ML17340B021
| ML17340B021 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 04/21/1981 |
| From: | Goldberg S NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8104220600 | |
| Download: ML17340B021 (10) | |
Text
04/21/81 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY CONNISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICEHSIHG BOARD In the Matter of FLORIDA POWER AHD LIGHT 'COMPANY (Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos.
3 and 4)
Docket Nos.
5O-1 (Proposed Amendments to Facils y Operating Licenses to Permit Steam Generator Repair)
,,l rr NRC STAFF
RESPONSE
TO INTERVENOR MOTION TO CONTINUE OR DENY
SUMMARY
DISPOSITION INTRODUCTION On April 15, 1981, the Intervenor filed a motion requesting the Board to either deny motions for summary disposition filed by the Staff. +.and Applicant ~
or grant him a continuance until his. several 2/
requests for the production of documents, dated'pril 14, and 15, 1981,. + have been complied with.
According to the motion and accompanying affidavit of Intervenor's
- counsel, the requested documents are necessary to permit the Intervenor to respond to the summary disposition motions.
Ql Staff motion for summary disposition of contentions 2 and 4A, dated March 23,, 1981.
Q2 Applicant motions for summary disposition of contentions 3,
6 and 8, dated April 7, 1981.
It appears from the motion and attached affidavit of counsel, that the Intervenor does not seek additional time to, respond to the Applicant's motions for summary disposition of contention 7, dated April 6, 1981.
Nor does Intervenor's recent document request seem relevant to this contention.
By letter dated April 7, 1981, the Intervenor advised the Applicant that he does not oppose the latter's motion for summary disposition of contention 5.
Q3 See requests for the production of documents from the Applicant, dated April 14 and 15, 1981 and request for the production of documents from the Staff, dated April 15, 1981.
i/i
II r
4 e~ ~l 4,
Even assuming that the requested documents are necessary to enable the Intervenor to respond to the summary disposition;motions, these documents
- could, and should, have been requested in a time period that would have permitted a timely response to the summary disposition motions.
Accordingly, the Staff opposes the present motion.
DISCUSSION The Staff motion for summary disposition of contentions 2 and 4A was served on March 23, 1981.
Responses to the Staff motion were due on April 17, 1981.
Yet it was not until April 15 that the Intervenor filed a request for the production of certain documents cited in several affidavits which accompanied that motion.
Certain of the, requested documents had been referenced in the Staff Safety Evaluation Report (HUREG-0756), issued in December, 1980.
The Staff is prepared to provide the Intervenors with copies of the requested documents, not otherwise provided by the.Applicant, and to do so expeditiously.
It would have done similarly had the request been served earlier.
The Intervenor has already received one extension of time within which to respond to the Staff motion. ~
Under the terms of the 4/
applicable Board ruling, the Intervenor's responses to the Staff motion must be filed within ten (10) days from the completion of his site inspection now planned for April 19.
Therefore, the response is due on April 29.
In any event, since the Staff intends to provide the requested Q4 See Licensing Board's Hemornadum and Order, dated April 7, 1981.
~I I
documents before April 29, the Intervenor will have already received the relief he presently seeks.
Moreover, in granting the Intervenor's first extension
- request, the Board admonished the Intervenor to "start preparing its answers promptly and not wait for the completion of the site inspection." +
The Applicant's motions for summary disposition of contentions 3,
6 and 8 were hand-delivered to the Intervenor on April 10.
Responses to the motion are due on April 30.
On April 14 and 15, the Intervenor filed requests upon the Applicant for the production of documents cited in certain affidavits accompanying these motions.
Most, if not.all, of these documents were referenced in the 1977 Steam Generator Repair Report, as
- amended, and could have been discovered earlier if deemed relevant to the preparation of the Intervenor's direct case.
The Staff is firmly committed to obtaining the resolution of controverted matters as expeditiously,.as possible consistent with the A
development of an adequate decisional record.
See 10 CFR Part 2, 4
Appendix A,
$ V.
The Staff and Applicant have already adduced an excellent evidentiary" record upon which.to base a summary decision on the contentions in this proceeding.
The Intervenor has yet to adduce any evidence to the contrary or demonstrate any evidentiary basis to support his contentions.
The time has come to do so or suffer summary disposition.
+5 Id. at 2.
's
All parties in this proceeding are represented by counsel who formally agreed upon the schedule for this hearing.
The contentions in this proceding were advanced in 1978.
The Intervenor should not have been waiting until the last minute to develop his-direct case on these contentions.
Given the advanced stage of the proceeding, further procrastination should not. be countenanced.
COHCLUS IOH In light of the above, the Staff opposes the present motion for continuance.
Respectfully submitted, Steven C. Goldberg Counsel for HRC Staff Dated at Bethesda, maryland this 21st day of Apri.l, 1981.
ll I
4 I
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY'Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos.
3 and 4)
)
)
Docket Nos.
50-250
)
50-251 (Proposed Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses to Permit Steam Generator Repair)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of NRC STAFF
RESPONSE
TO INTERVENOR MOTION TO CONTINUE OR DENY
SUMMARY
DISPOSITION in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class or, as indicated by an asterisk, through deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system, this 21st day of Apr,il, 1981.
Marshall E. Miller, Esq.,
Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel'.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Dr.
Emmeth A. Luebke Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Dr. Oscar H. Paris Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
.. Mr. Mark P.
Oncavage
,12200 S.W.
110th Avenue Miami, Florida 33176 Harold F. Reis, Esq.
Lowenstein, Newman, Reis, Axelrad 8 Toll 1025 Connecticut
- Avenue, N.W..
Washington, D.C.
20036 Burt Saunders, Esq.
Assistant Dade County Attorney 1626 Dade County Courthouse Miami, Florida 33130 Norman A. Coll, Esq.
- Steel, Hector E Davis Southeast First National Bank Building Miami, Flor ida 33131 Neil Chonin, Esq.
Counsel for,'Intervenor Suite 1400 Amerifirst Bldg.
One S.E.
3rd Avenue Miami, Florida 33131 Henry H. Harnage, Esq.
Peninsula Federal Bldg., 10th Floor 200 S.E. First Street Miami, Florida 33131 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Docketing and: Service Section Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 j
r LC even o
erg Counsel for NRC Staff
4>
~i 1,
~~~
ft J