ML20106F524

Motion to Request ASLB to Cancel Const License & Application for OL

ML20106F524
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	10/24/1984
From:	Sinclair M SINCLAIR, M.P.
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
CON-#484-792 OL, NUDOCS 8410300288
Download: ML20106F524 (3)

Text

-

j $

~

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION  ?.;h.

!!-W  ;

Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board

, '84 CCI 29 P1:13 In the Matter of: ) . . , ,,

) Docket Nos. 50-3290 6 ,-ssie.

50-3300L ' 'M

, CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY )-

)-

(Midland Plant,- Units 1. and 2) ')) ~ Operating License MOTION TO REQUEST THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD TO CANCEL THE CONSTRUCTION LICENSE /

- AND APPLICATION FOR OPERATING LICENSE HELD BY -

CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY FOR THE MIDLAND NUCLEAR PLANT October 24,1984 On Septeinber 10,1984, Consumers Power Company (CPCo) issued a letter to the Atomic Safety and Lic,ensing Board stating that, follomag the shutdown of the Midland nuclear plant in July, they had discontinued all licensing activities con- ,

cerning the plant and requested the Nucle ~ar Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff to do the same.

The Company also requested permission to discontinue sending audit reports and non-conformance reports to the Licensing Board, the NRC staff and hearing partlas. The' Company also wants to suspend reporting requirements derived from '

ALAB-106 This suspension of all normal reporting requirements for licensing is incon-sistent with the Company's desire and intent to keep their construction license and1ntent to request an.'extention of the date, as well as to retain their application for an oper-8 g h ense. ,

and against their Rules It would be inappropriateAor the NRC to relinquish all regulatory requirements 88 and yet allow the Company to maintain and even extend the dates of the construction 82o license, as well as keep in place their application for an operating Itcense.

Furthermore, on information from the Public Service Commission (PSC), in the the Company

. latest load forecast of CPCo. of August,1984/has recalculdted its demand for power and reduced its total amount of projected need for power by 500 to 700 mg by the year 2000, compared to its previous t~orecast. (Submitted by Peter S. Smith of CPCo's Corporate Planning Dept. on Oct. 8,1984, to the Michigan PSC).

)b - - - - - - - - _ _ . - - _ - - _ - - - - - - - - - - --J

Thus, this appears 'o eliminate the need for a substantial amount of Unit 2 of the piant.' _ Unit I has been mothballed, because Dow has canceled its steam contract. -

In addition, information for the Michigari PSC indicates thst the testimony add exhibits of CPCo. in Case No. U-7830 (Midland, Phase I) states that the Company's

_ most recent planning includes the assumptkon that the projec't will be totally canceled in 1987.

The-July 16 shutdown coupled with a $7 billion rate request for this non-produc-tive plant, coupled with their latest forecasts of reduction of need for increased capacity and their stated assumptions of 1987 cancellation, means the CPCo. Itself has cancelled the project.

Furthermore, there is no indication in this latest forecast that other efforts by industry,-

cities and individuals to avoid the high costs of power from CPCo have been factored

'into it. "

For example, last spring the City Council of the City of Saginaw voted to get Saginaw off the CPCo. grid entirely. They stated that they had no intention of allowing the people of Saginaw to pay for any part of the high costs of the badly man-aged and poorly constructed Midland nuclear plant. The city is now. actively seeking other sources of its own municipal power.

There is an on-going study in the tri-county area,-Saginaw, Midland and Bay City,-to study the feasibility of a trash-to-electricity facility.

This past month, State Senator Connte Binsfeld, along with 10 other people, went on a tour of several European trash-to-electricity operations which have been operating successfully for many years. She has introduced a bill in the Legislature for a model facility in Michigan, Various communities, i.e. Ann Arbor, Battle Creek, Boyne City, etc. are reactivhting low head hydroelectric power facilities already in place to reduce their

dependence on the utilitys' grid.

A University of Michigan study indicates that there is the equivalent of 4,large power plants ava!1able through cogeneration in the waste heat of Michigan's indus-try. Now that the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld PURPA 1978, utilities are required to buy.any additional power from any industrial or individual generators.

(New York Times, June 10, 1984)

2 .

All.these efforts at energy conservation and use of renewable energy indicate.

that there will continue to be a surplus of power in Michigan.

Therefore, Intervenor Mary Sinclair moves that the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board should cancel the construction license and the application for an operating

, ' license at the Midland nuclear plant.

• Respectfully sub ted,

_^ op .

& Y a_i b Mary P'. Splair cc: Dr. Frederick P. Cowan Charles Bechhoefer, Esq.

Jerry Harbour, Esq.

Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Michael I. Miller, Esq.

William Paton, Esq.

Mr. Wendell Marshall Ms. Barbara Stamiris James E. Brunner Mr. Frank Kelley, Esq.

Mr. Myron Cherry, Esq.

m .