ML19261A311
| ML19261A311 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 12/20/1978 |
| From: | Swanson D NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7901110273 | |
| Download: ML19261A311 (5) | |
Text
.
py 12/20/78 P! p7 9 l y ',,.,, U v, P
f' ' l U! ITED E.TATES OF AMERICA gg Nb LEAR REGULATORY CD:CIISS10N BEFORE 'IIIE ATO:'IC SAFETY A?;D LICENSI!;G APPEAL BliARD In the !!atter of
)
h[f/ j VIRGl!;I A ELECTRIC AND PO'.?ER COMPA?;Y)
Dochet Nos. 50-338 OL 1
h
)
50-339 OL/S7 w
j (North Anna !iuclear Power Station, )
[2.
y
./
Units 1 and 2)
)
!g q: p.i ff g
p Q,efit cd NRC STAFF REQUEST FOR EXTE';SION OF TIME
%g,
- g TO l'lI.E RESPONSE TO l'CS SUP"I.DIENTAL BRIEF
~Q By its Order dated Decen.ber 7, 1978, the Appeal Board granted the Union of Concerncd Scientists (UCS) permission to fi]e a supplemental apicus curiae brief.
The UCS was directed to confine its supplemental brief to the single point of why the turbine missile question cannot be resolved for Norto Anna independently of the outcome of the generic inquiry.
Finally, the Appeal Board's December 7, 1978 Order provided that the Staff and Licensee would be permitted, within one week of receipt, to file a response to the UCS brief, if so inclined.
The D af f received the latest UCS brief on December 15, 1978.
Pursuant to the timetable sat out by the Appeal Board, the Staff's response would be due on December 22, 1978.
In requesting permission to make an addi-tional filing, UCS stated that it was seeking the opportunity to address the fact that the Staff was taking a position in its November 16, 1978 Response to the UCS amicus brief which differed from what was set forth in 1977 with respect to the relationship between the generic study and the Staff's review of North Anna with respect to the turbine missile issue.
Iloweve r, the argument contained in UCS supplemental brief extends beyond the existence of a change in the Staff's position.
901110A73
. In its filing, the UCS has raised several issues not previously addressed in this proceeding regarding the adequacy of the Staff's review of the risks from turbine missiles at North Anna.
Included among these issues are the effect of the classification of turbine missiles as a Category A unresolved generic issu", the alleged lack of answers to the fundamental technical questions which the generic study was designed to provide, and the alleged lack of plant-specific measures for North Anna which would justify operation pending resolution of the safety problem being studied as part of the generic task plan (UCS Reply Brief, pp.2-4).
The Staff considers the UCS allegations to be ser ous, although unfounded, and strongly desires the opportunity to make an adequate response to them.
The Staff considers that such a response would have to include an affidavit providing the factual basis for the response.
However, although the UCS has had t he opport uni ty to develop its allegations since its receipt of the Staff's September 15, 1978 submittal to the Appeal Board, the Staff has just been informed of these allegations and, in accordance with the Appeal Board's Order is permitted only a week to respond to them.
However, in light of the conplexity of the issues raised and the existing commitments and scbedules of Staff personnel involved in the preparation of the affidavit and response to the UCS reply brief, the Staff requests an extension of time until January 5, 1979 to submit its response.
The Staff has assigned this matter top priority and key persons necessary to analyze the UCS brief and prepare the Staff response have been authorized to devote f ull time to this matter.
Hewever, due to pre-arranged vacation
- schedules connected with the holidayt., the Staff response cannot be con-pleted until the first week in January.
.CONCI.US I ON In light of the serf ousness of t he issues raised by the UCS In its supple-mental br ie f, the Staff strongly desires to have the opportunity to pre-pare an adequate response to the biref.
Counsel for VEPCo authorized
.e the Staff to include it in this request.
Accordingly, the Staff requests the Appeal Board to grant an extension of time for the Staff and VEPCO to respond to thn UCS supplemental brief until January 5,1978.
If such an extension were granted, the Staf f and Licensee would of course ranke every effort t o co:r.p l e t e their responses before that date.
Respectfully subnitted,
~
,,, wca/' -r g?- < _ow ^'? L Daniel T.
Swanson Counsel for NRC Staff Dated at lie t h es d ri, Maryland thin 20th day of December, 1978
s UNITED STATES OF A:dERICA NUCLF.AR IEGULATORY CC':.' !!SSION BEFORE THE ATOhflC SAFETY AND LICEm!:;G APPEAL BOARD in the hiatter of
)
)
VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY
)
Dochet Nou 50-338 OL
)
50-339 OL (North Anna Nuclear Power Station,
)
Units 1 and 2)
)
h CER FIFICATE OI-SERVICE I hereby certify that cop'er af "NRC STAFF REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO UCS SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF" in the above-captloned proceed-ing 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
,aclear Regulatory Commission's internal cail system, this 20th day of December, PD 8 '
Alan S. Rosenthal, Esq., Chairman
- Dr Paul W Puroom, Director Atomic Safety and Licensing Environmental Studies Institute Appeal Board Drexel University U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 32nd & Chestnut Streets Washington, D. C. 2055; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 Dr John Buck
- hir R. B. Briggs Atomic Saiety and Licensing 110 Evans Lane Appeal Board Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Michael W. hiaupin, Esq.
Ilunton & Williams hiichael C. Farrar, Esq.
- P. O. Box 1535 Atomic Safety and Licensing Richmond, Virginia 23212 Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.
-io-Richard Foster, Esq.
Washington, D. C. 20555 1908 A Lewis hiountain Road Charlattesville, Virginia 22903
t John J. Run zer, Esq.
Mr J a:aes M. Torson Pepper, liamilton & Scheetz 501 Leroy ;
123 Fouth broad Street Socorro, New Mexico 87801 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19109 Mr. Bradford Whitma i Dr. Renneth A. ?.icCollom Assistant Gbief Assistant Dean Pollution Control Section College of Engineering U.S. Justice Department Oklahoma State University Room 2623 Stillwater, Ohlahoma 74074 10th Street & Pennsylvz.nia Avenue, N.W,
Anthony Gambardella, Esq.
Y,a shingtun, D. C. 20530 Office of the Attorney General 11 South 12th Street - Room 308 Mrs. James C. Arnold Richmond, Virginia 23219 Box 3951 Charlottendle, Virt;init 22903 idre. J une Allen 412 Owens Drive Mr. Willian Warren lluntsville, Alabama 35801 722 St. Christoph..c's Road Ric hmond, Virpnia 23226 Mrs. Margaret Dietrich lloutc 2, box 568 Atomic Safety and Licensing Gordonsville, Virginia 22012 Hoard Panel
- U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. Dean P Agee Washington, D. C. 20555 Executive Secretary Board of Supervisors Atomic Safety and Licensing Louisa Courthouse Appt al Panel (5)*
Louisa, Virginia 23090 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 William 11. llodgers, J r., Esq.
Georgetown University Law Center Docketing and Service Section (3)*
600 New Jersey Avenue, N. W,
Office of the Secretary Washingten, D. C. 20001 U.S. huclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Ellyn R. Weiss, Esq.
Sheldon, llarmon, Roisman
& Weiss 102515th Street, N.W.
Suite 500 Washington, D.C. 20005 c.
,,,,,/' I., pmW Daniel T. Swanson Counsel for 11RC Staff