ML17266A428: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 17: Line 17:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:UNITEDSTATESOFAMERICANUCLEARREGULATORYCOiP'ISSIONIntheiiatterofFLORIDAPOWER&LIGHTCOt&3QW(St.LuciePlant,UnitNo.2)DocketNo.50-389PETITIONFORLEAVETOINTERVENEANDREQUSTFORHEARINGPursuantto10CFR52.714andtheCommission'sMarch9,1981,noticeoreceiptofanapplicationfromFloridaPower&LightCompany(FP&L)forafacilityoperatinglicense,46Fed.Reg.15831,Parsons&Whittemore,Inc.(P&W)anditssubsidiary,ResourcesRecovery(DadeCounty),Inc.(RRD),jointlypetitionforleavetointerveneinthisproceedingandrecuesttheCommissiontoholdalimitedantitrusthearing,asdescribedbelow,onFP&L'sapplication.Thegroundsforthispetitionandreauestaresetforthbelowandsomeofthemareelaborateduponintheaccompanyingbrief.IDENTIYOFPETITIONERS(1)P&WisaNewYorkcorporationengagedinavarietyofindust'alactivitiesintheUnitedStatesandthroughouttheworld.OneofweactivitiesinwhichP&Wand itssubsidiariesareengagedistheconstructionandoperation.-:,-.offacilitiesforprocessingsolidwaste.(2)RRDisaDelawarecorporationthatiswhollyownedbyP&W.RRDhasrecentlycompletedthe'coKstructionofasolidwasteprocessingfacilityinDadeCounty,Florida.Itisanticipatedthatthefacilitywillprocessupto18,000tonsofsolidwasteperweek,convertcombustiblematerialsintorefuse-derivedfuel,burnthefueltoraisesteam,andgenerateelectricity.Thefacilityhasaninstallednameplateelectricgenerationcapacityofapproximately76megawatts.ItisaaualifyingsmallpowerproductionzacilitywithinthemeaningozSection201ofthePublicUtilityRegulatoryPoliciesActof1978(PURPA),16U.S.C.5796,andtheimplementingregulations,18CFRPart292(1980).INTERESTQFPETITIONERSINTHISPROCEEDING(3)Petitionersseektointerveneinthisproceedingtoprotecttheirrightsandther'ghtsosimilarlysituatedentitiesunderPURPA,thefederalantitrustlawsandSection105coftheAtomicEnergyAct,asamended,42U.S;C.52135(c).ItisPetitioners'ontentionthatifFPaLispermittedtooperateSt.LuciePlant,UnitNo.2,underthetermsoftheproposedSettlementAgreementpendinginNRCDocketNo.50-389A,  
{{#Wiki_filter:UNITEDSTATESOFAMERICANUCLEARREGULATORY COiP'ISSION IntheiiatterofFLORIDAPOWER&LIGHTCOt&3QW(St.LuciePlant,UnitNo.2)DocketNo.50-389PETITIONFORLEAVETOINTERVENE ANDREQUSTFORHEARINGPursuantto10CFR52.714andtheCommission's March9,1981,noticeoreceiptofanapplication fromFloridaPower&LightCompany(FP&L)forafacilityoperating license,46Fed.Reg.15831,Parsons&Whittemore, Inc.(P&W)anditssubsidiary, Resources Recovery(DadeCounty),Inc.(RRD),jointlypetitionforleavetointervene inthisproceeding andrecuesttheCommission toholdalimitedantitrust hearing,asdescribed below,onFP&L'sapplication.
Thegroundsforthispetitionandreauestaresetforthbelowandsomeofthemareelaborated uponintheaccompanying brief.IDENTIYOFPETITIONERS (1)P&WisaNewYorkcorporation engagedinavarietyofindust'alactivities intheUnitedStatesandthroughout theworld.Oneofweactivities inwhichP&Wand itssubsidiaries areengagedistheconstruction andoperation.-:,
-.offacilities forprocessing solidwaste.(2)RRDisaDelawarecorporation thatiswhollyownedbyP&W.RRDhasrecentlycompleted the'coKstruction ofasolidwasteprocessing facilityinDadeCounty,Florida.Itisanticipated thatthefacilitywillprocessupto18,000tonsofsolidwasteperweek,convertcombustible materials intorefuse-derived fuel,burnthefueltoraisesteam,andgenerateelectricity.
Thefacilityhasaninstalled nameplate electricgeneration capacityofapproximately 76megawatts.
Itisaaualifying smallpowerproduction zacilitywithinthemeaningozSection201ofthePublicUtilityRegulatory PoliciesActof1978(PURPA),16U.S.C.5796,andtheimplementing regulations, 18CFRPart292(1980).INTERESTQFPETITIONERS INTHISPROCEEDING (3)Petitioners seektointervene inthisproceeding toprotecttheirrightsandther'ghtsosimilarly situatedentitiesunderPURPA,thefederalantitrust lawsandSection105coftheAtomicEnergyAct,asamended,42U.S;C.52135(c).ItisPetitioners'ontention thatifFPaLispermitted tooperateSt.LuciePlant,UnitNo.2,underthetermsoftheproposedSettlement Agreement pendinginNRCDocketNo.50-389A,  


particularlySectionXrelatingtotransmiss'onservices,theeffectuationofanimportantaspectoffederalenergypolicyasreflectedinPURPAmaybefrustratedanda"situationincon--sistentwiththeantitrustlaws"maybecreatedormaintained.42U.S.C.52135{c)(5).{5)Petitionerswillbedirectlyimpactedbytheabove-describedconseauencesofimplementingSectionZoftheproposedSettlementAgreement.RRDhascompliedwiththerequirementsofPURPAandhastakenthenecessarystepsto,securethebenefitstowhichitisentitled.Ontriarch13,1981RRDnotifiedtheFederalEnergyRegulatoryCommission(FERC)thatitisaQualifiedFaciliyundertheAct.AcopyofthatnoticewasservedthesamedayonFP&LwithacoveringletterinormingFP&LthatRRD"willbeginsalesofelectricenergytoFloridaPower&Lightonorafterninetydaysfromthedatehereof."(LettertoRobertTalionofFP&LfromGeorgeE.BoyhanofRRD;AppendixA).(6)RWhasalsosought"toexplorecompetitiveopportunitiesforsalestootherelectricutilityentities."Tothatend,RRDwroteFP&LonApril3,1981andaskedittoconfirmthatFP&L"villtransmitelectricityinbehalfofRRDtopoten-tialcustomersotherthanFP&L."AsauthorityforreauiringFP&LtoprovideRRDwithtransmissionservices,RRDcitedtheantitrustlawsandtheproposedSettlementAgreement.SeeLette-fromDavidBardin,CounselforP&WandRRD,toL.ChristianHauck,FP&L'sVicePresident,LegalAffairs{AppendixB).  
particularly SectionXrelatingtotransmiss'on
: services, theeffectuation ofanimportant aspectoffederalenergypolicyasreflected inPURPAmaybefrustrated anda"situation incon--sistentwiththeantitrust laws"maybecreatedormaintained.
42U.S.C.52135{c)(5).{5)Petitioners willbedirectlyimpactedbytheabove-described conseauences ofimplementing SectionZoftheproposedSettlement Agreement.
RRDhascompliedwiththerequirements ofPURPAandhastakenthenecessary stepsto,secure thebenefitstowhichitisentitled.
Ontriarch13,1981RRDnotifiedtheFederalEnergyRegulatory Commission (FERC)thatitisaQualified FaciliyundertheAct.AcopyofthatnoticewasservedthesamedayonFP&LwithacoveringletterinormingFP&LthatRRD"willbeginsalesofelectricenergytoFloridaPower&Lightonorafterninetydaysfromthedatehereof."(LettertoRobertTalionofFP&LfromGeorgeE.BoyhanofRRD;AppendixA).(6)RWhasalsosought"toexplorecompetitive opportunities forsalestootherelectricutilityentities."
Tothatend,RRDwroteFP&LonApril3,1981andaskedittoconfirmthatFP&L"villtransmitelectricity inbehalfofRRDtopoten-tialcustomers otherthanFP&L."Asauthority forreauiring FP&LtoprovideRRDwithtransmission
: services, RRDcitedtheantitrust lawsandtheproposedSettlement Agreement.
SeeLette-fromDavidBardin,CounselforP&WandRRD,toL.Christian Hauck,FP&L'sVicePresident, LegalAffairs{Appendix B).  


(7)Asdescribedmorefullybelow=an<.'-nPetitioners'ccompanyingbrief,SectionXotheproposed.SettlementAgreementaffectsPetitoners'bilitytosecure.rtsfull.-rightsunderPURPAandtogainaccesstoFPGL'.s.-.transmissiongridso'cancompetewithFPaLinthesale.ofelectricpower.TotheextentthattheoperatinglicensesoughtbyFP&LinthisproceedingincorporatesSectionX,Petitionerswillbedirectlyanddetrimentallyaffected.POTENTIALEFFECTSOFTHISPROCEEDINGONPZTITIONEPS'NTERESTSA.EffectsonPetitioners'URPArights.(8)SectionXoftheSettlementAgreement,forthefirsttimeinanNRClicensingproceeding,pu"portstoconferbenefitsonQualifyingFacilitieswithinthemeaningofPURPA.Inreality,thosebenefitsmaybeentirelyillusory;indeed,SectionXmayevenrequireRRDandotherQualifyingFac'1'tiestoabandonvaluablePUPZArightstobenefitfromthetransmissionservicesaffordedbySectionX.(9)Section210ofPURPAseekstoencourageco-genera-tionandsmallpowerproduction.ItdoessobyconferringuponQualifyingFacilitiestherighttoselltheirelecticaloutputtoanelectricutility,tointerconnectwithautil'yandtobuyatretailfromtheutilityelectricpowerneededwithinthefacility.TheimplementingregulationsexemptQualified=acilitiesrommostutility-typeregulationstoencourage
(7)Asdescribed morefullybelow=an<.'-n Petitioners'ccompanying brief,SectionXotheproposed.
Settlement Agreement affectsPetitoners'bility tosecure.rtsfull.-rightsunderPURPAandtogainaccesstoFPGL'.s.-.transmission gridso'cancompetewithFPaLinthesale.ofelectricpower.Totheextentthattheoperating licensesoughtbyFP&Linthisproceeding incorporates SectionX,Petitioners willbedirectlyanddetrimentally affected.
POTENTIAL EFFECTSOFTHISPROCEEDING ONPZTITIONEPS'NTERESTS A.EffectsonPetitioners'URPA rights.(8)SectionXoftheSettlement Agreement, forthefirsttimeinanNRClicensing proceeding, pu"portstoconferbenefitsonQualifying Facilities withinthemeaningofPURPA.Inreality,thosebenefitsmaybeentirelyillusory; indeed,SectionXmayevenrequireRRDandotherQualifying Fac'1'ties toabandonvaluablePUPZArightstobenefitfromthetransmission servicesaffordedbySectionX.(9)Section210ofPURPAseekstoencourage co-genera-tionandsmallpowerproduction.
Itdoessobyconferring uponQualifying Facilities therighttoselltheirelecticaloutputtoanelectricutility,tointerconnect withautil'yandtobuyatretailfromtheutilityelectricpowerneededwithinthefacility.
Theimplementing regulations exemptQualified
=acilities rommostutility-type regulations toencourage


competitiveentrybyindustrialconcernsintothegenerationbusiness.CongressenactedthesePKVAprovisi.ons.toovercomethereluctanceofelectricalutilitiestodobusinesswith.suchQualifyingFacilitiesonaneconomicallyviab3.ebasis.One.oftheimportanteffectsofPURPAisthefacilitationand.encourage-4/mentofcompetitionfromnewelectricalpowersources,.(10)SectionXappearstoadvancethepr'nciplessummarizedinparagraph(9)abovebyrequiringFP&Ltotransmitpower"(5)fromanyqualifyingcogenerationfacilityorsmallpowerproductionfacil'y(asdefinedbytheFederalEnergyRegulatoryCommissionin1SCFRPart292,SubpartB)withwhichCompanyisinterconnectedtoaneighboringentityorneighboringdistributionsystem,..."Thatcommitmenttotransmitpower,however,isconditioneduponaQualifyingFacility'sforfeitureofvaluablerightsunderPURPA.Speciically,underSectionZ(a)(5)theQualifyingFacilitymustarrangetorece'veanysalesofbackuppowerandmaintenancepowerfromtheneighboringentityorneighboringdistributionsystemtowhichtransmissionservicesareprovided.ThatconditionwouldforceRRDandotherQualifyingFacilitiestoabandontheirrighttosellalloftheirelectricpoweratthebuyer'savoidedcosts,underthe"/SeveralprovisionsofPURPAhavebeenrecentlyhelduncon-stitutionalbyJudgeHaroldCoxoftheUnitedStatesDistrictCourtfortheSouthernDistrictofMississippi,Mississiaoiv.PERE,Civ.ActionNo.J79-02212(c),(Peb.19,991Petiioners'ounselhavebeeninformedthat&eSolicitorGeneralintendstoappealthatdecisiondirectlytotheSupremeCourt.
competitive entrybyindustrial concernsintothegeneration business.
termsofPURPAandtobuyatretailfromFP&Lig:accoraance.Iwiththe3.atter'sob3.igationstoprovideallof;theenergy-neededbytheQualifyingFacilities.{11)ByplacingrestictionsontheprovisionoftransmissionservicestoQualifyingFacilitieswhichdonotapplyto"neighboringentities,"SectionXunfairlyandunrea-sonablydiscriminatesagainstQualifyingFac'lities.AlthoughPetitionersbelievethattheRRDfacilityinDade-CountyiqbothaQualifyingFacilityanda"neighboringentity-,'-'anguageofsubsectionX(a)(5)mightbeconstruedbyFP&Lasdiminishingrightsthathadbeenconferredbytheothersubsections.(12)Subsection{b)oSectionXintroducesafurtherrestrictionoftherightsconferredonneighboringentitiesandQualifyingFacilities.Thatprovisionstatesthat"Nothinginthislicenseshall.beconstruedtorequireCompanytowheepowerandenergytoorfromaretailcustomer.Althouhtheg'1restrictionshou3.dbeinterpretedonlyasalimitonretaicustomerswhicharenotinthegenerationbusiness,aclar'i-cationormodificationtothiseffectisessentia3.toassurethattheprovisowillnotforceaQualifyingFacility,exercisingitsrighttopurchasee3.ectxicityatretail,tocutatsel~offfromtheneededtransmissionsexvices.B.AntitrustEffects(13)FP&Lpossessesmonopolisticcontxoloveolovertheandeasternprovisionozran"ransmissionservicesinsouthernFior'a.  
CongressenactedthesePKVAprovisi.ons.
toovercomethereluctance ofelectrical utilities todobusinesswith.suchQualifying Facilities onaneconomically viab3.ebasis.One.oftheimportant effectsofPURPAisthefacilitation and.encourage-4/mentofcompetition fromnewelectrical powersources,.
(10)SectionXappearstoadvancethepr'nciples summarized inparagraph (9)abovebyrequiring FP&Ltotransmitpower"(5)fromanyqualifying cogeneration facilityorsmallpowerproduction facil'y(asdefinedbytheFederalEnergyRegulatory Commission in1SCFRPart292,SubpartB)withwhichCompanyisinterconnected toaneighboring entityorneighboring distribution system,..."Thatcommitment totransmitpower,however,isconditioned uponaQualifying Facility's forfeiture ofvaluablerightsunderPURPA.Speciically,underSectionZ(a)(5)theQualifying Facilitymustarrangetorece'veanysalesofbackuppowerandmaintenance powerfromtheneighboring entityorneighboring distribution systemtowhichtransmission servicesareprovided.
Thatcondition wouldforceRRDandotherQualifying Facilities toabandontheirrighttosellalloftheirelectricpoweratthebuyer'savoidedcosts,underthe"/Severalprovisions ofPURPAhavebeenrecentlyhelduncon-stitutional byJudgeHaroldCoxoftheUnitedStatesDistrictCourtfortheSouthernDistrictofMississippi, Mississiaoi v.PERE,Civ.ActionNo.J79-02212(c),
(Peb.19,991Petiioners'ounsel havebeeninformedthat&eSolicitor GeneralintendstoappealthatdecisiondirectlytotheSupremeCourt.
termsofPURPAandtobuyatretailfromFP&Lig:accoraance.
Iwiththe3.atter's ob3.igations toprovideallof;theenergy-neededbytheQualifying Facilities.
{11)Byplacingrestictionsontheprovision oftransmission servicestoQualifying Facilitieswhichdonotapplyto"neighboring entities,"
SectionXunfairlyandunrea-sonablydiscriminates againstQualifying Fac'lities.
AlthoughPetitioners believethattheRRDfacilityinDade-County iqbothaQualifying Facilityanda"neighboring entity-,'-'anguage ofsubsection X(a)(5)mightbeconstrued byFP&Lasdiminishing rightsthathadbeenconferred bytheothersubsections.
(12)Subsection
{b)oSectionXintroduces afurtherrestriction oftherightsconferred onneighboring entitiesandQualifying Facilities.
Thatprovision statesthat"Nothinginthislicenseshall.beconstrued torequireCompanytowheepowerandenergytoorfromaretailcustomer.
Althouhtheg'1restriction shou3.dbeinterpreted onlyasalimitonretaicustomers whicharenotinthegeneratio nbusiness, aclar'i-cationormodification tothiseffectisessentia3.
toassurethattheprovisowillnotforceaQualifying
: Facility, exercising itsrighttopurchasee3.ectxicity atretail,tocutatsel~offfromtheneededtransmission sexvices.
B.Antitrust Effects(13)FP&Lpossesses monopolistic contxoloveolovertheandeasternprovision ozran"ransmission servicesinsouthernFior'a.  


(14)SectionXoftheSettlementAgreement-issowrittenastoaffordFP&Lunreasonableopportunities--toconstrue-.:theprovisionscontainedthereininaway.Matwould.defeat.theirprocompetitiveobjective,therebymaintainingFP&L'monopoly.powerovertransmissionservices.(15)TheunreasonableandunfairdiscriminationbetweenQualifyingFacilitiesandothergeneratorsofelectricitydescribedinparagraph(13.)above,wouldplacePetitionersandothersimilarlysituatedentitiesatacompetitivedisadvantage.(16)Subsect'onZ(a)oftheSettlementAgreement,particularlyconditions(3),(4),and(5),giveFP&LexcessivediscretionarylatitudeindenyingPetitionersandothersimilarlysituatedentitiesaccesstoFP&L'stransmissiongrid,therebyPenablingFP&LtopreventPetitionersandothersfromsellingtheirgeneratedelectricitytomunicipalutilities.(17)Theeffectsdescribedinparagraphs(13)through(16)abovearemorefullyanalyzedintheaccompanyingbrief.TheysupportPetitioners'ontentionthatimplementationoftheSettlementAgreementaswrittenwouldsignificantlychangeFP&L'sactivitiesandproposedactivitieswithinthemeaningofSection105coftheAtomicEnergyAct,asamended,42U.S.C.52135(c)(2),requiringtheCommissiontoholdanantitrusthearingatthistime.Thesenewanticompetitiveactivitiesareparticularlyinvidioussince,onceapproved,,theywillappeartohavethesanctionofNRCandtheJusticeDepartment.Thatfactcoupled withthesuperficialimpetustocompetitionaffordedbythe':--.SectionXtransmissionprovisionsmakeitcriticalthat-the-.;positionofQualifyingFacilitiesunderPKUA.-betakenintoaccountbeforetheoperatinglicenseissues.NATUREOFPETITIONERS'IGHTSUNDERTMATONICENERGYACTTOINTERVENE(18)Petitionersareentitledtointerveneinth'sproceedingpursuanttoSections105cand189oftheAtomicEnergyAct,asamended,42U.S.C.552135(c),2239.Section.189statesthat"theComm'ssionshallgrantahearingupontherequestofanypersonwhoseinterestmaybeaffectedbytheproceeding,andshalladmitanysuchpersonasapartytosuchproceeding."Asdescribedinparagraphs(8)to(17)above,Petitioners'UR?Arightsandtheircompetitiveinterestsw'lbedirectlyimpactedbytheissuanceofanoperatingfacil'ylicensecontaining,orsubjectto,theconditionsoftheSett'e-mentAgreement.Therefore,theyshouldbepermittedtointer-veneandbeheardtoprotectthoserightsandinterestsandthe*/rightsandinterestsofothersimilarlysituatedentities.(19)Section105coftheAtomicEnergyActprovidesanadditionalstatutorybasisforinterveningandseekinga~/ThestaffoftheFloridaPublicServiceCommissionhasestimatedthattheFloridacapacityforQualifyingFacilityprojectsapproaches2700megawatts.
(14)SectionXoftheSettlement Agreement
lissues.Thatsectionrequiresthatanhearingontheantitrustissues.4ldattheoperat'nglicensestageifantitrustreviewbe.ea'nthelicensee'sactivitiesorproposed"s'gnificantchangesineicei~~ttothepreviousrevaewyactivatzeshaveoccurredsubsequenoconnectionwit.t:heCommission...inconnthAttorneyGeneralandthee~~~efacil'ty."Thesignifacantheconstructionpermitforthefaci'.tbFPSL'sintendedamplemmentationofthechangesbroughtaboutydtheireffectsuponPetitioners,asSettlementAgreementandtheareehs(13)to(17aove7)bveandintheaccompany-describedinparagzaptheriht-toint:ervenefortheingbrae,gib'ivePetitionerstherigananaandparticipatingin,tblishingtheneedfor,anpurposeofesait:reviewunderSection105c.secondantitrusrSOFPROCEEDINGASTORFICHSHTOINTERVENEPETITIONERSNIektointerveneintheinstant(20)PetitionersseektoanervtingtheLicensingthelimitedpurposeofassasiroceedingforeipuatefullytheconsequencesofBoardandethCommissiontoevaluatefuyseent.InsedSettlementAgreement.'onXoftheproposeeimplementingSectitoJeheardastoSectionZ'articuar,tonthee-p1PetitionerswishtoJeeartonthePUP>Arightsandcomp-tialldetrimentalimpactonthefPetitionersandothethersimaarytitiveinterestsoeQualifyingFacilities.notbelievethatatrial-type{21)Petitionersdonoteiev"h~ing1reuiredhere.Theyare"h~ingisnecessariyreqantitrusthearing
-issowrittenastoaffordFP&Lunreasonable opportunities-
-toconstrue-.:theprovisions contained thereininaway.Matwould.defeat.theirprocompetitive objective, therebymaintaining FP&L'monopoly.
powerovertransmission services.
(15)Theunreasonable andunfairdiscrimination betweenQualifying Facilities andothergenerators ofelectricity described inparagraph (13.)above,wouldplacePetitioners andothersimilarly situatedentitiesatacompetitive disadvantage.
(16)Subsect'on Z(a)oftheSettlement Agreement, particularly conditions (3),(4),and(5),giveFP&Lexcessive discretionary latitudeindenyingPetitioners andothersimilarly situatedentitiesaccesstoFP&L'stransmission grid,therebyPenablingFP&LtopreventPetitioners andothersfromsellingtheirgenerated electricity tomunicipal utilities.
(17)Theeffectsdescribed inparagraphs (13)through(16)abovearemorefullyanalyzedintheaccompanying brief.TheysupportPetitioners'ontention thatimplementation oftheSettlement Agreement aswrittenwouldsignificantly changeFP&L'sactivities andproposedactivities withinthemeaningofSection105coftheAtomicEnergyAct,asamended,42U.S.C.52135(c)(2),requiring theCommission toholdanantitrust hearingatthistime.Thesenewanticompetitive activities areparticularly invidious since,onceapproved,,
theywillappeartohavethesanctionofNRCandtheJusticeDepartment.
Thatfactcoupled withthesuperficial impetustocompetition affordedbythe':--.SectionXtransmission provisions makeitcriticalthat-the-.;
positionofQualifying Facilities underPKUA.-betakenintoaccountbeforetheoperating licenseissues.NATUREOFPETITIONERS'IGHTS UNDERTMATONICENERGYACTTOINTERVENE (18)Petitioners areentitledtointervene inth'sproceeding pursuanttoSections105cand189oftheAtomicEnergyAct,asamended,42U.S.C.552135(c),2239.Section.189statesthat"theComm'ssion shallgrantahearingupontherequestofanypersonwhoseinterestmaybeaffectedbytheproceeding, andshalladmitanysuchpersonasapartytosuchproceeding."
Asdescribed inparagraphs (8)to(17)above,Petitioners'UR?A rightsandtheircompetitive interests w'lbedirectlyimpactedbytheissuanceofanoperating facil'ylicensecontaining, orsubjectto,theconditions oftheSett'e-mentAgreement.
Therefore, theyshouldbepermitted tointer-veneandbeheardtoprotectthoserightsandinterests andthe*/rightsandinterests ofothersimilarly situatedentities.
(19)Section105coftheAtomicEnergyActprovidesanadditional statutory basisforintervening andseekinga~/ThestaffoftheFloridaPublicServiceCommission hasestimated thattheFloridacapacityforQualifying Facilityprojectsapproaches 2700megawatts.
lissues.Thatsectionrequiresthatanhearingontheantitrustissues.4ldattheoperat'ng licensestageifantitrust reviewbe.ea'nthelicensee's activities orproposed"s'gnificant changesineicei~~ttothepreviousrevaewyactivatzes haveoccurredsubsequen oconnection wit.t:heCommission
...inconnthAttorneyGeneralandthee~~~efacil'ty."
Thesignifacan theconstruction permitforthefaci'.tbFPSL'sintendedamplemmentation ofthechangesbroughtaboutydtheireffectsuponPetitioners, asSettlement Agreement andtheareehs(13)to(17aove7)bveandintheaccompany-described inparagzaptheriht-toint:ervene fortheingbrae,gib'ivePetitioners therigananaandparticipating in,tblishingtheneedfor,anpurposeofesait:reviewunderSection105c.secondantitrusrSOFPROCEEDING ASTORFICHSHTOINTERVENE PETITIONERS NIektointervene intheinstant(20)Petitioners seektoanervtingtheLicensing thelimitedpurposeofassasiroceeding foreipuatefullytheconsequences ofBoardandethCommission toevaluatefuyseent.InsedSettlement Agreement.
'onXoftheproposeeimplementing SectitoJeheardastoSectionZ'articuar,tonthee-p1Petitioners wishtoJeeartonthePUP>Arightsandcomp-tialldetrimental impactonthefPetitioners andothethersimaarytitiveinterests oeQualifying Facilities.
notbelievethatatrial-type
{21)Petitioners donoteiev"h~ing1reuiredhere.Theyare"h~ingisnecessari yreqantitrust hearing


10preparedtoaccepttherecordasdevelopedtodate,andwouldnotaskthatitbereopened.Petitionersseek.onlytosupple-mentthat.record,inanymannertheCommissiondeemsappropriate,topresenttheirevidencetotheCommissionand-toarguetheir.positionbaseduponthesupplementedrecord..Petitioners'.evidencewillincludePP&L'sanswerto,,thelettermarkedas'ppendixB,whichtheyhaverequestedbyApril17.(22)Astheaccompanyingbrief'pointsout,Petitioners'URPArightsareinterrelatedwiththeir'ntitrustconcerns.ThePURPAr'hts,however,canbe.separatelyconsideredandprotectedwithoutanantitrusthearing,iftheCommissionissoinclined.OneofPetitioners'ontributionsasintervenorswillbetodemonstratetheinconsistenciesbetweentheSettlementAgreementandtherightsaffordedbyPURPA.(23)SincePetitioners'nterestintheproceedingislimitedtoSectionXoftheAgreement,theirrigntscouldbeeasilyandefficientlyprotectedwithoutunduedelayinthe'ssuanceofZP&L'soperatinglicense.
10preparedtoaccepttherecordasdeveloped todate,andwouldnotaskthatitbereopened.
11-CONCLUSXONThispetitiontointerveneshouldbegranted,andanorderallowinginterventionshouldbeentered.Alimitedanti-N*trusthearing,asdescribedabove,alsoshouldbeordered.Respectfullysubmitted,GeorgeR.KuciNarcGaryE3.len.SwardArent,Pox,Kintner,Plotkin6Kahn1815HStreet,N.N.washington,D.C.20006(202)857-6000April7,3.983.CounselforPetitioners}}
Petitioners seek.onlytosupple-mentthat.record,inanymannertheCommission deemsappropriate, topresenttheirevidencetotheCommission and-toarguetheir.positionbaseduponthesupplemented record..Petitioners'.
evidencewillincludePP&L'sanswerto,,thelettermarkedas'ppendixB,whichtheyhaverequested byApril17.(22)Astheaccompanying brief'pointsout,Petitioners'URPA rightsareinterrelated withtheir'ntitrust concerns.
ThePURPAr'hts,however,canbe.separately considered andprotected withoutanantitrust hearing,iftheCommission issoinclined.
OneofPetitioners'ontributions asintervenors willbetodemonstrate theinconsistencies betweentheSettlement Agreement andtherightsaffordedbyPURPA.(23)SincePetitioners'nterest intheproceeding islimitedtoSectionXoftheAgreement, theirrigntscouldbeeasilyandefficiently protected withoutunduedelayinthe'ssuanceofZP&L'soperating license.
11-CONCLUSXON Thispetitiontointervene shouldbegranted,andanorderallowingintervention shouldbeentered.Alimitedanti-N*trusthearing,asdescribed above,alsoshouldbeordered.Respectfully submitted, GeorgeR.KuciNarcGaryE3.len.SwardArent,Pox,Kintner,Plotkin6Kahn1815HStreet,N.N.washington, D.C.20006(202)857-6000April7,3.983.CounselforPetitioners}}

Revision as of 11:21, 29 June 2018

Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing.Commission Should Hold Limited Antitrust Hearing.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML17266A428
Person / Time
Site: Saint Lucie NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 04/07/1981
From: GARY M, KUCIK G, SWARD E E
ARENT, FOX, KINTNER, PLOTKIN & KAHN, PARSONS & WHITTEMORE
To:
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML17266A429 List:
References
NUDOCS 8104090669
Download: ML17266A428 (16)
v • d • e


Text

UNITEDSTATESOFAMERICANUCLEARREGULATORY COiP'ISSION IntheiiatterofFLORIDAPOWER&LIGHTCOt&3QW(St.LuciePlant,UnitNo.2)DocketNo.50-389PETITIONFORLEAVETOINTERVENE ANDREQUSTFORHEARINGPursuantto10CFR52.714andtheCommission's March9,1981,noticeoreceiptofanapplication fromFloridaPower&LightCompany(FP&L)forafacilityoperating license,46Fed.Reg.15831,Parsons&Whittemore, Inc.(P&W)anditssubsidiary, Resources Recovery(DadeCounty),Inc.(RRD),jointlypetitionforleavetointervene inthisproceeding andrecuesttheCommission toholdalimitedantitrust hearing,asdescribed below,onFP&L'sapplication.

Thegroundsforthispetitionandreauestaresetforthbelowandsomeofthemareelaborated uponintheaccompanying brief.IDENTIYOFPETITIONERS (1)P&WisaNewYorkcorporation engagedinavarietyofindust'alactivities intheUnitedStatesandthroughout theworld.Oneofweactivities inwhichP&Wand itssubsidiaries areengagedistheconstruction andoperation.-:,

-.offacilities forprocessing solidwaste.(2)RRDisaDelawarecorporation thatiswhollyownedbyP&W.RRDhasrecentlycompleted the'coKstruction ofasolidwasteprocessing facilityinDadeCounty,Florida.Itisanticipated thatthefacilitywillprocessupto18,000tonsofsolidwasteperweek,convertcombustible materials intorefuse-derived fuel,burnthefueltoraisesteam,andgenerateelectricity.

Thefacilityhasaninstalled nameplate electricgeneration capacityofapproximately 76megawatts.

Itisaaualifying smallpowerproduction zacilitywithinthemeaningozSection201ofthePublicUtilityRegulatory PoliciesActof1978(PURPA),16U.S.C.5796,andtheimplementing regulations, 18CFRPart292(1980).INTERESTQFPETITIONERS INTHISPROCEEDING (3)Petitioners seektointervene inthisproceeding toprotecttheirrightsandther'ghtsosimilarly situatedentitiesunderPURPA,thefederalantitrust lawsandSection105coftheAtomicEnergyAct,asamended,42U.S;C.52135(c).ItisPetitioners'ontention thatifFPaLispermitted tooperateSt.LuciePlant,UnitNo.2,underthetermsoftheproposedSettlement Agreement pendinginNRCDocketNo.50-389A,

particularly SectionXrelatingtotransmiss'on

services, theeffectuation ofanimportant aspectoffederalenergypolicyasreflected inPURPAmaybefrustrated anda"situation incon--sistentwiththeantitrust laws"maybecreatedormaintained.

42U.S.C.52135{c)(5).{5)Petitioners willbedirectlyimpactedbytheabove-described conseauences ofimplementing SectionZoftheproposedSettlement Agreement.

RRDhascompliedwiththerequirements ofPURPAandhastakenthenecessary stepsto,secure thebenefitstowhichitisentitled.

Ontriarch13,1981RRDnotifiedtheFederalEnergyRegulatory Commission (FERC)thatitisaQualified FaciliyundertheAct.AcopyofthatnoticewasservedthesamedayonFP&LwithacoveringletterinormingFP&LthatRRD"willbeginsalesofelectricenergytoFloridaPower&Lightonorafterninetydaysfromthedatehereof."(LettertoRobertTalionofFP&LfromGeorgeE.BoyhanofRRD;AppendixA).(6)RWhasalsosought"toexplorecompetitive opportunities forsalestootherelectricutilityentities."

Tothatend,RRDwroteFP&LonApril3,1981andaskedittoconfirmthatFP&L"villtransmitelectricity inbehalfofRRDtopoten-tialcustomers otherthanFP&L."Asauthority forreauiring FP&LtoprovideRRDwithtransmission

services, RRDcitedtheantitrust lawsandtheproposedSettlement Agreement.

SeeLette-fromDavidBardin,CounselforP&WandRRD,toL.Christian Hauck,FP&L'sVicePresident, LegalAffairs{Appendix B).

(7)Asdescribed morefullybelow=an<.'-n Petitioners'ccompanying brief,SectionXotheproposed.

Settlement Agreement affectsPetitoners'bility tosecure.rtsfull.-rightsunderPURPAandtogainaccesstoFPGL'.s.-.transmission gridso'cancompetewithFPaLinthesale.ofelectricpower.Totheextentthattheoperating licensesoughtbyFP&Linthisproceeding incorporates SectionX,Petitioners willbedirectlyanddetrimentally affected.

POTENTIAL EFFECTSOFTHISPROCEEDING ONPZTITIONEPS'NTERESTS A.EffectsonPetitioners'URPA rights.(8)SectionXoftheSettlement Agreement, forthefirsttimeinanNRClicensing proceeding, pu"portstoconferbenefitsonQualifying Facilities withinthemeaningofPURPA.Inreality,thosebenefitsmaybeentirelyillusory; indeed,SectionXmayevenrequireRRDandotherQualifying Fac'1'ties toabandonvaluablePUPZArightstobenefitfromthetransmission servicesaffordedbySectionX.(9)Section210ofPURPAseekstoencourage co-genera-tionandsmallpowerproduction.

Itdoessobyconferring uponQualifying Facilities therighttoselltheirelecticaloutputtoanelectricutility,tointerconnect withautil'yandtobuyatretailfromtheutilityelectricpowerneededwithinthefacility.

Theimplementing regulations exemptQualified

=acilities rommostutility-type regulations toencourage

competitive entrybyindustrial concernsintothegeneration business.

CongressenactedthesePKVAprovisi.ons.

toovercomethereluctance ofelectrical utilities todobusinesswith.suchQualifying Facilities onaneconomically viab3.ebasis.One.oftheimportant effectsofPURPAisthefacilitation and.encourage-4/mentofcompetition fromnewelectrical powersources,.

(10)SectionXappearstoadvancethepr'nciples summarized inparagraph (9)abovebyrequiring FP&Ltotransmitpower"(5)fromanyqualifying cogeneration facilityorsmallpowerproduction facil'y(asdefinedbytheFederalEnergyRegulatory Commission in1SCFRPart292,SubpartB)withwhichCompanyisinterconnected toaneighboring entityorneighboring distribution system,..."Thatcommitment totransmitpower,however,isconditioned uponaQualifying Facility's forfeiture ofvaluablerightsunderPURPA.Speciically,underSectionZ(a)(5)theQualifying Facilitymustarrangetorece'veanysalesofbackuppowerandmaintenance powerfromtheneighboring entityorneighboring distribution systemtowhichtransmission servicesareprovided.

Thatcondition wouldforceRRDandotherQualifying Facilities toabandontheirrighttosellalloftheirelectricpoweratthebuyer'savoidedcosts,underthe"/Severalprovisions ofPURPAhavebeenrecentlyhelduncon-stitutional byJudgeHaroldCoxoftheUnitedStatesDistrictCourtfortheSouthernDistrictofMississippi, Mississiaoi v.PERE,Civ.ActionNo.J79-02212(c),

(Peb.19,991Petiioners'ounsel havebeeninformedthat&eSolicitor GeneralintendstoappealthatdecisiondirectlytotheSupremeCourt.

termsofPURPAandtobuyatretailfromFP&Lig:accoraance.

Iwiththe3.atter's ob3.igations toprovideallof;theenergy-neededbytheQualifying Facilities.

{11)Byplacingrestictionsontheprovision oftransmission servicestoQualifying Facilitieswhichdonotapplyto"neighboring entities,"

SectionXunfairlyandunrea-sonablydiscriminates againstQualifying Fac'lities.

AlthoughPetitioners believethattheRRDfacilityinDade-County iqbothaQualifying Facilityanda"neighboring entity-,'-'anguage ofsubsection X(a)(5)mightbeconstrued byFP&Lasdiminishing rightsthathadbeenconferred bytheothersubsections.

(12)Subsection

{b)oSectionXintroduces afurtherrestriction oftherightsconferred onneighboring entitiesandQualifying Facilities.

Thatprovision statesthat"Nothinginthislicenseshall.beconstrued torequireCompanytowheepowerandenergytoorfromaretailcustomer.

Althouhtheg'1restriction shou3.dbeinterpreted onlyasalimitonretaicustomers whicharenotinthegeneratio nbusiness, aclar'i-cationormodification tothiseffectisessentia3.

toassurethattheprovisowillnotforceaQualifying

Facility, exercising itsrighttopurchasee3.ectxicity atretail,tocutatsel~offfromtheneededtransmission sexvices.

B.Antitrust Effects(13)FP&Lpossesses monopolistic contxoloveolovertheandeasternprovision ozran"ransmission servicesinsouthernFior'a.

(14)SectionXoftheSettlement Agreement

-issowrittenastoaffordFP&Lunreasonable opportunities-

-toconstrue-.:theprovisions contained thereininaway.Matwould.defeat.theirprocompetitive objective, therebymaintaining FP&L'monopoly.

powerovertransmission services.

(15)Theunreasonable andunfairdiscrimination betweenQualifying Facilities andothergenerators ofelectricity described inparagraph (13.)above,wouldplacePetitioners andothersimilarly situatedentitiesatacompetitive disadvantage.

(16)Subsect'on Z(a)oftheSettlement Agreement, particularly conditions (3),(4),and(5),giveFP&Lexcessive discretionary latitudeindenyingPetitioners andothersimilarly situatedentitiesaccesstoFP&L'stransmission grid,therebyPenablingFP&LtopreventPetitioners andothersfromsellingtheirgenerated electricity tomunicipal utilities.

(17)Theeffectsdescribed inparagraphs (13)through(16)abovearemorefullyanalyzedintheaccompanying brief.TheysupportPetitioners'ontention thatimplementation oftheSettlement Agreement aswrittenwouldsignificantly changeFP&L'sactivities andproposedactivities withinthemeaningofSection105coftheAtomicEnergyAct,asamended,42U.S.C.52135(c)(2),requiring theCommission toholdanantitrust hearingatthistime.Thesenewanticompetitive activities areparticularly invidious since,onceapproved,,

theywillappeartohavethesanctionofNRCandtheJusticeDepartment.

Thatfactcoupled withthesuperficial impetustocompetition affordedbythe':--.SectionXtransmission provisions makeitcriticalthat-the-.;

positionofQualifying Facilities underPKUA.-betakenintoaccountbeforetheoperating licenseissues.NATUREOFPETITIONERS'IGHTS UNDERTMATONICENERGYACTTOINTERVENE (18)Petitioners areentitledtointervene inth'sproceeding pursuanttoSections105cand189oftheAtomicEnergyAct,asamended,42U.S.C.552135(c),2239.Section.189statesthat"theComm'ssion shallgrantahearingupontherequestofanypersonwhoseinterestmaybeaffectedbytheproceeding, andshalladmitanysuchpersonasapartytosuchproceeding."

Asdescribed inparagraphs (8)to(17)above,Petitioners'UR?A rightsandtheircompetitive interests w'lbedirectlyimpactedbytheissuanceofanoperating facil'ylicensecontaining, orsubjectto,theconditions oftheSett'e-mentAgreement.

Therefore, theyshouldbepermitted tointer-veneandbeheardtoprotectthoserightsandinterests andthe*/rightsandinterests ofothersimilarly situatedentities.

(19)Section105coftheAtomicEnergyActprovidesanadditional statutory basisforintervening andseekinga~/ThestaffoftheFloridaPublicServiceCommission hasestimated thattheFloridacapacityforQualifying Facilityprojectsapproaches 2700megawatts.

lissues.Thatsectionrequiresthatanhearingontheantitrustissues.4ldattheoperat'ng licensestageifantitrust reviewbe.ea'nthelicensee's activities orproposed"s'gnificant changesineicei~~ttothepreviousrevaewyactivatzes haveoccurredsubsequen oconnection wit.t:heCommission

...inconnthAttorneyGeneralandthee~~~efacil'ty."

Thesignifacan theconstruction permitforthefaci'.tbFPSL'sintendedamplemmentation ofthechangesbroughtaboutydtheireffectsuponPetitioners, asSettlement Agreement andtheareehs(13)to(17aove7)bveandintheaccompany-described inparagzaptheriht-toint:ervene fortheingbrae,gib'ivePetitioners therigananaandparticipating in,tblishingtheneedfor,anpurposeofesait:reviewunderSection105c.secondantitrusrSOFPROCEEDING ASTORFICHSHTOINTERVENE PETITIONERS NIektointervene intheinstant(20)Petitioners seektoanervtingtheLicensing thelimitedpurposeofassasiroceeding foreipuatefullytheconsequences ofBoardandethCommission toevaluatefuyseent.InsedSettlement Agreement.

'onXoftheproposeeimplementing SectitoJeheardastoSectionZ'articuar,tonthee-p1Petitioners wishtoJeeartonthePUP>Arightsandcomp-tialldetrimental impactonthefPetitioners andothethersimaarytitiveinterests oeQualifying Facilities.

notbelievethatatrial-type

{21)Petitioners donoteiev"h~ing1reuiredhere.Theyare"h~ingisnecessari yreqantitrust hearing

10preparedtoaccepttherecordasdeveloped todate,andwouldnotaskthatitbereopened.

Petitioners seek.onlytosupple-mentthat.record,inanymannertheCommission deemsappropriate, topresenttheirevidencetotheCommission and-toarguetheir.positionbaseduponthesupplemented record..Petitioners'.

evidencewillincludePP&L'sanswerto,,thelettermarkedas'ppendixB,whichtheyhaverequested byApril17.(22)Astheaccompanying brief'pointsout,Petitioners'URPA rightsareinterrelated withtheir'ntitrust concerns.

ThePURPAr'hts,however,canbe.separately considered andprotected withoutanantitrust hearing,iftheCommission issoinclined.

OneofPetitioners'ontributions asintervenors willbetodemonstrate theinconsistencies betweentheSettlement Agreement andtherightsaffordedbyPURPA.(23)SincePetitioners'nterest intheproceeding islimitedtoSectionXoftheAgreement, theirrigntscouldbeeasilyandefficiently protected withoutunduedelayinthe'ssuanceofZP&L'soperating license.

11-CONCLUSXON Thispetitiontointervene shouldbegranted,andanorderallowingintervention shouldbeentered.Alimitedanti-N*trusthearing,asdescribed above,alsoshouldbeordered.Respectfully submitted, GeorgeR.KuciNarcGaryE3.len.SwardArent,Pox,Kintner,Plotkin6Kahn1815HStreet,N.N.washington, D.C.20006(202)857-6000April7,3.983.CounselforPetitioners

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML17266A428&oldid=741904"