ML20045G585
| ML20045G585 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 07/07/1993 |
| From: | Grant G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Guttman D LAFAYETTE, LA, SPIEGEL & MCDIARMID |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9307140158 | |
| Download: ML20045G585 (4) | |
Text
.
p ung'o, e
UNITED STATES j
t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
(
f WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 July 7, 1993 Daniel Guttman, Esq.
Spiegel & McDiarmid Suite 1100 1350 New York Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-4798 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)
Dear Mr. Guttman:
In connection with the comments you submitted regarding the proposed transfer of control of ownership of the River Bend Station, please provide a response from your client, the City of Lafayette, to the following by July 22, 1993:
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.
Paragraph 61,025, the FERC urgeu the Entergy customers (and the NRC staff presumes 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 service over the Entergy system, to approach the FERC with specific objections in the context of a request to amend or approve a service contract with Entergy Corporation. Would Lafayette 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 Lafayette's access to the GSU/Entergy transmission grid, what is Lafayette's understanding of the significance, if any, of the presence of a specific sentence requiring one transmission rate for a group of entities (i.e.,
"For each coordinating group of entities there shall be a single transmission charge.") in the Waterford 3 nuclear license (artitrust 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 Lafayette will have to forego if the GSU/Entergy merger is consummated and Lafayette is not granted " network transmission" or parallel meaningful access to the newly created GSU/Entergy regional transmission network?
J.\\
/0 Jg 090095 NBC RE C91TBi C&P'i 930714015B 930707 PDR ADOCK 05000458 P
i i
Daniel Guttman, Esq.
2 Thank you for your cooperation in assisting the staff in the review process.
Sincerely, Geo "re t Ag Chief In p3ct o Li en ing Policy Branch Pr ram Han gement, Policy Development and Analysis Staff cc: Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esq.
1 r
t i
6
July 7, 1993 t
Daniel Guttman, Esq.
2 Thank you for your cooperation in assisting the staff in the review process.
Sincerely, Original signed by G. Grant j
Geoffrey Grant, Acting Chief Inspection and Licensing Policy Branch-Program Management, Policy Development and Analysis Staff cc: Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esq.
s Distribution:
Central Files ILPB RF GGrant RWood WLambe DSkay GHoller NRCPDR LPDR PDFES/ILPB PDFES/ILPB OGC NRR/PDIV-2 ILPB/ AS Wlambe*
RWood*
GHoller*
-4b(RSkay GGra 6/29/93 6/29/93 7/1/93 7 /z /93
'] /1
- See previous concurrence
-+
t i
t l
P i
Daniel Guttman, Esq.
2 Thank you for your cooperation in assisting the staff in the review process.
Sincerely, i
f Geoffrey Grant, Acting Chief Inspection and Licensing Policy Branch Program Management, Policy Development and Analysis Staff I
cc: Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esq.
Distribution:
i Central files!
ILPB RF GGrant RWood i
WLambe DSkay GHoller NRCPDR LPDR p) l PD ES/ LPB P
W OGC NRR/PDIV-2 ILPB/PMAS i
WLambe R ood GHolleV DSkay GGrant
/gp93 672 g/93
?/ / /93
/ /93
/ /93
)
I i
l 1
i