ML20052D108
| ML20052D108 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas, Comanche Peak, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 05/04/1982 |
| From: | Dopsovic D, Mcmillen N JUSTICE, DEPT. OF |
| To: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-A, NUDOCS 8205060281 | |
| Download: ML20052D108 (10) | |
Text
m o
D'C ET-'
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION og gny _4 n r g
)
In the Matter of
)
Docket Nos. 50-498A
)
50-499A HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER
)
COMPANY, et al.
)
Docket Nos. 5.0-A (South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2)
)
601.3) g
)
9 TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING
)
g fj COMPANY, et al.
)
- g.. - *'
(Comanche Peak Steam Electric
)
S;
, go'f7
D g-Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
kq.,3yW ; h
%QOd%{g$
)
s s,
e RESPONSE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TO
- BROUNSVILLE AND REQUEST FOR IMMEDIATE APPROVAL OF
)
THE SETTLEMENT LICENSE CONDITIONS Pursuant to the order of the Administrative Law Judge dated April 15, 1982, the Department of Justice (" Department") hereby submits its response to the filing of the Public Utilities Board of the Ci ty of Brownsville, Texas ("Brownsville").
The Department f urther requests that the Administrative Law Judge immediately approve and order the attachment of the settlement license conditions for both the Comanche Peak units and the South Texas Project.
Finally, the Department requests that the Administrative Law Judge order Brownsville to inform him and the parties whether it will seek further relief, either by evidentiary hearing or otherwise.
Unless Brownsville can d
support the need for further proceedings, both the Comanche J
Peak and South Texas proceedings should be terminated.
((
8205060281 820504 PDR ADOCK 05000445 N
PDR-
On April 15, 1982 the Administrative Law Judge ordered Brownsville to submit responses to four questions to determine its position with regard to the proposed settlement of the South Texas case.
Brownsville was not required to set forth its position concerning the Comanche Peak settlement license conditions.
Brownsville did not intervene in the Comanche Peak proceeding and is not a party to that proceeding.
All parties to the Comanche Peak proceeding have withdrawn or agreed to the proposed settlement.
That settlement is now uncontested and the proposed license conditions should now be immediately approved and ordered attached without further showing by the parties.
The Department submits that the record already contains adequate information to find that the proposed Comanche Peak settlement license conditions are in the public interest.
See pp.
3-4, infra.
Brownsville has responded to the four questions set forth in the order of April 15, 1982 concernino its oosition'in South Texas.
Brownsville now takes the position that it does not oppose approval of the proposed settlement in the South Texas case and that it does not request rejection of that settlement.
It has not stated that approval of that settlement will either af firmatively harm it or create or maintain a situation inconsistent with the antitrust laws.
Given these responses, it would appear that Brownsville no longer contests the approval and attachment of the proposed settlement license conditions in South Texas. _-
i '
4 In cases where not all parties have entered into a settlement or agreed to withdraw, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved settlement license conditions where it has found that they are a fair and reasonable settlement in the public interest and that their immediate attachment would not prejudice any party. 1/
Brownsville's response does not state that it will be prejudiced by immediate attachment.
Consequently, the Administrative Law Judge need only determine that the settlement is a fair and reasonable settlement within the public interest in order to approve these conditions.
The Department submits that this settlement meets this test and I
that there currently exists an adequate record for such.a determination.
On December 3, 1980, the NRC staf f filed its Comments and Motion For Approval of Settlement License Conditions. 2/
That pleading contains a detailed analysis of the reasons the proposed settlement license conditions in both the Comanche Peak and South Texas proceedings are in the public interest.
i The Department also filed on that date a pleading setting forth 1/
- Sce, e.g.,
Duke Power Company (Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 & 2), LEP-74-47, 7 A.E.C. 1158, 1159 (1974); Louisiana Power & Light Co. (Unterford Steam Generating Station, Unit No.
3), LBP-74-78, 8 A.E.C. 718 (1974); Florida Power & Light Co.
(St. Lucie Plant, Unit No. 2), " Memorandum and Order" (April 24, 1981), unpublished, at 3-6, 12.
2/
NRC Staf f Comments On and Motion For Approval of Settlement License Conditions, dated December 3, 1980.
The Motion For Approval of the Settlement License Conditions has not yet been ruled upon and is currently pending..-..
its support for the settlement license conditions as being in the public interest. 3/
On the basis of this record, the Administrative Law Judge should find the settlement license conditions to be in the public interest and order their attachment.
In the view of the Department, only one unresolved matter remains.
While this matter does not prevent the Administrative Law Judge from immediately approving the settlement license conditions and ordering their attachment, it could delay termination of the South Texas proceeding unless resolved now.
It is unclear to the Department whether Brownsville may yet seek an evidentiary hearing to obtain relief in addition to the settlement license conditions in the South Texas proceeding.
Although Brownsville's responses and statements of its counsel 1
(Tr. at 1315, 1323) can be read to indicate that it will not do so, the matter may not be free from doubt.
3/
Reply of the Department of Justice to the Comments of the Public Utilities Board of the City of Brownsville Opposing Proposed Settlement Licence Conditions, dated December 3, 1980 at 514.
The Department also set forth its position in support of the settlement license conditions at the prehearing conference held before the Licensing Board on October 24, 1980.
The Department also addressed the manner in which the licensing conditions would remedy the situation set forth in its advice letters.
(Tr. at 1215-1222).
The Department does not believe that the Administrative Law Judge need find that the settlement license conditions remedy the situation inconsistent with the antitrust laws alleged in the Attorney General's advise letter before approving the license cor.d i tions.
Ilowe ver, the Administrative Law Judge may find these discussions useful.
The Department's position with regard to' the relevance of the AC and DC interconnection issue to these proceedings was also set forth there.
(Tr. at 1222-1236). _
In order to resolve this last issue, the Department requests that the Administrative Law Judge order Brownsville to state for the record, within ten days of that order, whether it intends to request an evidentiary hearing or otherwise seek relief in addition to the settlement license conditions in the South Texas case.
If Brownsville indicates it will not seek further relief, both the Comanche Peak and South Texas proceedings should be terminated.
In the event Brownsville indicates that it does intend to request further relief in South Texas, Brownsville should be required to state at that time and with specificity the issues that will require further resolution and whether it believes an evidentiary hearing will be required to resolve each such issue.
In conclusion, the Department of Justice requests that the settlement license conditions for both the Comanche Peak units and the South Texas Project be approved and made ef fective in their entirety.
The Departnent further requests that the Administrative Law Judge order Brownsville to state for the record whether it will seek any f urther relief in the South I
i._
Texas case and whether it believes an evidentiary hearing will be required.
Dated:
May 4, 1982 Respectfully submitted, Washington, D.C.
9 Nancy H. McMillen
)'
M M
dvid A. Dopsovic Attorneys Energy Section Antitrust Division U.S.
Department of Justice (Telephone No:
(202) 724-6316)
-G-
yv UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 32 tgy -4 P515 Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board t-In the Matter of
)
HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER
)
COMPANY, et al.
(South
)
Docket Hos. 50-498A Texas Project, Units 1 and
)
50-499A 2)
)
)
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING
)
COMPANY, et al.
(Comanche
)
Docket Nos. 50-445A Peak Steam Electric
)
50-446A Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that service of the foregoing Status Report of the Department of Justice has been made on the following parties listed hereto this 4th day of May 1982, by depositing copies thereof in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid.
James A. Laurenson, Esquire Alan S. Rosenthal, Esquire Administrative Law Judge Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Michael C. Farrar, Esquire Commission Thomas S. Moore, Esquire Washi ng ton,.
D.C.
20555 Atomic Safety nnd Licensing Appeal Board Panel Samuel J.
Chilk, Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Office of the Secretarf of Commission the Nuclear Regulatory Washington, D.C.
20555 Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Jerome E.
Sharfman, Esquire Chase R. Stephens, Secretary U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Docketing and Service Branch Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Washington, D.C.
20555 Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Stephen H.
Lewis, Esquire Ann P. Hodgdon U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Of fice of the Executive Legal Director Washington, D.C.
20555
Thomas S. Moore, Esq.
David M.
Stahl, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Isham, Lincoln & Beale Appeal Board 1120 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Suite 325 Commission Washington, D.C.
20036 Washington, D.C.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Michael I. Miller, Esq.
Appeal Board Peter Thornton, Esq.
U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Isham, Lincoln & Beale Commission 4200 One First National Plaza Washington, D.C.
Chicago, Illinious 60603 Atomic Safety and Licensing Richard C.
Balcugh, Assistant Board City of Attorney U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory City of Austin Commission P.O. Box 1088 Washington, D.C.
20555 Aus ti n, Texas 78767 G.W. Oprea, Jr.
Nicholas M. Meiszer, City Manager Executive Vice President City of Austin Houston Lighting and Power P.O.
Box 1088 Company Austin, Texas 78767 P.O. Box 1700 Houston, Texas 77001 R. Gordon Gooch, Esq.
R.L. Hancock, Director Baker and Botts City of Austin Electric Utility 1701 Penn. Ave.,
N.W.
P.O. Box 1088 Washington, D.C.
20006 Austin, Texas 78767 J. Michael Baldwin, Esq.
Don R.
Butler, Esq.
J.
Gregory Copeland, Esq.
J225 South West Tower Baker and Botts Austin, Texas 78701 3000 One Shell Plaza Houston, Texas 770022 J.A.
Bouknight, Jr., Esq.
Wheatley and Wollesen Douglas G. Green, Esq.
1112 Watergate Office Building Lowenstein, Newman, Reis &
2600 Virginia Avenue, N.W.
Axelrad Washington, D.C.
20037 1025 Connecticut Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 Joseph B.
Knotts, Jr., Esq.
Jay M. Galt, Esq.
Debevoise & Liberman Jack P.
Fite, Esq.
1200 Seventeenth St., N.W.
Looney, Nichols, Johnson & Hayes Washington, D.C.
20036 219 Couch Drive Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102
O Merlyn D. Sampels, Esq.
Robert E. Bathen, Esq.
J.
Irion Worsham, Esq.
R.W. Beck &' Associates dorsham, Forsyth & Sampels P.O. Box 6817 2001 Bryan Tower Orlando, Florida 32803 Dallas, Texas 75201 Robert A.
Jablon, Esq.
Ms. Evelyn H.
Smith George Spiegel, Esq.
Route 6, Box 298 Spiegel & McDiarmid Gaffney, South Carolina 29340 2600 Virginia Ave.,
N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20037 W. Roger Wilson, Esq.
Morgan Hunter, Esq.
Jon C. Wood, Esq.
McGinnis, Lochridge & Kilgore 1500 Alamo National Building Texas State Bank Building San Antonio, Texas 78205 Fifth Floor 900 Congress Avenue Austin, Texas 78701 Douglas F. John, Esq.
John W.
Davidson, Esq.
McDermott, Will and Emery Sawtelle, Goode, Davidson & Troilo 1850 "K"
St.,
N.W.
1100 San Antonio Savings Building Suite 500 San Antonio, Texas 78205 Washington, D.C.
20006 Robert M. Rader, Esq.
James E. Monahan Conner, Moore and Corber Executive Vice President and 1747 Pennsylvania Ave.,
N.W.
General Manager Washington, D.C.
20006 Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.
P.O. Box 6296 Waco, Texas 76706 Linda L. Asker, Esq.
Maynard Human, General Manager Leca J.
Barish, Esq.
Western Framers Electric Cooperative Attorney General's Office P.O. Box 429 P.O.
Box 12548 Anadarko, Oklahoma 73005 Austin, Texas 78711 Ms. Nancy Holdam Jacobson Donald M. Clements, Esq.
Coordinator, Citizens for Fair Gulf State Utilities Company Utility Regulatory P.O.
Box 2951 1400 Hemphill Street Beaumont, Texas 77704 Porth Worth, Texas 76104 Frederick H.
Ritts, Esq.
Mr. G. Holman King Law Of ficas of Northcutt Ely West Texas Utilities Co.
Watergate 600 Building P.O. Box 841 Wanhington, D.C.
20037 Abilene, Texas 79604 e
t
Robert A. O'Neil, Esq.
Robert E.
Cohn, Esq.
Miller, Balis & O'Neil, P.C.
Richard J. Leidi, Esq.
776 Executive Building Butler, Binion, Rice, Cook & Knapp 1030 15tn St., N.W.
818 Connecticut Avenue, H.W.
Washington, D.C.
20005 William H.
Burchette, Esq.
Perry G.
Brittain, President Heron, Burchette & Ruckert Texas Utilities Generating Co.
1200 How Hampshire Ave.,
N.W.
2001 Bryan Tower Suite 420 Dallas, Texas 75201 Washington, D.C.
20036 J.K. Spruce, General Manager City Public Service Board P.O. Box 1771 San Antonio, Texas 78296 W.N. Woolsey, Esq.
Kleberg, Dyer, Redford & Weil 1030 Petroleum Tower Corpus Cnristi, Texas 78474 Dick Terrell Brown, Esq.
800 Milam Building San Antonio, Texas 78205 i
Somervell County Public Library P.O.
Box 417 Glen Rose, Texas 76043 Mr. William C.
Price Central Power & Light Co.
P.O.
Box 2121 Co rpus Christi, Texas 78403 Antitrust and Economic Analysis Branch Diticion of Engineering Office of Nuclear Reaction Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4
Washington, D.C.
20535 NANCY H. MCMILLEN, Attorney Washington, D.C.
20006 Energy Section, Antitrust Division, Department of Justice l
l l
-