ML071650213

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Petitioners' Response to Order (Regarding Schedule and Guidance for Proceedings)
ML071650213
Person / Time
Site: Harris Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 06/08/2007
From: Runkle J
North Carolina Waste Awareness & Reduction Network (NC WARN), Nuclear Information & Resource Service (NIRS)
To: Lam P, Mignerey A, Austin Young
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
SECY RAS
References
50-400-LR, ASLBP 07-855-02-LR-BD01, RAS 13774
Download: ML071650213 (3)


Text

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOlVllC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD PANEL DOCKETED USNRC Before Administrative Judges: June 8, 2007 (10:51am)

Ann Marshall Young, Chair OFFICE OF SECRETARY Dr. Peter S. Lam RULEMAKINGS AND Dr. Alice Mignerey ADJUDICA1-IONS STAFF In the Matter of: Docket No. 50-400-LR CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COlVlPANY ASLBP lV0.07-855-02-LR-BD01 (Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1)

June 8,2007 PETITIONERS' RESPONSE TO ORDER

{Regardins Schedule and Guidance for Proceedinas)

NOW COME the Petitioners, the North Carolina Waste Awareness and Reduction IVetwork (IVC WARN) and the Iluclear Information and Resource Service (WIRS) with a response to the questions posed in the Order Regarding Schedule and Guidance for Proceedings issued on June 5, 2007, and related matters.

1. Service date. Petitioners submitted their hearing request and intervention petition by email to the Commission on May 19 and by overnight delivery on that same day. This is the service day to be used to set dates for responses.
2. Dates for araument. Of the two dates presented by the ASLB, June 28 or July 17, 2007, Petitioners prefer the July 17 date because of previous commitments by counsel.

Counsel has discussed other possible dates with counsel from Progress Energy and the NRC, and is generally available at the Board's convenience after July 16. The July 17 date or a later date would also give interested persons and local government representatives more notice for the possible limited appearance session as described in 10 C.F.R. § 2.315.

3. Oral araument and lirr~itedappearance session. Petitioners support scheduling the oral arguments on the petition near the Shearon Harris NPp. Counsel suggests that a phone

conference will not be adequate given the volume of documents that will be in the record, and the possible need for counsel and Board members to handle those documents and other matters efficiently. Scheduling the oral arguments near the Shearon Harris NPP would also facilitate the limited appearance session, allowing concerned persons and local government representatives to present their testimony directly to the Board.

4. Extension of time. Petitioners reserve the right to request an extension of time to reply to briefs by the other parties, depending on their length and the issues that are presented in them.
5. Service. This filing is being served by email (WordPerfect and Adobe Acrobat formats) on those served with the Order issued on June 5, 2007. Note that I have added representatives of NC WARN and NIRS to the email list, Jim Warren is iim@NCWARN.orq and Paul Gunter is pgunter~cnirs.org. As a matter of convenience, orders and filings sent by email should be sent to them in addition to the Board, staff and counsel.

An original and two conforming paper copies are being filed by mail to the Office of the Secretary with copies to counsel for Progress Energy and the NRC.

This is the 8th day of June, 2007.

FOR THE PETITIONERS John D. Runkle Attorney at Law P.O. Box 3793 Chapel Hill, N.C. 27515 919-942-0600 (o&f) jrunkleamindspring.com

JOHN D. RUNKLE ATTORNEY AT LAW POST OFFICE BOX 3793 CHAPEL HILL, N.C. 27515-3793 919-942-0600 June 8, 2007 Office of the Secretary of the Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Re: Petitioners' Response to Order Carolina Power & Light Company Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 (Docket No. 50-400)

Dear Sirs:

Attached please find the original and two copies of Petitioners' Response to Order in this proceeding. By copy of this letter, I as serving the members of the ASLB and counsel for the other parties.

Sincerely, John D. Runkle cc. ASLB members David Roth, OGC John O'Neill, Pillsbury Winthrop