Eearings began in Philadelphia on March 24, 1981, and concluded on November 13, 1981. The hearings included 38 days of evidentiary hearings and three non-evidentiary, days.
Over thirty witnesses appeared, producing a record of more than
4,000 pages. Additionally, over 1,200 discovery requests were made by the parties.
5 Investigation, Limerick Nuclear Generating Station PUC Docke t I-8 0100341. l 6 The Commission's conclusion tha t PECO is financially unstable is based, in part, on (1) its refusal to permir PECO to include the cost of construction work in pecgress (CWIP) for Limerick in the determination of its then-present rate structure; (2) the " resultant probability that the Company's bond rating will not improve above its present BBB (S tandard and Poors Ratings) and may in fact slide further;" and (3) the
" exorbitant cost of capital" required to finance construction of both units. PUC order of August 2 7, 19 82 a t 2 4.
7 Pennsvivania Public Philadelchia Electric Co. v.
Utility Commission, (No. 2365 C. D. 1982, filed October 26, ,
1982).
8 The Supreme Court's Order read:
AND NOW, this 8th day of November, 1982, it being clear from the opinion accompanying the order of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission dated October 15,
- 1982, denying a stay of its order of August
- 27, 1982, that the order of August 27 does
- not prohibit construction at Limerick Unit 2, the stay entered by the Commonwealth Court on October 26, 1982, is vacated, the order entered by the Commission en October 15 , 1982, denying a stay is reinstated, and the matter is remanded for expedited consideration.
Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission and Office of Consumer Advocate v. Philadelonia Electric Co. , Pa. , A.2d (Nos. 129 & 130 E. D. Misc. Docket 1982, filed _Novemoer 8, 1982).
9 66 Pa. C. S. SS101-3315.
10 66 Pa. C.S. 5501(b) provides:
Administrative authority and regulations.--The commission shall have general administrative power and- authority to supervise and~ regulate all public utilities doing business within this Ccmmonwealth. The commission may make such
6' -
regulations, not inconsistent with law, as may;be necessary or proper in the exercise offits powers or for the performance of its duties.
11 66 Pa. C. S. 5331.-
(a) General rule.--The commission may, on its own motion and whenever it may, be necessary. in the performance of its duties, investigate and examine the i- condition and management of any public utility or any other person or corporation subject to this part. In conducting the investigations the commission may proceed, either with or without a hearing, as it may deem best, but it shall make no order without affording the parties affected thereby a hearing. Any investigation, inquiry or hearing which the commission has power to undertake or hold shall be conducted pursuant to the provisions of this chapter.
12 In its October 15, 1982 order denying PECO's request for a supersedeas, the PUC stated: "The decision to cease construction is appropriately in the hands of PECO management."
L3 66 Pa. C. S . S1301.
1 4
We will not here delineate the narrow parameters encompassing an abuse of managerial discretion.
15 In its August 27th order and opinion, the PUC stated:
Section 1903 of the Code, 66 Pa. C. S.
S19G3, requires this Commission to register a securities certificate if we find the issuance of the securities proposed therein is necessary or proper for the present and probable future capital needs of the public i utility filing the certificate. Based on the record established in this proceeding, which we believe reflects the present and possible future capital needs of PECO in regard to the simultaneous construction of Units 1 and 2, we declare that at this time the approval of new securities issuances to finance construction of Unit 2 would be l
l i
a neither necessary, propar, nor in the public interest. Therefore, no new securities issuances should be approved to finance Unit 2....
We note that this prospective rejection of securities certificates is clearly not provided for in S1903 of the Code.
A rejection may only occur "[ulpon the submission or completion 3 of any securities certificate." 66 Pa. C. S. $ 1903 (a) .
16 The Corporation Commission of the State of Oklahoma is the state regulatory agency akin to the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission.
17 0kla. Stat. tit. 17, 5184 (1982).
18 66 Pa. C.S. S 1903 (a) .
19 Mich. Comp. Laws $460.301 (1982).
20 the power to oversee the The specific grant of construction and siting of power plants was proposed in our General Assembly but never enacted. See S.B. 781, Printer's No. 1921 (1977); d. B. 42, Printer's No. 44 (1979); H. B. 2154, Printer's No. 2755 (1978). This grant of such. a specific power, however, seems to be the trend in other states, i . e. ,
New York, Massachusetts, Wisconsin and Alabama.
- - - , - .- . _ _ _ . .l