ML20207J048
| ML20207J048 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 12/24/1986 |
| From: | Burchette W HERON, BURCHETTE, RUCKERT & ROTHWELL |
| To: | Funches J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| CON-#190-9855, RTR-REGGD-09.033, RTR-REGGD-9.033 A, NUDOCS 8701080272 | |
| Download: ML20207J048 (2) | |
Text
-
Heron, Burchette, Ruckert&Rothwell Suim 7W S*'N 1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W.
[N CA 958W Washington, D.C. 20007
<9i6 % ws (202) 337-7700
@MQ TWX 710-822-9270 Ausan.tx 7s70 (512)499 & O6 December 24, 1986 Mr. Jesse L. Funches Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Re:
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Unit 1, Docket No. 50-445A; Antitrust Operating License Review; Responses to Regulatory Guide 9.3
Dear Mr. Funches:
In your notice of receipt of antitrust information published in 51 Fed. Reg. 42, 953 (November 26, 1986), you requested any person who wishes to have views considered with respect to significant changes related to antitrust matters which occurred since the antitrust settlement to submit such views to your office.
In accordance with your request and as an update to the information Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas, Inc.
(" Tex-La") supplied on September 3, 1986, this letter provides additional antitrust information.
In its September 3 submission, Tex-La described two categories of changed activities by Texas Utilities Electric Company ("TUEC").
First, TUEC has sought to close off Tex-La's access to alternative sources of power.
Second, the extreme increase in cost and the delay in the expected commercial operation date of Comanche Peak, exacerbated by TUEC's change in rate design to force Tex-La to pay twice for the plant, has reversed the fundamental assumption of the May 6, 1980 Settlement and now makes Tex-La less competitive with TUEC.
There has been one major change in each of these categories of activities since September 3.
First, as to access to alternative sources of power, Tex-La and TUEC reached an agreement in November 1986 concerning the transmission of bulk power from Houston Lighting
& Power Company to Tex-La.
Tex-La, for financial reasons, felt compelled to agree to the terms and conditions demanded by TUEC.
Transmission services under the agreement commenced as of December 22.
The effect on Tex-La of TUEC's delay in negotiating the contract and all other aspects of TUEC's ongoing attempt to cut off access to alternative sources of power remain as described in Tex-La's September 3 letter.
ADOCK05000gS gr Q gf 8701080272 861224 DR
Mr. Jesse L. Funches December 24, 1986 Page 2 Second, as to Comanche Peak costs and expected commercial operation dates, on November 25, 1986, TUEC announced a new cost estimate and schedule for Comanche Peak.
As of September 3, 1986, TUEC had abandoned its last firm cost estimate of $5.4 billion, declaring the costs to be
" indeterminate," and had estimated a commercial operation date of late 1988 for Unit 1 and no specific date for Unit 2.
Now TUEC estimates a total cost for the project of approximately
$7.6 billion, an increase of 41% over the $5.4 billion estimate.
Also, TUEC now projects a commercial operation date of January 1989 for Unit 1 and July 1989 for Unit 2.
These increases further undermine Tex-La's competitive position vis-a-vis TUEC.
We appreciate this opportunity to provide you this updated information and hope that it proves useful.
Sincerely yours, e
IM 6).nu)
William H. Burchette WHB/bmb cc:
Mr. William G. Counsil Robert A. Wooldridge, Esq.
Thomas G. Dignan, Jr., Esq.
A. Nicholas Reynolds, Esq.
__