ML20070N821

Motion for Termination of Proceeding & Withdrawal of Application.Site Will Be Used for Alternative Power Generation Facility.Site Redress Plan Will Address Return of Site to Undisturbed Condition.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20070N821
Person / Time
Site:	Black Fox
Issue date:	01/23/1983
From:	Gallo J, Styles L ISHAM, LINCOLN & BEALE, PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF OKLAHOMA
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML20070N786	List: ML20070N783 ML20070N821
References
NUDOCS 8301250619
Download: ML20070N821 (25)

Text

1/23/83 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of the Application of )

Public Service Company of Oklahoma )

Associa' Electric Cooperative, Inc.) Docket Nos. STN 50-556 and )

Western Farmers Electric Cooperative ) STN 50-557

)

(Black Fox Station, Units 1 and.2) )

MOTION FOR TERMINATION OF PROCEEDING AND WITHDRAWAL OF APPLICATION INTRODUCTION Public Service Company of Oklahoma, Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc. and Western Farmers Electric Cooperative (" Applicants") filed their original Motion for Termination of Proceeding and Withdrawal of Application with the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in the captioned docket on April 6, 1982. The motion was filed when Applicants announced their decision, on February 16, 1982, to cancel the Black Fox Station nuclear project. On June 18, 1982, the Licensing Board denied, without prejudice, Applicants' Motion for Termination of Proceeding and Withdrawal of Application to construct the Black Fox Station nuclear project, b! On January

-1/ Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Memorandum and Order (Denying, Without Prejudice, Applications' Motion for Termination of Proceeding and Withdrawal of Application) ,

dated June 18, 1982 (hereafter " Memorandum and Order") .

4 0301250619 830123 PDR ADOCK 050005gg G

7, 1983, the Licensing Board issued a subsequent Order-requesting applicants to advise the Board, on or before January 21, 1983, whether any decision had been made as to the future of the Black Fox site and the site improvements made under the Black Fox Station Limited Work Authorization

("LWA"), as amended. 2/

In its June 18 Memorandum and Order, the Licensing Board denied Applicant's April 6 Motion, without prejudice, notwithstanding Applicants' commitment to submit to the NRC Staff, after the end of 1982 (once a decision had been made on the use of the Black Fox site for alternative power-generation projects) a site redress plan consistent with the site's future use. 3/ The Eoard found that it would not be prudent to approve Applicants' plan for determining necessary site redress measures since disputes might arise after its jurisdiction had been terminated. S/

2/ Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Order, dated January i 7, 1983 (hereafter "Crder") .

3/ Applicant's Response to Licensing Board's April 29, 1982 Order with attached Affidavit of John B. West, Black Fox project manager, dated May 14, 1982. The April 29 Order deferred decision on Applicant's Motion and directed the filing of a document describing the extent of Black Fox site activity and proposed restorative measures. Dr. West's affidavit was submitted in response to the Order.

The West affidavit proposed no site redress at that time as each construction facility and improve-ment could well be used in an alternate power-generation facility at the Black Fox site.

4/' Memorandum and Order at 3.

It also disagreed with the NRC Staff's view 5[ that there was sufficient information for the Board to grant the motion to withdraw and terminate the proceeding as long as Applicants took affirmative measures to stabilize the site and to control erosion. 5/

The Board's findings were based on the possibility that, by the end of 1982, Applicants could decide not to construct an alternative power-generation facility at the Black Fox site. The Board feared that if a "no-go" decision was made there would be no guarantee that construction buildings and facilities would be removed, that excavations would be back-filled and that Applicants would take other proper measures to redress the site.

Applicants' commitment to maintain the Black Fox site in a prudent manner pending their alternative power-generation decision was not deemed sufficient. 1[ Pending a decision on the future of the Black Fox site, the Board suggested that Applicants should proceed to stabilize against erosion those areas specified by the NRC Staff. 5!

5/ See Reply of NRC Shaff to Licensing Board's April 29, 1982 Order, dated June 2, 1982. The Staff's view was based, in part, on a May 17, 1982 visit to the Black Fox site.

6/ Id.

7/ Id. at 4.

8/ Id. at 5.

4 In response to the Licensing Board's June 18 Memorandum and Order, Applicants developed and submitted to the NRC Staff, on September 20, 1982, a soil stabilization and erosion control program. 9/ The plan addressed the concerns identified by the NRC Staff after the May 17, 1982 site inspection. Applicants received Staff approval of their plan for soil stabilization on September 24, 1982. 10/-

The soil stabilization program, as approved, was begun in September 1982 and will be completed by September 1933. 11/

Whil.e Applicants were preparing to inform the Licensing Board of these efforts and their decision on the future of Black Fox Station, the Board issued its January 7, 1983 Order. The January 7 Order requests that Applicants advise the Licensing Board whether a decision has been made with respect to the use of the Black Fox site. Three options were presented in the Order. If no decision had been made, Applicants were to

-9/ Letter from John B. West, Manager, Black Fox Station Project, to Ms. Elinor Adensam, Chief Licensing Branch 4, NRC Division of Licensing, with attached Soil Stabilization Plan, dated September 20, 1982, here-after Exhibit 1 submitted with the instant Motion.

~~10/ Letter from Thomas M. Novak, Assistant Director for Licensing, NRC Division of Licensing, to John B. West, dated September 24, 1982, hereafter Exhibit 2 submitted with the instant Motion.

--11/ Applicants' Black Fox Station Soil Stabilization and Erosion Control Plan, dated August 30, 1982, at Figure 2, hereafter Exhibit 3 submitted with the instant Motion.

submit monthly status reports to the Licensing Board. If a decision had been made not to construct an alternative project at the Black Fox site, b ! A pplicants were to commit to redress the site as nearly as possible to its pre-LWA state. If, however, a decision to build at the Black Fox site had been made, Applicants were to advise the Licensing Board whether each facility and other improve-ment made at the site under the amended LWA would be utilized in the alternative project design. 12/

As will be shown below, it has now been decided to use the Black Fox site for an alternative power-generation facility, and a redress plan has been structured by Applicants. Therefore, Applicants hereby move the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, pursuant to 10 C.F.R. S 2.107, to enter an order terminating the instant proceeding and permitting Applicants to withdraw, without prejudice, their application for construction permits.

DISCUSSION Applicants' original April 6, 1982 Motion for Termination and Withdrawal of Application set forth the rationale behind the decision to cancel the Black Fox Station

--12/ Or if a decision had been made not to utilize certain of the Black Fox site facilities and improvements.

13/ Licensing Board Order at 2.

___u ._ a ..- _ _

f -

6-

} nuclear project. The original Motion also stated the " good cause" reasons for permitting termination of the captioned proceeding and withdrawal, without prejudice, of the application for construction permits. These reasons remain valid today and are hereby incorporated in the instant Motion.

On November 26, 1982, Public Service Company of Oklahoma ("PSO") publicly announced plans for the construc-tion of Inola Station, a coal-fired electric power generating station, to be built at the site of the cancelled Black Fox Station nuclear project. --14/ Current plans provide for commercial operation of Inola Station Unit 1 at the Black Fox site during 1992 with Unit 2 to follow during 1994. (West Affidavit, paragraph 2 and attachment 1.) Tentative long--

range plans ultimately provide for the construction of up to four coal-fired units at the cancelled Black Fox site.

The decision to build the Inola Station was made as a part of the integrated planning of the Central and South West

("CSW") system, the holding company for PSO. Planning is coordinated by an Operating Committee with representatives from the four operating companies (Central Power and Light Company, Public Service Company of Oklahoma, Southwestern Electric Power Company, and West Texar Utilities). It is 14/ Further affidavit of John B. West, with accompanying attachments, dated January 14, 1983, hereafter Exhibit 4 submitted with the instant Motion.

- . , _.r-  % < -., , . , -

,,,% m-..--,,.. ~ ,--. - - ~.-.-- ..--,- ,

incorporated in a Joint Facilities Plan which defines the load recponsibility and planning reserve ?.evels of each company in the CSW System, including PSO. (West Affidavit, paragraph 2.) Official approval of the Joint Facilities Plan, including construction of the coal-fired steam generating facility at Inola (formerly Black Fox) Station, is found in a letter from Mr. Durwood Chalker, Central and South West Corporation Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, to Mr. John W. Turk, Jr. , Chairman of the CSW Operating Committee. (West Affidavit, attachment 2.)

CSW's decision to build the Inola Station eliminates the Licensing Board's concern that Applicants would decide not to construct alternative power-generation projects at the Black Fox site. Applicants, however, cannot determine at this time which facilities and other Black Fox site improvements will be used in the Inola Station design. (West Affidavit, paragraph 3.)

The final decision on whether some or all of the construc-tion improvements accomplished under the Black Fox Station LWA, as amended, will be utilized at the large coal-fired electric generating complex should be made during the design of the Inola Station layout and site facilities, currently expected to begin during 1984. (West Affidavit, paragraphs 3-4.) A decision now would be premature. Unnecessary and undesirable planning

- - . - - = -- . .

i restraints on the layout and ultimate design of Inola Station would result. (West Affidavit, paragraph 4.) For example, design and construction plans may dictate that existing buildings and warehouses be moved rather than dismantled or the railroad spur be extended or relocated. (jgi. )

For these reasons, prudent management requires that a

decision on the usefulness of the Black Fox improvements

occur in conjunction with design efforts for Inola Station.

(jpd. ) As design and construction efforts for Inola Station progress, Applicants commit to dismantle unnecessary Black Fox site improvements which will not be utilized and to return disturbed site areas to conditions consistent with the site development and environmental requirements of.

I a coal-fired electric power generating station. (jpd. )

During the interim period, the Applicants will complete the soil stabilization program approved by the NRC Staff i

and will maintain the site so as not to adversely impact the surrounding offsite environment. (West Affidavit, paragraph 5.)

Thus, Applicants have now structured a redress plan for the Black Fox Station site. 'The first step is to identify the useful Black Fox improvements during

site layout and planning beginning in 1984, and integrate these improvements with the design of the Inola Station.

I, i

f 4

- - , - - - , - - , - , - , - , , _ , , - , - , - - - , , , . . , , . - -._---------=.--.,--,ev ,--.--,----n --m--,- ,---.e- a -,--c--- -- - s --- --

Thereafter, as reinforced by Dr. West's commitment, Applicants will dismantle any unnecessary Black Fox improvements and will return disturbed areas to conditions consistent with the present use of the site. The decision to construct and operate Inola Station coupled with the mechanisms for redress described above provide the Licensing Board with adcquate assurance and informa-tion concerning the future use and environmental control of the Black Fox site to warrant the grant of the instant motion.

For good cause shown, Applicants' motion should be granted.

Respectfully submitted,

-- g&

g [ Joseph Gallo Yl' e- . M>

Lisa c. Etg)ts Two of the attorneys for Public l Service Company of Oklahoma l

l Isham, Lincoln & Beale l 1120 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.

Suite 840 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 833-9730 l

Dated: January 23, 1983 i

Exhibit 1 DIN 5-024-829 PUBUC SERVICE COMPANY OF OKLAHOMA e"'

I s

A CENTRAL AND SOUTH WEST COMPANY P.O. BOX 201/ TULSA. OKLAHOMA 74102 / (9181599-2000 /1WX 910-845-2106 -

September 20, 1982 File: 214.1011.210 Ms. Elinor Adensam Chief, Licensing Brat.ch 4 Division of Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

Dear Ms. Adensam:

In response to the ASLB Memorandum and Order of June 18, 1982, PSO has developed the attached Black Fox Station Soil Stabilization and Erosion Control Program.

As directed, this plan addresses the concerns identified in the NRC Staff sub-mittal of June 2, 1982. The plan previously has been discussed with both Mr. Dino Scaletti, NRC Licensing Branch, and Mr. Jerry LaRoach, NRC Environmental Engineering Branch.

We look forward to timely approval of the plan by the NRC Staff in order that we may begin implementation as soon as possible.

Very ruly yours,

/ 4

/-

% : $. .<yl, J

\

u'

,Xfohn B. West 1 ,

Manager, Black Fox StaLion Project JBW:SVP:bj r Attachment cc:Mr. Joseph Gallo, Isham, Lincoln & Beale l

CENTRAL AND SOUTH WEST SYSTEM E!"2 @N'4"?,'Sh' h%Sygepomnany or Omanoma gg.g,sgn eggyic Power gt Tegtilit es

., . p n, Exhibit 2

<h, UNITED STATES

[ 3 g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g ,E WASHINGTON. D. C. 20556

%, * . . . . / SEp24IM Docket Nos: 50-556 and 50-557 Mr. John B. West, Manager Black Fox Station Nuclear Project l Public Service Company of Oklahoma l P.O. Box 201 Tulsa, Oklahoma 74102

Subject:

Black Fox Station Erosion Control Plan The staff has reviewed the Black Fox Station Soil Stabilization and Erosion Control Plan (transmittal lett r to Elinor Adensam dated September 20,1982) that was developed in response to the June 18, 1982, Order by the ASLB. We have concluded that implementation of the plan will adequately stabilize the soil in the areas that were found to be eroding during our visit to the BFS Site in May of this year.

Sincerely, ba -

/ { WA Thomas M. Novak, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing cc: See next page l

Exhibit 3 August 30, 1982 BFS SOIL STABILIZATION AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN Introduction The Limited Work Authorization issued to the BFS Project on July 26, 1978 imposed a legal obligation to maintain the BFS site in an environmentally prudent manner consistent with the conditions of the LWA. These conditions include requirements for implementation and maintenance of soil stabilization and erosion control measures.

On May 17, 1982, representatives of the NRC Staff conducted an inspection of the BFS site. The purpose of the inspection was to review construction activities completed to date under the BFS LWA and assess the potential for adverse off-site environmental impact resulting from these construction activities. As a result of this inspection, the NRC Staff identified certain areas of the BFS site requiring additional soil stabilization and erosion control measures. The purpose of this plan is to address those areas of concern identified by the NRC Staff.

Scope The following areas were identified by the NRC Staff as requiring. additional soil stabilization and erosion control measures:

AREA 1 Channels along the inclined RPV haul road; AREA II Slopes along both sides of the barge slip and the inclined RPV haul road; AREA III Eroded areas along the access road and railroad rights-of-way; AREA IV Area surro'unding the helicopter pad; AREA V Engineered drainage system.

i Figure 1 illustrates the location of identified areas.

Program Development The BFS soil stabilization and erosion control plan is based on consultations with both commercial landscape contractors and representatives of the U.S.

I Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Services. Follcwing their inspection of the identified areas, these consultants provided recommendations based on their e.. pert knowledge of local soils, climate, drainage methods and special procedures necessary to establish viable vegetati'e v ground cover.

Based on these recommendations, a plan has been developed to address the areas of concern identified by the NRC Staff. The plan provides for construction of improved drainage channels along the inclined RPV haul road to control erosion. The plan further provides for establishing vegetative cover to stabilize the soil on identified inclined areas.

1

)

The selected method for establishing vegetative cover, where required, is a hydro-mulch application of both a quick germinating soil stabilizing grcss, such as bermuda or fescue grass (depending on the season of application), and a mixture of native grasses. To facilitate the hydro-mulch application, soil samples from all areas to receive vegetative cover have been analyzed to d5termine the type and quantities of nutrients to be added to the soil.

Program AREA I - Channels Along the RPV Haul Road: An improved drainage system will be constructed along the sides of the inclined RPV Haul Road. This will be accomplished by widening and shaping the existing channels as necessary and building concrete chutes in these channels to provide rapid drainage and prevent further soil erosion. To ensure effective drainage from the road surface to the concrete chutes and to prevent erosion of the roadbed, railroad crossties will be placed on the road bed in a baffle arrangement and necered to the roadbed to prevent displacement during runoff. This installation will provide both the channels and the roadbed with long-term stability against further erosion.

AREA II - Slopes Along Both Sides of the Barde Slip and Inclined RPV Haul Road: These areas will be provided a vegetative cover by planting a mixture of fescue and native grass seed. The seeding area will be prepared by shaping and scarifying the soil to provide a satisfactory bed for germination and growth. The seeds will be applied by a hydro-mulch process. This process distributes a stabilizing medium for the seed and soil to hold both in place until germination can occur. The process also distributes the fertilizer required during the first months of growth, and helps retain moisture during this critical period. Water will be applied to the area as required.

AREAS III and IV - Eroded Areas Along the Access Road and Railroad Rights-of-Way and the Area Surrounding the Helicopter Pad: The area surrounding the helicopter pad extends both east and west of the guard house.

The areas east and west of the guard house will be seeded with grasses. The soil in the area north of the guard house consists of a mixture of shale and clay which have shown an insignificant amount of erosion since excavation, indicating the inherent stability of that soil. Therefore, no further measures to stabilize this area will be undertaken at this time. In the course of maintaining the site in an environmentally prudent manner, this area will be observed for evidence of accelerated erosion and appropriate stebilization methods will be employed as needed.

The remaining areas will be provided with a vegetative cover by planting a mixture of Bermuda grass and native grass seed. The application will be by hydro-mulch process similar to that used in Area No. II. The fertilizer application rate will be adjusted to the values indicated for each of these areas. Water will be applied to the area as required.

AREA V - Engineered Drainage System: There are no areas of the engineered drainage system experiencing significant erosion at this time. This stability is due to the protection of existing vegetation and inherent stability of the soil material. The drainage system will be maintained to serve its protective

function of minimizing the off-site impact of soil erosion. Should significant erosion develop in this area, appropriate measures will be employed to stabilize the soil.

Schedule A three phased schedule for implementing the BFS soil stabilization and erosion centrol plan has been developed. While the plan for vegetation has been selected to provide reasonable assurance of success, there are several variables, including rainfall, temperature, and terrain, that may impact the results of tl.e program. The phased approach will allow the benefit of using the experience gained in the first phase in later vegetative activities.

Figure 2 details the implementation schedule by area.

9 4

lj

., ,c - 7(s -

o =

v, N e N A

5 >

y:.o p, <y mL P

([q ~

V f

=

=

7 mO ""^ L .

g~y gR

~

~ ,

= T .

N T[x(- = O

=

cg (.. = e C

~

g I

I I

j f 3 e }f , (

=. mN ~

s O

I S

O j ' R

(

' N D #7 ( -

_'+ ,7  :

{h

[ mE

=(g ~ ',

(N A -

QA g

p 3 t. .

'[  ;

m l l!  :

l,i f

' w. . -

b3*

O - ,

/s-)k_'h1)wfAq, 7/ l3 r

ej p;;

t A

y

,g,(pb ia q

}

d q,,

l il

).- t I_q)j 7[k)_

i L

pUL ._

\ )

e q h.n_

- g '- - , c -

n~

y(

. gNl .i

_% I <

) y(f d'r" , }. ,-

..-._ - a

' ; )v t'

5 O'kgO L h'

+. .

n r b '

[_-

rJ 4 j E=_.

,4fA

.yc j

rb9 f' g . _

J

_x

_W p- _'

c -

7- (-;Q (g N n ?= %N-V

2. ; E

,< (

O

_ \ %_['I _h >

N c- q

e. . ,

f gA E \

/b(Vf nR

)

3 A

)

e m3'%"".

y M,

s.

- /

' f -

C cR. a. k

\

.r . fq ,, .f /,, 3 35g%

m.

nbJ \

\s

.N ]'wuC. -

. 'yh.,

_,'Q;\ ' -

m.

7 -

I

. < '7 a

3

, \\~

t- .

-. 4 1yV ,

%,I \ .

O yk ..

N

,l

. i ,

\

A = x F C

X

_"~"

R .'-

N9'x

\mN y

A '

k '

R.

i'

[ -

BFS SOIL STABILIZATION ,

AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN e

IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE t

! e 11/82 12/82 l 6/83 7/83 8/83 9/83

9/82 10/82 l

. I Area No. I I II l

. I l

Area No. II l l I

i

! l Area Nos. III, IV l l l

l l

l FIGURE 2

. . Exhibit 4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of the Application of )

)

Public Service Company of Oklahoma, )

Associated Electric Cooperative, ) Docket Nos. STN 50-556 and ) STN 50-557 Western Farmers Electric Cooperative )

)

(Black Fox Station, Units 1 and 2) )

AFFIDAVIT OF JOHN B. WEST, PH.D.

I, John B. West, of lawful age and being first duly sworn, depose and say that:

1. My name is John B. West. I reside at 7901 South Yukon, Tulsa, Oklahoma. I am employed by Public Service Company of Oklahoma ("PS0") as Black Fox Station Project Manager. I have been associated with the Black Fox Station management staff since 1976. Prior to that, I was a member of the faculty of the School of Chemical Engineering, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma, for over twenty-one years. I was also employed as a graduate assistant for four years at the Ames Laboratory, Iowa State Universi-ty; and by General Electric Company on the Chemical and Metallurgical Program and at the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory for about one year each. I received B.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Chemical Engineering from Iowa State University. I am a registered Professional Engineer in the State of Oklahoma,

2. On November 26, 1982, PS0 publicly announced plans for the construction of Inola Station, a coal-fired electric power generating station to be built at the site of the cancelled Black Fox Station Nuclear Project. A copy of the PS0 news-release is provided as Attachment 1. Current plans

provide for commercial operation of Inola Station Unit I during 1992 with Unit 2 to follow during 1994. Tentative long-range plans ultimately provide for the construction of up to four coal-fired units at the site. Future generating station construction is a part of the integrated planning of the Central and South West system. PlanningibcoordinatedbyanOperating Committee, with representatives from the operating companies (Central Power and Light Company, Public Service Company of Oklahoma, Southwestern Electric Power Company, and West Texas Utilities Company) and Central and South West Services, Inc. The Operating Committee recommends to the Chief Executive Of ficer of the Central and South West Corporation a Joint Facilities Plan based upon the load responsibility and planning reserve levels of each company. A copy of a letter from Mr. Durwood Chalker, Central and South West Corporation Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, to Mr. John W. Turk, Jr.,

Chairman of the Operating Committee, approving the current recommendation of the Committee for facilities including the coal-fired steam turbine generating facilities at Inola Station is provided as Attachment 2.

3. By my affidavit of Fhy 13, 1982, I provided to the Board a delin-eation of the selected construction activities accomplished in accordance with the Limited Work Authorization, as amended, ("LWA") for Black Fox Station. My affidavit also described how these site improvements may be of value in the construction and operation of an alternate power generating station construct-ed at the Black Fox site. The final decision to utilize some or all of the construction improvements accomplished under the Black Fox Station LWA will be made during the design of the Inola Station site layout and site facilities.

Early design activities, including conceptual design for permitting purposes, are expected to commence during 1984.

2

- =. . - _ _ _ _. . _ _ .

4. A commitment, at this time, to utilize some or all of the site improvements accomplished under the Black Fox Station LWA, as currently configured, would impose unnecessary and undesirable restraints on the layout and ultimate design of Inola Station, making it less than optimum and increasing costs. The optimum site layout may indicate that the current grading and elevation configuration of the site requires modification. Design and construction plans may dictate that existing buildings and warehouses.be moved rather than dismantled. The station layout may require that the railroad spur be extended or relocated. For these reasons, determination of necessary and prudent site modification and site redress measures should occur in conjunction with the design efforts for Inola Station. Accordingly, PSO proposes no site redress measures at this time. As design and construction efforts for Inola Station progress, unnecessary site improvements shall be dismantled and disturbed site areas returned to conditions consistent with the site development and environmental requirements of a coal-fired electric power generating station site.

5. Consistent with PS0's commitment to maintain the Black Fox Sta-tion site in an environmentally prudent manner, and in accordance with the Board's conclusion contained in the Memorandum and Order of June 18, 1982 that certain areas specified in the NRC Staff's submittal of June 2, 1982 should be stabiliz d against soil erosion, PS0 has developed and is implementing a soil stabilization and erosion control plan for the Black Fox Station site. Prior to initiation, this plan was reviewed and approved by the NRC Staff. PSO continues its commitment to maintain the Black Fox Station site so as not to adversely impact the surrounding off-site environment.

3

Attachment Executed at Tulsa, Oklahoma

- L -

Subscribed And Sworn To Me This / Day of J nuary, 1983

~

1

_/ ! , . ,

iD? li;<idt d!r ?~//

My Commission Expires Hoveraber 17, lES4 4

i i

i t

< 4

. . l

)

p NEWS FROM 083 4 ~

P.O. BOX 201, TULSA, OKLAHOMA 74102 AC 918 5962000 FOR RELE.AS[mmedia te FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Attachent 1 CONTACT: Dan Manley 599-2728 PSO PLANNING SCHEDULE INCLUDES COAL UNITS Public Service Company of Oklahoma's long-range planning  ;

schedule includes coal-fired electric generating units at the i Inola, Oklahoma plant site previously designated for the Black Fox Station nuclear project cancelled earlier this year, PSO discrosed' today.

The tentative schedule puts the first unit of Inola Station in commercial service in 1992, followed by a second unit in 1994.

Under some long-range projections, a total of four units could be operated when the site is fully developed. The preliminary environmental and engineering studies for coal-fired units on the site will be initiated soon.

I PSO's planned participation in the 1992 unit is set at 248 megawatts.

Other companies in the Central and South West System ,

plan to own 192 megawatts.

The total size of the unit will not be determined until after the other two Black Fox Station joint-owners, Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc. and hestern Farmers Electric Cooperative, have had an opportunity to evaluate their interest in owning capacity in the coal-fired project. Other Oklah6mh utilities will'be given an opportunity to participate in the project.

9-pso CENTRAL AND SOUTH WEST SYSTEM

.(.. 4 gnt{ Power 4nd,Lght IJ2682

{ugcyege, Company of Oktahoma gwytegn Egne Power gst egsytmt'es

l5 *

. Attachment 2 I

Centraland South West Corporation '

arco on. w an. . o :r rsese . rie res ares 4 "

d".a. c, .w e gg,,,,

August 31, 1982 '

Mr. John W. Turk, Jr. I. i \l T .

'- '*8 ' **

Vice President, Superintendent of Power Southwestern Electric Power Company -

$1 p g jog 2, j P. O. Box 21106

• OTT'?.I OF Shreveport, Imuisiana 71156 ,

CFY C.: PO'.'.%R -

Dear Mr. Turk:

In your letter of August 3,1982, you reported the concensus recommendations of the Central and South West Operating Comunittee Meeting held July 26, 1982 at Bayview.

• Reconunendation No. I regarding the 138 KV line and terminal to be located on CPL's System between San Miguel and Dilley in Atascosa and Frio Counties is hereby approved.

Reconunendation No. 2 concerning our facilities plan which the Consnittee record:

revised is hereby approved and restated as follows for the 1985 Benry W. Pirkey Unit 1 1986 Dolet Hills Unit 1 1987 STP Unit 1 oklaunio'n 91 1988 - -

1989 STP Unit 2 Coleto Creek tktit 2 1990 -

I 1931 , WalkerCountyAhl 1992 Inola Unit 1* -

1993 Valley Unit 1 1994 Inola Unit 2*

1995 , Valley Unit 2 1996 Inpla Unit 3 1997 Walker County B91 . -

Oklaunion Unit 2 1998 Inola Unit 4 1999 Walker County A92 2000 Walker County Bf2 2001 PSO Coal Unit 1

• CSW Operating Companies' portion is 440 p5f and AEC portion i s 200 let.

cewei ro a. and unte company Pinse somee company as o ieb . seusmenom Decire Power company . woes Teses ui.ieme com cent et one soum wow se v.ces >c .ccess one soum wee ruses.ine.

ELECTRICITYFOR HIESoUTNWEST

y

. Attachment 2 . .

. (continued) .

j Mr. John W. Turk, Jr. '

Page 2 August 31, 1982 He operating Comunittee continues to function in a splendid manner, and I again express my appreciation to you and the members for your good work. - ,

Sincerely,

, )

^ _k_,

9 DCajc G

h e

9 9

O O

9 9

9

- 0 l

e

O~ D UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of the Application of )

Public Service Company of Oklahoma )

Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc.) Docket Nos. STN 50-556 and )

Western Farmers Electric Cooperative )

STN 50-557

)

(Black Fox Station, Units 1 and 2) )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE OUT OF TIME and MOTION FOR TERMINATION OF PROCEEDING AND WITHDRAWAL OF APPLICATION in the above-captioned proceeding were served upon the persons shown below by deposit in the United States mail, first-class postage prepaid, this 23rd day of January, 1983.

Sheldon J. Wolfe, Esquire Docketing and Service Section Administrative Judge Office of the Secretary of Atornic Safety and Licensing the Commission Board Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission- Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Frederick J. Shon Atomic Safety and Licensing

Administrative Judge Board Panel i Atomic Safety and Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Board Panel Commission U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Washington, D.C. 20555 l Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Paul W. Purdom Atcmic Safety and Licensing Administrative Judge Appeal Board Panel

, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission l c/o Environmental Studies Washington, D.C. 20555 Group Drexel University 32nd and Chestnut Streets Philadelphia, PA 19104

Elaine I. Chan, Esquire James H. Thessin. Esquire Counsel for NRC Staff Counsel for NRC Staff U. S. Nuclear Regulatory U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Joseph R. Farris, Esquire Mr. Maynard Human Feldman, Hall, Franden, Reed General Manager

& Woodard Western Farmers Electric 816 Enterprise Building Cooperative Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103 P. O. Box 429 Andarko, Oklahoma 73005 Mr. Clyde Wisner Public Affairs Officer Mr. Gerald P. Diddle NRC Region 4 General Manager 611 Ryan Plaza Drive Associated Electric Suite 1000 Cooperative, Inc.

Arlington, Texas 76011 P. O. Box 754 Springfield, Missouri 65801 Mrs. Carrie Dickerson Citizens Action for Safe Michael L. Bardrick, Esquire Energy, Inc. Assistant Attorney General P. O. Box 924 State of Oklahoma Claremore, Oklahoma 74107 State of Oklahoma 112 State Capitol Building Mrs. Ilene H. Younghein Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73105 3900 Cashion Place Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73112 Mr. Lawrence Burrell Route 1, Box 197 Fairview, Oklahoma 73737 Omfoseph/ Gallo jp'

.