ML19256E298
| ML19256E298 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Allens Creek File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/24/1979 |
| From: | Wolfe S Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | Durkin P AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7911020065 | |
| Download: ML19256E298 (2) | |
Text
p m
'mC PUBLIC DOCUMgg ROM N
.g 7 4 913 96 2
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA M}
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I
THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD b
s SERVED SEP 2 51979 In the Matter of
)
)
HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER cnMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-466 CP
)
(Allons Creek Nuclear Generating
)
Station, Unit 1)
)
ORDER (September 24,1979)
In a letter dated August 3, 1979, Mr. Peter Durkin stated that he peti-tioned to halt the licensing of the Allens Creek Nuclear Power Plant because of four reasons.
Thereafter, in a letter dated September 10, 1979, which was received by the Board on September 20th, Mr. Durkin advised the Board that his previous letter had been misunderstood, that he wished to be a full party, and that he was submitting a separate letter of specific contentions.
In another letter dated September 10, 1979, which was received by the Board on September 21st, Mr. Durkin listed five contentions.
The Supplementary Notice Of Intervention Procedures dated June 12, 1979 (44 Fed. Reg. 35062, June 18,1979), among other things, directed that a peti-tion for leave to intervene must be filed by July 18, 1979, and that a person shall state that he failed to file a petition for leave to intervene pursuant to the Board's notices of May 31 and September 11, 1978, because of the restric-tions on permissible contentions contained in those notices.
Mr. Durkin did not file his petition for leave to intervene by July 18, 1979.
Moreover, neicher in his petition filed sixteen days after the due date 1E7 345 7 91102 0C)b b nor in subsequent submissions, did he show good cause for the failure to file on time and discuss the four other factors set forth in 10 C.F.R. 9 2.714(a)(1) which would have enabled the Board to determine whether his nontimely filing should be entertained.
Finally, he did not state in his petition that he had failed to file a petition pursuant to the Board's notices of May 31 and September 11, 1978, because of the restrictions on permissible contentions contained in those notices.
Accordingly, Mr. Durkin's petition for leave to intervene is denied.
Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 9 2.715(a), he may make a limited appearance statement at a time to be scheduled at a later date.
Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 9 2.714a, he may appeal this Order to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board within ten (10) days after the service of this Order.
IT IS SO ORDERED FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Sheldon J. W4/fe, Esqtlire Chairman Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 24th day of September,1979.
l/
In passing, we note that the Staff forwarded a copy of the Rules of Practice to Mr. Durkin on August 28, 1979.
0 m
.