ML20149M462

Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Draft Policy Statement on Restructuring & Economic Deregulation of Electric Utility Industry

ML20149M462
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	12/09/1996
From:	Bram S CONSOLIDATED EDISON CO. OF NEW YORK, INC.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
References
FRN-61FR49711, RULE-PR-50 61FR49711-00012, 61FR49711-12, NUDOCS 9612170071
Download: ML20149M462 (2)

Text

' si.ph.n B. Bram DOCKET NUMBER j **"*""'"'*"'

PROPOSED RUi.E PR S a -

,2 (N FR.147/i) 00cKETE0 USMRC Consohdated Edison Company of New York,Inc.

4 Irving Place, New York, NY 10003 Telephone (212) 460-1210 'M E 10 P4 :02 December 9, ,

.I ,

\

Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Attention: Docketing and Service Branch Re: Draft Policy Statement on the Restructuring and Economic Deregulation of the Electric Utility Industry. 61 Fed. Register 49711. September 23.1996

Dear Sir:

Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. (" Con Edison"), as owner and operator of the Indian Point Units 1 and 2 nuclear generating station, is pleased to provide comments in connection with the Commission's issuance for public review of the referenced draft policy statement. As the Commission is aware, Con Edison, together with other investor-owned utilities in New York State, is currently engaged in proceedings before the New York State Public Service Commission ("PSC") intended to promote a competitive market for electrical generation in the State. Con Edison's proposal, filed with the PSC this past October 1 and subject to the PSC's review and approval, would provide for corporate restructuring to facilitate the movement to deregulation. The proposed restructuring would make Con Edison a wholly-owned regulated subsidiary of a parent holding company also having as subsidiaries several unregulated companies. As noted in our letter to NRC of October 1, there would be no direct or indirect transfer of control of the Indian Point licenses to another person since Con Edison's current array of common shareholders would own 100% of the holding company, which would in turn own 100% of the common stock of Con Edison.

Con Edison, therefore, respectfully takes exception to that portion of the draft policy statement and NRC's June 21,1996 Administrative Letter 96-02 which broadly suggest that the formation of holding companies, regardless of their inherent structure, would constitute a direct or indirect transfer of ficense control requiring NRC approval !O pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80. While Con Edison concurs that the Commission should certainly be informed in advance of all proposed licensee corporate restructurings, certain restmeturings, such as the creation of a parent holding company, do not by themselves 9612170071 961209 7 PDR PR 50 61FR49711 PDR

" / ()

C~

j; i g necessarily effect a direct or indirect transfer of ownership, and should not be subject to l

,- unnecessary and potentially delaying regulatoiy processes without cause. Accordingly, a j statement in the draft policy that "NRC staff has advised licensees that agency consent should be sought and obtained under { 50.80 for the formation of a new holding company over an existing licensee" fails to consider that the creation of holding companies may not in fact implement a direct or indirect transfer of control under Commission regulations.  ;

}

i We submit that a functional, rather than a structural, test should be applied in determining :

! whether the conditions triggering 50.80 approval would or would not occur, and that no i blanket conclusions as to control transference can be reached. Accordingly, the i Commission should preliminarily defer to a licensee's description ofits proposed ,

j corporate restructuring and require approval under 50.80 only if, after a specified period  !

for review, the Commission is unable to concur with a conclusion reached by a licensee

that no direct or indirect transfer of control would occur.

?

We believe that the adoption of such a regulatory procedure would maintain the Commission's ability to remain informed concerning licensee restructurings, while enhancing the industry's transition to competitive markets, and avoiding the potential administrative delays inherent in seeking further regulatory approvals. Con Edison looks forward to working with the Commission as it develops revised decommissioning and financial assurance regulations as the electric utility industry moves toward restructuring and increased deregulation.

Sincerely, l

4 1

f 2