ML19329E250

Response to CPC Comments Re ALAb-452 Review.Intermediate or Premature Review Not Appropriate for Reasons Expressed in Comments,Doj & NRC Pleadings & Commission Discussions. Certificate of Svc Encl

ML19329E250
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	02/03/1978
From:	Jablon R MICHIGAN MUNICIPAL COOPERATIVE POWER POOL, SPIEGEL & MCDIARMID
To:
References
NUDOCS 8006120546
Download: ML19329E250 (6)

Text

_-_ - . __ -

l 1

p' e, .

UNITID STATES OF AMERICA S '

3E70RE THE g NUCI.IAR REGUI.ATORY COMMISSI 2

$d' 0y k l

/

Il $9 C

In the Matter ot.

% 6-/s O 6 $/*

Consumers Power Company Docket Nor I50-32 #

)

D (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2) ) M C 330d 2, i .9 RESPONSE OF MUNIS/CO-OPS TO COMMENTS OF CONSUMF.RS POL'ER COMPANY Consumers Power Company (" Consumers Pcver") favors 1:mtediate -

review of ALA3-452. In accordance with the Commission's January 13, 1978 Order, Munis/Co-ops respond:

{

l. Consu=ars Power Co=pany states (Co=ments , pp.1-2) :

"Since 1970, numerous legal and policy issues have arisen concerning the Co= mission's responsibilities under section 105 (c) . . . .Immediate review of ALA3-452 will help alleviate the present uncertainty about the Co= mission's antitrust authority and responsibility which currently prevails."

Consu=ers Power has chosen to litigate virtually every legal and policy issue relating to the Ccmmission's antitrust jurisdiction. There is little uncertainty concerning the Co=. ission's statutory " responsibilities";

there is lipigation over how they will be applied.1/ -

THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS >

POOR QUAUTY PAGES  ;

1/ In the second pre-hearing conference, back in October of 1972, counsel for Consumers Power Company noted:

"It =ay be hulpful to the Board to keep in sind that we do have a fairly significant event hanging over this proceeding, which is the possibilit7 of a decision of the Supre=e Court in two cases, particularly the Otter ,

Tail case new pending before dem, which could have a definite bearing on de state of de law which would control, in part at least, the issues being raised by the Intervenors and de Department of Justice." (Tr. 10 3-104) .

3e first case was Otter Tail Power Co. v. United S tates , 410 U.S. 366 (1973); the second was Gulf S tates Utilities Co. v. ??c, 411 U.S. 747 (1973). Consumers Power Company was correct that the cases are "significant" to this proceeding. It appears not to have noticed that the cases were decided contrary to de Company's positions. '

• 0 M

. - _ . - . . 0 eise.. M 4 - ._ _ . . .

--.- . - - . . .-.~.- --. -. . . .

2. Consumers Power Company states (Comments, p. 3): ,

l

" Deferral of review would needlessly waste not only )

administrative resources but also the resources of '

lower Michigan's race-payers. The Company and the intervenors 'nerein are electric utilities whose costs-including legal expenses to pursue the instant litigation-are borne by their customers."

To be blunt, immediate review would likely do no more than string out the litigation process, delay effective relief and cdlitate against any realistic hopes of settlement. It will not likely result in faster _

resolution of issues. The Midland plants have been " grandfathered" so that construction could commence concurrently with antitrust review.

Thus, there has been lictie incentive for Consumers Power to reach reasonable agreement. With regard to the cost of litigation, Munis/Co-ops can assure the Commission that such costs are of greater concern to them than to Consumers Power Company. Indeed, according to its counsel, Consumers Power has spent over $1 million on this litigation, which well illustrates the practical problems by smaller entities litigating against large companies. See Attachment A. Piecemeal litigation will only add to the burden.

3. Consumers Power Company states (Comments, p. 4),

review is necessary because "many utilities will be making final 'go or no go' decisions whether to proceed with construction of presently-deferred nuclear units. . ." What Consumers Power appears to )

l be saying is that if it actively pursues its antitrust jurisdiction, l

l the Commission could deter applicants from investing in nuclear units. .

Considering that the purpose of section 105 of the Atomic Energy Act, 42 U.S.C. 52135, is to provide for meaningful application of antitrust principles to licensees in connection with their licensed activities, this is a strange statement. Is Consumers Power saying that utilities will not construct plants if they are forced to obey the law? We note

-3 .

I s

that this i=plicit threat that effective exercise of :he Commission's an:itrus jurisdic: ion will delay or prevent plant cons: rue:1on seems to be shared by only a handful of utilities, since .los: have seccled : heir antitrust obligations.

4. Consumers Power Company states (Comments, p. 5) that immediate review of the findings of the Appeal Board " besmirch" its good name. The Appeal Board decision speaks for itself. If it does not have persuasiveness, Consumers Power need not worry. .However, Munis/

' Co-ops suggest that Consumers Power's concern is that the decision g -

convincing. In that event, there is nothing : hat can el1=inate its persuasiveness. Finally, Consu=ars Power has =ade a co=piste record for all to make whatever judg=ents they choose concerning its good name.

If the Commission desires to pursue the question of Consumers Power's

" good name" at this time, in addition to the Appeal Board's decision, it might peruse the documents and deposition material attached :o Munis/Co-ops' " Motion to Limit Discovery and Issues and A1:ernatively

_ For Summary Finding Requiring Imposition of License Condi: ions," filed J August 28, 1973 in this docket. Among those docu=ents is one document expressing that "[:]he first goal of our Marketing activities or program concerning other utilities in our service area, is, of course, to acquire these syscams" (Appendix H) , and another, stating the Company's " expressed goal to el1=in. ate the possible participation of undesirable third parties" from :he Michigan Power Pool. (Appendix G) .

Ultimately, whether 1: will review ALA3-452 is a satter for Commission judgment. However, a reading of the decision 1:self demonstra:es i: is likely to #.:hstand review. Although Munis/Co-ops have always believed that :he issues were much less complica:ed than

Consumers Power would maka them appear, Consumers Power's motion would imply that the issues are many, broad and complicated. In this context , intermediate or premature review would not appear to be called for for the reasons expressed in the Comments of Munis/Co-ops, the Department of Justice, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff pleadings and for the reasons discussed by the Commission, as well, in its brief to the United States Court of Appeals in Central Power & -

Light Company v. Nuclear Regulatorv Commission and United States of

, America, CADC No. 77-1464, el g. (January 20, 1978). }

Respectfully submitted,

, -' / /

Robert A. Jablon Attorney for the Cities of Coldwater, Grand Haven, Holland, Traverse City, and Zeeland, the Northern Michigan Electric Cooperative, Inc., Wolverine Electric Cooperative, and the Michigan Municipal Electric Association February 3,1978 Law Offi es of:

Spiegel & McDiarmid 2600 Virginia Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20037 202-333-4500

• MS -hM*" =-ehe -4N w *wme ame hw, esp ++emW_ e=m-gm e

i .

~7 Trse. W.*.LI. sTTdIT 'O t.;Ts.NAL Tasony. Jan. 3.1973~Ac:ach. A

\ .

THE Coimmehs Po1cer.in EffectIs Told to Sell Justice kenc7 Urges - .

A P' art af &cledr Plant tb Competitors ICC to Postpone IUse Sy Jsaa? L.ernAt sa In. Intercity Bus Fares ' '

., .nmera =wer ?ss v u.:.snaarJerasu. !n de U.S. is goutg :o han :o 'at in anyese l >

l WASHINGTCN-u a r:Ang 2at mems . rescer."

eis, gno : g.: al.le *.s knM ha own power %D.E l

are :s send.saoc2 vans 2rmgn ce mee-m ggg7mmfm.astce ww Depm:me:t  ?.4.V' t

whars =ori. Mr. ams saw. cia doct- :upd m utenaacunmar:e 3,,p,,, T'd d85

, { ::e nuity mausc7. a .aderal appesi Ward een 'D*:2 saca greany !avars ce **rif2=1 porcon d , poggpoo, , ."q. ncmase :n marcty has ta effect commanded C:asunars Power Cs.

to sad part of 2e axummers huge soc! ear Ce indas:ry. de apops ami antm7mes It lans schdalad m take eenet .ms miay.

will help mem :n arrn in c=mpecem vt2

' Now-

' power pant in Ed1and. Met., a sman JnD*

tan nanrey. the sensabsidised, mapsymt perunus of me The departnant's Aactmut Dtytnan sad #@

~h11 ha was issued gmady at industry. < - ce !are Mour. 2e seven2 :s ce past cree D SNT AcmaDr. be appeal board didn't specify years, shouw w supede am me ICC ce= acne

• the Lei.-g of the Ladiday weesad t!y tas , completas aa nventerwur of me has 2ndas. .The Func l Nuclear Ragetisary e-= man's Ammte what Fmenme Power usust dq m :stnady 'I and- its

'satser and r'ement Appeat Board. It is de !!ading d aantmsc noianaus, In part be- ' ~ """"" -

' .'A 98C:ii:35 based as 2ndtags by as t!nsenember canse the heartsg.nened is un d date and The tre taersase has bout sancht my or ct2Walcf in ~part beemass me uc!!!y has changed its .Nadenal.3ns Traf"c Wem be me- ' money at -

board that c'a===s P:wur vtainted aan- postcas shout-sectag an ownerstep tutarest trust !aws, partcularty in dealtags wim two setung organizacca h ca 2tarcty bus ta- g,f electr.e cooperanves in M!ctican and an la 3e trzable plagued !!.7 Akm 3Cdland dustrr, wtisch marmade de hainno=y !s in pg,jg7, l = m.r.pny owned power synams. De plast. me appeal pensi :sstme: ara :! cess. per:'.ousasancal ~=wa =- In ~=== a rume int board to reopen de rec =rd and dereef.

2nanimons ".bdt:g also could sewnfy hand- tar to fashim spec 5c aatt :st r=mmihn with me ICC. de Anctmut Dty:siott ac. , W est.yf .-

' icas de campany is dd=' vert agatast an- k:owledged that bas fadersato has decil:ed.

Oc:cated m :::st sat:3. But thoust ce appeal kard Cdstt issue hat it also enat=aded be IC*12 cts adattuats e Casamers Power recurved pernusson ta spec 1Sc insc :cf.cas. Mr. Ross said "one g l 1 hrmaaott akat be indusc7 and its reve-

• the cond1::as.al:nost certainty weu!d be m

. Septa =cer a e=cc:ue worz as ibe party setl part of tie p.act."

m seeds m deter =me weather heter mes are jn. N E l 58 :s 'mu 5:baz W. sistad h coc:pleeon 2 IE" satt: sit -= nsf'a 2e ap.

. Is ssh:ctung

, M@C 2 ac" * ==*r c'h. .

pea n n e wr m m ward ee cime m a c . of faut ra:a. ar=g a =e be : mas =y Me divts:ca als: c:2=usi ICC aspreval EUbl

., h,C**

,. ,, page eputica. tte ;!ce==ng board shocMa't throuet me Nameca13t:s Trag".c A="~ c r

e wastaar c:nnme"Ja st. add w ha2sd. sees to 'h d ce elec=:e uttry la. because. It said. rew=sas of Grvysotmd

.'.,,a m W 2e %A:t taa sound m .dus.try. But it added y9,Sgg,,, -

Corp.'s Grvytound uses Inc. and Cacemen-

. , p^

. '" M 1218 8A 3 U' Cf 3 , ~ m,g3,77p,,,,.!ta=se coing1 ul ':1a:lways I:c., a Rol! day has Inc. cut. /c..

Ser.das garacng.dec=:c=7 tz de unh ten-be it a @ ant he whee (2g, asor, acconst he more than 3D% d t:sinstry reve- .

ay's c=smI:ers. ce pas also is W 2 ,,,,g d:nacca. Ec?.': .

b .j ae::ssa. esale of as tn. =ces. De raza barem synam. Se dvtson

mc

ce larp man *** d procent saam, g3 .una. power.nsf-s , mesnly

.s

!are.

said. 2 Hows 5:anciady sausf bus compan:es M =M Cs. has czuracs a ;urttase- closed _t2 d rei:af."

to be lu:Irped witi less ef!t est cacerns, hMq bg.c-Tft 7-2e steam for use at 13 g: ant c==:; mas maar s cm de use of me =tuity's wt:ch may df.stort be acmal amnne'a.eco- ' '

g.,,

3 , m,t dat='c=7 .' ect made ' ditos M 2e ha istuscy.

appes! b' oard's most rect =t opu:ta sur:es mananer Powr's ~

te CanncQ at Wage ami'Pitdr StabCthy '

d' , , , t. ors g de viciacces :mi "'*$

" 7g.4% D,h g * ;;. *ir ; g ,, 7, ; ;; ,,; L#e*!T*:nes%t*"".s"M *p' 2

.,, , 32"f *,,,. 3,,,,, ,, ,,,, ,.

,e u w e d o m d. C: ,3 m g e y re.

p*: 21. rest. **s ==

=.t-1 = ee2r me:=$ m m = m. ALL Wo!

!nsed to ":cor2nate" the W M pcwer Mc e recent!y. $ cuss. as a ev=e"$' soM u~a est

aan;cer ==.st ;1a=s. Chgnss ac mi to acc!",

sstramzabecauselawmakars with certata' smad rcanas est an ".and. c nfrmed. Casc.:nes acpears wC!st to ~he Ce n

~

'ru saca as tz=arden. Gern Alkan % M lockad" wt2:a e-a=m= s' serf *.::= area. sec. W beca=se d Snancar problems "Dese acccas by e'a='-'ws have effee- 2 c:mpleCag de place. Ac:: orang 15 me sp. M*e::s:s M'"-"'

!ssrud maz :Jcisar Wmost dat De Ces=1Se::se taz;sers*--cocM hasar umcpdy . vely preventad *e smag systanss- Cat. peal board. Cass=nrs is :xsw "ac::veiy me. quetCcer;= me sc sumers costpeders b many.5 mar ==- get afhg** 2e possible safe W1"ll% ester- '

8'""d2e"ce=1 3- Q 2dusu7 s:":etih!*:*e" : :

culd ea e=se = 3,.,, ,',.3,, , ,3, ,,,, ,,,,,,,11 md ,.mg me.=:m ens. .a s,eces, sarp tatarest to de too esspernew in d=:r anc c==ecr ;a s.e M:=nat= mat un bee. e eng me wg

.efst:ed by-.y be ocar asse

- cuamagpaneis, se load power." Mr. Salzman's lmgby optmas en!!!y hirJean_ ~-

om= = tm .

, set %~:s = H.-a bye.

peal. board member Richard S. Salzmaa coachdod.. '..;e-wrote as tach-duck act:nca re=lem wett: 07 "De resultis to g!= N=m= s a c

. a ~ .

• 7t L n D

""'~'~# h - -* 2-um N,.4T T'dh dryd c::::ccitec . A:r.a :

t'aewwa= Wmiam Warted Rms. 2e 'and pect:ye edge aver ce sman c: "es:nn. sa lawyer nr Casamers ??our. 'sh=M 2e edge at=.butable to its ear =se of =sangoly CEARU"ll'I. N.CfAP) - take P5wer bud 12t :::aT. asw=

?.ccert d::

7t:1ce."very ct:reme" and safd be ts coo- power. rather ttan da **=w opera:cas. Cs. has receitui a castrue::ce cer=st tr:str. n aa; .we at M es sider"g aH poachie ways tu reverse l2. Se Nuefmar Reg :!a=ry es' - 2:r !:t .,: .37 "Now Nemars vtshme :n intestse its ; reposed =.5 ts!at ^m suctear gta- SI: :::: ::: :

?

De Cassumers P:ver scar:ey accidgat efncency .4 **ersm y large ::ncient- a c;;a:,;::.av).d )q a sma , ts?* ca es caness d me--a but tred geners ng ut:3. h*ery ** pow = den, a statesman $:e *e : c:7 inad. -

W,m_.c. ,

wt3 On 2:st per=:r was isssed F:1da7:: pea t : cart other caservers toot wescar me ret, exacercate. 2e ance w--==-~ve sn=acca  ;

21amry :m nmuv = or ce fateral catr:s . . . :::e tremmednas :ns:s d defecomtite approval by me NPCs A::32nc Safety and ;;a:;:eesand c s :::,ne ::a::::.g tea:::.

wtf1 avert::r: 2e asonal hard: F,num==es tacinology r.t % ::ne:aar 1anza was 14 cans =g Board, ac=srm::g to a 32ae Power spokesmas. -  :.::q;s:ct Se Ca -

Power already das sosat 2 :: d$m er more borse by me *:easury . . . am;i Cmgress .

p.a!.Ocrac=

. Seac-a titigste tte ite=ref casa vtuct begs:in thin t 1::and tar piume cc:montre to best- ne tree-mit 'ac2:7 wG be %:2 a 2e A :, ca!:a:sc:se 1777 '

, eftt only be faw . . . hat =tians we s:rp is Boar:t River to les ssr**e

• Ca=:ey Sa l a::. Tera::::::;

Aa ME". Rose sees ;t. 2e appeal Mard dat'ls ;rs=sety vtat wG haWR 2 this 2 2e westers ;, art d ce stata. _,,a*~=----

strayed :ar beyond Congreurs teant. I:s m.sa." -

- Unie FTeetved a .".=n:51 WTI s2dsr:=1- M::344=:

latmaa is a m -=er decent." h said. ;x

. . con from 2e board :n May :rit and !.t=i- .:n ga;,,3, 2.*eE tantesnyl 2e speant toant musscans ttad.nte wort has been =ider way nace. , y.,q,.

.smsnmers Power and ts :sany cese 2::n. maa e-= ::mst sea ;nrt of :ne Mid. s::.es, a 7as E ar disc are. battdtag e ;sannmg s=r :and ; tans =sy no longer M espea27 mar - 2nt. accial conse :cena d me plant has been 2:2 vacmrs. .

. . .. . . ' . 'oas for ce tsg su: ry.

delayed pending San! MEC sopreval d.2s ,- nMm *

.. conscrec=ca per=st. . . v , , ,

"ner opodes :nsulaims 'ac:mm by aar . :r 2e ;ower .swt a ucaus=g werd. wench ne erst at be cree 1.:si.coH:Jovast

!!ry tt de U.S as man = Tsat its s: n. :o i deci! sed to imm== ar.turze rest:=cas a :n:ts '.s e=N=t :o beg =t ocuracom 2 2e 23 M of y.cimr.

,,,,g g sD PoWW.", _. Mr. Joe use of.m2e plaar. - c'.u=".w.T des argued 2at

. . .-- IIld

-- lMIS. vtt1 GifttpleCCsLd me ot21st 190 _

CEP.TIFICATE OF SERVICE

• l

• t I

I hereby certify that I have this day caused to be served the foregoing RESPONSE OF MUNIS/CO-OPS TO COMMENTS OF CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY, by deposit in the United States mail, upon the following persons:

Alan S. Rosenthal, Esquire James B. Falahee, Esquire Chairman, Atomic Safety and .

General Counsel Licensing Appeal Board Consumers Power Company Nuclear Regulatory Commission 212 West Michigan Avenue Washington, D.C. 20555 Jackson, Michigan 49201 Michael C. Farrar, Esquire William Warfield Ross, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing

• Wald, Harkrader & Ross Appeal Board 1320 - 19th Street, N.W. .,

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20036 .

Washington, D.C. 20555 Keith Watson, Esquire Richard S. Salrman, Esquire Wald, Harkrader & Ross Atomic Safety sad Licensing 1320 - 19th Street, N.W.

Appeal Board Washington, D.C. 20036 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Seth R. Burwell, Esquire Burwell & Shrank Hugh K. Clark, Esquire 1020 Washington Square Building Chairman, Atomic Safety Lansing, Michigan 48933 and Licensing Board Nuclear Regulatory Commission %norable Frank Kelly Washington, D.C. 20555 Attorney General State of Michigan Robert Verdisco, Esquire Lansing, Michigan 48913 Antitrust Counsel for Nuclear -

Regulatory Cotatission Staff Dr. J. V. Leeds , Jr.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 941 Washington, D.C. 20545 Houston, Texas 77001 Frank W. Karas, Chief Public Proceedings Branch Office of the Secretary Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20545 Mark Levin, Esquire Forrest Bannon, Esquire Antitrusc Division Department of Justice P.O. Box 7513 Washington, D.C. 20044 Dated at Washington, D.C. , this 3rd day of February,1978.

l

.,  ?-

Robert A. Jablon

,