|
|
| Line 16: |
Line 16: |
|
| |
|
| =Text= | | =Text= |
| {{#Wiki_filter:f>>UNITEDSTATESOFAMERICANUCLEARREGULATORY COMMISSION A,DOCKETEDUSNRCJUL20>98i> | | {{#Wiki_filter:f>>UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION A, DOCKETED USNRC JUL20>98i> |
| ~DlficeoftheSecretary DoeReting 5Service~0Branch)IntheMatterof:))FLORIDAPOWER&LIGHTCOMPANY)(St.LuciePlant,UnitNo.2))))~I(~DocketNo.50-A,,gg6-gpss5~~go>"+~~0>+Qs~~,CO,.cgPETITIONFORLEAVETOINTERVENE | | ~Dlfice of the Secretary DoeReting 5 Service~0 Branch)In the Matter of:))FLORIDA POWER&LIGHT COMPANY)(St.Lucie Plant, Unit No.2))))~I (~Docket No.50-A ,,gg 6-gpss 5~~go>"+~~0>+Qs~~, CO,.cg PETITION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE'v Metropolitan Dade County, Florida (" Dade Count hereby petitions to intervene in this.construction licensing proceeding, subject to the conditions described below.Dade County's basis for intervention in this proceeding is at this I between Dade County and Resources Recovery (Dade County), Inc.("RRD")and related companies and a related agreement between Dade County and Florida Power&Light Company ("FPL").On April 24, 1981, RRD filed a petition for leave to intervene in this proceeding. |
| 'vMetropolitan DadeCounty,Florida("DadeCountherebypetitions tointervene inthis.construction licensing proceeding, subjecttotheconditions described below.DadeCounty'sbasisforintervention inthisproceeding isatthisIbetweenDadeCountyandResources Recovery(DadeCounty),Inc.("RRD")andrelatedcompanies andarelatedagreement betweenDadeCountyandFloridaPower&LightCompany("FPL").OnApril24,1981,RRDfiledapetitionforleavetointervene inthisproceeding. | | Because of the nature of Dade County's interest in this proceeding, it seeks intervention only if the Commission permits RRD or any related company to intervene in this proceeding. |
| BecauseofthenatureofDadeCounty'sinterestinthisproceeding, itseeksintervention onlyiftheCommission permitsRRDoranyrelatedcompanytointervene inthisproceeding.
| | II.This Petition is figed by Metropolitan Dade County, Florida.I III.All correspondence and communications regarding this Petition should be addressed to: time limited to its interest in protecting its rights relating to a solid waste resource.recovery project, pursuant to contracts Reubin O'D.Askew Greenberg, Traurig, Askew, Hoffman, Lipoff, Quentel&Wolff, P.A.1401 Brickell Avenue Miami, Florida 33131 Robert R.Nordhaus Van Ness, Feldman, Sutcliffe, Curtis&Levenberg 1050 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW Seventh Floor Washington, D.C.20007 Si072i0301 Si0709 PDR ADOCK.05000389 PDR V |
| II.ThisPetitionisfigedbyMetropolitan DadeCounty,Florida.IIII.Allcorrespondence andcommunications regarding thisPetitionshouldbeaddressed to:timelimitedtoitsinterestinprotecting itsrightsrelatingtoasolidwasteresource. | | BACKGROUND On September 28, 1976, Dade County and Resources Recovery (Dade County), Inc.("RRD"), entered into a purchase contract and a management and operations contract pursuant to which RRD agreed to construct for sale to Dade County and to operate and manage over a 20-year period, respectively, a solid waste processing and resource recovery facility..The facility was to be comprised of equipment capable of processing solid waste into fuel and of burning this fuel in boilers to produce steam.A related part of the facility was to consist of two steam-turbine generators with a combined capacity of 76 megawatts and related transmission facilities. |
| recoveryproject,pursuanttocontracts ReubinO'D.AskewGreenberg, Traurig,Askew,Hoffman,Lipoff,Quentel&Wolff,P.A.1401BrickellAvenueMiami,Florida33131RobertR.NordhausVanNess,Feldman,Sutcliffe, Curtis&Levenberg 1050ThomasJefferson Street,NWSeventhFloorWashington, D.C.20007Si072i0301 Si0709PDRADOCK.05000389PDR V
| | When the subject facilities were substantially complete and other contractual requirements had been fulfilled by RRD, RRD was to be compensated pursuant to the terms of an Escrow Agreement at which time RRD was to transfer title to the facility to Dade County.In November, 1977, Dade County entered into a contract with FPL providing that Dade County would sell and FPL would buy the referenced electrical generation facilities and the steam produced by the resource recovery facility's boilers.Dade County's obligations under this agreement were assumed in the main by RRD and a related company by separate agreement between Dade County and RRD.FPL would operate the electrical generation facilites to produce electricity using the steam produced in the solid waste facility being operated by RRD and related companies. |
| BACKGROUND OnSeptember 28,1976,DadeCountyandResources Recovery(DadeCounty),Inc.("RRD"),enteredintoapurchasecontractandamanagement andoperations contractpursuanttowhichRRDagreedtoconstruct forsaletoDadeCountyandtooperateandmanageovera20-yearperiod,respectively, asolidwasteprocessing andresourcerecoveryfacility. | | In 1980 a dispute arose regarding performance under these contracts by RRD and its related companies. |
| .Thefacilitywastobecomprised ofequipment capableofprocessing solidwasteintofuelandofburningthisfuelinboilerstoproducesteam.Arelatedpartofthefacilitywastoconsistoftwosteam-turbinegenerators withacombinedcapacityof76megawatts andrelatedtransmission facilities. | | At present, RRD and Dade County are involved in arbitration before the American Arbitration Association concerning this dispute.On March 13, 1981, Resources Recovery (Dade County), Inc.(RRD)filed a"Notice of Qualification of Small Power Production Facility" pursuant to Section 292.207(a) of the |
| Whenthesubjectfacilities weresubstantially completeandothercontractual requirements hadbeenfulfilled byRRD,RRDwastobecompensated pursuanttothetermsofanEscrowAgreement atwhichtimeRRDwastotransfertitletothefacilitytoDadeCounty.InNovember, 1977,DadeCountyenteredintoacontractwithFPLproviding thatDadeCountywouldsellandFPLwouldbuythereferenced electrical generation facilities andthesteamproducedbytheresourcerecoveryfacility's boilers.DadeCounty'sobligations underthisagreement wereassumedinthemainbyRRDandarelatedcompanybyseparateagreement betweenDadeCountyandRRD.FPLwouldoperatetheelectrical generation facilites toproduceelectricity usingthesteamproducedinthesolidwastefacilitybeingoperatedbyRRDandrelatedcompanies.
| |
| In1980adisputearoseregarding performance underthesecontracts byRRDanditsrelatedcompanies.
| |
| Atpresent,RRDandDadeCountyareinvolvedinarbitration beforetheAmericanArbitration Association concerning thisdispute.OnMarch13,1981,Resources Recovery(DadeCounty),Inc.(RRD)fileda"NoticeofQualification ofSmallPowerProduction Facility" pursuanttoSection292.207(a) ofthe
| |
|
| |
|
| ~~EnFederalEnergyRegulatory Commission's | | ~~E n Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's |
| ("FERC")Rules.InitsNotice,RRDstatedthatitownsandoperatesasmallpowerproduction facilityinDadeCounty,Florida.OnMay6,1981,FPLfileda"Protest, PetitionforDeclaratory Order,andPetitiontoIntervene" inthisproceeding. | | ("FERC")Rules.In its Notice, RRD stated that it owns and operates a small power production facility in Dade County, Florida.On May 6, 1981, FPL filed a"Protest, Petition for Declaratory Order, and Petition to Intervene" in this proceeding. |
| OnJuly9,1981,DadeCountyfiledaPetitiontoIntervene intheseFERCpro-.ceeding.AtthistimeFERChasnotactedonthesepetitions.
| | On July 9, 1981, Dade County f iled a Petition to Intervene in these FERC pro-.ceeding.At this time FERC has not acted on these petitions. |
| Becauseofthependencyofthearbitration proceeding, DadeCountyatthistimeexpresses nopositionastowhetherornotthefacilityisaqualifying facility.
| | Because of the pendency of the arbitration proceeding, Dade County at this time expresses no position as to whether or not the facility is a qualifying facility.In view of the referenced contractual dispute between Dade County and RRD and its related companies, and the re-sultant uncertainty as to whether the facility is or will be a qualifying facility under the FERC rules, and since'he outcome of this proceeding may affect the rights and opportunities I af forded Dade County with regard to the subject facility, Dade County seeks leave to intervene in this proceeding, if RRD's intervention petition is granted.IV.The Grounds for Intervention Resolution of the referenced contractual dispute and the outcome of the FERC's proceeding may result in the facility's being determined to be a qualifying facility.If so determined, electricity produced at this facility might be offered for sale to FPL or to other electric utilities. |
| Inviewofthereferenced contractual disputebetweenDadeCountyandRRDanditsrelatedcompanies, andthere-sultantuncertainty astowhetherthefacilityisorwillbeaqualifying facilityundertheFERCrules,andsince'heoutcomeofthisproceeding mayaffecttherightsandopportunities IaffordedDadeCountywithregardtothesubjectfacility, DadeCountyseeksleavetointervene inthisproceeding, ifRRD'sintervention petitionisgranted.IV.TheGroundsforIntervention Resolution ofthereferenced contractual disputeandtheoutcomeoftheFERC'sproceeding mayresultinthefacility's beingdetermined tobeaqualifying facility.
| | If the utilities to which this power is to be sold are not directly interconnected with the facility, FPL may be required to furnish transmission services, if the power is to reach"these utilities. |
| Ifsodetermined, electricity producedatthisfacilitymightbeofferedforsaletoFPLortootherelectricutilities.
| | As discussed in RRD's petition for leave to intervene, without access to FPL's transmission facilities, power from the facility may be prevented from being sold to willing buyers.Without access to such buyers, as discussed below, the facility may be prevented from receiving the revenues necessary to cover its operating and maintenance costs and its debt service. |
| Iftheutilities towhichthispoweristobesoldarenotdirectlyinterconnected withthefacility, FPLmayberequiredtofurnishtransmission
| | V.Interest of the Petitioner in this Proceeding The subject facility, is intended to help dispose of Dade County's solid waste, and to produce steam and ultimately electricity. |
| : services, ifthepoweristoreach"theseutilities.
| | In order for the facility to perform these functions, its owners must receive revenues sufficient to cover its operating and maintenance costs.One source of such revenues is the sale of electricity; clearly, the rate at which electricity generated by the facility can be sold will affect the viability of the project.If FERC holds that the facility is a"qualifying facility", then'nder FERC rules this rate will depend on the purchasing utility system's"avoided cost" (the incremental cost of the electricity which, but for the purchase from the qualifying facility, such utility would generate itself or purchase from another source).Because of the significant differences in these costs among various utilities, the revenues available to the facility's owner and thus the'viability of the project may be greatly affected by the facility's access to transmission facilities required to deliver power from the facility to potential utility customers. |
| Asdiscussed inRRD'spetitionforleavetointervene, withoutaccesstoFPL'stransmission facilities, powerfromthefacilitymaybeprevented frombeingsoldtowillingbuyers.Withoutaccesstosuchbuyers,asdiscussed below,thefacilitymaybeprevented fromreceiving therevenuesnecessary tocoveritsoperating andmaintenance costsanditsdebtservice.
| | VI.Grounds for Non-Timely Intervention As noted in RRD's petition for leave to intervene in this proceeding< |
| V.InterestofthePetitioner inthisProceeding Thesubjectfacility, isintendedtohelpdisposeofDadeCounty'ssolidwaste,andtoproducesteamandultimately electricity. | | the Commission's Rules for untimely petitions to intervene may be granted based upon a balancing of certain criteria.These are set forth in 10 C.F.R.Section 2.714(a)(1): (i)Good cause for not f il ing on time: Dade County'interest in this proceeding is based on RRD's petition for leave to intervene. |
| Inorderforthefacilitytoperformthesefunctions, itsownersmustreceiverevenuessufficient tocoveritsoperating andmaintenance costs.Onesourceofsuchrevenuesisthesaleofelectricity; clearly,therateatwhichelectricity generated bythefacilitycanbesoldwillaffecttheviability oftheproject.IfFERCholdsthatthefacilityisa"qualifying facility",
| | That petition was not filed until April 24, l98l;as a result, prior to that time, Dade County had no reason to seek intervention in this proceeding.(ii)The availability, if any, of other means to pro-tect the Petitioner's interests: |
| then'nder FERCrulesthisratewilldependonthepurchasing utilitysystem's"avoidedcost"(theincremental costoftheelectricity which,butforthepurchasefromthequalifying | | This proceeding will establish certain requirements regarding access to FPL's transmission system.Dade County is aware of no other pending proceedings in which these requirements are being established.(iii)The extent to which Petitioner-'s Participation may reasonably be expected in developin a sound record: As discussed in RRD's petition for leave to intervene, Dade County's interest may differ substantially from those of other parties in this proceeding, including RRD.Dade County's participation is therefore necessary for the development of a complete record in this proceeding.(iv)The extent to which Petitioner's interest will be represented by existin parties: As noted above,, no other qualifying facilities have requested intervention in this proceeding, and Dade County's interests are not necessarily the same as RRD's or of those pertaining to any other qualifying facilities. |
| : facility, suchutilitywouldgenerateitselforpurchasefromanothersource).Becauseofthesignificant differences inthesecostsamongvariousutilities, therevenuesavailable tothefacility's ownerandthusthe'viability oftheprojectmaybegreatlyaffectedbythefacility's accesstotransmission facilities requiredtodeliverpowerfromthefacilitytopotential utilitycustomers.
| | Therefore, no other party will represent, Dade County's interests in this proceeding.(v)The extent to which Petitioner's participation will broaden the issues or delay the proceedings: |
| VI.GroundsforNon-Timely Intervention AsnotedinRRD'spetitionforleavetointervene inthisproceeding< | | Dade County's intervention will not broaden the issues or delay the proceeding. |
| theCommission's Rulesforuntimelypetitions tointervene maybegrantedbaseduponabalancing ofcertaincriteria.
| | As stated above, its interest in this pro-.ceeding is conditioned upon the Commission's treatment of.RRD's request for leave to intervene. |
| Thesearesetforthin10C.F.R.Section2.714(a)(1):(i)Goodcausefornotfilingontime:DadeCounty'interestinthisproceeding isbasedonRRD'spetitionforleavetointervene.
| | If the Commission determines it appropriate to consider RRD's arguments, Dade County's version of such events will be a material factor in this proceeding. |
| ThatpetitionwasnotfileduntilApril24,l98l;asaresult,priortothattime,DadeCountyhadnoreasontoseekintervention inthisproceeding.
| | If these issues are already being considered, presentation of Dade County's interests will not delay or broaden the issues. |
| (ii)Theavailability, ifany,ofothermeanstopro-tectthePetitioner's interests: | |
| Thisproceeding willestablish certainrequirements regarding accesstoFPL'stransmission system.DadeCountyisawareofnootherpendingproceedings inwhichtheserequirements arebeingestablished.
| |
| (iii)TheextenttowhichPetitioner-'s Participation mayreasonably beexpectedindevelopin asoundrecord:Asdiscussed inRRD'spetitionforleavetointervene, DadeCounty'sinterestmaydiffersubstantially fromthoseofotherpartiesinthisproceeding, including RRD.DadeCounty'sparticipation istherefore necessary forthedevelopment ofacompleterecordinthisproceeding. | |
| (iv)TheextenttowhichPetitioner's interestwillberepresented byexistinparties:Asnotedabove,,nootherqualifying facilities haverequested intervention inthisproceeding, andDadeCounty'sinterests arenotnecessarily thesameasRRD'sorofthosepertaining toanyotherqualifying facilities. | |
| Therefore, nootherpartywillrepresent, DadeCounty'sinterests inthisproceeding. | |
| (v)TheextenttowhichPetitioner's participation willbroadentheissuesordelaytheproceedings: | |
| DadeCounty'sintervention willnotbroadentheissuesordelaytheproceeding.
| |
| Asstatedabove,itsinterestinthispro-.ceedingisconditioned upontheCommission's treatment of.RRD'srequestforleavetointervene.
| |
| IftheCommission determines itappropriate toconsiderRRD'sarguments, DadeCounty'sversionofsucheventswillbeamaterialfactorinthisproceeding.
| |
| Iftheseissuesarealreadybeingconsidered, presentation ofDadeCounty'sinterests willnotdelayorbroadentheissues.
| |
|
| |
|
| ~~cBasedontheabove,DadeCounty'spetitionforleavetointervene inthisproceeding shouldbegranted.Respectfullysubmitted,GREENBERG gTRAURIGiASKEWiHOFFMAN,LIPOFF,QUENTELSWOLFF,P.A.SpecialCounseltoMetropolitan DadeCounty,FloridaBy:RUBINOCD.ASKEWVANNESSgFELDMANgSUTCLIFFEfCURTIS6LEVENBERG, Associate SpecialCounseltoMetropolitan DadeCounty,FloridaBy:OB~NORDHAUS l | | ~~c Based on the above, Dade County's petition for leave to intervene in this proceeding should be granted.Respect f ully submi t ted, GREENBERG g TRAURIG i ASKEW i HOFFMAN, LIPOFF, QUENTEL S WOLF F, P.A.Special Counsel to Metropolitan Dade County, Florida By: R UBIN OCD.ASKEW VAN NESS g FELDMAN g SUTCL I FFE f CURTIS 6 LEVENBERG, Associate Special Counsel to Metropolitan Dade County, Florida By: OB~NORDHAUS l |
| UNITEDSTATESOFAMERICANUCLEARREGULATORY COMMISSION
| | UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION |
| )IntheMatterof:))FLORIDAPOWER&LIGHTCOMPANY)(St.LuciePlant,Unit'No'.2))))DocketNo.50-389A,'" | | )In the Matter of:))FLORIDA POWER&LIGHT COMPANY)(St.Lucie Plant, Unit'No'.2))))Docket No.50-389A,'" CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the Petition'o Intervene submitted by Dade County were served on the following. |
| CERTIFICATE OFSERVICEIherebycertifythatcopiesofthePetition'o Intervene submitted byDadeCountywereservedonthefollowing. | | persons via first class mail, postage prepaid, this,day of'uly, l981: Ivan W.Smith, Esq., Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555'ichael A.Duggan, Esq.College of Business Administration University of Texas Austin, Texas 787l2 Robert M.Lazo, Esq.Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555 Donald A.Kaplan, Esq.Robert Fabrikant, Esq.'ntitrust Division U.S.Department of Justice Washington, D.C.20530 Jerome E.Sharfman, Esq., Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555 Joseph Rutberg, Esq.Antitrust Counsel U.S.Nuclear Reguulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555 Mr.Jerome D.Saltzman, Chief Antitrust and Indemnity Group Office of the Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555 Richard E.Salzman, Esq.Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555 Daniel M.Gribbons, Esq.Herbert Dym, Esq.'ovington and Burling 888-15th Street, NW Wasington, D.C.20006 J.A.Bouknight, Jr., Esq.Lowenstein, Newman, Reis&Axelrad 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.Washington, D.C.20036 John E.Mathews, Jr., Esq.Mathews, Osborne, Ehrlich, NcNatt, Gobelman"6 Cobb 1500 American Heritage Life Building Jacksonville, Florida 32202 Robert A.Jablon, Esq.Speigel and McDiarmid 2600 Virginia Avenue, N.W.Washington, D.C.20037 William C.Wise, Esq.1200-18th Street, N.W.Suite 500 Washington, D.C.10036 Janet Urban, Esq.P.O.Box 14141 Washington, D.C.20044 William H.Chandler, Esq.Chandler O'Neal, Avera, Gray, Lang a Stripling P.O.Drawer 0 Gainesveille, Florida 32602 Michael C.Farrar, Esq.Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555 |
| personsviafirstclassmail,postageprepaid,this,dayof'uly,l981:IvanW.Smith,Esq.,ChairmanAtomicSafetyandLicensing BoardU.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555'ichaelA.Duggan,Esq.CollegeofBusinessAdministration University ofTexasAustin,Texas787l2RobertM.Lazo,Esq.AtomicSafetyandLicensing BoardU.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555DonaldA.Kaplan,Esq.RobertFabrikant, Esq.'ntitrust DivisionU.S.Department ofJusticeWashington, D.C.20530JeromeE.Sharfman, Esq.,ChairmanAtomicSafetyandLicensing AppealBoardU.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555JosephRutberg,Esq.Antitrust CounselU.S.NuclearReguulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555 Mr.JeromeD.Saltzman, ChiefAntitrust andIndemnity GroupOfficeoftheNuclearReactorRegulation U.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555RichardE.Salzman,Esq.AtomicSafetyandLicensing AppealBoardU.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555DanielM.Gribbons, Esq.HerbertDym,Esq.'ovington andBurling888-15thStreet,NWWasington, D.C.20006J.A.Bouknight, Jr.,Esq.Lowenstein, Newman,Reis&Axelrad1025Connecticut Avenue,N.W.Washington, D.C.20036JohnE.Mathews,Jr.,Esq.Mathews,Osborne,Ehrlich,NcNatt,Gobelman"6Cobb1500AmericanHeritageLifeBuildingJacksonville, Florida32202RobertA.Jablon,Esq.SpeigelandMcDiarmid 2600VirginiaAvenue,N.W.Washington, D.C.20037WilliamC.Wise,Esq.1200-18thStreet,N.W.Suite500Washington, D.C.10036JanetUrban,Esq.P.O.Box14141Washington, D.C.20044WilliamH.Chandler, Esq.ChandlerO'Neal,Avera,Gray,LangaStripling P.O.Drawer0Gainesveille, Florida32602MichaelC.Farrar,Esq.AtomicSafetyandLicensing AppealBoardU.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555
| | ~t.~Florida power a Light Company Attn: Dr.Robert E.Uhrig Vice President Advanced Systems a Technology P.O.Box 529100 Miami, Florida 33152 Respectfully submitted,'GREENBERGg TRAURIG, ASKEW;HOFFMANN LIPOFFg QUENTEL WOLF F, P.A.Special Counsel.to Metropolitan Dade Coun, Florida By: REUBIN O'SKEW t t I W'1"-I}} |
| ~t.~FloridapoweraLightCompanyAttn:Dr.RobertE.UhrigVicePresident AdvancedSystemsaTechnology P.O.Box529100Miami,Florida33152Respectfully submitted, | |
| 'GREENBERGg TRAURIG,ASKEW;HOFFMANNLIPOFFgQUENTELWOLFF,P.A.SpecialCounsel.toMetropolitan DadeCoun,FloridaBy:REUBINO'SKEW ttIW'1"-I}} | |
Petition to Intervene in Const Licensing Proceeding.Outcome May Affect Rights & Opportunities Afforded Dade County Re Solid Waste Resource Recovery Project Pursuant to Contracts W/Resources Recovery,Inc.Certificate of Svc Encl| ML17212A363 |
| Person / Time |
|---|
| Site: |
Saint Lucie  |
|---|
| Issue date: |
07/09/1981 |
|---|
| From: |
ASKEW R, NORDHAUS R R
AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED, DADE COUNTY, FL, GREENBERG, TRAURIG, ASKEW, HOFFMAN, LIPOFF, QUENTEL, VAN NESS, FELDMAN, SUTCLIFFE, CURTIS & LEVENBERG |
|---|
| To: |
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
|---|
| References |
|---|
| ISSUANCES-A, NUDOCS 8107210301 |
| Download: ML17212A363 (14) |
|
|
|---|
Category:INTERVENTION PETITIONS
MONTHYEARML20077P6411991-07-22022 July 1991
Petition for Hearing & Leave to Intervene.* Requests Petition for Hearing & Leave to Intervene & Lists Supporting Statements
ML20151W6251988-06-24024 June 1988
Intervenor Request to Withdraw Contention.* Request to Withdraw Admitted Contention 2 Re Dangers That Might Exist from Presence of Temporary Crane Installed in Spent Fuel Pool Storage Area.Concerns No Longer Considered Sensible
ML20149F1151988-02-0404 February 1988
NRC Staff Response to Amended Petition to Intervene.* Listed Proposed Contentions Inadmissable & Should Be Rejected. Contentions 4,5,6,8,11 & 15 Supported W/Adequate Bases & Should Be Admitted for Litigation.W/Certificate of Svc
ML20148C9921988-01-21021 January 1988
Request for Hearing & Petition for Leave to Intervene.* Expansion of Spent Fuel Facility Involves Significant Hazard Determination Which Requires Public Hearing & EIS Before Approval.Served on 880121
ML20207L9021987-01-0505 January 1987
Response of NRC Staff to Amended Request for Hearing Filed by J Paskavitch.* J Paskavitch Petition for Leave to Intervene as Amended Should Be Denied.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20009G8351981-07-29029 July 1981
Addendum to 810720 Petition to Intervene.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML17212A3631981-07-0909 July 1981
Petition to Intervene in Const Licensing Proceeding.Outcome May Affect Rights & Opportunities Afforded Dade County Re Solid Waste Resource Recovery Project Pursuant to Contracts W/Resources Recovery,Inc.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML17212A2541981-06-26026 June 1981
Partial Response in Opposition to Parsons & Whittemore 810424 Petition for Leave to Intervene.Petition Is Untimely & Fails to Show Sufficient Interest.Certificate of Svc & Supporting Matl Encl
ML17209B1461981-05-26026 May 1981
Response in Opposition to Fl Cities 810407 Petition to Intervene & for Consolidation.Petition Is Moot & Addresses Issues Beyond Scope of Proceeding.No Finding of Significant Change Warranted.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML17212A2551981-05-0606 May 1981
Response in Opposition to Parsons & Whittemore Petition to Intervene in Spent Fuel Pool Mod Hearing.Petition Seeks to Raise Antitrust Issues.Allegations Are W/O Basis in Factor or Law.Certificate of Svc & Affidavit Encl
ML17209A9911981-04-24024 April 1981
Petition to Intervene in Ongoing Const Licensing Proceeding & Request for Limited Antitrust Hearing
ML17209A9701981-04-16016 April 1981
Response Opposing Hs Wells 810323 Ltr Petition to Intervene. Ltr Does Not Clearly State Desire to Intervene & Participate & Fails to Meet Interest Requirement.Notice of Appearance & Certificate of Svc Encl
ML17266A4281981-04-0707 April 1981
Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing.Commission Should Hold Limited Antitrust Hearing.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML17266A4261981-04-0707 April 1981
Petition to Intervene in OL Proceeding.Intervenors Have Been Granted Intervention in CP Proceeding & Request Intervention Here as Protective Matter.W/Encls & Certificate of Svc
ML17209A9721981-03-23023 March 1981
Petition to Intervene in OL Proceeding
1991-07-22
[Table view]
Category:RESPONSES & CONTENTIONS
MONTHYEARML20077P6411991-07-22022 July 1991
Petition for Hearing & Leave to Intervene.* Requests Petition for Hearing & Leave to Intervene & Lists Supporting Statements
ML20151W6251988-06-24024 June 1988
Intervenor Request to Withdraw Contention.* Request to Withdraw Admitted Contention 2 Re Dangers That Might Exist from Presence of Temporary Crane Installed in Spent Fuel Pool Storage Area.Concerns No Longer Considered Sensible
ML20149F1151988-02-0404 February 1988
NRC Staff Response to Amended Petition to Intervene.* Listed Proposed Contentions Inadmissable & Should Be Rejected. Contentions 4,5,6,8,11 & 15 Supported W/Adequate Bases & Should Be Admitted for Litigation.W/Certificate of Svc
ML20148C9921988-01-21021 January 1988
Request for Hearing & Petition for Leave to Intervene.* Expansion of Spent Fuel Facility Involves Significant Hazard Determination Which Requires Public Hearing & EIS Before Approval.Served on 880121
ML20207L9021987-01-0505 January 1987
Response of NRC Staff to Amended Request for Hearing Filed by J Paskavitch.* J Paskavitch Petition for Leave to Intervene as Amended Should Be Denied.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20009G8351981-07-29029 July 1981
Addendum to 810720 Petition to Intervene.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML17212A3631981-07-0909 July 1981
Petition to Intervene in Const Licensing Proceeding.Outcome May Affect Rights & Opportunities Afforded Dade County Re Solid Waste Resource Recovery Project Pursuant to Contracts W/Resources Recovery,Inc.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML17212A2541981-06-26026 June 1981
Partial Response in Opposition to Parsons & Whittemore 810424 Petition for Leave to Intervene.Petition Is Untimely & Fails to Show Sufficient Interest.Certificate of Svc & Supporting Matl Encl
ML17209B1461981-05-26026 May 1981
Response in Opposition to Fl Cities 810407 Petition to Intervene & for Consolidation.Petition Is Moot & Addresses Issues Beyond Scope of Proceeding.No Finding of Significant Change Warranted.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML17212A2551981-05-0606 May 1981
Response in Opposition to Parsons & Whittemore Petition to Intervene in Spent Fuel Pool Mod Hearing.Petition Seeks to Raise Antitrust Issues.Allegations Are W/O Basis in Factor or Law.Certificate of Svc & Affidavit Encl
ML17209A9911981-04-24024 April 1981
Petition to Intervene in Ongoing Const Licensing Proceeding & Request for Limited Antitrust Hearing
ML17209A9701981-04-16016 April 1981
Response Opposing Hs Wells 810323 Ltr Petition to Intervene. Ltr Does Not Clearly State Desire to Intervene & Participate & Fails to Meet Interest Requirement.Notice of Appearance & Certificate of Svc Encl
ML17266A4281981-04-0707 April 1981
Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing.Commission Should Hold Limited Antitrust Hearing.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML17266A4261981-04-0707 April 1981
Petition to Intervene in OL Proceeding.Intervenors Have Been Granted Intervention in CP Proceeding & Request Intervention Here as Protective Matter.W/Encls & Certificate of Svc
ML17209A9721981-03-23023 March 1981
Petition to Intervene in OL Proceeding
1991-07-22
[Table view]
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARL-99-201, Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 72 Re Reporting Requirements for Nuclear Power Reactors.Fpl Followed Development of NEI Comments on Rulemaking & Endorse These Comments1999-09-0707 September 1999
Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 72 Re Reporting Requirements for Nuclear Power Reactors.Fpl Followed Development of NEI Comments on Rulemaking & Endorse These Comments
ML20206H4441999-05-0303 May 1999
Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR170 & 10CFR171 Re Rev of Fy 1999 Fee Schedules
ML20205J0461999-04-0101 April 1999
Comment Supporting Proposed Draft Std Review Plan on Foreign Ownership,Control & Domination.Util Supports Approach Set Forth in SRP Toward Reviewing Whether Applicant for NRC License Owned by Foreign Corp.Endorses NEI Comments
ML20205B3771999-03-16016 March 1999
Comment Opposing PRM 50-64 Re Liability of Joint Owners of Npps.Util Endorses Comments of NEI & Urges Commission to Deny Petition for Rulemaking
ML17355A2511999-03-0909 March 1999
Comment Supporting Amend to Policy & Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions Re Treatment of Severity Level IV Violations at Power Reactors.Util Also Endorses Comments of NEI on Revs
L-98-306, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Requirements for Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at NPP1998-12-10010 December 1998
Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Requirements for Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at NPP
L-98-272, Comment on Draft Reg Guide DG-4005, Preparation of Suppl Environ Repts for Applications to Renew Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses1998-10-28028 October 1998
Comment on Draft Reg Guide DG-4005, Preparation of Suppl Environ Repts for Applications to Renew Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses
L-98-252, Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR2 & 51 Re Streamlined Hearing Process for NRC Approval of License Transfers.Fpl Also Endorses Comments of NEI on Proposed Rule1998-10-0606 October 1998
Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR2 & 51 Re Streamlined Hearing Process for NRC Approval of License Transfers.Fpl Also Endorses Comments of NEI on Proposed Rule
L-98-248, Comment Supporting Statement of Policy on Conduct of Adjudicatory Proceedings.Fpl Also Endorses Comments of NEI on Policy Statement1998-10-0505 October 1998
Comment Supporting Statement of Policy on Conduct of Adjudicatory Proceedings.Fpl Also Endorses Comments of NEI on Policy Statement
ML17229A7551998-05-29029 May 1998
Comment Opposing Proposed Communication Re Augmented Insp of Pressurized Water Reactor Class 1 High Pressure Safety Injection Piping
ML20217P6691998-04-0202 April 1998
Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Industry Codes & Standards,Amended Requirements
ML17354A8741998-03-27027 March 1998
Comment Opposing Proposed Generic Communication,Lab Testing of nuclear-grade Activated Charcoal (M97978)
ML20216C1991998-03-0303 March 1998
Comment on Proposed Generic Communication Re Yr 2000 Readiness of Computer Sys at Npps.Util Endorses Nuclear Energy Inst Comments.Comments Submitted on Behalf of Plant
ML17354B1061998-02-26026 February 1998
Submits Listed Requests for NRC EA Per 10CFR2.206 to Modify OLs for All FPL NPPs Until Licensee Can Demonstrate Open Communication Channels Exist Between NRC & Licensee.Also Requests EA to Address Alleged Discriminatory Practices
L-97-269, Comment on Pr 10CFR55, Initial Licensed Operator Exam Requirements1997-10-21021 October 1997
Comment on Pr 10CFR55, Initial Licensed Operator Exam Requirements
L-97-265, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 73, Frequency of Reviews & Audits for Emergency Prepardness Programs Safeguards Contingency Plan & Security Programs for Np Reactors1997-10-14014 October 1997
Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 73, Frequency of Reviews & Audits for Emergency Prepardness Programs Safeguards Contingency Plan & Security Programs for Np Reactors
ML20217M0751997-08-13013 August 1997
Licensee Response to Supplemental 10CFR2.206 Petitions Filed by Tj Saporito & National Litigation Consultants.Petition Provides No Basis for Extraordinary Relief Requested. Petition Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc
ML17354A5181997-05-27027 May 1997
Licensee Response to 10CFR2.206 Petition Filed by Tj Saporito & National Litigation Consultants.Petition Should Be Denied,Based on Listed Info.W/Certificate of Svc
ML17354A5631997-05-17017 May 1997
Second Suppl to 970423 Petition Requesting Enforcement Against Listed Util Employees by Imposing Civil Penalties, Restricting Employees from Licensed Activities & Revoking Unescorted Access
ML17354A5611997-05-11011 May 1997
Suppl to 970423 Petition Requesting Enforcement Action Against Util Former Executive Vice President,Site Vice President & Maint Superintendent by Imposing Civil Monetary Penalty
ML17354A5651997-04-23023 April 1997
Requests That NRC Take EA to Modify,Suspend or Revoke FPL Operating Licenses for All Four Nuclear Reactors Until Licensee Can Sufficiently Demonstrate to NRC & Public That Employees Encouraged to Freely Raise Safety Concerns
ML20137R4681996-12-10010 December 1996
Transcript of 961210 Proceeding in Atlanta,Ga Re Predecisional EC Re Facility Activities.Pp 1-151.Supporting Documentation Encl
L-96-137, Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Reliability & Availability Info for Risk-Significant Sys & Equipment1996-06-0606 June 1996
Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Reliability & Availability Info for Risk-Significant Sys & Equipment
IR 05000335/19960031996-03-0808 March 1996
Transcript of 960308 Hearing in Atlanta,Ga Re NRC Insp Repts 50-335/96-03 & 50-389/96-03.Pp 1-101.Supporting Documentation Encl
ML17228B3551995-12-0404 December 1995
Comment Opposing Proposed Generic Communication, Boraflex Degradation in SFP Storage Racks.
L-95-270, Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 51 Re Decommission of NPPs1995-10-15015 October 1995
Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 51 Re Decommission of NPPs
ML17228B2841995-09-12012 September 1995
Comment Supporting Rg DG-1043,Rev 2 to Rg 1.49, NPP Simulation Facilities for Use in Operator License Exams.
ML17228B2221995-07-13013 July 1995
Comment Supporting Proposed Generic Communication 10CFR50.54 Re Process for Changes to Security Plans W/O Prior NRC Approval
L-95-199, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Changes in Frequency Requirements for Emergency Planning & Preparedness Exercises from Annual to Biennial1995-07-10010 July 1995
Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Changes in Frequency Requirements for Emergency Planning & Preparedness Exercises from Annual to Biennial
ML17353A2471995-06-27027 June 1995
Comments on Proposed Rule Re, Review of NRC Insp Rept Content,Format & Style.
ML17228B2101995-06-27027 June 1995
Comment Opposing Proposed GL Relocation of Pressure Temp Limit Curves & Low Temp Overpressure Protection Sys Limits.
ML20134N0421995-01-18018 January 1995
Partially Deleted Transcript of Interview W/J Kunkel on 950118 at Jensen Beach,Fl.Pp 1-40
ML20134N0621995-01-18018 January 1995
Partially Deleted Transcript of Interview W/A De Soiza on 950118 at Jensen Beach,Fl.Pp 1-40.Supporting Documentation Encl
ML20134N0281995-01-18018 January 1995
Partially Deleted Transcript of Interview W/Eo Poarch on 950118 at Jensen Beach,Fl.Pp 1-78
ML20134N0331995-01-18018 January 1995
Partially Deleted Transcript of Interview W/D Jacobs on 960118 in Jensen Beach,Fl.Pp 1-50
ML20134N0301995-01-18018 January 1995
Partially Deleted Transcript of Interview W/H Fagley on 950118 at Jensen Beach,Fl.Pp 1-63
ML17228A9851995-01-17017 January 1995
Comment Supporting Proposal to Issue GL Providing Guidance for Determining When analog-to-digital Replacement Can Be Performed Under Requirements of 10CFR50.59
L-94-325, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Fracture Toughness Requirements for LWR Pressure Vessels.Endorses NEI Comments & Recommendations1994-12-29029 December 1994
Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Fracture Toughness Requirements for LWR Pressure Vessels.Endorses NEI Comments & Recommendations
L-94-329, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR2 Re Policy Statement Rev, Policy & Procedure for Enforcement Actions; Policy Statement,Discrimination1994-12-22022 December 1994
Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR2 Re Policy Statement Rev, Policy & Procedure for Enforcement Actions; Policy Statement,Discrimination
L-94-304, Comment Supporting Proposed GL Re Reconsideration of Nuclear Power Plant Security Requirements for Internal Threat1994-12-0202 December 1994
Comment Supporting Proposed GL Re Reconsideration of Nuclear Power Plant Security Requirements for Internal Threat
ML17228A8751994-10-0303 October 1994
Comment Opposing Proposed Rule Re Pilot Program for NRC Recognition of Good Performance by Nuclear Power Plants
ML20072S5221994-08-25025 August 1994
Comment Opposing Petition for Rulemaking 9-2 Re Request for NRC to Revise Regulations of 10CFR9 to Provide Public Access to Info Held by Licensees But Not Submitted to NRC
L-94-206, Comment Opposing Proposed Change to Rule 10CFR26, Consideration of Changes to Fitness for Duty Requirements. Util Wants Current Scope of Drug Testing in 10CFR26 to Be Retained & Current Trustworthiness Programs to Be Improved1994-08-0909 August 1994
Comment Opposing Proposed Change to Rule 10CFR26, Consideration of Changes to Fitness for Duty Requirements. Util Wants Current Scope of Drug Testing in 10CFR26 to Be Retained & Current Trustworthiness Programs to Be Improved
ML20072B3251994-08-0101 August 1994
Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Change Consideration of fitness-for-duty Requirements
L-94-150, Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-60 Re Amend to 10CFR50.54 by Changing Frequency W/Which Licensees Conduct Independent Reviews of Emergency Preparedness Program from Annually to Biennially1994-06-17017 June 1994
Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-60 Re Amend to 10CFR50.54 by Changing Frequency W/Which Licensees Conduct Independent Reviews of Emergency Preparedness Program from Annually to Biennially
ML17228A3121993-09-24024 September 1993
Answer of Florida Municipal Power Agency to FPL Response in Opposition to Petition for Enforcement Action. W/Vols I & II of Apps
ML17228A2981993-08-27027 August 1993
Response of Florida Power & Light Co in Opposition to Petition for Enforcement Action.
ML17309A7141993-07-0202 July 1993
Petition of Florida Municipal Power Agency for Declaration & Enforcement...Antitrust Licensing Conditions & to Impose Requirements by Order. W/Vols I & II of Apps to Petition
ML20045F2091993-06-24024 June 1993
Comment on Proposal Re Radiological Criteria for Decommissioning NRC-licensed Facilities.Supports Proposed Criteria
ML17349A8161993-04-22022 April 1993
Comment Endorsing NUMARC Comments Re Proposed Generic Communication, Availability & Adequacy of Design Bases Info.
1999-09-07
[Table view] |
Text
f>>UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION A, DOCKETED USNRC JUL20>98i>
~Dlfice of the Secretary DoeReting 5 Service~0 Branch)In the Matter of:))FLORIDA POWER&LIGHT COMPANY)(St.Lucie Plant, Unit No.2))))~I (~Docket No.50-A ,,gg 6-gpss 5~~go>"+~~0>+Qs~~, CO,.cg PETITION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE'v Metropolitan Dade County, Florida (" Dade Count hereby petitions to intervene in this.construction licensing proceeding, subject to the conditions described below.Dade County's basis for intervention in this proceeding is at this I between Dade County and Resources Recovery (Dade County), Inc.("RRD")and related companies and a related agreement between Dade County and Florida Power&Light Company ("FPL").On April 24, 1981, RRD filed a petition for leave to intervene in this proceeding.
Because of the nature of Dade County's interest in this proceeding, it seeks intervention only if the Commission permits RRD or any related company to intervene in this proceeding.
II.This Petition is figed by Metropolitan Dade County, Florida.I III.All correspondence and communications regarding this Petition should be addressed to: time limited to its interest in protecting its rights relating to a solid waste resource.recovery project, pursuant to contracts Reubin O'D.Askew Greenberg, Traurig, Askew, Hoffman, Lipoff, Quentel&Wolff, P.A.1401 Brickell Avenue Miami, Florida 33131 Robert R.Nordhaus Van Ness, Feldman, Sutcliffe, Curtis&Levenberg 1050 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW Seventh Floor Washington, D.C.20007 Si072i0301 Si0709 PDR ADOCK.05000389 PDR V
BACKGROUND On September 28, 1976, Dade County and Resources Recovery (Dade County), Inc.("RRD"), entered into a purchase contract and a management and operations contract pursuant to which RRD agreed to construct for sale to Dade County and to operate and manage over a 20-year period, respectively, a solid waste processing and resource recovery facility..The facility was to be comprised of equipment capable of processing solid waste into fuel and of burning this fuel in boilers to produce steam.A related part of the facility was to consist of two steam-turbine generators with a combined capacity of 76 megawatts and related transmission facilities.
When the subject facilities were substantially complete and other contractual requirements had been fulfilled by RRD, RRD was to be compensated pursuant to the terms of an Escrow Agreement at which time RRD was to transfer title to the facility to Dade County.In November, 1977, Dade County entered into a contract with FPL providing that Dade County would sell and FPL would buy the referenced electrical generation facilities and the steam produced by the resource recovery facility's boilers.Dade County's obligations under this agreement were assumed in the main by RRD and a related company by separate agreement between Dade County and RRD.FPL would operate the electrical generation facilites to produce electricity using the steam produced in the solid waste facility being operated by RRD and related companies.
In 1980 a dispute arose regarding performance under these contracts by RRD and its related companies.
At present, RRD and Dade County are involved in arbitration before the American Arbitration Association concerning this dispute.On March 13, 1981, Resources Recovery (Dade County), Inc.(RRD)filed a"Notice of Qualification of Small Power Production Facility" pursuant to Section 292.207(a) of the
~~E n Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's
("FERC")Rules.In its Notice, RRD stated that it owns and operates a small power production facility in Dade County, Florida.On May 6, 1981, FPL filed a"Protest, Petition for Declaratory Order, and Petition to Intervene" in this proceeding.
On July 9, 1981, Dade County f iled a Petition to Intervene in these FERC pro-.ceeding.At this time FERC has not acted on these petitions.
Because of the pendency of the arbitration proceeding, Dade County at this time expresses no position as to whether or not the facility is a qualifying facility.In view of the referenced contractual dispute between Dade County and RRD and its related companies, and the re-sultant uncertainty as to whether the facility is or will be a qualifying facility under the FERC rules, and since'he outcome of this proceeding may affect the rights and opportunities I af forded Dade County with regard to the subject facility, Dade County seeks leave to intervene in this proceeding, if RRD's intervention petition is granted.IV.The Grounds for Intervention Resolution of the referenced contractual dispute and the outcome of the FERC's proceeding may result in the facility's being determined to be a qualifying facility.If so determined, electricity produced at this facility might be offered for sale to FPL or to other electric utilities.
If the utilities to which this power is to be sold are not directly interconnected with the facility, FPL may be required to furnish transmission services, if the power is to reach"these utilities.
As discussed in RRD's petition for leave to intervene, without access to FPL's transmission facilities, power from the facility may be prevented from being sold to willing buyers.Without access to such buyers, as discussed below, the facility may be prevented from receiving the revenues necessary to cover its operating and maintenance costs and its debt service.
V.Interest of the Petitioner in this Proceeding The subject facility, is intended to help dispose of Dade County's solid waste, and to produce steam and ultimately electricity.
In order for the facility to perform these functions, its owners must receive revenues sufficient to cover its operating and maintenance costs.One source of such revenues is the sale of electricity; clearly, the rate at which electricity generated by the facility can be sold will affect the viability of the project.If FERC holds that the facility is a"qualifying facility", then'nder FERC rules this rate will depend on the purchasing utility system's"avoided cost" (the incremental cost of the electricity which, but for the purchase from the qualifying facility, such utility would generate itself or purchase from another source).Because of the significant differences in these costs among various utilities, the revenues available to the facility's owner and thus the'viability of the project may be greatly affected by the facility's access to transmission facilities required to deliver power from the facility to potential utility customers.
VI.Grounds for Non-Timely Intervention As noted in RRD's petition for leave to intervene in this proceeding<
the Commission's Rules for untimely petitions to intervene may be granted based upon a balancing of certain criteria.These are set forth in 10 C.F.R.Section 2.714(a)(1): (i)Good cause for not f il ing on time: Dade County'interest in this proceeding is based on RRD's petition for leave to intervene.
That petition was not filed until April 24, l98l;as a result, prior to that time, Dade County had no reason to seek intervention in this proceeding.(ii)The availability, if any, of other means to pro-tect the Petitioner's interests:
This proceeding will establish certain requirements regarding access to FPL's transmission system.Dade County is aware of no other pending proceedings in which these requirements are being established.(iii)The extent to which Petitioner-'s Participation may reasonably be expected in developin a sound record: As discussed in RRD's petition for leave to intervene, Dade County's interest may differ substantially from those of other parties in this proceeding, including RRD.Dade County's participation is therefore necessary for the development of a complete record in this proceeding.(iv)The extent to which Petitioner's interest will be represented by existin parties: As noted above,, no other qualifying facilities have requested intervention in this proceeding, and Dade County's interests are not necessarily the same as RRD's or of those pertaining to any other qualifying facilities.
Therefore, no other party will represent, Dade County's interests in this proceeding.(v)The extent to which Petitioner's participation will broaden the issues or delay the proceedings:
Dade County's intervention will not broaden the issues or delay the proceeding.
As stated above, its interest in this pro-.ceeding is conditioned upon the Commission's treatment of.RRD's request for leave to intervene.
If the Commission determines it appropriate to consider RRD's arguments, Dade County's version of such events will be a material factor in this proceeding.
If these issues are already being considered, presentation of Dade County's interests will not delay or broaden the issues.
~~c Based on the above, Dade County's petition for leave to intervene in this proceeding should be granted.Respect f ully submi t ted, GREENBERG g TRAURIG i ASKEW i HOFFMAN, LIPOFF, QUENTEL S WOLF F, P.A.Special Counsel to Metropolitan Dade County, Florida By: R UBIN OCD.ASKEW VAN NESS g FELDMAN g SUTCL I FFE f CURTIS 6 LEVENBERG, Associate Special Counsel to Metropolitan Dade County, Florida By: OB~NORDHAUS l
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
)In the Matter of:))FLORIDA POWER&LIGHT COMPANY)(St.Lucie Plant, Unit'No'.2))))Docket No.50-389A,'" CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the Petition'o Intervene submitted by Dade County were served on the following.
persons via first class mail, postage prepaid, this,day of'uly, l981: Ivan W.Smith, Esq., Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555'ichael A.Duggan, Esq.College of Business Administration University of Texas Austin, Texas 787l2 Robert M.Lazo, Esq.Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555 Donald A.Kaplan, Esq.Robert Fabrikant, Esq.'ntitrust Division U.S.Department of Justice Washington, D.C.20530 Jerome E.Sharfman, Esq., Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555 Joseph Rutberg, Esq.Antitrust Counsel U.S.Nuclear Reguulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555 Mr.Jerome D.Saltzman, Chief Antitrust and Indemnity Group Office of the Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555 Richard E.Salzman, Esq.Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555 Daniel M.Gribbons, Esq.Herbert Dym, Esq.'ovington and Burling 888-15th Street, NW Wasington, D.C.20006 J.A.Bouknight, Jr., Esq.Lowenstein, Newman, Reis&Axelrad 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.Washington, D.C.20036 John E.Mathews, Jr., Esq.Mathews, Osborne, Ehrlich, NcNatt, Gobelman"6 Cobb 1500 American Heritage Life Building Jacksonville, Florida 32202 Robert A.Jablon, Esq.Speigel and McDiarmid 2600 Virginia Avenue, N.W.Washington, D.C.20037 William C.Wise, Esq.1200-18th Street, N.W.Suite 500 Washington, D.C.10036 Janet Urban, Esq.P.O.Box 14141 Washington, D.C.20044 William H.Chandler, Esq.Chandler O'Neal, Avera, Gray, Lang a Stripling P.O.Drawer 0 Gainesveille, Florida 32602 Michael C.Farrar, Esq.Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.20555
~t.~Florida power a Light Company Attn: Dr.Robert E.Uhrig Vice President Advanced Systems a Technology P.O.Box 529100 Miami, Florida 33152 Respectfully submitted,'GREENBERGg TRAURIG, ASKEW;HOFFMANN LIPOFFg QUENTEL WOLF F, P.A.Special Counsel.to Metropolitan Dade Coun, Florida By: REUBIN O'SKEW t t I W'1"-I