ML19262A097
| ML19262A097 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 09/10/1979 |
| From: | Jay Dougherty DOUGHERTY, J.B., Potomac Alliance |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7910260344 | |
| Download: ML19262A097 (5) | |
Text
- iR; ?UDLiC LQCUEM NN f *"
~
- -%p+
1, 3 t
UNITED STATES CF AMERICA
')
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY CCMMISSION g
g h
3EFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL SCARD v
e scc' In the Matter of
)
)
Docket Nos. 50-339 SP VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER CO.
)
50-339 SP
)
(North Anna Power Station
)
Proposed A=endment to Units 1 an.d 2)
)
Operating License NPF-4 AMENDED STATEMENT OF EXCEPTIONS The Potomac Allians i, on behalf of itself and Citi: ens Energy Forum, Inc. Chereinafter collectively "Intervenors")
submit this amended statement of exceptions to two rulings of the Atemic Safety and Licensing Board (hereinafter "the Licensing Board") embodied in a document entitled "Scard Decisions" ' dated August 6, 1979) as supplemented by (1) an
,"Irder Denying Interveners' Motien to A=end Petition to Intervene" (dated August 17, 1979), and (2) an " Order Granting 1EPCO's Metien for Su= mary Dispositien" (dated August 24, 1979).
In response to Intervencrs' original statement of excep-
- (dated August 21, 1979) the Atcmic Safety and Licensing Appeal Scard (hereinafter "the Appeal Scard"), en August 27, 1979, deferred the colling of the period in which to seek relief from the Licensing Board's August 6 order.
The Appeal
=
Scard gave the Intervencrs permission subsecuently te supple-i
=en: their criginal exceptiens er to stand upon them.
1217 0~20
?00R BMgL 7 9102 60 J ebcp
Intervenors respectfully request leave to instead supplant completely their original exceptions with those listed infra.
The effect of this change would be to reduce substantially the number of issues to be resolved on this appeal.
This reduction is due to Intervenors' desire not to challenge on the =erits the Licensing Board's decision with respect to each and every one of its factual and legal determinations.
Rather, Intervenors would raise on review only those errors below which were sufficiently serious so as to merit scrutiny by the Appeal Board, as followr:
- 1. The Licensing Board Erred in Finding that There Existed No Genuine Issue ci Material Fact with Respect to the
. Contention Labelled " Materials Integ:..ty."
(Order Granting 7EPCO's Motion for Sc= mary Disposition (hereinafter " Order of August 24"), 11 27 and 28.)
- 2. The Licensing Board Erred in Finding that There
- -Id No Genuine Issue of Material Fact with Respect to the Crntention Labelled " Alternatives." (Order of August 24, 11 33 and 34.)
- 3. The Licensing Board Erred in Finding that There Existed No Genuine Issue of Material Fact with Respect to the i
Cententic.; Labelled " Service Water Cooling System." (order of August 24, it 35 and 36.)
1L1/
Ot1 n
?00RORl81Lil
- 4. The Licensing Board Erred in Finding that, as a Matter of Law, VEPCO was Entitled to Judgment with Respect to the Contention Labelled " Alternatives." (Order of August 24, 11 33, 34, and 37.)
- 5. With respect to Each of the Seven Contentions at Issue in the Proceeding, The Licensing Board Erred in Failing to Explain or Specify Adequately the Factual and Legal Bases for i'.5 Granting of VEPCO's Motion for Summary Disposition.
(Board Decisions, August 6, 1979, in ice entirety; Order of August 24, 19 12-37, particularly 15 19-36.)
- 6. The Licensing Board Erred in Denying Intervenors' Motion to Amend Petition to Intervene (June 15, 1979) and in Deterr.ining to Take No Action ou Account of the Decision of Unitt i States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Minnesota v. NRC (1979).
(Board Decisions, dated
, August 6, 1979; Order Denying Intervenors' Motion to A=end P=.ca..,to Intervene (dated August li, 1979), 15 2, 4, el sec.)
7 The Licensing 3 card Erred in Granting VEPCO's Motion ary Disposition in that the Hearing Schedule Established
'n- 'ha Proceeding Was So Unduly Abbreviated th>,
I.tervenors Were Illegally Rendered Unable to Conduct Adequate Discovery or Otherwise Present an Adequate Defense to VEPCO's Metion.
(see Orders of the Licensing Board dated May 4, 1979; June 6, i
1979, and June 29, 1979). 1 <,! /
O ! 2-DR ORigt
t Respectfully subm4 ted,
-- v 7
.k g,a;ne s 3. Doughprty -
n 16 S Streetf hv Dated: Septerter 10, 19 1 Washington, D.C.
20009 (202) 234-3742 (202) 452-9600 Counsel for Intervenors P00R BRBIWL 1217 023 9
~
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby affirm that copies of the foregoing Amended Statement of Exceptions were served this 10th day of August, 1979, by deposit in United States Mail, First Class, to the folicwing:
Valdati.ia B.
Deale, Esq.,
Michael W.
Maupin, Esq.
Chairman, Atomic Safety Hunten & Williams and Licensing Board P.O. Box 1535 1001 Connecticut Ave., NW Richmond, VA 23212 Washington, DC 20036 Steven C. Goldberg, Esq.
Mr. Ernest Hill Office of the Executive Lawrence Livermere Laboratory Legal Director University of California U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cc= mission P.O. Box 800, L-123 Washington, DC 20555 Livermore, CA 94550 Alan S. Rosenthal, Esq.
Dr. Cuentin J.
Stcher Atc7ic Safety and Licensing Appeal 3d.
Fisnerles Research Institute U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cc= mission Uni'.ersity cf Washington Washington, D.C.
20555 Sea'. la, WA 98195 Dr. John H.
Buck Secretary Atomic Safety And Licensing Appeal Bd.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cc==ission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 ATTN: Chief, Docketing cnd Ferice Section Dr. Lawrence R.
Quarles Atemic Safety and Licensine Acceal Ed.
Sa fety and Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cc5 mission
--t 3 card Washington, D.C.
20555 U.S.
Nu: lear Regulatory Cc=m'n Washing on, D.C.
20555 k
l SR James 3. Dougherty i
i Ccunsel for Interv.9 par %
7 @'
/'O, O?
[&Qipli L m.
43 e
m l
s y
... _ _..