ML20045G355
| ML20045G355 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 07/07/1993 |
| From: | Grant G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Berger M BRAND & HALL |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9307130233 | |
| Download: ML20045G355 (4) | |
Text
_ _
s p stre
'o UNITED STATES l'
g g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 r,,
- y July
- 7, 1993 Melvin G. Berger, Esq.
Brand, Beeny, Berger & Whitler 1730 K Street, N.W.
Suite 1000 Washington, D.C. 20006 l
Re: Gulf States Utilities Company; River Bend Station, Docket No. 50-458:
Proposed Transfer of Ownership of River Bend Station from Gulf States Utilities Company (GSU) to Entergy Corporation (Entergy) i
Dear Mr. Berger:
l In connection with the comments you submitted regarding the proposed transfer of I
control of ownership of the River Bend Station, please provide a response from your clients, Terrbonne Parish (Terrebonne) and the Louisiana Energy and Power Authority (LEPA), to the following by July 22, 1993-i 1)
In the FERC " Order Accepting Rate Schedules, Accepting Amendment to Power Agreement, Conditionally Accepting Transmission Tariff With Modifications, Conditionally Accepting Service Agreements, Granting Waiver of Notice, and Denying Motion to Update Market Power Analysis", dated April 5, 1993, 63 F.E.R.C.
I Paragraph 61,025, the FERC urged the Entergy customers (and the NRC staff presumes i
GSU's customers as well subsequent to the merger) who are eligible for certain benefits perceived to be broader than what is termed " point-to-point" transmission 4
service over the Entergy system, to approach the FERC with specific objections in l
the context of a request to amend or approve a service contract with Entergy l
Corporation. Would Terrebonne and LEPA explain to the staff why this proposal would not be an acceptable option in resolving its transmission access dispute with GSU/Entergy?
2)
In terms of Terrbonne's and LEPA's access to the GSU/Entergy transmission grid, what is Terrebonne's and-LEPA's understanding of the significance, if any, of the presence of a specific sentence requiring one transmission rate for a group i
of entities (i.e., "For each coordinating group of entities there shall be a single transmission charge.") in the Waterford 3 nuclear license (antitrust license condition 5) and the lack of a similar sentence in the River Bend and Grand Gulf nuclear licenses?
- 3) Are there currently any specific power transactions underway or currently being negotiated which Terrebonne or LEPA will have to forego if the GSU/Entergy merger is consummated and Terrebonne or LEPA is not granted " network transmission" or parallel meaningful access to the newly created GSU/Entergy regional transmission network?
- 4) At page 11 of Terrebonne's, " Comments, Petition For Leave To Intervene, And Requests For A Finding Of Significant Change And A Hearing Of Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government", Terrbonne states that the, a m mmem a(
eom 9307130233 930707 PDR ADDCK 05000458 P
PDR c.
Melvin G. Berger, Esq 2
El i. nation of the second largest utility [GSU] in the region as a Jott t.9< ardinating partner will reduce substantially the potantic' r coordinated development of generation available to e d LEPA.
Terrebori '-
Please provide more specific examples of how the elimination of GSU as an independent power entity would adversely impact competition in the bulk power services market in which Terrebonne and LEPA participate.
Thank you for your cooperation in assisting the staff in the review process.
Sincerely, h
Ge fr r nt, A
'ng Chief Inspectio and Licensing Policy Branch Program Management, Policy Development and Analysis Staff cc: Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esq.
l l
l
July 7, 1993 Melvin G. Berger, Esq.
2 Elimination of the second largest utility [GSU] in the region as a potential coordinating partner will reduce substantially the potential for coordinated development of generation available to Terrebonne and LEPA.
Please provide more specific examples of how the elimination of GSU as an independent power entity would adversely impact competition in the bulk power services market in which Terrebonne and LEPA participate.
t Thank you for your cooperation in assisting the staff in the review process.
Sincerely, I
j Original signed by G. Grant l
Geoffrey Grant, Acting Chief Inspection and Licensing Policy Branch Program Management, Policy Development and Analysis Staff cc: Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esq.
Distribution:
Central Files ILPB RF GGrant RWood WLambe DSkay GHoller NRCPDR LPDR PDFES/ILPB PDFES/I'.PB OGC NRR/PDIV-2 ILPB/
WLambe*
RWood*
GHoller* -4"<zDSkay#
GGra 6/29/93 6/29/93 7/1/93 pr/;1/93 7/7
- See previous concurrence
l Melvin G. Berger, Esq.
2 l
Thank you for your cooperation in assisting the staff in the review process.
l Sincerely, Geoffrey Grant, Acting Chief Inspection and Licensing Policy Branch Program Management, Policy Development and Analysis Staff i
l cc: Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esq.
l Distribution:
Central Files "ILPB RF GGrant RWood WLambe DSkay GHoller
'I [d NRCPDR l
I LPD PMEh./LPB h lh d'
i NRR/PDIV-2 ILPB/PMAS PDF LPB WLambe p3od GHolle DSkay GGrant f /J$93 g g /93 7///93
/ /93
/ /93 l
l l
l 1
l l
.. --