ML20030B117
| ML20030B117 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 08/04/1981 |
| From: | Bloch P Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-A, NUDOCS 8108060079 | |
| Download: ML20030B117 (3) | |
Text
_.
=
.g(~*
52 g
4 m
- y.\\ I.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
]
s' '
NUCLEAR REGULNIORY COFMISSION AUG 4 1981, d s
y f
em : of the Sec,retary
'e ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD e
sa
_g m.o s,,
e
~
, # o,j#ssa 7 Before Atninistrative Judges:
k3 Bnach
- i v.s.gSM p
4 d
Peter B. Bloch, Chairman
.4 f
Ng'/] y Michael A. Duggan f
Q Ibbert M. Lazo Ivan W. Smith, Alternate SERVED Aug 4 7ggy
)
FLORIDA IWER & LIGiff COMPANY
)
) Docket No. 50-389A
)
)
(St. Incie Plant, Unit No. 2)
)
August 4, 1981
)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER OJNCERNING FIDRIDA POhiER & LIGEff 00MPAtTf'S MOTION EOR A DECLARATORY ORDER On July 16, 1981 Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) requested an z
order assuring it that this antitrust proceeding would nat interfere with its plans to operate the St. Incie Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 2 (St.
Lucie), which FFL hopes to be able to load with fuel in October 1982. On July 27, 1981 Floridu Cities' responded tc the motion.
FPL seeks to invoke the Board's authority to' ensure that proceedings are conducted in a " fair" manner, citing 10 CFR 52.718.
However, we have examined FPL's arguments and (nmpared them to arguments raised by Cities.
We conclude, without reaching a decision on the merits of the motion, that FPL has not shown that Cities has intentionally misled the Comnission or has engaged in deceptive conduct which requirds an imnediate remedy.
8108060079 81080,
$8 f 3
g p{/,
PDR ADOCK 05000389 l
M PDR
.,i bbtion for Declaratory Order:
_2 Egregious misconduct could provide a reason to invoke the Board's power to regulate the proceeding. However, in the absence of such a showing, we fail to understani why 1 mediate action need be taken in the interest of fair and efficient proceedings.
'Ihere is still time.
It is August 1981. FPL does not expect to load fuel until October 1982; and the Comission's Staff estimates some slippage from that projected date. Consequently, we see ro urgency in acting on this notion at this time and we have decided to concentrate on matters nore directly related to the determination of the merits of this case.
We believe. that this notion is rot yet ripe. Should it become ripe, it may well be relevant to the merits of the motion to consider whether the actions of either of the parties have delayed the proceeding. Hence, by postponing action we strengthen the incentives for the timely resolution of contested issues. Acting row would deprive the Board of this potentially inportant incentive for expediting the proceeding.
ORDER For all the foregoing reasons and based on consideration of the entire record in this matter, it is this 4th day of August, 1981 ORDERED (1) 'Ihe Fbtion for a Declaratory Order and to Dismiss filed by Florida Power & Lighi. Company on July 16, 1981, is foun3 not to be ripe and a decision on the merits of the petition is reserved until such time as it can be shown that there is a substantial risk that failure to act.on the notion would affect the date on which St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 2, can load fuel,
1 Motion for Declaratory Order:
3 i
(2) 'Ihis is an interlocutory order from which there is no appeal.
1 3
EOR 'IllE i.
A'IQ4IC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD I.
,,[
,. ~
2'
{
Peter B. Bloch, Chairman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE 1
August 4. 1981 Bethesda, Maryland 1
4 I
1~
5 I
O 4
}
i i
j i
.