ML20057A157
| ML20057A157 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 09/07/1993 |
| From: | Pembroke J CAJUN ELECTRIC POWER COOPERATIVE, INC., DUNCAN, WEINBERG, MILLER & PEMBROKE, P.C. (FORMERLY |
| To: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20057A151 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9309130124 | |
| Download: ML20057A157 (5) | |
Text
8 6
\\*a L1 5
I O
2p pygED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
[ #3 j
p _7 ?M hl BEFORE THE i --
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 7
/,l Dj
^%
$TT,Thhh In the Matter of
)
Gulf States Utilities Company Docket No. 50-458
)
-a (River Bend Station)
)
REPLY OF CAJUN ELECTRIC POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.,
TO THE RESPONSE OF GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY ON STAFF'S PROPOSED DETERMINATION THAT THE REQUESTED LICENSE AMENDMENTS DO NOT INVOLVE A SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION WITHIN THE MEANING OF 10 C.F.R. S 50.92 4
Cajun Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.
(" Cajun"),
pursuant to 10 C.F.R.
g 2.706 (1993), hereby files its Reply to Gulf States Utilities Company's ("GSU") response on Staff's L
proposed determination that requested license amendments do not involve a significant hazards consideration
(" Proposed Determination") within the meaning of 10 C.F.R. 5 50.92 (1993)
{
On April 6, 1993, and on August 17, 1993, Cajun filed, respectively, its Comments and Amendments to Comments on the Proposed Determination.
On August 23, 1993, GSU filed its Response with regard to the Proposed Determination.
Cajun hereby submits its reply to GSU's Response.
To avoid burdening the record, particularly since GSU's response does not call into question Cajun's arguments, Cajun will not restate its arguments previously made in its August 6 and August 17 pleadings.
Cajun does note, however, that GSU blithely indicates that Staff should have no concerns regarding the " safe" shutdown 9309130124 930907 PDR ADOCK 050004Is O
t 84
., l of River Bend.
Egg GSU Response at 6-8.
Staff should have t
}
\\
concerns regarding GSU's proposed solution regarding the shutdown scenario and those concerns should be substantial.
)
GSU utilizes a " trust me" approach arguing that Entergy Operations, Inc.
("EOI"), the proposed plant operator, would simply shut down the plant in the event of a GSU financial calamity resulting from its litigation with Cajun.
- However, i
v among the matters which GSU fails to address area:
1.
Does the premature shutdown of the nuclear facility increase the safety l
hazards related to the Plant?
2.
How will EOI fund the shutdown if GSU no i
longer makes payments to EOI under the GSU/EOI River Bend Station Operating
-f l
i Agreement?
i 3.
How can EOI effect a shutdown of River l
Bend if Cajun opposes GSU's shutdown decision?
i 4
f i
On the record as currently developed, Staff is unable j
to make a determination that no significant hazard will result j
i from the proposed license amendments.
I t
WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons., and for the l
6 reasons set forth in Cajun's August 6 and August 17, 1993 pleadings, Cajun requests that the Staff and/or the Commission:
i 1.
Grant Cajun's requested intervention in this
]
proceeding for all purposes;
)
i 2.
Deny the requested no significant hazards consideration determination; or, in the alternative, order a full evidentiary hearing to determine whether the requested no significant hazards consideration determination should be granted and whether the requested license amendments should be granted; 3.
Impose on the issuance of the no significant i
hazards consideration determination and the
j
- s.,
approval of the proposed license amendments, a condition which would (a) require Entergy to extend its credit to, indemnify and otherwise financially support GSU in the event GSU loses the i
Cajun Litigation or the Texas Litigation, and/ar (b) require Entergy to fully fund EOI operation of l
River Ber.d to ensure its safe and reliable operation; f
4.
Approve the proposed license amendments only upon
}
Cajun's consent; l
l 5.
Approve the license amendments only upon conditions which are adequate to protect Cajun's interests as a thirty percent owner of River Bend; 6.
Order that GSU and EOI fully comply with River Bend license conditions 10 and 12; and 7.
Grant such other relief as the Commission deems appropriate.
a Dated:
September 7, 1993 Respectfully submitted, l
b Ja46s DT Pembroke i
Thomas L, Rudebusch DUNCAN, WElNBERG, MILLER &
I j
- PEMBROKE, P.C.
I i
1615 M Street, N.W.
i Suite 800
( 0 6
63 b f
Attorneys for Cajun Electric 1
Power Cooperative, Inc, 1
i l
E d
I
- mm e
i t
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I,
James D.
Pembroke, hereby certify that I have this l
7th day of September 1993, served the foregoing document upon each person designated on the attached service list by first class mail, postage prepaid.
i o o 4-4/-
.% tine s D. Pembroke DUNCAN, WEINBERG, MILLER
& PEMBROKE, P.C.
1615 M Street, N.W.
Suite 800 Washington, D.C.
20036 (202) 467-6370
'O h
g W
sq? ', @q a
+2
~.
D t,t
<o
'h e
Samuel J.
Chilk, Secretary Nuclear Regulatory Com=1ssion Office of the General Counsel One White Flint North U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory 11555 Rockville Pike Commission Room 16 H1 Washington, DC 20555 Rockville, MD 20852 Philip P.
Graham, Vice President Gulf States Utilities Company 5485 U.S. 11ighway 61 Mark J.
Wetterhahn, Esq.
Post Office Box 220 Counsel for GSU St. Francesville, LA 70775 Winston & Strawn 1400 L Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20005 Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Administrative Judge Administrative Judge B.
Paul Cotter, Jr.,
Chairman Richard F.
Cole Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission-Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 Cecil L.
Johnson, Esq.
Vice President - Legal Services Administrative Judge Gulf States-Utilities Company Peter S.
Lam 350 Pine Street Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Beaumont, TX 77701 U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555