ML19225A315

Comm Ed Motion Requesting Board to Establish Reasonable Schedule for Filing Contentions & Responses.Suggests 790702 for Contentions & 790720 for Responses.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML19225A315
Person / Time
Site:	Byron
Issue date:	06/07/1979
From:	Bielawski A, Murphy P ISHAM, LINCOLN & BEALE
To:
References
NUDOCS 7907180844
Download: ML19225A315 (6)

Text

.

1. 4

- 9 q NRG PUlLIO D00UMEW2 RCOM ,

$2 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

=

hd g tensIe I

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION k e

) A (A In the Matter of )

)

COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-454

) 50-455 (Byron Nuclear Power Station, )

Units 1 and 2) )

)

APPLICANT'S MOTION REQUESTING THAT THE BOARD ESTABLISH A SCHEDULE

_ FOR THE FILING OF CONTENTIONS Commonwealth Edison Company (" Applicant") hereby moves the Board to exercise its authority pursuant to 10 CFR S2.711 and require that final contentions in these proceed-ings be filed on or before July 2, 1979, and that responses, if any, thereto be filed on or before July 20, 1979, r establish its own reasonable schedule for the filing af final contentions. The grounds for this motion are as follows.

ARGUMENT On April 18, 1979, Applicant requested that the Board establish a date for a special prehearing conference.1 This motion was supported by the NRC Staff.2 The Board has 1/ " Motion Requesting That The Board Schedule a Prehearing Conference," dated April 18, 1979.

2_/

"NRC Staff Response to Applicant's Motion Requesting That The Board Schedule a Special Prehearing Conference,"

dated May 4, 1979.

409 324 7 0 0718 0 Wf',

not, as of this time, established such a date which may well be due to scheduling conflicts of Board Members.

A notice of hearing an this proceeding was pub-lished in the Federal Register on December 15, 1978. (43 F. R. 58659). Various timely petitions to intervene were filed, and on March 23, 1979, this Board entered an order granting leave to intervene to the Petitioners. Thus, Petitioncrs have had actual notice of the hearing for at least six months, and notice of their status as participants in these proceedings for approximately two months. However, Petitioners have not filed any amended contentions or stated their intention to stand on their previously filed conten-tions. In all probability, any amended contentions will not bc forthcoming until a deadline is set by the Board. As a result, preparation for these proceedings by the non-inter-vening parties has come to a standstill. Therefore, if it is impossible for the Board to schedule a special prehearing conference, the Board should adopt the alternate mechanism proposed in the present motion.

Some of the possible benefits which would flow from an order such as the one proposed by Applicant are as follows:

(1) Informal discovery on contentions as to which no objections are posed could commence immediately upon the filing of Petitioner's contentions.

(2) Negotiations regarding the contentions as to which objections are posed might well result in agreements 7',.-

/nn iu/ JcJ with respect to the acceptability of certain modifica'. ions to these contentions or possibly voluntary withdrawal of contentions. Stipulated contentions would focus upon the specific matters which are truly contraver :ed, thereby significantly limiting and clarifying the legal and factual issues which the Board will eventually have to rule on at the special prehearing conference.

(3) If Applicant determines that certain con-tentions are mcritorious, Applicant 7ulu redify its plans and thereby alleviate some, if not all, of 1etitioners' concerns.

(4) As the Appeal Board has recognized, the pr -

visions of 10 CFR S2.714(b) may not permit sufficient time to formulate adequate contentions. Houscon Lignting and Power Company (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1), ALAB-535, 2 CCH Nucl. Reg. Rptr. at 28, 942 in. 16 (April 4, 1979). An order such as the one proposed herein would avoid any such possibility of procedural unfairness.

(5) The proposed schedule would give Applicants and the Staff a realistic opportunity to examlue and respond to the final contentions.

As Applicant has treviously indicated, Peti-tioners have ha' more than ample time to formulate their final contentions. "[A] petitioner can and should use the period following the filing of his petition to gather the material and do the analysis necessary to prepare adequate 409 326 contentions." Allens Creek, ALAB-535, supra, at 28, 942 fn.

16. Therefore, the establishment of time limits for the filing of contentions would not abrogate any of Petitioners' substantive or procedural rights, and may even serve to rectify what has been characterizei as an " obvious gap" in the r'iles.3 lbid.

WHEREFORE, Applicant respectfully moves the Board to exercise its authority pursuant to 10 CFR 52.711 and require that final contentions be filed on or before July 2, 1979, and responses be filed on or before July 20, 1979, or, in the alternative, establish a date for the special pre-hearing conference as previously requested.

DATED: Tune 7, 1979 Respectfully submitted, I (

(& /) . 1/ ?/

Paul M. Murphy /

,/

l-- , kG Alan P. Bielawski ISHAM, LINCOLN & BEALE Attorneys for One First National Plaza Commonwealth Edison Company Suite 4200 Chicago, Illinois 60603 (312)S58-7500

-3/ The League of Women Voters of Rockford, the only Peti-tior.er who responded to Applicant's earlier request that this Board schedule a prehearing conference, has indicated that a prehearing conference could be sche-duled for July 1, 1979. See, " Answer To Motion Request-ing That The Board Schedule a Special Prehearing Con-forence," dated April 23, 1979. Therefore, this Peti-tioner was presumably prepared to file final contentions as of June 15, 1979.

-c7 k ' '

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

)

In the Matter of )

)

COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-454

) 50-455 (Byron Nuclear Power Station, )

Units 1 and 2) )

)

CERTIF ICATE OF SERVICE I, Alan P. Bielawski, one of the attorneys for Com-monwealth Edison Company, certify that copies of " Applicant's Motion Requesting That The Board Schedule A Special Prehearing Conference" have been served in the above-captioned matter on the following by United States mail, postage prepaid, this 7th day rf June, 1979:

Edward Luton, Esq., Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. A. Dixon Callihan Union Carbide Corporation P.O. Box Y Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Dr. Franklin C. Daiber College of Marine Studies University of Delaware Newark, Delaware 19711 Myron Karman, Esq.

Office of the Executive Legal Director United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. '0555 Richard J. Goddard, Esq.

Office of the Executive Legal Director United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 tnn ,oo iU/ JcU

Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary of the Commission United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Chief Hearing Counsel Office of the Executive Legal Director United States Nuclear Regulatory Commissimn Washington, D.C. 20555 Ms. Betty Johnson 1907 Stratford Lane Rockford, Illinois 61107 Ms. Marilyn J. Shineflug 1816 Judy Lane DeKalb, Illinois 60115 Ms. Beth L. Galbreath 734 Parkview Rockford, Illinois 61107 DATED: June 7, 1979 i

~

I w Alan P. Bielawski l

U/ JL /