ML17303A309

Discusses 860522 Telcon Re Public Svc Co of New Mexico Proposed Holding Company Restructuring.Application of 10CFR50.80 to Proposed Restructuring Questioned Since Util Remains Licensee.Transfer of License Not at Issue

ML17303A309
Person / Time
Site:	Palo Verde
Issue date:	06/09/1986
From:	Moore C KELEHAR & MCLEOD
To:	Reis E NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
References
NUDOCS 8702260102
Download: ML17303A309 (8)

Text

REGULATORY INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM (RIDS) f ACCESSIQj'4 NBR: 8702260102 DOC. DATE: 86/06/09 NOT*R I D: NO DOCKET ¹ FACIL: STN-.50-528 Palo Verde Nuclear Stations Uni t 1i Arizona Pub 1 i 05000528 AUTH. NAME ~ AUTHOR AFFILIATIQN MOORED C. L. - Kel char 8c NcLeod RECIP. NANE RECIPIENT AFFILIATION REISE E. J. Office of the Executive Legal Director (Pre 860701)

SUBJECT:

Discusses 860522 telcon re Public Svc Co oF New Mex ico proposed holding company-restructuring. NRC advised that FR notice needed to be publishedi per 10CFR50. 80. Informs that proposed restructuring would entail no transfer of license.

DISTRIBUTION CODE: 9005D COPIES RECEIVED: LTR ENCL SIZE:

TITLE: Licensing Submittal: Application/General InFo Amdt NOTES: Standardized plant. N. Davis'RR: 1Cg. 05ooo5 8 CITRATE RECIPIENT CQPIEB RECIP I ENT COP 1ES ID CODE/NANE LTTR ENCL ID CODE/MANE LTTR ENCL PWR-B PD7 LA PWR-B PD7 PD 05 LI E 04 INTERNAL: ACRB 10 ADM/LFNB AEOD/PTB ELD/HDS3 AVT/GAB O9 OGC/AD FILE 01 SP EXTERNAL LPDR 03 NRC PDR 02, NSIC 06 NOTES:

TOTAL NUMBER OF COP IEB REQUIRED: LTTR 18 ENCL

I 1

~,

0

,%'i p, K K l"t tg g 'I C f

~t 'a C g>,

P. Ip E P C

/

l

~i) ~

h

)

F h

l, I 'P l

t ~

4 I'I ll I

~ )I

pyro V~~5>SAP'ARBARA KELEHER 6( McLEOD, P. A.

ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW RUSSCLL MOORE ALBIN PUBLIC 5CRVICC BUILDING W. A. KELCHLR WILLIAM B. KELCHCR KATHRYN J. KUHLCN MICHACL L KCLCHER RANDOLPH L. HAM OLIN P. O. DRAWCR AA Ieee l972 PATRICK W. HURLEY MARK STYLCS CHARLCS A. PHARRIS EVAN S. HDBBS ALBUOUEROUEs NEW MEXICO 67IO3 A. H. M c LEO D RICHARD B. COLE ARTHUR 0 BEACH P. SCOTT EATON MARDARFT E. DAVIDSON IDOZ-IBTe JOHN M. KULIKDWSKI THOMAS L, DRICSS JOHN B. TITTMANN THOMAS F. KCLCHCR PCTCR H JOHNSTONC PAULA Z. HANSDN THOMAS C. BIRD 865590 OF CDUHSEL HENRY F, NARVAEZ THOMAS H. TOEVS CHARLES L. MOORE WILLIAM M. CASEY ROBERT H CLARK RICHARD L. ALVIORCZ TCLCPHONC 842-6262 BRIAN J. OsROURKC PATRICK V. APDOACA RONALD F, HORN KURT WIHL ARCA COOC 505 PHIL KRCHBICL RIKKI L. QUINTANA CLYDE F. WORTHEN HCLCN 'D. HILLEDASS SPENCER RCIO CAROl. LISA SMITH MICHACI. WILC JUDITH L. DURZO ELI2ABETH E. WHITCFIELO THOMAS J. ZIMDRICK ROBERT C CONKLIN June 9, 1986 RF BECCA A. HOUSTON File 00431-238 Edwin J. Reis, Esq.

Assistant Chief Hearing Counsel Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7735 Old Georgetown Road Room 9604 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Re: Public Service Company of New Mexico

Dear Ed:

This letter will follow up on my letter of May 22, 1986, concerning Public Service Company of New Mexico ("PNMB) and its proposed holding company restructuring. As you know, we had provided materials to the Staff on April 23, 1986, including responses to three specific questions raised earlier by Ed Christenbury concerning the proposed restructuring.

In our phone conversation on May 22, 1986, you indicated that some type of notice would be published in the Federal Receister in connection with the holCing company restructuring, and you specifically referred to 10 C.F.R. Section 50.80 as imposing the requirement for such a notice and subsequent Commission action.

Upon reflection, and after discussing the matter with Art Gehr and Tim Toy, we are somewhat perplexed as to the ration-ale for requiring a Federal Register 'publication and any action by the Commission in connection with the holding company re-structuring. The formation of holding companies by electric utilities has been rather commonplace in recent years.been Many utilities holding nuclear power plant licenses have involved in such restructurings, yet none of us is aware of any require-ments imposed by the Commission on those restructurings. Tim Toy had earlier orally provided the names of relevant holding companies (actual and proposed) and utilities to the Staff, and those are reiterated here as follows:

I 87ppp+pf 02 860b09 050005Z8 RDR ADQCK P PDR

~a I'

4 KELEHER 6 McLEOD, P. A.

June 9, 1986 Page 2 Holdin Com an Name Electric Utilit Nuclear Power Plant(s) Involved Por tland General Corp. Por tland Electric General', WPPSS Unit 3; Trojan Company SCANA South Carolina V. C. Summer Unit 1 Electric & Gas Co; Public Service Public Service Salem Units 1 & 2; Enterprise Group Electric & Gas Co. Peach Bottom Incorporated Units 1 & 2; Hope

'reek Units 1 & 2.

Wisconsin Electric Point Beach Units Power Company 1&2 Centerior Toledo Edison Co. Davis-Besse Unit 1; and Cleveland Perry Units 1 & 2; Electric Aluminat- Beaver Valley Unit 2 ing Company AZP Group, Inc. Arizona Public Palo Verde Units Service Company 1, 2 & 3 Dominion Resources Virginia Electric North Anna Units

& Power Company 1 & 2; Surry Units 1 & 2 Houston Industries, Houston Lighting & South Texas Units Ines Power Company 1 & 2 Florida Progress Florida Power Corp. Crystal River Unit 3 Corporation FPL Group, Inc. Flor ida Power & Saint Lucie Units Light Company 1 & 2; Turkey Point Units 3 &. 4 In reviewing 10 C.F.R. Section 50.80, we find it very difficult to see how Section 50.80 applies to the proposed hold-ing company restructuring. Although there would be an additional intermediary (the holding company) imposed between the utility (PNN) and its present shareholders, the shareholders would be identical upon formation of the holding company. Control would

I KELEHER & McLEQ D, P. A.

June 9, 1986 Page 3 therefore be unaffected. The utility would remain the licensee; thus, there would be no issue of a "transfer" of the license.

As indicated in PNM's filing on April 23, 1986, PNM anticipates that the proposed restructuring would not adversely affect the financial resources available to the utility for the reasons indicated therein (see the response to Question 8) and would not affect the management of the utility (see the response to Question 9).

PNM is very anxious to have this issue resolved, such that it does not become a last minute stumbling block in connec-tion with its restructuring. Please let us know if there are any additional questions or comments which you might have.

'ours very truly, KELEHER 6 McLEOD, P.A.

By eL~~

Charles L.

Z.

Moore cc: Edward S. Christenbury, Esq.

Arthur C. Gehr, Esq.

Timothy M. Toy, Esq .

Mr. A. J. Robison Mr. R. B. Starnes 3351D

n 1 I