ML19347A613

Discusses Status of CPC 761105 Testimony Re Effects of Delay & Costs of Abandonment.Updating Testimony Re Changes in Conditions & Circumstances Requires Two to Three Wks. Requests That ASLB Grant CPC 761213 Motion.Svc List Encl

ML19347A613
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	01/17/1977
From:	Bartelman C, Renfrow R, Rosso D ISHAM, LINCOLN & BEALE
To:	Coufal F, Leeds J, Luebke E Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
NUDOCS 8007291075
Download: ML19347A613 (4)

Text

U s. v w . .

Q'![iRC g ; gy ~ A

$ > u jg- _

/

fp ,.314);}'30

/

}

pu ~  :

, ._ c,, m ISHAM, LINCOLN &- BEALE

,-h g. %' M ' '

s COUNSELORS AT LAW wASNeNGTOM OFFICC

_. COsARa i Sa N:.n <

.0$O in staCCT. N.w.

• • t

- RoeCRT T. uNCous. tom'..C=

eses ' 4 watuaaeG.SCALC. 1848*8983 ' ONE FIRST NATIONAL RLAZA - WAS NtNOTON. O. C. 2OO36 202*e33 9730

'ye FORTY-SECONQ FLQQR RA PN O. STCNCNSbN A. DANIEL ,CLOMAN MARLCNC R. ASRAMS ROSC AT W. KLCINMAN

. Pa*Up r *WRC CLL GCCFFRCv A. ANOCRSON MuGM R. McCOMSS JR.

. ' . ' -'CMARLCS.WALTER

'. A. SANC ' -

J. MARTMANN cSMARON L. MING 312*75 8*750 0 TCLCX:2 5288 MARGARCT C. SasTCR wf LL8AM S. Menav JR.

!5 LCAM A.CSLeNG :

CJON R. LsNO . . CuGCNC M. SCRNSTCIP6 GERALO O. MINOCLL MsCMACL s. M sLLER weLUAM T. CAMsLL TERRY F. MOReT2

. ' c1NC wsiu2M C. wsDavisCARRow . DONALD J. Me LACMLAN JOMN C. C AMCRON.sR. PAUL M. MuRPMY

^

C R G. u N5 t f. eCAU SLANO ne av OLSO :3 A N. N WAC t CaCu1RO 8 CG4LV8C LAU R E NC E O. LA S R v , MARLAN M. OCLLSY GC ARY 0.CSTERLANO

- RO!CRT C CRONeN ROSCRT A.70LLES CLARE CVANS DowMS MsCHACL A. PopC CtLCCN StRANO . C.RsCHARO JoMNSON COSCLL M.C AD% JR. R.REXRENFRow,I2 C 20 0 UOAMv T. h N ftC L.' E C MN W WC JAMES A. rLCTCMCR TMOMAS GRADY NYAN E*CMARD C. PowCLL _ GCCROC w. GeLLMOR ROSCRT C. GANJA PAUL W. SCHRQCOCR ALCKANOCR MCMMCYCR

• MARTHA C.G888S DAvs0 M. SRCCTOR

• OF CouMSEL REYNALDO p. CLOvCR Davio M.STAML ]

PAUL r.MANavn MARn M.viRSMSo CHRISTINC McR.MCMMgYgR RCSCRT H. WMCCLCR DONALD s. M LLin C R RONALO Q. ZAMARIPS e

January 17, 1977 )

l l

i Frederic J. Coufal, Esq._ Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke, Esq.

Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Board' Panel

~

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

? U.S. : Nuclear Regulatory Coran. Washington, D.C. 20555

~ Washington,'D.C. 20555 Dr. J. Venn Leeds, Jr. Esq.

110807-Atwell Ecuston, Texas 77096 Gentilemen:

^

~During;this past. week, we have had the opportunity of. conferring.with personnel at Censumers Power Company

^

f ('? Consumers")iregarding the _ status of the. testimony cubmitted by' Consumers on' November 5, 1976, which was prepared in October and the'first week-of November. , Certain portions of that testi-

, :monyEwere-based on'the expectation that a decisi'n o on continuation,

- ivaodification or suspension of the' construction-permits would be -

2"renderedfonior:about December.1, 1976. As a-result of that expec-tation,itwo-different time periods were chosen as representative

~

ofithe potential?for- delay and utilized for analysis of (1) the s

m: 1 effects:ofidelay and (2) the comparison'of the cost'to complete

snd operateatidland to:the cost _cf abandoning Midland and instal-l ling ~and epcrating an' alternative source. Those. time periods are 12/1/7_6 to 5/1/77 and 12/1/76 to'9/1/77. Obviously, the. decision 1

on1 continuation,lmodificati^n o or suspension of the construction-

, permits was notrissued on December 1,-1976. Thus, the time period utilized.in theLevaluation of effects of_ delay and costs of-eabandonmentLis'somewhat out of date. A' change in the period

' studied'would!necessarily vary the dollar figures in the testimony

~

gS  ; relating _tokthereffects of delay and the costs of abandonment.-

E l~. ;800429%g

@ N

_- ,_ m , m - - - - - - -

2 M m'n,uary$17,? 1977l 7_ , -

Ja 4- ,

9agg2 .  ;

-Moreover,:theLtestimony.was prepared ~on the: basis of circumstances and conditions '~as they were 'known~ to Consumers in October and 'the ifirst~ week of; November andise'veral changeshave. occurred in the -

(meantime. LSome of the1 changes' relate to:

.(1) The=Dow-Consumers; negotiations. Dow'and Consumers ave' met'in(the' interimto' discuss lthe points outlined in' the -testimony of Messrs. -Temple and Howell.

I b _(2)' .The ' receipt from Sechtel' of Forecast 2 relating

' ~

. to-cost;and-scheduling 1 estimates and consumers' currenttreview.ofLForecast 2 to determine whether

any. changes should'befmade to current. cost and schedulingiestimates. -

(3) ~ Changes in.estimatesaof future fue1~ costs (both nuclear

'and coal).

(4) Changes in plansfregarding retirement of certain

-older Consumers' generating rtations.

.These'changesLnecessarily affect such computations ,

as cost of purchased'or' substituted power, cost of delay, etc. .

! It is not possible to ascertain precisely what the changes in' -

. cost figuresiwould be without redoing the computations which went into the preparation of.the existing testimony. It does, ~

seem clear, however,1that the changes would_not significantly

. affect'the'important ratios which the. existing testimony.es-

'tablishes. ; The- ratios of '(1) .the effect on costs of a delay .

.to'the additiona'l investment'which wouldibe made'if1 construction is allowed to continue;- (2) Lthe 'effect on costs of a ' delay _ to -

the change .in~ the' cost of abandonment due- to: continued construc-i= tion; and -(3)f the alternative of proceeding with Midland to that of abandoningLMidland-and installing an alternate generating.

source; should.not 1 varyLsignificantly from those reflected in the existing _ testimony. -In.short,sthe existing testimony, which was based-onycomputations'for two representative time periods, chosen-withithe intent of. informing,this Board of1the_ scope and magnitude ofEthe effects'of~itsLavailable courses of action, should not be

~

altered:significantly due to the. changes in circumstances. That

testimonyjshould1thereforeLbe'an adequatesbasis for the Board to makeLan' informed decision on whether_to continue, modify or sus-

. pend the iconstruction . permits, 'so long ~ as? it reali::es that it is -

Edeali.9(with1ever-changingJconditions and circumstances and that L :thentestimony7isffixed:as'ofl December 1,.1976.-

However,cshould the Board' desire >to receive up-to-date l testimony,Jincorporating'any? changes in~ conditions and circum-

, fstances',g priorJ to; procseding with -the suspension' hearings,iwe1 urge

• itito' grant Consumers" motion of' December' 13, 1976 and prescribe a l' ' schedule forDtheaconduct"of1these; proceedings, thereby establishing -

t.JaltimeLperiodisetting(forthca new;beginning date and an end date

<. a , e ' D- , _ , , . ~ . . . - _ . - - .. , _ --

~

w .,

EhCCrc.?Caufol,:Lu**kg, Cnd'Licdo-.. N

-, . :Jcnuary 17,'1977' c-

. .Pfgof3

upon:which al1~ testimony would be based. Preparation of.such' updated' testimony'would. require a minimum of.two-to three~ weeks.

.We'alsoEurge the Board:to. consider the-alternative schedules set forth.iniour" motion of: December 13.. Basically,7we now viewithe JBoard's options as::

-1. Freezing testimony:as:of December-1, 1976, for

_ purposes only of the suspensionLhearing, setting a definite schedule for future proceedings and-proceeding _with'the suspension hearing;

2. ~ Adjourning'the hearing for about a month, setting a definite schedule.for future ~ proceedings, includ-ing-a timeLperiod on which alL c6mputations in the suspension.caseishould'be based, and instructing Consumers to update the-testimony; or

3. Consolidating the suspension hearing with the substantive hearing on!the remanded issues, setting

.a definite schedule for all future proceedings and instructing Consumers to update its testimony.

With-regard to this last alternative, we-would

-point-out;that-the Draft Enviornmental Statement:has been issued on' schedule ('we are informed that it issued Friday, January 14th) and Lthat the schedule setiforth 'in our motion of December 13 for commencing the substantive hearing on the remanded-issues on June 6,.1977 continues'to be realistic. .

Respectfully submitted, ,

Y.GHC David J.-Rosso

~

R. Rex Renfrot ', III CarylLA. Bar 1 man.

l Ish'am, Lincoln 1& Beale -l

'One First National Plaza.

. 2Q.hicago ,7. Illin'ois 60603 DJR:mc cc:1' Service: List-

.)

4 D

1

, 9 4 4 - x-g-. - .g.-.w-, --e- m mn , 4--- >--me--ww , ,eg-y

m- ~

. r, y ,

b

+

• i ,; _ ,: .

x

• T SERVICE LIST.

Frederic.J. . Coufal,-Esquire,1 Chairman Atomic. Safety and Licensing Board Panel-U.S.: Nuclear RegulatoryLCcmmission .

-Washington, D.C.. 20555 Dr.I mmeth'A.

E Luebke

. Atomic Safety-!and. Licensing.: Board ' Panel U.S.: Nuclear. Regulatory Commission Washington, D'.C. 20555 LDr.-J.iVenn Leeds ~, Jr., Esquire -

10807 Atwell' Houston, Texas'fc77096: "

Atomic Safety.and' Licensing Board. Panel nU.S. NuclearLRegulatory Commission

. Washington,'D.C. 20555-AtomicLSafety and Licensing" Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionL ,

' Washington, D.C. 20555 .

Mr. C."R.'.Stephens

Chief, Docketing.and; Service-Section LOffice of-the. Secretary.of'the Codmission U.S. Nuclear: Regulatory Commission.

. Washington, D.C.. 20555.

Lawrence Brenner,: Esquire -

Counsel;for:NRC Staff-U.S.1 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington,'DiC.: -20555

L'.[F. Nute, Esquire.

Legal:D.epartment.

' 2Dow! Chemical U.S'.A.

'"'Michiganz DivisionL .

-Midland,-Michigan '48640 LMyron M. Cherry,,' Esquire-Suite 4501-cone IBM Plaza

-Chicago,EIllinois- 60611" i-

.W

'n > .- . I.6h ,, y .. y+-