ML20039D355

From kanterella
Revision as of 21:05, 14 March 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Advises That CP Application Fee Indicated in NRC 811127 Ltr Is Not Justifiable & That Util Is Seeking Judicial Determination of Matter.Declines to Pay Fee Pending Outcome of Litigation
ML20039D355
Person / Time
Site: 05000496, 05000497
Issue date: 12/24/1981
From: Counsil W
NORTHEAST UTILITIES
To: Miller W
NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
References
A02137, A2137, NUDOCS 8201040011
Download: ML20039D355 (1)


Text

.

IMrHI!AST IFFII.rFIIES e e o oa w aw acce m

  • "*"*S**"S"**"*'"""""""'

,e P o BOX 270

] i4 - w u , o ***

HARTFOAD. CONNECTICUT C6101

~;"::::::==::'~"' aw> nun L L a ::T i ",: n " ~ '

December 24, 1981 y

Docket Nos. 50-496 - y ik, yD g 50-497  %, /.-

A02137 'N , , ke

-l .w C3 -

2 Mr. William O. Miller, Chief License Fee Management Branch

'\ :f' *QDI%.

ur;.s 4 g(

Office of Administration U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

  1. '2 Q[g/, '

Washington, D. C. 20555

Reference:

(1) W. O. Miller letter to W. G. Counsil, dated November 27, 1981, Docket Nos. 50-496 and 50-497.

Gentlemen:

Montague Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Fee for Services and Materials On December 2, 1.981, we received the above Reference (1) which enclosed an invoice for aervices and materials for the amount of $953,402.00.

You stated that the invoice is being sent in accordance with the Commission's practice to recover costs associated with the review by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff of the construction permit application for Montague Units 1 and 2.

We do not believe that this demand for payment is justifiable and have joined with other utilities in seeking a judicial determination of this matter. We therefore decline to pay this fee pending the outcome of that litigation.

Sincerely, ,

/ b$dt William G. Counsil Senior Vice President ib 8201040011 811224 PDR ADOCK 05000496 A PDR