ML19263B946
| ML19263B946 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000471 |
| Issue date: | 01/16/1979 |
| From: | Beverly Smith NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Callihan A, Cole R, Luton E Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, UNION CARBIDE CORP. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7901250178 | |
| Download: ML19263B946 (2) | |
Text
'
d i UNITED STATES
,'*4 NUCLEAR RECULATORY CCMMisslON
- ,j Q..
~ WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555
. v.
vg
%,[T"Y/
Janua ry 16, 1979 xnc pueuc occomNT accM Edward Luton, Esq.
Dr. A. Dixon Callihan Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Union Carbide Corporation U. S. fluclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box Y Washington, D. C.
20555 Cak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Dr. Richard F. Cole Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
@8 Washington, D. C.
20555 f^
{
rp [ W_ g 7 \\
In the Matter of S/
%p
.h, bji BOSTON EDIS0N COMPANY, ET AL.
O q
(Pilgrim Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 2)
{
d g
4 Docket No. 50-471 c'W Gentlemen:
3 y,
Pursuant to the Board's Order of January 15, 1979, the tRC Staff's statement concerning the review status of outstanding matters is set forth below.
The Staff expects to issue, within the next few days, the Safety Evaluation Report Related to Construction of Pilorim Nuclear Generatina Station, Unit No. 2, Boston Edison Company, et al. - Supplement No. 4 for Pilgrim Unit 2.
This supplement will contain, inter alia, an updated evaluation of the Applicants' financial qualificatior.s and a discussion of the impacts of generic safety issues on the Pilgrim Unit 2 application.
Copies of this supplement will be fornished to the Board and parties in this proceeding as soon as it is printed, which we expect to be sometime during the next week.
As the Board is aware, the hearings in this proceeding have been held in abeyance since November, 1977.
The issues remaining to be heard are alternative sites, financial qualifications and the radon issue.
For the reasons discussed below, we believe that these issues could be heard between the weeks of March 4 and 18, 1979.
We propose that the Board, if its schedule will permit, set aside this period of time for hearing in order to assure that this evidentiary record can be Gmpleted in a timely fashion.
Alternative sites is one of the major issues to be heard.
The Staff anticipates that the writing of its evaluation will be comoleted by January 26, 1979.
By letter of January 3,1979, the Staff proposed to 7 9012 5 0 / 7f
' ~ ~~~ ^
the Executive Director, Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) a modified procedure which the Staff believes to be the functional equivalent of recirculation of the new alternative site evaluation.
(Copies of this letter were previously furnished to the Board and parties). Acceptance of this proposal would permit the Board to hear this issue in early March.
If the Staff is required to formally recirculate, the Staff could not go to hearing with respect to alternate sites until somewhat later.
- However, this would not preclude a hearing on Applicants' financial qualifications in early March. We will inform the Board and parties as soon as the recirculation matter is finally resolved.
On August 8,1978, the Staff filed "NRC Motion to Adopt Special Procedures For Consideration of Radon and Striking Cost-Benefit Balance For Pilgrim Unit 2".
If the Board grants this unopposed motion, no hearing time will be required on this issue.
In summary, the Staff believes that the remaining issues in this case are nearly ripe for hearing. Accordingly we suggest that the Board and parties conmit to a definite period of time for hearing of these remaining issues so that this proceedin) can be concluded.
There is one final matter which merits the Board's consideration. On April 27,1978, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts moved the Board to supplement the hearing record on the issue of need for power.
The Staff and Applicants opposed the motion. By order of July 14, 1978 the Board ruled on a number of outstanding motions; however, this motion was not included in that order.
The Staff would appreciate an early ruling on the motion since time will be needed to prepare testimony if the motion is gra nted.
Sincerely, i)
X/m
,0 ~~~~).c-2 Barry H. Smith
' Counsel for NRC Staff cc: See Pilgrim Unit 2 Service List 4
O