ML20086L372

Response Opposing Applicant Motion to Bifurcate Hearing Re Emergency Plan Contentions.Bifureation Would Inhibit Development of Adequate Record on Emergency Plan Issues. Affirmation of Svc Encl

ML20086L372
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	02/02/1984
From:	Jeffrey Riley GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
NUDOCS 8402080203
Download: ML20086L372 (7)

Text

~

UKITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION nxyr7Ep rm BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of ) ~84 RB -6 P1 :12

)

DUKE POWER COMPol.Y, g d. ) Docket Kos.r: 5.0-413....

) Ec50-41k,ig'v-(Catawba Euclear Station, ) 2.:ANC3 Units 1 and 2) ) Feoruary 2, 198h C ESG 'S RESP 0:<SE TO s.PF LIC..KT' S ECTIO ; TO LIFURCATE THE H::.ahILG hEGnhDI;.G E:;EhG:2.01' PLn? COKTEATIJI.5 Ih TxE F 0h!' DF .. . .,F?!].JI' bY J:3 Jh. EII D appaiennt filed a r.ctior. to tifurcate the cutject hearing rc3uesting the appointment of e separate Board to near ener6en03 planning contentions, Jan. lb, 19d,. C.sc3 herewith filas its oppositien to npelicant's r.otion.

There are tnres ba:es for CidG's opposition. 1) In sn affidavit in cupport of .'.pplicant's motion, Warren Owen, Executive Vice President, Ingineering and Construction, stcted "In the event any of these activities (fuel loading, zero power physics testing, .

0-b' s power testing, and 5-100 t power testing) are delayed there will be significant costs tc the consumer in Acrth and South .

Cnrelina." 233 uill show that witn declaring a nuclear ststion t commercial, Applicant has requested a rate increase, not a decresse.

2) Inere is no compelling need for power frcn Catawbn unit 1 now nor will there be in tne ressonac1;. foreseeable future. 3) The existing Eoar; has alrendj heard extensive testir.cn;. on dis Contention 17 It has exar.ined witnesses of the parties in regard to botn local meteorology and the effect of this meteorology on the probable consequences of a severe accident with particular _

reference to Charlotte, if Contention 11, Tr. Dec. 13 and la, 19tk.

It has hear the voir dire's of witnesses and been in a position to .

reach conclusions as to the probit) and competence of these witnesses.

8402000203 840202 $2 PDR ADOCK 05000413 O PDR e hO;

The present Boerd found the init'.al Palmetto /CESG contention in need of revision in response to considerationsadvanced by Staff and Applicant. A Board revised versicn was found acceptable for

consideration of the merits, Memorandum and Order, Sept. 29, 1984, p . 14 ' Applicant has sineo expressed opposition to the admission of this contention, Nov. 13, Jan. 12, and Jan. 16, 1984 It has sought reconsideration, application of 10 CFR $2 756 procedures, directed certification and the establishment of a new board to hear this matter. This extraordinary activity on the part of Applicant, a seasoned and largely successful litigant in NRC f proceedings, may indeed ref. Lect an apprehension on their part that they will not prevail in a matter in which a Board has shown a i disposition to consider emergency planning for Charlotte based on the merits. CESG recognizes that the present schedule will permit hearing of emergency planning matters and a decision on the  !

contentions in a time frame which will not be damaging to the public interect and which could amply accomodate Applicant's previously stated fuel loading date of November, 1984 The only i

( effect of an earlier fuel loading data will be to advance the date 5 on which Applicant can claim commercial operation. The sole -

~

beneficiary will be Applicant in terms of increased earnings. The public will be made to pay prematurely for a facilgy that does not E benefit it. ~

l l Significant Costs to the Consumer l

The cost of McGuire units 1 and 2 has recently been put at

$1.8-1 9 billion. The cost of Catawba, with approximately the same capacity, is put at about $3 7 Clearly, the capital cost component l

of generation at Catawba will be greater than for McGuire, p I attest that I have personally talked with William Cart 6r,

~

l l

. t

~3-head accountant for the Eorth Carolina Utilities Commission. He has provided me with rate increase requests made by the Applicant in regard to McGuire units 1 and 2 and the increase allowed by the North Carolina Public Utilities Comnission for unit 1. Mr.

Carter stated that the capital costs associated with these units outweighed the fuel savings. The factors provided were:

McGuire-1 McGuire-2 Duke request UC allowed Duke request In thousands Increase s110,933 $96,628 591,032 Capital 127,077 114,h77 79,170  ;

O/M, fuel (16,1hh) (13,6h9) 11,862  ;

Fuel (41,799) (41,304) (42,106) i Wages 14,337 14,337 9,653 Depreceation 20,447 20,4L7 25,575 I Gneral taxes 3,919 3,6o9 3,273  :

Income tax 1h,607) ( 4,63_6) 9,260 Total (7,703) (7,k67) 5,705

)

Total x 2.1* (16,1kh) (15,6g9) 11,662 Tax factor is 2.1.

Clearly Mr. Owen is in error. One longer Catawba is deleyed the more will be the savings to consumers in Ecrth and South Carolina.

!ieed For Power Tne current (1973) forecast for electrical pcwer need made Pw b b'c l by the, Staff of the North Carolina Utilities Commission puts the first year of requiring Catawba-1 as 1990, Catswba-2 as 1999. The May 1954 fuel loading date seems to be part and parcel of Duke's practice of overforecasting electrical peak demand. In 1971 Duke i forecast summer peak loads of the order of 37,500 MW. Current i

Duke forecasts are of the crder of'14,000 MW. Current capacity, including McGuire-1 and 2 is of the order of 14,600 MW. There is

h.

no threatened shortage in peak capacity in the imnediately foreseeable future. No conceivable hcrn will be done Applicant's custoners j

by delaying the availability of Catawba-1 for in excess of five i Q years. -I Testinony on DES Contention 17 The Testinony of witnesses fron all parties was in accord tnat ,

the prevailing wind from Catawba is in the direction of Charlotte.

1 1he FilS and the testinony of the Staff's ccnsequence witnese put fatalities in worst case relesse and neteorology in the region  :

of 19,000 to 24,000, FEIS, p. F-h. The Board has shown that a consideration of neteorology is not excluded under the regulations, Menorandun and Order of Sept. 29, 195h, p. h. Clearly the present Ecard has invested tine and thcusht in regard to the energency e contentions, having ruled on then and, as required restricted or revised then. As there is nothing to be gained by the p6ssible slightly earlier conclusion cf this proceeding, it is in the interest '

of the efficient use cf the Ecard's efforts and a sound record to z

l not have te " brin 6 up to speed" a newly appointed board, u l It is also essential to fairness and due process to not -

(

i accelerate the pace to a peint where it is conpletely inpossible fcr Intervenorc tc contribute tc a valid record. It is hardly i

necessary to conpare the Applicant's abundant resources, six counsel of record to date and ample technical support to intervenor's.

Conclusion i

This Ecard shculd deny Applicant's request to appoint a new board to near the ener enc 3 planning contentions. There will be 5 l no benefit to the public nor is the record likely to benefit.

l Intervenor will be unduly burdened. The issuance of the license will hasten tne day at which tne public is cutjected to a rate

-$- D L" E

..e increase reflecting the high cost of capital for Catawba as 7 compared to the anticipated fuel saving. There is no basis in t

fact.or in equity for imposing an arbitrary early decisional date i L

on the Catawba p.*oceeding. The public will be the loser, both l, r

economically and safety-wise in terms of developing an adequate ti i

record on such energency planning issues as the development of [!;

energency plans for part of Charlotte. g

?]

F. espe:: fully subnitted, D

7 ../

5 fh : u, tt s Jesse L. hile- fory :ne  ;:j Carolins E.nvironnental  ;

Study Group a

Sworn to and subscribed before ne this k da.y of February, 19 4  ;.

+:

,- i  ::,

,;I' G L. J v' _ A .

> %_  ?!

l ..o:q q rublic m

f/, Cere.bsi:n b;. :: f. .:T.tu 2,1517 E

l i

l l

i l

11 l

t .

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA C0t'F'E:

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION d" BEFORE THE A10MIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD

,84 FEB -6 P1 :12 In the Matter of ) 3. 3 ; . . . e

) GCCc Uc,3 4 SEE .

DUAE POWER COMPANY, et al. ) Docket No. 50-413 WCH

) 50-414 (Catawba Nuclear Station )

Units 1 and 2) )

A WIRMATYOE OF SERVIC_E I htreby sffirr. that copies of "CSEG ' S Ri:.SPOLSE TO AFFL1CA;;T' S KOTIOh TO BIFURCATE THE HEAR 1hG REGARDING EMERGEhCY PLAh C0hTEiiTIO:;S I?; TiiE FORM OF AK AFFIDAVIT BY JESSE RILEi" in the above. captioned matter were served en the follouing by deposit in the United States mail' this 2nd day of February, 19c4:

James L. Kelley, Chairman Richard P. Wilson, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Assistant Attorney General Panel State of South Carolina U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 11549 Washington, D. C. 20555 Columbia, South Carolina 29211 Dr. Paul W. Purdom Robert Guild, Esq.

235 Columbia Drive Attorney-at-Law Decatur, Georgia 30030 P. O. Box 12097 Charleston, South Carolina 29412 Dr. Richard F. Foster Palmetto Alliance P. O. Box 4263 2135 1/2 Devine Street Sunriver, Oregon 97702 Columbia, South Carolina 29205 Chairman Ron Shearin, Esq.,

, Atomic Safety and Licensin9 Duke Power Company Board Panel P. O. Box 33169 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Charlotte, N. C. 28242 Washington, D.C. 20555 Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

- +-

h George E. Johnson, Esq.

, Karen E. Long Office of the Executive Legal Assistant Attorney General Director N. C. Department of Justice -

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 629 Washington, D.C. 20555 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Scott Stucky Don R. Willard Docketing and Service Section Mecklenburg County U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Department of Environmental -

Commission Health -

Washington, D.C. 20555 1200 Blythe Boulevard Charlotte, North Carolina 28203 Michael J. McGarry, III, Esq. .

Bishop, Liberman, et al 1200 Seventeenth Street, N . 'a' . O Washington, D.C. 20036 (Jesse L.) Riley

//] }

)

l l

b

=

i e

~

1

\ e