Preliminary Answers by Intervenors to Interrogatories Submitted by Applicant.Interrogatories Pertain to Site Selection.Certificate of Svc Encl| ML19259B298 |
| Person / Time |
|---|
| Site: |
Perkins  |
|---|
| Issue date: |
01/02/1979 |
|---|
| From: |
Pfefferkorn W
PFEFFERKORN & COOLEY, P.A. |
|---|
| To: |
|
|---|
| References |
|---|
| NUDOCS 7901260031 |
| Download: ML19259B298 (7) |
|
|
|---|
Category:INTERROGATORIES; RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES
MONTHYEARML19259B2981979-01-0202 January 1979
Preliminary Answers by Intervenors to Interrogatories Submitted by Applicant.Interrogatories Pertain to Site Selection.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19322A1311978-12-15015 December 1978
Applicant'S Interrogatories to Intervenors & Request for Production of Documents Concerning Position Re Issues Before ASLB & Plans Re Upcoming Hearings.Certificate of Svc Encl
1979-01-02
[Table view]
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20054F5991982-06-14014 June 1982
Response Supporting Util 820419 Motion to Withdraw CP Application W/O Prejudice & Opposing Award of Costs & Attys Fees to Intervenor.Expenses Resulted from Intervenor Actions.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20053D2351982-05-28028 May 1982
Reply Opposing Intervenor 820429 Response to Util 820419 Motion to Withdraw Application for Cps.Application Should Be Dismissed W/O Prejudice & Util Should Not Be Required to Pay Intervenor Costs & Atty Fees.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20052F9151982-05-10010 May 1982
Response Opposing Applicant Motion for Leave to File Reply. No New Issues Raised in Response & Mere Fact Motion Superficial Not Valid Reason for Allowing Reply
ML20052E5541982-05-0606 May 1982
Motion for Leave to File Reply to Intervenor 820429 Response to Util Motion to Withdraw Application for CPs W/O Prejudice.Factual & Legal Arguments in Intervenor Response Could Not Be Anticipated.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20052C7221982-04-29029 April 1982
Response to Applicant Motion to Withdraw.Proceeding Should Be Dismissed W/Prejudice & Costs,Fees & Expenses Paid by Applicant.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20054E1661982-04-21021 April 1982
Notice of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20054E0491982-04-19019 April 1982
Motion to Withdraw Application for CPs W/O Prejudice. Intervenors Failed to Meet Compelling Burden of Justification to Establish Demonstrated Injury in Order to Dismiss Applications W/Prejudice.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20042B2391982-03-19019 March 1982
Motion for Leave to File Reply to Intervenor 820311 Response to Motion to Withdraw Applications.Intervenor Response in Requesting Dismissal Be W/Prejudice Is in Fact Motion for Addl Relief.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20041F7821982-03-11011 March 1982
Response to Applicant Motion to Withdraw.Motion Should Be Granted & Proceeding Terminated W/Prejudice.Applicants Should Pay All Intervenor Costs Including Atty Fees. Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20069B9541982-03-0202 March 1982
Motion to Withdraw W/O Prejudice CP Applications.Board of Directors Voted to Withdraw Applications on 820223. Proceedings Should Be Terminated as Moot.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20041C3451982-02-19019 February 1982
Point of Information Notifying All Parties That Any Attempt by Applicant to Salvage Findings Produced by Incomplete Info,Studies & Misleading Pressure & Haste Should Be Rejected.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20040F3761982-02-0303 February 1982
Notice of Appearance in Proceeding
ML20040A8261982-01-11011 January 1982
Opposition to Matl in Intervenors' 820106 Response to Aslab 811229 Order & Request to Strike.Info Comparing Lake Level of Lake Norman W/High Rack Lake in Fall 1981 Should Not Be Received by Aslab.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20039E9941982-01-0505 January 1982
Response to Order.Motion to Consider New Evidence & Reopen Record Designation for High Rock Lake Association,Inc Was Incorrect.Info Listed Re Lake Level.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20039C2371981-12-23023 December 1981
Response Opposing Intervenors' 811208 Motion to Consider New Evidence & Reopen Proceeding.Motion Fails to Meet Stds for Reopening Proceeding.New Evidence Is Unsupported Allegation of Recreational Use.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20062M2061981-12-0808 December 1981
Motion to Consider New Evidence & Reopen Proceedings.New Evidence Consists of Extensive Use of High Rock Lake During Fall & Lack of Any Rule Re Curve Protection.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20008G1181981-05-0505 May 1981
Response Transmitting Replies to ASLB 810428 Order Which Inquired Into Impact Conclusions in 810402 Nucleonics Week Rept Might Have on Future Plans.Replies Were Previously Submitted for Similar Requests.W/Certificate of Svc
ML19343D6101981-04-30030 April 1981
Response in Opposition to Intervenor 810416 Pleading. Commission Regulations Prohibit Response,So Pleading Should Be Stricken.Item 3 of D Springer 810412 Ltr to J Buck Should Be Stricken as Addl Rebuttal.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20003F6751981-04-16016 April 1981
Intervenors' Response.Use of Site More than one-half Mile North of Other Two Sites Was Prejudicial to Site Comparison W/Facility
ML19345G8841981-04-13013 April 1981
Response in Opposition to Intervenor 810401 Motion to Reopen Record.Motion Is Untimely & Lacks Showing of Good Cause. Intervenor Allegation Insignificant & Would Not Alter Result
ML19345G8871981-04-10010 April 1981
Affidavit Re Maps Submitted W/Intervenor 810401 Motion for Reopening of Record.Maps Portray Same Sites Visited by Applicant,Nrc & Intervenor Representatives.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20126H5041981-03-31031 March 1981
Motion That Proceedings Be Reopened Due to Improper Identification & Portrayal of Lake Norman.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20002E1381981-01-21021 January 1981
Motion for Extension to Set Oral Argument on Alternative Site Issue for 810401.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19340D9451980-12-31031 December 1980
Brief in Opposition to Intervenor 800829 Exceptions to ASLB 800222 Partial Initial Decision 3 Holding No Obviously Superior Alternative Site Exists.Decision Should Be Affirmed.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19345B3001980-11-24024 November 1980
Request for Extension Until 801231 to File Brief Supporting 801028 Exceptions Due to Heavy Case Load.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19339B0261980-10-28028 October 1980
Exceptions & Notice of Appeal from ASLB 800222 Partial Initial Decision Approving Alternate Site Analysis. Uncontradicted Evidence of Water Defect Was Disregarded by Aslb.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19337A4761980-09-24024 September 1980
Responsive Brief in Opposition to D Springer 800902 Notice of Appeal from ASLB 800814 Order Denying Petition to Intervene.Urges Affirmation of Order Due to Unjustifiable Late Intervention.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19338E1751980-09-18018 September 1980
Motion for 30-day Extension to File Brief Re Intervenors' 800829 Exceptions to ASLB 800222 Partial Initial Decision. Counsel Involved in Serious Family Matter.Certificate of Svc Encl.Granted on 800922
ML19338C8021980-09-0202 September 1980
Brief of D Springer in Support of 800415 Petition to Hear Oral Argument Re Opposition to Location of Facilities.No Consideration Given to How Energy,Water & Financial Resources Can Be Conserved.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19338C8011980-09-0202 September 1980
Notice of Appeal from ASLB Order Denying Appellant 800415 Motion.Nrc Misrepresented to ASLB State Position Re Availability of once-through-cooling.No Consideration Given to Alternative Sites
ML19331D8761980-08-29029 August 1980
Notice of Appeal from ASLB 800222 Partial Initial Decision Re Alternative Sites.Seeks Exceptions Re ASLB 780717 Order Which Limited Reopening of Record to Evidence Re Staff Analysis of Site Alternative.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19331B9871980-08-0606 August 1980
Brief in Support of 800415 Petition to Intervene.Relies on Appalachian Vs Train Re Finding That Cooling Lakes Are Best Technology Available Per Epa.Urges Participation as Matter of Discretion.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19320A6591980-06-27027 June 1980
Request for 30-day Extension to File Brief in Support of D Springer 800415 Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19318B3281980-06-23023 June 1980
Response in Opposition to Intervenors' 800606 Motion to Reconsider or Reopen Record.Applicant Has Already Opposed D Springer Petition & Affidavit,On Which Intervenors' Motion Was Based,As Untimely & Unsupported.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19318A7801980-06-18018 June 1980
Response in Opposition to Intervenors' 800611 Motion for Addl Time to File Exceptions to ASLB 800222 Partial Initial Decision Re Alternate Site Issue.Motion Is Based on Springer Affidavit Which Was Opposed by Util.W/Certificate of Svc
ML19312F0081980-06-11011 June 1980
Motion for Extension Until 800825 or After to File Exceptions to ASLB 800222 Partial Initial Decision.Awaited Resolution of Petition to Reopen Record Based on D Springer Affidavit May Make Appeal Unnecessary.W/Certificate of Svc
ML19316B0951980-06-0909 June 1980
Response in Opposition to D Springer 800415 Affidavit Re 800415 Petition Requesting 60-day Extension to File Documents Supporting Allegations.Adheres to 800509 Position. Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19316B1261980-06-0606 June 1980
Motion to Reconsider ASLB 800222 Decision or to Reopen Record Due to Reasons Stated in D Springer Affidavit. Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19318A3001980-05-21021 May 1980
Affidavit in Support of D Springer 800415 Petition Alleging That Neither NRC or ASLB Has Fully Considered Potential for once-through Cooling & Tower Cooling.Supporting Documentation & Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19323G7751980-05-0909 May 1980
Response in Support of D Springer Petition to Intervene.Addl Info May Be Helpful in Reaching Proper Decision.Certificate of Svc & Supporting Documentation Encl
ML19316B1871980-05-0909 May 1980
Response in Opposition to D Springer 800415 Petition to Intervene.Intervenor Advanced Grounds That Have Been Previously Rejected in 1976-77 Petitions.Petition Untimely & Unsupported by Facts.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19323F4911980-04-30030 April 1980
Request for Extension Until 800509 to Respond to D Springer 800415 Petition to Intervene.Petition Was Served at Old Address of Counsel.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19309G5561980-04-15015 April 1980
Petition to Intervene Requesting Appointment of Special Staff to Represent Public Interest W/Integrity.Alleges That Position of State of Nc Was Willfully & Knowingly Misrepresented.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19254F8701979-10-16016 October 1979
Reply in Opposition to Applicant 791009 Response.Nrc re-examination of 790924 Pleading Issues Requires Full Hearing.Decision on Alternate Site & Generic Safety Matters Is Premature.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19210B7691979-10-0909 October 1979
Response to NRC 790924 Motion for Prehearing Conference.No Prehearing Conference Needed Until Completion of TMI Investigations.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19254E0611979-09-27027 September 1979
Motion Requesting Opportunity to Respond to NRC 790924 Pleading Directed to Intervenors' Motion to Dismiss or to Stay Proceedings.States Commitment to File Response on or Before 791009.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19209D2621979-07-26026 July 1979
Affidavit Attesting That Purpose of 790615 Testimony Was to Discuss Util long-range Const Schedules & Plans. Ascertains That No Changes Have Occurred in Util Willingness to Build Facility
ML19249E9161979-07-25025 July 1979
Applicant Opposition to Intervenor Motion to Dismiss Proceedings Or,In Alternative,To Stay Action.Draft Affidavit by Wh Owen & Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19289E9281979-04-18018 April 1979
Opposes Intervenors' 790305 Motion to Reopen Record & Defer Indefinitely Issuance of Initial Decision on Generic Safety Issue Considerations.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19289F0341979-03-21021 March 1979
Opposes Intervenors 790305 Motion to Reopen Record for Addl Hearing.Requests Initial Decision Be Issued. Certificate of Svc Encl
1982-06-14
[Table view] |
Text
2* I q
$p Ef gf .f NRC PUBLIC D% g bfh$
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA &
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION la
) Docket Nos. STN STN50-488 50-489 In the Matter of ) STN 50-490
)
DUKE POWER COMPANY )
)
(Perkins Nuclear Station, )
Units 1, 2 and 3) )
PRELIMINARY ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS TO PRODUCE _
atories NOW COME the Intervenors regarding the Interrog d do hereby state and Requests to Produce of the Applicant an t opportunity and ii that the Intervenors have not had suff i s andc en Requests to time to fully respond to the Interrogator eh n such additional Produce and will supplement these Answers w e On account of information and other matters become h Intervenors available.
have been the holidays and the shortness of time, te tions at this time unable to answer many aspects of these ques i on the basis of its own and are still in the process of prepar ng n review of Interrogatories to Applicant as well as its ow licant to determine information which it has received from the App t for January 29, how it will proceed in the hearing which is se 1979. f the 1 Intervenors understand that at least two o issues are whether there are other obviously superior sites d whether the NRC Staf f the Perkins site for a nuclear station danalternative sites.
has adequately become informed and evaluate h se questions and There may be other issues connected with t e 790126001/
6
there is certainly a generic issue which the Intervenors are in the process of studying at this time.
- 2. The preliminary indication of Intervenors' under-standing of at least two of the issues is based upon the pleadings and briefs which were filed in the spring and summer of 1978 and the information which was filed in the summer and fall of 1978 by the Applicant and by the NRC Staff. As pointed out above, the Intervenors have not completed their research and anaylsis and therefore it may well be that other issues will emerge, or that the issues will be framed in a different way.
- 3. At this time it is the Intervenors' position that there are other superior sites to the Perkins site and that the NRC Staff has not done an adequate j ob of either informing itself or in evaluating and analyzing the alternative sites.
- 4. The Intervenors' basis for this has been set out in its filing of December 22nd to some extent and the Intervenors are now in the process of developing fully its evider.ce for the hearing on January 29, 1979, which will set out that basis for its position. The Intervenors are reviewing information obtained from the applicant and information in the file of this case, as well as other information in order to support its position.
- 5. In the an.awer to the previous questions, Intervenors mentioned the filing in this proceeding as well as information which it received from the Applicant which Intervenors believe will support Intervenors' position. The Intervenors are in the process of organizing this material and cannot at this time list specifically which portions of this material it is relying on at the present time.
- 6. The Intervenors are now attempting to contact various experts and to obtain additional information in preparation to prefile testimony in regard to the hearing on January 29, 1979.
- 7. The Intervenors are in the process of attempting to contact experts and laymen throughout north Carolina in regard to the alternate site questions. Intervenors are making contacts with people at various schools, colleges and universities and at other institutions in attempt to obtain help and guidance on factual and analytical questions.
- 8. As of this time, the Intervenors have no knowledge that any documents have been prepared, research undertaken or studies conducted in regard to its attempts to obtain the help mentioned in the previous questions.
- 9. Yes. Intervenors intend to prefile testimony, present witnesses and exhibits and to cross-examine and otherwise fully participate in the hearing.
- 10. Yes. At this time, Intervencrs do not know who will sponsor such testimony.
- 11. See answer to No. 10.
- 12. See answer to No. 10.
- 13. Yes. The Intervenors are in the process of pre-paring its information and anaylsis in regard to its position that sites obviously superior to the Perkins site exist for the construction and operation of a nuclear power plant similar to Perkins. When this work is completed, Intervenors will file the results of this work.
- 14. Intervenors are now working on the basis for its conclusion; but as mentioned earlier, it has previously pointed out some of the relevent information which it has received and which it believes will be useful in basing such conclusions, and the sources of this information are set out in answers to previous Interrogatories.
- 15. The Intervenors are working on its evaluation and when it is completed they will give what they consider to be the most important criterion with respect to alternate site selection. Intervenors will also give the basis for such criterion selection.
- 16. When the Intervenors have completed their work they will also give other criteria which support their conclusions.
- 17. Intervenors have visited various sites, including but not limited to the Lake Norman sites. Certain representatives of the Tntervenors have visited other sites and the Intervenors are now in the process of getting together all of its information of 4. sited sites and will be furnishing this information as soon as it has obtained all of it.
- 18. Intervenors have always considered that the Perkins site is not a viable site. Therefore, many sites have always been obviously superior to the Perkins site which has always been considered by the Intervenors, and many other persons, agencies, institutions and companies to be a defective and woefully inadequate site for a nuclear plant. The Intervenors are in the process of determining when other sites were considered specifically as viable alternatives. We will supplement this answer when such information is available.
- 19. Yes.
- a. The Intervenors have not completed their anaylsis which will allow it to answer in a full and complete way a - e of this question, but will do so shortly in a complete manner.
- 20. Yes. The Intervenors have previously in its filing of November 22nd dealt with some of the issues raised in subquestions a - e and when the Intervenors complete shortly their work on this matter they will supplement their answer to this question and answer fully questions a - e.
- 21. Yes. See answers to Nos. 19 and 20 above.
- 22. Intervenors have contacted various State, Federal and local officials with regard to the consideration of sites other than Perkins. These contacts have been so numerous and for over such a long period of time it would not be possible for Intervenors to give a list of such contacts.
- 23. Yes. They remain active.
- 24. The Intervenors have discussed and had meetings in regard to the issues under-consideration many times--over the past several years. Intervenors do not now know the dates of such meetings and discussions.
- 25. The Intervenors are aware of the position which they take in response to these Interrogatories.
- 26. David Springer and Mary Davis.
- 27. Yes. Intervenors have attended numerous local, State and Federal meetings over the past several years in regard to the subject of alternate sites in general. It would not be possible to list the dates and places of such meetings.
- 28. Yes. See answer to No. 27 above.
- 29. Yes. See answer to No. 27 above. The types of meetings which have been attended over the past several years have not limited themselves in the manner set out by questions No. 27, 28 and 29. At most of these meetings all three of the issues raised in these three questions have been brought up in one way or the other.
- 30. The Intervenors have attended various meetings, including hearings of this Board, which presented the question of power plant siting. As to whether the authorities presented in these hearings and other hearings by State agencies were knowledgeable is a question which has not been finally decided and indeed is perhaps the purpose of this re-opened hearing on January 29, 1979. Therefore, Intervenors would not concede that certain authorities presented up to this date are in fact knowledgeable, but hope to present such knowledgeable authorities at the hearing on January 29, 1979.
This the 2nd day of January, 1979.
Sworn to and subscribed WilliSE G. Pfefferkofn ' g F before me this 2nd day of y January, 1979.
11k ]_1.
Notary Publ'It:
1 f
My commission expires: February 7, 1980
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I he.reby certify that copies of Preliminary Answers to Interrogatories and Requests to Produce in the above-captioned matter have been served on the2nd following by deposit in the United States mail this day of January , 19 79 .
Elizabeth S. Bowers Charles A. Barth, Esq.
Chairman, Atomic Safety Counsel for NRC Regulatory Staff and Licensing Board Office of the Executive Legal U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Director Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Washington, D.C. 20555 Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Donald P. deSylva Associate Professor of William A. Raney, Jr., Esq.
Marine Science Special Deputy Attorney General Rosenstiel School of Marine State of North Carolina and Atmospheric Science Department of Justice University of Miami Post Office Box 629 Miami, Florida 33149 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Dr. Walter H. Jordan William L. Porter, Esq.
881 West Outer Drive Associate General Counsel Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Duke Power Company Post Office Box 2178 Chairman, Atomic Safety Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Mr. Chase R. Stephens Commission Docketing and Service Section Washington, D.C. 20555 Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Chairman, Atomic Safety and Commission Licensing Appeal Board Washington, D.C. 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. J. Michael McGarry, III Washington, D.C. 20555 Debevoise and Liberman 700 Shoreham Building 806 Fifteenth Street Washington, C. Q005 WilTiam G. Pfefferk6rn Attorney for IntervenorsV '[/ y//
PFEFFERKORN & COOLEY, P.A, Post Office Dox 43 Winston-Salem, N.C. 27102 Telephone: (919) 725-0251