ML20066G441

Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR2,50 & 54 Re Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal.Substantive Typo in 901015 Filing on Behalf of Licensee Noted

ML20066G441
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	01/23/1991
From:	Jablon R CONSOLIDATED EDISON CO. OF NEW YORK, INC.
To:	Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
References
FRN-55FR29043, FRN-56FR64943, RULE-PR-2, RULE-PR-50, RULE-PR-54 55FR29043-00201, 55FR29043-201, AD04-2-099, AD4-2, AD4-2-99, NUDOCS 9101280058
Download: ML20066G441 (2)

Text

i' CCCKET NU:,iSER NO,0 SED BULE M Afd15N rss ru hOl OLORGE GPl%QEL PC S l' I F. G F l. & M C D l AMil l(w)3 i"L6 ROBERT C McosAMMID DEN F'NkEL.5? EtN SA NDRA J STREBEL 'g g g g g 3.p, g g g g g g w. ;Q( LONAJ WEIO fMAN ROBER f A JABLDN M ARGARET A McGOWRIC K A ASH;NGiot. D C ?OOO*3 -.6 7 96 EVEAN M DERNARD JAME5 N HORWOOO j ALAN J ROT H F84WL M FALON j D4ANE H LAUTRUP '

IR ANC ES E FHANC69 * . h "M)

DANIE L i DAVIOSON T E L t' PHONE t;O2 t B79 4

)* JEFFREY R DABSIN pg3gg g ggp .  ? E ( l'( .1P 8 0 R ( 2 0.; 6 H M* d JWA. DAVID KOLAER gg g DAv1D R STR AtJS T E L E COf 4C R 5 202: 079 40H1 DONN#E $ BLAiR W1LLJAM S HUANG R!BE J PET E RS Y MOM AS C 1RAUGER JOHN J COR9ETT 1

PETER J HOPhtNG CYNTHta G BOOORAD ' ' , RUSSELL F GMITH- [U GARY J NEW ELL ({} AOOWC GHARTEV TAGOE RICHARD A BROWN

• P DaviO LOPEZ JOBC PH V AN LATCW

• h4ARE F BADALAME NTE

=RENA1 ETEINZO.I ' DAVID E POMPER P DANIEL BRUNrp

• JOSHUA # ATE 4

SCOTT H STRAU5s USA 3 GFL.D

' T ERf'&A A FERRANTE (7 covNSEL ' M A TT HEW F LJNTNER -

. PENCER L.n,M.ALL MARC = RO R, R .........c..~.

.A~T,<1NveM e Ae .. ... . _ ,..... . a

....... ~. m .~.. ... ~ .

.........~.....

• -.....-e...,...o January 23, 1991 ~ ~' - **** ~

...'..e.~~....m.

.".a Mr. Samuel L.-Chilk Secretary of the Commission United States Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 ATTENTION: Docketing and Service Branch Re: Notice of Proposed Rule on Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal

Dear Mr. Chilk:

~In reviewing the comments-on the proposed rulemaking relating to nuclear power plant license renewals, if we noted a substantive typographical error in the October'15, 1990, filing on behalf of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., el-al. 2/ On page eight of their comments on antitrust issues, they quote the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy as stating "there may be acclications to extend'or renew a license...." H.R. Report

-No. 1470, 91st-Cong. 2nd Sess. 29 (1970) (emphasis in quotation of Consolidated Edison Co., et al.). In fact, the Joint Committee report states "there may be applications to extend or review a license...." Id. (emphasis added),

lf 55 Fed. Reg. 29043 (July 17, 1990).

l l 2/. Comments on Behalf of Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, 1 Inc.; Niagara Mohawk' Power Corp.; Northeast Utilities; Public Service Electric & Gas; Rochester Gas & Electric; South Carolina

, Electric & Gas Co. ; TU Electric; Washington Public Power Supply I

System; and Yankee Atomic Electric Co.

[

9101280058 910123 PDR PR 2 55FR29043 PDR g)O J

/

Mr. Samuel L. Chilk January 23, 1991 Page 2

~

As explained in the initial comments of the American Public power Association, the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association and Public Systems, dated Ontober 15, 1990, 2/

applications for license modifications during the initial term or for extension of an abbreviated term (i.e., what the Joint Committee referred to as " applications which may be filed during the licensing process") A/ are " applications to extend or review a license" for which antitrust review is generally not required unless the modificali..=, constitutes a new or substantially different facility. A license renewal application for a new term

-is an application for a new license for which antitrust review is manoated. Therefore, the Joint Committee's language does not support the proposed rule's failure to provide for antitrust review of license renewal applications. 1/ Because the misquotation of the language could inadvertently mislead, we call the misquotation in the Consolidated Edison Co, et al. comments to your attention.

Respectfully submitted,

, h/fh42 b.

Robert A. Jablon M8 Cynthia S. Bogorad Russell F. Smith, III Attorneys for American Public Power Association, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association and Public Systems cc: Joseph B. Knotts, Esq.

2/ Page 8, n.23.

A/ Report by the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. Report No. 1470, 91st Cong., 2nd Sess. 29 (1970).

5/ In any event, as further described in our initial comments, see, e.a., pages 9-16, in view of changes in the electric utility industry and thus in the activities of the licensees, as well as changes In the licensed facilities themselves which have occurred since the initial antitrust review, the renewal license is for a "substantially different" facility.