|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20217H9511999-10-21021 October 1999 Memorandum & Order.* Proceeding Re Nepco 990315 Application Seeking Commission Approval of Indirect License Transfers Consolidated,Petitioners Granted Standing & Two Issues Admitted.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 991021 ML20217N2561999-10-21021 October 1999 Transcript of Affirmation Session on 990121 in Rockville, Maryland Re Memorandum & Order Responding to Petitions to Intervene Filed by co-owners of Seabrook Station Unit 1 & Millstone Station Unit Three.Pp 1-3 ML20211L5141999-09-0202 September 1999 Comment on Draft Reg Guide DG-4006, Demonstrating Compliance with Radiological Criteria for License Termination. Author Requests Info as to When Seabrook Station Will Be Shut Down ML20211J1451999-08-24024 August 1999 Comment Opposing NRC Consideration of Waiving Enforcement Action Against Plants That Operate Outside Terms of Licenses Due to Y2K Problems ML20210S5641999-08-13013 August 1999 Motion of Connecticut Light & Power Co,Western Massachusetts Electric Co & North Atlantic Energy Corp to Strike Unauthorized Response of Nepco.* Unauthorized Response Fails to Comply with Commission Policy.With Certificate of Svc ML20210Q7531999-08-11011 August 1999 Order Approving Application Re Corporate Merger (Canal Electric Co). Canal Shall Provide Director of NRR Copy of Any Application,At Time Filed to Transfer Grants of Security Interests or Liens from Canal to Proposed Parent ML20210P6271999-08-10010 August 1999 Response of New England Power Company.* Nu Allegations Unsupported by Any Facts & No Genuine Issues of Matl Facts in Dispute.Commission Should Approve Application Without Hearing ML20210H8311999-08-0303 August 1999 Reply of Connecticut Light & Power Co,Western Massachusetts Electric Co & North Atlantic Energy Corp to Response of New England Power Co to Requests for Hearing.* Petitioners Request Hearing on Stated Issues.With Certificate of Svc ML20210J8501999-08-0303 August 1999 Order Approving Transfer of License & Conforming Amend.North Atlantic Energy Service Corp Authorized to Act as Agent for Joint Owners of Seabrook Unit 1 ML20211J1551999-07-30030 July 1999 Comment Opposing That NRC Allow Seabrook NPP to Operate Outside of Technical Specifications Due to Possible Y2K Problems ML20210E3011999-07-27027 July 1999 Response of New England Power Co to Requests for Hearing. Intervenors Have Presented No Justification for Oral Hearing in This Proceeding.Commission Should Reject Intervenors Request for Oral Hearing & Approve Application ML20209H9101999-07-20020 July 1999 Motion of Connecticut Light & Power Co & North Atlantic Energy Corp for Leave to Intervene & Petition for Hearing.* with Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20195H1911999-06-15015 June 1999 Application of Montaup Electric Co & New England Power Co for Transfer of Licenses & Ownership Interests.Requests That Commission Consent to Two Indirect Transfers of Control & Direct Transfer ML20206A1611999-04-26026 April 1999 Memorandum & Order.* Informs That Montaup,Little Bay Power Corp & Nepco Settled Differences Re Transfer of Ownership of Seabrook Unit 1.Intervention Petition Withdrawn & Proceeding Terminated.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 990426 ML20205M7621999-04-15015 April 1999 Notice of Withdrawal of Intervention of New England Power Co.* New England Power Co Requests That Intervention in Proceeding Be Withdrawn & Hearing & Related Procedures Be Terminated.With Certificate of Svc CLI-99-06, Order.* Joint Request for ten-day Extension of Schedule Set Forth in CLI-99-06 in Order to Facilitate Parties Settlement Efforts Granted,With Exception of Date of Hearing. with Certificate of Svc.Served on 9904071999-04-0707 April 1999 Order.* Joint Request for ten-day Extension of Schedule Set Forth in CLI-99-06 in Order to Facilitate Parties Settlement Efforts Granted,With Exception of Date of Hearing. with Certificate of Svc.Served on 990407 ML20205G0921999-04-0505 April 1999 Joint Motion of All Active Participants for 10 Day Extension to Permit Continuation of Settlement Discussion.* Participants Request That Procedural Schedule Be Extended by 10 Days.With Certificate of Svc ML20205G3091999-03-31031 March 1999 Petition That Individuals Responsible for Discrimination Against Contract Electrician at Plant as Noted in OI Rept 1-98-005 Be Banned by NRC from Participation in Licensed Activities for at Least 5 Yrs ML20204E6401999-03-24024 March 1999 Protective Order.* Issues Protective Order to Govern Use of All Proprietary Data Contained in License Transfer Application or in Participants Written Submission & Oral Testimony.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 990324 ML20204G7671999-03-23023 March 1999 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50.54(a) Re Direct Final Rule,Changes to QA Programs ML20207K1941999-03-12012 March 1999 North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Participation in Proceeding.* Naesco Wished to Remain on Svc List for All Filings.Option to Submit post-hearing Amicus Curiae Brief Will Be Retained by Naesco.With Certificate of Svc ML20207H4921999-02-12012 February 1999 Comment on Draft Contingency Plan for Year 2000 Issue in Nuclear Industry.Util Agrees to Approach Proposed by NEI ML20203F9471999-02-0909 February 1999 License Transfer Application Requesting NRC Consent to Indirect Transfer of Control of Interest in Operating License NPF-86 ML20199F7641999-01-21021 January 1999 Answer of Montaup Electric Co to Motion of Ui for Leave to Intervene & Petition to Allow Intervention out-of-time.* Requests Motion Be Denied on Basis of Late Filing.With Certificate of Svc ML20199H0451999-01-21021 January 1999 Answer of Little Bay Power Corp to Motion of Ui for Leave to Intervene & Petition to Allow Intervention out-of-time.* Requests That Ui Petition to Intervene & for Hearing Be Denied for Reasons Stated.With Certificate of Svc ML20199D2461999-01-19019 January 1999 Supplemental Affidavit of Js Robinson.* Affidavit of Js Robinson Providing Info Re Financial Results of Baycorp Holding Ltd & Baycorp Subsidiary,Great Bay Power Corp. with Certificate of Svc ML20199D2311999-01-19019 January 1999 Response of New England Power Co to Answers of Montaup Electric Co & Little Bay Power Corp.* Nep Requests That Nep Be Afforded Opportunity to File Appropriate Rule Challenge with Commission Pursuant to 10CFR2.1329 ML20206R1041999-01-13013 January 1999 Answer of Little Bay Power Corp to Motion of New England Power Co for Leave to Intervene & Petition for Summary Relief Or,In Alternative,For Hearing.* with Certificate of Svc ML20206Q8451999-01-12012 January 1999 Written Comments of Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Co.* Requests That Commission Consider Potential Financial Risk to Other Joint Owners Associated with License Transfer.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 990114 ML20199A4741999-01-12012 January 1999 Answer of Montaup Electric Co to Motion of Nepco for Leave to Intervene & Petition for Summary Relief Or,In Alternative,For Hearing.* Nepco 990104 Motion Should Be Denied for Reasons Stated.With Certificate of Svc ML20206Q0151999-01-12012 January 1999 North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Answer to Petition to Intervene of New England Power Co.* If Commission Deems It Appropriate to Explore Issues Further in Subpart M Hearing Context,Naesco Will Participate.With Certificate of Svc ML20199A4331999-01-11011 January 1999 Motion of United Illuminating Co for Leave to Intervene & Petition to Allow Intervention out-of-time.* Company Requests That Petition to Allow Intervention out-of-time Be Granted.With Certificate of Svc ML20198P7181998-12-31031 December 1998 Motion of Nepco for Leave to Intervene & Petition for Summary Relief Or,In Alternative,For Hearing.* Moves to Intervene in Transfer of Montaup Seabrook Ownership Interest & Petitions for Summary Relief or for Hearing ML20198P7551998-12-30030 December 1998 Affidavit of J Robinson.* Affidavit of J Robinson Describing Events to Date in New England Re Premature Retirement of Npps,Current Plans to Construct New Generation in Region & Impact on Seabrook Unit 1 Operation.With Certificate of Svc ML20195K4061998-11-24024 November 1998 Memorandum & Order.* North Atlantic Energy Services Corp Granted Motion to Withdraw Proposed Amends & Dismiss Related Adjudicatory Proceedings as Moot.Board Decision LBP-98-23 Vacated.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 981124 ML20155J1071998-11-0909 November 1998 NRC Staff Answer to North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Motion for Leave to File Reply.* Staff Does Not Object to North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Motion.With Certificate of Svc ML20155D0041998-10-30030 October 1998 Motion for Leave to File Reply.* Licensee Requests Leave to Reply to Petitioner 981026 Response to Licensee 981015 Motion to Terminate Proceedings.Reply Necessary to Assure That Commission Is Fully Aware of Licensee Position ML20155D0121998-10-30030 October 1998 Reply to Petitioner Response to Motion to Terminate Proceedings.* Licensee Views Segmentation Issue as Moot & Requests Termination of Subj Proceedings.With Certificate of Svc ML20155B1641998-10-26026 October 1998 Response to Motion by Naesco to Withdraw Applications & to Terminate Proceedings.* If Commission Undertakes to Promptly Proceed on Issue on Generic Basis,Sapl & Necnp Will Have No Objection to Naesco Motion.With Certificate of Svc ML20154K8751998-10-15015 October 1998 Motion to Withdraw Applications & to Terminate Proceedings.* NRC Does Not Intend to Oppose Motion.With Certificate of Svc ML17265A8071998-10-0606 October 1998 Comment on Integrated Review of Assessment Process for Commercial Npps.Util Endorses Comments Being Provided by NEI on Behalf of Nuclear Industry ML20154C8171998-10-0606 October 1998 Notice of Appointment of Adjudicatory Employee.* Notice Given That W Reckley Appointed as Commission Adjudicatory Employee to Advise Commission on Issues Related to Review of LBP-98-23.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 981006 CLI-98-18, Order.* Grants Joint Motion Filed by Naesco,Sapl & Necnp for Two Week Deferral of Briefing Schedule Set by Commission in CLI-98-18.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 9810061998-10-0505 October 1998 Order.* Grants Joint Motion Filed by Naesco,Sapl & Necnp for Two Week Deferral of Briefing Schedule Set by Commission in CLI-98-18.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 981006 ML20153H4471998-10-0101 October 1998 Joint Motion of Schedule Deferral.* Naesco,Sapl & Necnp Jointly Request Temporary Deferral of Briefing Schedule as Established by Commission Order of 980917 (CLI-98-18). with Certificate of Svc ML20154F9891998-09-29029 September 1998 License Transfer Application Requesting Consent for Transfer of Montaup Electric Co Interest in Operating License NPF-86 for Seabrook Station,Unit 1,to Little Bay Power Corp ML20154D7381998-09-21021 September 1998 Affidavit of FW Getman Requesting Exhibit 1 to License Transfer Application Be Withheld from Public Disclosure,Per 10CFR2.790 ML20153C7791998-09-18018 September 1998 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Reporting Requirements for Nuclear Power Reactors.Util Endorses NRC Staff Focus on Operability & Funtionality of Equipment & NEI Comments ML20151Z5611998-09-18018 September 1998 Order.* Pursuant to Commission Order CLI-98-18 Re Seabrook Unit 1 Proceeding,Schedule Described in Board 980904 Memorandum & Order Hereby Revoked Pending Further Action. with Certificate of Svc.Served on 980918 ML20151Y0331998-09-17017 September 1998 Order.* All Parties,Including Util,May File Brief No Later than 981007.Brief Shall Not Exceed 30 Pages.Commission May Schedule Oral Argument to Discuss Issues,After Receiving Responses.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 980917 ML20153E8771998-09-16016 September 1998 Comment Opposing Draft NUREG-1633, Assessment of Use of Potassium Iodide (Ki) as Protective Action During Severe Reactor Accidents. Recommends That NRC Reverse Decision to Revise Emergency Planning Regulation as Listed 1999-09-02
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20210S5641999-08-13013 August 1999 Motion of Connecticut Light & Power Co,Western Massachusetts Electric Co & North Atlantic Energy Corp to Strike Unauthorized Response of Nepco.* Unauthorized Response Fails to Comply with Commission Policy.With Certificate of Svc ML20210P6271999-08-10010 August 1999 Response of New England Power Company.* Nu Allegations Unsupported by Any Facts & No Genuine Issues of Matl Facts in Dispute.Commission Should Approve Application Without Hearing ML20210H8311999-08-0303 August 1999 Reply of Connecticut Light & Power Co,Western Massachusetts Electric Co & North Atlantic Energy Corp to Response of New England Power Co to Requests for Hearing.* Petitioners Request Hearing on Stated Issues.With Certificate of Svc ML20210E3011999-07-27027 July 1999 Response of New England Power Co to Requests for Hearing. Intervenors Have Presented No Justification for Oral Hearing in This Proceeding.Commission Should Reject Intervenors Request for Oral Hearing & Approve Application ML20205G0921999-04-0505 April 1999 Joint Motion of All Active Participants for 10 Day Extension to Permit Continuation of Settlement Discussion.* Participants Request That Procedural Schedule Be Extended by 10 Days.With Certificate of Svc ML20205G3091999-03-31031 March 1999 Petition That Individuals Responsible for Discrimination Against Contract Electrician at Plant as Noted in OI Rept 1-98-005 Be Banned by NRC from Participation in Licensed Activities for at Least 5 Yrs ML20207K1941999-03-12012 March 1999 North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Participation in Proceeding.* Naesco Wished to Remain on Svc List for All Filings.Option to Submit post-hearing Amicus Curiae Brief Will Be Retained by Naesco.With Certificate of Svc ML20199H0451999-01-21021 January 1999 Answer of Little Bay Power Corp to Motion of Ui for Leave to Intervene & Petition to Allow Intervention out-of-time.* Requests That Ui Petition to Intervene & for Hearing Be Denied for Reasons Stated.With Certificate of Svc ML20199D2311999-01-19019 January 1999 Response of New England Power Co to Answers of Montaup Electric Co & Little Bay Power Corp.* Nep Requests That Nep Be Afforded Opportunity to File Appropriate Rule Challenge with Commission Pursuant to 10CFR2.1329 ML20206R1041999-01-13013 January 1999 Answer of Little Bay Power Corp to Motion of New England Power Co for Leave to Intervene & Petition for Summary Relief Or,In Alternative,For Hearing.* with Certificate of Svc ML20199A4741999-01-12012 January 1999 Answer of Montaup Electric Co to Motion of Nepco for Leave to Intervene & Petition for Summary Relief Or,In Alternative,For Hearing.* Nepco 990104 Motion Should Be Denied for Reasons Stated.With Certificate of Svc ML20206Q8451999-01-12012 January 1999 Written Comments of Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Co.* Requests That Commission Consider Potential Financial Risk to Other Joint Owners Associated with License Transfer.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 990114 ML20155J1071998-11-0909 November 1998 NRC Staff Answer to North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Motion for Leave to File Reply.* Staff Does Not Object to North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Motion.With Certificate of Svc ML20155D0041998-10-30030 October 1998 Motion for Leave to File Reply.* Licensee Requests Leave to Reply to Petitioner 981026 Response to Licensee 981015 Motion to Terminate Proceedings.Reply Necessary to Assure That Commission Is Fully Aware of Licensee Position ML20155D0121998-10-30030 October 1998 Reply to Petitioner Response to Motion to Terminate Proceedings.* Licensee Views Segmentation Issue as Moot & Requests Termination of Subj Proceedings.With Certificate of Svc ML20155B1641998-10-26026 October 1998 Response to Motion by Naesco to Withdraw Applications & to Terminate Proceedings.* If Commission Undertakes to Promptly Proceed on Issue on Generic Basis,Sapl & Necnp Will Have No Objection to Naesco Motion.With Certificate of Svc ML20154K8751998-10-15015 October 1998 Motion to Withdraw Applications & to Terminate Proceedings.* NRC Does Not Intend to Oppose Motion.With Certificate of Svc ML20153H4471998-10-0101 October 1998 Joint Motion of Schedule Deferral.* Naesco,Sapl & Necnp Jointly Request Temporary Deferral of Briefing Schedule as Established by Commission Order of 980917 (CLI-98-18). with Certificate of Svc ML20236W0931998-07-30030 July 1998 Reply to Staff & Naesco Objections to Joinder of Necnp & to Naesco Objection to Standing.* Advises That Jointer Issue Involves Only Question of How Pleadings May Be Captioned. W/Certificate of Svc ML20236U4221998-07-27027 July 1998 North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Supplemental Answer Standing Issues.* Request for Hearing & Petition to Intervene,As Applied to Sapl & New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution,Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20236T5201998-07-27027 July 1998 NRC Staff Response to 980709 Submittal by Seacoast Anti- Pollution League & New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution (Necnp).* Board Should Deny Intervention by Necnp. Staff Does Not Contest Sapl Standing.W/Certificate of Svc ML20236J1111998-07-0202 July 1998 North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Answer to Supplemental Petition for Hearing.* Util Will Respond to Any Further Petitions on Schedule Directed by Licensing Board Memorandum & Order of 980618.W/Certificate of Svc ML20249B9151998-06-24024 June 1998 NRC Staff Answer to Seacoast Anti-Pollution League (Sapl) 980605 Request for Hearing & to New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution 980618 Request for Intervention.* Board Should Not Grant Sapl 980605 Request.W/Certificate of Svc ML20249B7631998-06-18018 June 1998 Supplemental & Amended Petition for Institution of Proceeding & for Intervention Pursuant to 10CFR2.714 on Behalf of Seacoast Anti-Pollution League & New England Coalition on Nuclear Power.* ML20249A9501998-06-12012 June 1998 Supplemental Petition of Great Bay Power Corp for Determination of Reasonable Assurance of Decommissioning Funding ML20199K3861998-01-29029 January 1998 Petition for Determination That Great Bay Power Corp'S Acceleration of Decommissioning Trust Fund Payments Would Provide Reasonable Asurance of Decommissioning Funding Or,In Alternative,Would Merit Permanent Exemption ML20217P7781997-12-18018 December 1997 Petition to Suspend Operating License Until Root Cause Analysis of Leaks in Piping in Train B of RHR Sys Conducted, Per 10CFR2.206 ML20140B9601997-06-0404 June 1997 Suppl to Great Bay Power Corp Petition for Partial Reconsideration of Exemption Order to Submit Requested Cost Data & to Request,In Alternate,Further Exemption ML20135A1051997-02-21021 February 1997 Petition of Great Bay Power Corp for Partial Reconsideration of Exemption Order.* Seeks Reconsideration of Staff'S Preliminary Finding That Great Bay Is Not Electric Utility as Defined by NRC in 10CFR50.2 ML20094N4021992-03-27027 March 1992 App to Appeal of Ofc of Consumer Advocate (Nuclear Decommissioning Finance Committee) Appeal by Petition Per Rsa 541 & Rule 10 ML20076D1281991-07-17017 July 1991 Licensee Motion to Dismiss Appeal.* Appeal Should Be Dismissed Based on Listed Reasons.W/Certificate of Svc ML20073E1301991-04-22022 April 1991 Opposition of Ma Atty General & New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution to Licensee Motion for Summary Disposition.* Board Should Reopen Record,Permit Discovery & Hold Hearing on Beach Sheltering Issues ML20070V3311991-03-29029 March 1991 Licensee Motion for Summary Disposition of Record Clarification Directive in ALAB-939.* Licensee Request That Motion Be Moved on Grounds That Issues Herein Identified Became Moot & Thus Resolved.W/Certificate of Svc ML20070V4061991-03-25025 March 1991 Massachusetts Atty General Response to Appeal Board 910311 Order.* License Should Be Vacated Until There Is Evidence of Adequate Protective Measure for Special Needs Population. W/Certificate of Svc ML20076N0831991-03-21021 March 1991 Massachusetts Atty General Response to Appeal Board 910308 Order.* Opposes Licensing Board Issuance of Full Power OL Based on Reliance of Adequacy of Plan.W/Certificate of Svc ML20076N1861991-03-19019 March 1991 Intervenors Reply to NRC Staff & Licensee Responses to 910222 Appeal Board Order.* NRC & Licensee Should File Appropriate Motions & Supply Requisite Evidentiary Basis That Will Allow Board to Make Decision.W/Certificate of Svc ML20070M5151991-03-18018 March 1991 Licensee Response to Appeal Board 910308 Order.* Listed Issues Currently Being Appealed Should Be Dismissed as Moot. W/Certificate of Svc ML20076N0671991-03-15015 March 1991 Licensee Response to Appeal Board 910311 Order.* Controversy Re Special Needs Survey Resolved.Next Survey Will Be Designed by Person Selected by State of Ma & Licensee Will Pay Costs.W/Certificate of Svc ML20070M3781991-03-11011 March 1991 Licensee Response to 910222 Appeal Board Order.* Response Opposing Suspending or Otherwise Affecting OL for Plant Re Offsite Emergency Plan That Has Been Twice Exercised W/No Weakness Identified.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20070M2101991-03-11011 March 1991 Reply to Appeal Board 910222 Order.* Response Opposes ALAB-918 Issues Re Onsite Exercise Contention.W/Certificate of Svc ML20029B6061991-02-28028 February 1991 Response of Ma Atty General to Appeal Board 910222 Order.* Questionable Whether Eight Issues Resolved.To Dismiss Issues Would Be Wrong on Procedural Grounds & Moot on Substantive Grounds.W/Certificate of Svc ML20070E7741991-02-25025 February 1991 Opposition to Licensee Motion to Dismiss Appeal of LPB-89-38.* Believes Board Should Not Dismiss Intervenors Appeal Because There Was No Hearing on Rejected Contentions. Board Should Deny Licensee Motion.W/Certificate of Svc ML20066H0831991-02-12012 February 1991 Licensee Motion to Dismiss Appeal of LBP-89-38.* Appeal Should Be Dismissed Either as Moot or on Grounds That as Matter of Law,Board Correct in Denying Hearing W/Respect to Contentions at Issue.W/Certificate of Svc ML20066H0021991-02-0808 February 1991 Licensee Response to Appeal Board Order of 910204.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20067C5081991-02-0101 February 1991 Ma Atty General Response to Appeal Board Dtd 910122.* Identifies Two Issues That Potentially May Be Resolved. State Will Continue to Investigate Facts Re post-hearing Events That May Effect Pending Issues.W/Certificate of Svc ML20029A0451991-01-28028 January 1991 Licensee Suggestion for Certified Question.* Draft Certified Question for Appeal Board Encl.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20029A0431991-01-28028 January 1991 Licensee Response to 910124 Memorandum & Order.* Common Ref Document Derived from Copying Respective Portions of Emergency Response Plan & Associated Documents Provided.W/ Certificate of Svc ML20070U4811991-01-24024 January 1991 Motion Requesting Limited Oral Argument Before Commission of City of Holyoke Gas & Electric Dept New Hampshire Electric Cooperative Mact Towns ML20029A0091991-01-24024 January 1991 Response to Appeal Board 910111 Order.* Atty General Will Continue Ad Intervenor in Facility Licensing Proceeding. Changes to Emergency Planning for Facility Forthcoming. W/Certificate of Svc ML20029A0121991-01-24024 January 1991 Motion for Substitution of Party.* Atty General s Harshbarger Moves That Secretary of NRC Enter Order Substituting Him in Place Jm Shannon as Intervenor to Proceeding.W/Certificate of Svc 1999-08-03
[Table view] |
Text
.
4 .
e
' UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'TO: Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation-RE: Construction Permits CPPR-135-CPPR-136 o********************
IN THE MATTER OF
- Docket Nos. 50-443 Public Service ~ Company of
.New Hampshire, et"al
-(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2)
REQUEST FOR AN ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CONSTRUCTION PERMITS FOR THE PROPOSED NUCLEAR POWER PLANT AT SEABROOK.
SHOULD NOT BE SUSPENDED OR REVOKED This request for an Order to Show Cause is made~on behalf of.the Seacoast Anti-Pollution League, 5 Market Street, Portsmouth, New Hampshire, 03801, an Intervenor in the above captioned.
The relief requested is an Order to Show Cause why the Seabrook construction permits should not be suspended or revoked because of lack of financial qualification on the part of Public Service Company of-New Hampshire, lead applicant for the Seabrook plant.
This request is based on the fact that PSNH no longer has a
" reasonable financing plan in light of relevant circumstances" due to the following:
- 1. January 11, 1982 Order of the New Hampshire Public Utility Commission indicatingJno further financing authorization would'be forthcoming for Unit 2 in light of present cir-cumstances.
8202100371 820205 PDR ADOCK 05000443 O
PDR . . - .- , . . . - --- -.
, 2. Reduction of the bond rating.on PSNH as second mortgage bonds to below investment grade by Standard & Poor's.
- 3. Imminent cash demands far in excess of funds available through operating income or, in light of items one and two above, available financing.
INTRODUCTION The staff and the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in Docket Numbers 50-443 and 50-444 found PSNH financially qualified to own and operate 50%
of the Seabrook facility.1 By divided vote, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board upheld the finding. The Commission also reviewed PSNH's fi-nancial qualification in Public Service Company of New Hampshire, et al (Seabrook Station, Units- 1 and 2) , 7 NRC 1 (1978), at which time it established that the " reasonable assurance" requirement of 10 C.F.R.
550.33(f) required an Applicant to have a " reasonable financing plan in the light of relevant circumstances." 7 NRC at'18. In New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution v. NRC, 582 F 2d 87, the First Circuit affirmed.
l Notwithstanding these decisions, PSNH's financial condition continues to be appropriate for reexamination since, as noted, under the Commission's Seabrook Decision, 7 NRC 1, PSNH must have a reasonable plan for financing the plant in the light of relevant, and hence changing, circumstances. The First' Circuit, in upholding the decision IAt the time of the initial decision, the total cost of the facility was estimated to be 1.545 billion. The nest recent cost estimate, provided by Dr. Richard Rosen of ESRG, is 7.63 billion.
3.-
i .that Public Service was financially qualified, specifically stated that "the NRC is not bound'by the[NRC's previous] decision should circumstances change in.the futu'e or should predictions not be borne out." 582
' F. 2dcat 93, note-9.
One reexamination of PSNH's financial qualifications has~already occurred. In March, 1979'the Seacoast Anti-Pollution League requested a/Show Cause Order on financial qualification grounds which was denied on November 16, 1979. In' denying the request, Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Denton relied primarily on the ability of PSNH to get rate relief, and thereby to attract investors to provide the nicessary capital. In other words, Mr. Denton, as a
" fundamental" assumption,rolicd on the "cxistence of a rational regulatory environment." (Decision, Slip Opinion at 18.)
In light of the validity of this " fundamental. underlying assumption" Mr. Dento7 was able to conclude that, as of November 1979,
< 'PSNH had a " reasonable financing plan".and denied the request.
I. THE FINDING THAT A " RATIONAL REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT"'
ASSURES FINANCIAL. QUALIFICATION IS NO LONGER VALID.
A fundamental premise of all decisions' concluding that PSNH is financially qualified to build the Seabrook facility is this:
- The NHPUCah's historically supported ~Seabrook, starting with its own Certificate of Site and Facility issued in~ January 1974.
--The NHPUC is constutionally required to permit rates designed to allow PSNH-to earn a-fair ~ rate of return, that is, a return necessary to attract capital for its operation and '
future needs.
- The rates will therefore be sufficient to attract the necessary capital, although perhaps at higher cost.
This tidy syllogism, however, is no longer valid, if it ever was. The fact is that PSNH cannot earn revenues which the NHPUC has allowed it to earn. Therefore, although the allowed return on equity may be entirely sufficient, the earnings are not, and it is PSNH that has to earn its revenues, not the NHPUC. In short, the assumption that the NHPUC can solve PSNH's problems, or is constitutionally required to, is without merit.
In its recent rate decision, Docket DR-81-87, the NHPUC, in an exhaustive opinion and report, allowed PSNH rates designed to permit it to earn an additional 28.9 million dollars, against an original rate request for 35 million. The decision was viewed
" positively" by PSNH, and SAPL is advised that PSNH has not applied for a rehearing as to the level of rates granted, a prerequisite to any appeal.
Notwithstanding the largest rate increase ever granted to PSNH, computed on an allowed rate of return on equity of 17%, Standard and Poors on January 18, 1982, within a week of the Decision, lowered its rating on PSNH's second mortgage bonds from BBB to BB+, below investment grade.
2 In its January 11, 1982 rate decision, the NHPUC allowed PSNH a 17% return on equity, among the highest ever allowed to an electric utility in the United States.
This event clearly establishes the fundamental fallacy in the syllogism on which the NRC has previously relied to find the applicant financially qualified; namely, that an adequate rate of return assures a utility will be financially qualified, if-the regulatory agency has previously approved its construction projects.
The NHPUC recognized this when it succinctly stated, at page 121:
"This Company's problem is not rate of return but cash flow."
The NRC, therefore, can no longer assume that an adequate rate of return, which PSNH has always been allowed, insures that an applicant will be financially qualified to_ safely construct and operate.a nuclear plant. The fact is, as set forth in part-3 of this request, PSNH faces a cash crisis, which cannot be met by allowing it higher rates.
II. THE NHPUC NO LONGER SUPPORTS SEABROOK II.
Even if the syllogism discussed in part I were valid, it is no longer appropriate to assume that the NHPUC will allow rates designed l to permit the construction of Seabrook Unit II, The NHPUC states on pages 120 and 121:
i "The Company's financial position is caused'by its commitment to the construction of Seabrook, and can therefore be improved only.by changing this l construction program. The Company has relied for its future health and success on one, and only one,. alternative. As a result, few options are available to the Company for improving its financial position. All these options _ involve major changes in the Company's plans for Seabrook. The options include: selling additional shares of both units, modifying the Seabrook agreement and selling shares ef.only one_of'the uhits; delaying one or both of the units; cancelling one of the units. "
Furthermore,fthe NHPUC has backed up its statements
.with an appropriate order. .It states on page 122:
"If during the next six months PSNII's' bond rating is downrated from its present level of BB+(S.P.)
or BBB . (Moody's) the Commission will condition its financings that will prevent their use toward the construction of Seabrook II...If their rating drops again it will no longer be of investment grade. A BB+/BBB utility is unlikely to be able to raise the 1.3 billion over the next five years. A lower ra utilitycouldneverraisethislevelofcapital."ged The event that the NIIPUC' said would prevent it frcm authorizing future financings for the construction of Unit II has indeed occurred with the lowering by Standard and Poors of the rating on PSNH's second mortgage bonds, called General and Refunding Bonds, from BBB , to BB+.
Therefore, by NIIPUC Order there will be no regulatory approval for financing of construction for Unit II.
Since PSNil cannot construct Unit II without new financing, it .is clear that PSNil no longer has " reasonable assurance" that-it can and will obtain the necessary funds to construct the facility. It is therefore absolutely clear it is no longer financially qualified within.the meaning of 10 C.F.R. S50.33(f).
3 It appears the NIIPUC inadvertently transposed the bond ratings for Standard and Poors and Moody's, since it was Standard and Poors that had been BBB and was reduced to BB+, whereas the Moody rating has remained at BA, less than investment grade. See the attached article from the Wall Street Journal, January 18, 1982 discussing PSNH's bond rating, and the effect of the decision of the NIIPUC.
e I
e
III. PSNH FACES A CASH' CRISIS WHICH PRECLUDES A FINDING THAT IT HAS-A " REASONABLE FINANCING' PLAN IN THE LIGHT OF RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES."
In 1982, PSNH assumes the following financing:
PSNH ASSUMED FINACINGS (000's) 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 Comnon Stock 69,866 64,000 74,400 54,800 40,200 Preferred Stock 30,000 30,000 30,000 Iong-Term Debt:
Term Note Rollover 25,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Term Note Addition 25,000 Eurodollar Po11over 28,000 Eurodollar Rollover 27,000 Eurobond 30,000 Barclay's Term Note 20,000 Banker's Acceptance 25,000-G & R Financing 140,000 90,000 120,000 120,000
'IUTAL 174,866 309,000 244,400- 254,800 210,200 50,000 Source: NHPUC Decision, Page 104 On information and belief, SAPL avers that the bulk of this 1982 financing will be required within the first two quarters of 1982 since, PSNH will, within a month, no longer have the benefit of having all construction costs at Seabrook paid by the owners of the facility, while they purchase approximately 15% of the facility from PSNH. During the past approximately 12 months, this has been the case, while the other owners have increased
their ownership through a so-called " adjustment" period,
- at a time when PSNH's ownership share has been reduced"to
~
approximately 35%.
Since the Seabrook' construction force is reported to be approximately 6,500 people, and since the average wage ~is reported to be $15 per hour, the payroll at Seabrook alone is 3.9 million dollars a week. At a 35% ownership level, PSNH will have to, within the month, start paying payroll cost alone of approximately 1.3 million per week.
This amount of payroll costs at Seabrook amounts to 71 million dollars a year. In addition, PSNH has outstanding more than 23 million shares of common stock, with a dividend of $2.12 per share. Thus, the dividend requirements for 1982, even if no more stock is issued, is 49 million-dollars.
These, of course, represent major cash requirements, which cannot be met through AFUDC, but only through revenues.
The question, therefore, is whether these, and other cash requirements, can be met through PSNH's financing plan.
As noted above, PSNH suggests 309 million will be needed during 1982.
To meet this, PSNH plans to raise 64 million through new l issues of common stock. At $14 a share, this represents nearly 4.6 million new shares to be issued this year. Thera is no assurance that PSNH can successfully market this many shares.
Its stock, since the rate increase, has been below $14, far below book value.4 4In 1971, the year before the first application for Seabrook was filed with the NHPUC, PSNH's stock sold above $30.
PSNH must, today, issue new financing merely to meet its dividend obligations, since its total operating income for the 12 months ended June 30, 1981, was only-45.2 million.
PSNH cannot~ issue first mortgage bonds, since its assets
'are fully mortgaged. Thus, its most important financing vehicle-i i in 1982 will be the issuance _of its second mortgage bonds, -
called G & R' financing. It plans to issue 140 million in 1982, of which nest was to be placed. in the first half. These bonds, however, are now rated below investment grade by both major rating services. Hence, there is no reasonable assurance that
, these bonds can be sold.-
Therefore, in the light of relevant _ circumstances, PSNH has no reasonable financing plan for the present year, and should i be found financially unqualified.
CONCLUSION PSNH's lack of financial qualifications is shown not only by the foregoing, but also by the report of the NHPUC in DR-81-87:
" Examination of PSNH forecasts and statements before ,
a this Commission yield the conclusion that the Company
! tends ta) overestimate its revenues and underestimate i
its_ costs with some regularity. Thus we must assume that the Company is actually worse off than their financial forecasts would indicate. Given the less favorable future conditions that this Commission e
expects and unfareseen events _that may have a negative impact on PSNH, this Commission is forced to conclude the PSNH may indeed reach a point in the near future where it will be unable to secure additional i financing and unable ta) meet current obligations."
(Page 105)
,. c 4
For the reasons stated, the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation should immediately institute a proceeding to show cause why the Seabrook construction permits should not be revoked or suspended due to the lack of financial qualification of the lead applicant, Public Service Company of New Hampshire, in the present circumstances.
Respectfully submitted, SEACOAST ANTI-POLLUTION LEAGUE By Its Attorneys, LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT A. BACKUS e
BY; d _
' Robert A. Backus February 5, 1982 l
1 i-
- s .,. v - , ,
,,..,,4 s e-, - r . s ..- .. u ,.~. m . .-s -
s . . c ., m - .
1
~ .
im E
- w se .m h-n2 i
E Taz.Ezempt Bonds PS New Hampshire's Seabrook Funding . .. _, ,_ ., ,... _
esarrgt re.ormJ. Donds issued Dy 1011 reeds and
- Is Clouded by S&P's Cut in Bond Ratings U
""2""~""M w \
.,.m-- ,, ss 13 d5% 4%.
= + Ch.ee.n C Carv PU Orst shs 10 54 G n:r ,, C. hen, neene.e. S Br& Tun f ~ a 5:
j l l l l ll u.....
153 EY D' M ELN l l l oeia. anors. part aum Davosas Cnty PV Opst ews 11 m si +1w N.
. . n n= . Dow JoMS MusseCPALS I I e 18 23w 25w. . -
saeffRspersaref Tus wau. STmaar Jousman. 9, .
se Fior.se Turnces Aum 44 'C1 M
,,,l 6e
.5E '
[Si i
MANCHESTER. N.H. - Public Service -
'Co. of New Hampshire's problems anancing [ !"7.MT"an n $'E N $ ..
r: its Seabrook nuclear plant are likely to in- ]
,,,,, y 2ll"'di,",,*,*,, ,, N ,* , " , , "J, ,
mvum eo as r La. oma T-=nes *ws a sow uw . .
f55 .c' rease as a result of Standard & Poor's "
l's :. Corp. lowering the ratings on some of its ,,
6 fpjrj % , mar %".13$:$"?
Uawi $* 7::
ofw p_
"E.
tonds below investment grade.
- ' The New Hampshire Pub!!c Utilities W .,
wnuc. as St. Co. my s%. me 6i as l
- Commission, which earner last week had cr-oc s I
.,,c, ;?,'; ; T T3 i I .
wnuc. Asmir. Co. Ny ins va e4 m
= .yfered. Public Service to seu part of its inter- e tAST WEEK 14.19 % g ,asmsyCa.Ny W g s1
.::.. Lest in the Seabrook plant out of concern for PREV W EEX14.14 % MM_ ,
- ags vurre.a. ausi 2.as w w w ..
s.5 ::the utiuty's Snancing outlook, immediately ,Qk "E - " reacted to the rating agency's action by for-
- , , , , , '"', ,, ,, 772.M' "J Tu"** aum
% 5 7 $*"
us 3 = o
~=r E. fbidding further ftnnnemg of the second of amount of capital we have to raise, we can Uj $ "* ,',",*n 82 .h $ $
.*two units under construction at Seabrook. defer for a couple of montns, but over the Nv gm g .sws g 80 .
g EE- !a 'Under various state laws Sduciaries of long run, we must seH bonds," Mr. Harrison av s,= , r aum . . , .i at 25 . !* son 2e pension plans aren't allowed to . buy said.
"; glll @ ,^,",'" Og ; y y q;" der
.. 3- bonds that have ratings less than investment Charles Bayless Anancial vice president =y sim vnrv , ais w se u
"~5. . U
- grade. trnndard & Poor's, citing "ru.mi., of Public Service, said this yean the utility is
'5E ' . for continued deterioration of the company's scheduled m raise 5285.5 munnn, with $180
"?$ll @ g*
omia vuneme aum
"]*
43s = m g _i-a__
E==: , *Snancial position " lowered the rating on its InHHan of that in long term bonds. Most of If5; '"' 5 l? i Uj
% Pa 34 " . + ' .
Ogeneral and refunding bonds to double-B. the rest would be raised through the sale of g g "; g nj EEE ' - 3plus from triple B-rninus, the bottom invest. common and preferred stock. g.o
,,, w av a nJ a it ss si .. ..;
23:E . - ment grade. Last year, Pubile Service had to raise
=E~
g,,v,',,"l, P,, 'y L . ",,,+8 Standard & Poor's also lowered the rat. only $151 million barmna much of the 5- sa c,wn. es aum ins m n n .. . . .
5 553 l*tng on Public Service's preferred stock to nnnetng burden was temporarily taken over C ls,"",,."'i E sig ; g pg g EE ll double-B-minus from doubleB and. lowered by' the cornpantae that evpended their inter-
.*the rating on us Srst ma bonds to ests in Seabrook. - " g *,,s,sg ,
g g gw p ,rw .
';tnple-B-minns from
,,,,,m p,ss os .n s, _i, Er
- DahidMa~hsad the Electne Utility Mr. Scotto of Srnnrerd & Poor's said re-
. Ment rate m!1ngs by the unlities commisst n
- lllQ gs usg 4 s2 ,7; -2 w
ww.iem pass er- ew n as n -t
, M' I roup G at Standard & Poor's, said only two have been " positive " but said: " Earnings MQlj d'.ii"J J j*
t ???? .'lother utilities have bond ratings below in, and cash flow cannot be expected to mean- wwv'em pass .: iiws -to n ai SE P, vestment grade. They are United Illuminat. ingfully improve, at least until the first Sea; n'f",,,""L"".'"."'**"""*"'"""*'"'-
l E d ing Co. of New Haven, Conn., and Generaj brook unit is placed in servtce." -
E ::Pubue Uuunes Co. of Parsippany, N.J., Mmors bvestes Service be., aumer i
'which owns the Three MUe Island nuclear U facinty major bond rating agency, for wveral years has rated Pubuc Service of New Hamp-Debt CalendarIs Slimi E.::= .
- Mnancing the Seabrook nuclear reactor, shire's . general and refunding. bonds Ba, b11rrOring the Concern "which currently is expected to cost $3.6 by. which it said is generally regarded as below
- M- :; lion, has been an overwhelming burden for investment grade. It rates the nrst mort-M. llPubuc Service of New Hampshire. Although gage bonds Baa. ,its lowest investment Over Fed Poh.ey, Rates _
~-"., Puhuc Service started with a 50% interest in grade-J; lhe plant, two years ago it sold 15% toPub!!c otherService can't issue any more first su e ww. svus, Jovanas. scarf an,.n,r
@ NEW YORK-Reflecting the nervousness ZNew England utiuties because it couldn't af. matgage bonds because those can't be se-4' ford the funding. Earuer last week the New cured by construction work stillin progress. in the credit markets over Federal Reserve
~~
THampshire Pubuc Utilities Cnmrn* or, and the completed properties already are System poucy and interest rates, only a 0;- handful of corporate and munic! pal debt is- Bad
- dered it to sell an additional 7% interest be. matgaged, Mr. Scotto said,
- cause of doubts it could nnance more than He said the lowered rating still contains sues Thaa.re schedul.ed eernio. m inunfor offer.ing
, no.cwo this waek.
J 25%. y -The-
"the underlying assumption that somehow s.n o so on a sucYir i J. Michael love, chairman of the utilities the company will manage to see its,way **'" ca..new an.an cannon
- rnmmiuton, said Friday
- "Furcer-financ- mmgh de Snancing of Seabuk. g n,rew M
,, pp y ca- m mun
,e no . ,
a tags for the second umt won't be approved
- gun %.until the situation is improved, either by the c===c5$ cur a*we ca ca-mme carnman enn. Morg
'iEE j
' :other utilities buy 1Dr in or the company Boatmen's Banediares Proposal " *'"' """" ~",',J:="- v ST.14UIS-Boattnen's Baneshares Inc. s25'n.'r*r #* $ "n' D ,.'.'a~s D "Er'i.,w.'."ro ** j s~"
- ,'chandrig to delay further construction at the agreed in princ!ple to acquire Farmers & """i. m sevm rasin=n eeuw wann. s Ame
.md 7,
- l;second unit." Merchants Bank. Cape Girardeau, Mo. The ~
Robert Harrison, president of Pub!1c Ser- price wasn't disclosed.. Hvar+ou.e.c-sze "S"'E "a"m' m ueise Blytt j;vice, said 'we will have to continue to seH . Boatmer's said the acquisition requires a o. "",,g'";,2,*J,'"o' g'l;, m, ,,,,em ,,,,
l zum, we sn riarwan,.nc.n e rn.-
$ ong-term debt" to finance the company's defimtive agreement and regulatory ap- TA,x g ev El1 jg ... construction program. The first of the 1.- prova!. Farmers & Merchants Bank, with wer=n Prie, La Es aman w introwenunt
$150.000 kilowatt reactors at Seahrook ts assets of about $129 milbon, would become '"" ** ""'O E'*o"",r"'? Mi'
.cscheduled for completion early in 1984 with Boatmen's lith bank chddiary. the bank """""c'88 ^885*"t* C'ro. for frw cMy of he vart.
- the second scheduled for 1986. "With the holding company said. E= T wf U "'sE2n=I".E U"El r 1.1 R
.g, ; _ rwenue mana. vu u .a tvncn anne w.E.a.ic ri
Bevill Allthese securrties have been sold. This annosacement aype.srs.u a m.stter of record only.
Cham
, _