ML20101N405
| ML20101N405 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 12/19/1984 |
| From: | Tower J SENATE |
| To: | Haby H NRC OFFICE OF CONGRESSIONAL AFFAIRS (OCA) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20101N391 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8501040014 | |
| Download: ML20101N405 (8) | |
Text
. E,=
40PM Tdt'ER COMMITTEES:
TDCAS
. AKMED SE VICES CH A17, MAN j
B ANatlNG.HOUS'NG.AND
?JCnifeb Sfafes Senefe
"""^~ ^"*'"'
oc T WASHINGTON. D.C. 20510 November 19, 1984 Office of Congressional Relations Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear Director:
RE:
Hayden Haby Because of the desire of this office to be responsive to all inquiries and communications, your consideration of the attached is requested.
Your findings and views, in duplicate form, along with return of the enclosure, will be appreciated.
Sincerely, k
f '
k John Tower JT/ck Enclosure Return attention:
Greg Talley I
I l
EDO -- 000146 rs01%SUO P
l PDR t
0
- C.
,i y '.;
I 3- (
i l
November 2, 1984 The Honorable John Tower United States Senate 142 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Mr. Tower I would like to express my deep concern about the delays in the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Licensing Process which only result in higher consumer cost and unavailable electrical reserves.
The Comanche Peak Plant is practically ready to load fuel and commence tee'~ng to begin commercial operation.
The follo-wing are facts conc?rning the Texas Utilities (TU) system.
1.
The TU system reached a peak load of 15265 Megawatts (MW) on August 29, 1984 exceeding the 1983 estimate of 14300 MW.
The operating reserve decreased to 2652 MW or 14.7x based on the TU System capacity of 17890 MW.
However, the TU Sys-tem's only had an actual.6 x reserve capacity on August 29 due to unanticipated plant outages.
2.
The TU System did not have an alternate source of power during the load peak.
3.
The 1985 summer peak is expected to be 8.8% greater than the 1983 peak. A 16608 MW peak would leave 1282 MW or 7.2 x reserve.
The Comanche Peak Unit One could provide en addi-tional 1139 MW.
Depending on the TU System total capacity is some what risky and idealistic due unexpected generating loss,. excessive load growth l
and natural gas curtailment.
The consequences of the slightest unexpected circumstance can be a systen brownout causing a loss of industrial production and residential service.
Each day of delay at Comanche Peak cost the Utility and consumer about one million dollars in preventable interest, ope-rating and replacement fuel costs.
t I feel there is a necessity for the Atomic Safety Board Licensing hearings however, certain anti-nuclear power groups use them as delaying tactics.
Therefore the Hearings need to be expedited in the following manner.
f-.~.
l November 2, 1984 Page 2 1.
Create alternate ASLB hearings.
2.
Create deadlines for submitting all safety concerns.
Any subsequent concern would be submitted to the NRC for investi-gation.
3.
Inform your colleagues with TU constituents of the conse-quences of licensing delays.
I have greatly enjoyed you service to the state, nation and world as a Senator and your influence will be truly missed.
I would deeply appreciate your response.
Thank You Sincerely Yours, yde G.
Haby, Jr.
403 Cherokee Pecan Plantation Granbury, Texas 76048 f
1
f.
1
.p5>a nf{o UNITED STATES
,...; 8 g.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
{
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%, * * " * /
ED0 PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL 8 04I DUE: 12/13/84 EDO CONTROL: 000146 DOC DT: 11/19/84 SEN. JOHN TOWER FINAL REPLY:
TO:
OCA FOR SIGNATURE OF:
GREEN SECY NO: 84-2011 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DESC:
ROUTING:
ENCLOSES LTR FROM HAYDEN G. HABY, JR. RE DELAYS RMARTIN IN LICENSING PROCESS FOR COMANCHE PEAK GCUNNINGHAM ASSIGNED TO: NRR DATE: 11/29/84 CONTACT: DENTON SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS:
RETURN INCOMING WITH REPLY.
Received NRR:
11/29/84 contact:
Eisenhut cc: Case /Denton i
W 9teeW 20 0 - o0 0 f3me j N58 /
PPAS ga der *
\\l c},
LYWHj
/
l t
Li,m!. '
i g. - n.
".,"i,:
..:A
\\.'*@x, R
CORRESPONDENCE DNTRC; TICKET Sen John Tower a
'.1"JM5 ER :
54-2011 LOGGING DATE:
11/27/84 0FFICE DF THE SI::.CARY ACTION OFFICE:
ED0 AUTHOR:
Sen John Tower, Const Ref AFFILIATION:
Hayden Haby L:. : 1.R DATE:
11/19/84 FILE CODE: ID&R,5 Comanche Peak ADDRESSEE:
OCA S Us s,:.L :
Delays in the lic process for Comanche Peak Direct Reply...Suspens5:
Dec 7 DISTRIBUTION:
OCA to Ack SPECIAL HANDLING:
None SIGNAWRE DATE:
FOR THE COM!ilSSION:
Billie Rec'd O '
O f*
!'j. goo
~
.N.f, ff Tu.
n e...., pp*y m
'*......,3 l
1 i.
90h TO$fER CouuiTTEEs.
TEXAS ARMED SERVICES CHAIRMAN 5 ANKING HOUSING AND 3Cnifeb States Senate
"""^~J/T WASHINGTON. D.C. 20510 November 19, 1984 Office of Congressional Relations Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear Director:
RE:
Hay' den Haby Because of the desire of this office to be responsive to all inquiries and communications, your consideration of the attached is requested.
Your findings and views, in duplicate form, along with return of the enclosure, will be appreciated.
Sincerely,
)
r /
Uk
~
John Tower JT/ck Enclosure Return attention:
Greg Talley l
EDO -- 000146
l November 2, 1984 The Honorable John Tower United States Senate 142 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Mr. Tower I would like to express my deep concern about the delays in i
the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Licensing Process which only result in higher consumer cost and unavailable electrical reserves.
1 The Comanche Peak Plant is practically ready to load fuel and commence testing to begin commercial operation.
The follo-wing are facts concerning the Texas Utilities (TU) system.
1.
The TU system reached a peak load of 15265 Megawatts (MW) on August 29, 1984 exceeding the 1983 estimate of 14300 MW.
The operating reserve decreased to 2652 MW or 14.7% based on the TU System capacity of 17890 MW.
However, the TU Sys-tem's only had an actual 6
- reserve capacity on August 29 due to unanticipated plant outages.
2.
The TU System did not have an alternate source of power during the load peak.
i 3.
The 1985 summer peak is expected to be 8.8k greater than j
the 1983 peak. A 16608 MW peak would leave 1282 MW or 7.2 x
{
reserve.
The Comanche Peak Unit One could provide en addi-l tional 1139 MW.
i Depending on the TU System total capacity is some'what risky and idealistic.due unexpected generating loss, excessive load growth c
i and natural gas curtailment.
The consequences of the slightest unexpected circumstance can be a system brownout causing a loss of industrial production and residential service.
Each day of delay at Comanche Peak cost the Utility and consumer about one million dollars in preventable interest, ope-rating and replacement fuel costs.
I feel there is a necessity for the Atomic Safety Board Licensing hearings however, certain anti-nuclear power groups use l
them as delaying tactics.
Therefore the Hearings need td be expedited in the following manner.
i i
l
,--r
+--
---www
-,-.iq---
e.
e.
wy-w-w,-w-w-ww
---mr--,q.--v--wy w
-.,r w-e,-
w------e--wsw ww.--w-e e-.-.-sy---
,--w----i.-ww-.-wr---w---------,-a-v---
w
---w-,--,
e-w w--w
4
\\
l November 2, 1984 Page 2 1.
Create alternate ASLB hearings.
2.
Create deadlines for submitting all safety concerns.
Any subsequent concern would be submitted to the NRC for investi-gation.
3.
Inform your colleagues with TU constituents of the conse-l quences of licensing delays.
I have greatly en3oyed you service to the state, nation and l
world as a Senator and your influence will be truly missed.
I 1
would deeply appreciate your response.
Thank You Sincerely Yours, YhullHaby, Rdyde G.
Jr.
403 Cherokee Pecan Plantation Granbury, Texas 76048
-_