ML19276F263
| ML19276F263 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 03/06/1979 |
| From: | Lazo R Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7903280153 | |
| Download: ML19276F263 (7) | |
Text
.
-G U N
^'
.S~
\\
m
{3
- ?,C:3 7
n.
\\
--I NO-
-)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA a
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (h. [g,' g ',-
q}l 4
y' A/
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 3/
.3 4
as,'44 l i:
6
)
In the Matter of ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY,
)
)
STN 50-593
)
(Palo Verde Nuclear Generating i
March 6,1979 Station, Units 4 and 5)
)
)
ORDER FOLLOWING SPECIAL PREHEARING CONFERENCE Pursuant to notice, a special prehearing conference in the above-identified proceeding was held by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in Phoenix, Arizona, on February 21, 1979. / Counsel for the Applicants and counsel for the NRC Staff were present and participated in the pre-hearing conference. Also present and participating were Mr. Larry Bard, petitioner for leave to intervene, and counsel for the California Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, the Arizona Atomic Energy Commission and the Public Utilities Comission of the State of California.
The City of El Paso, another petitioner in this proceeding, did not appear and was not represented at the prehearing conference.
- / otice of Special Prehearing Conference dated January 26, 1979 (44
-N F.R. 6533, February 1, 1979).
79032801 5.3 (7
. The Licensing Board heard oral argument regarding the petition for leave to intervene filed by Mr. Bard and the contentions which he seeks to have litigated in this proceeding. The Board's rulings on matters which can be disposed of at this time are set forth below.
1.
Petition for Leave to Intervene Filed by Mr. Larry Bard Applicants and the Staff agreed at the outset that Mr. Bard had demonstrated a personal interest that may be affected by the results of the proceeding and urged the Board to find that the petitioner had established " standing" for leave to intervene. They disagreed, however, over the question of whether petitioner had stated at least one admis-sible contention and therefore should be admitted as a party.
In the view of the Staff, Mr. Bard's Second Amendment of his Petition for Leave to Intervene dated September 11, 1978, contains at least one con-tention which meets the requirements of particularity set forth in 10 CFR 5 2.714. Applicants continued to feel strongly that adequate con-tentions had not been stated.
Following oral argument concerning the contentions set forth in Mr. Bard's Sacond Amendment and a short recess during which discussions took place between Mr. Bard and the parties, an agreement was reached.
Thereupon, four stipulated contentions were offered for the Board's approval. The Board approves the stipulation and hereby rules that the following contentions are admissible in this proceeding:
Contention 1.
The Applicant has failed to show that adequate measures will be taken to prevent seepage into the perched water zone under the PVNGS site, and hence to the groundwater table by contaminants leached from the evaporation ponds and by burial of solid wastes in the waste disposal area on site.
Contention 2.
The Applicant has not demonstrated that suffi-cient water will be available to cool Palo Verde Units 4 and 5, since water availability in the 91st Avenue plant depends upon the Applicar.ts' unfounded speculation with regard to in-creases in population and per capita water usage.
Contention 3.
Alternative sources of cooling water for Palo Verde Unifs 4 and 5 have not been adequately evaluated.
Spe-cifically, the use of groundwater, irrigation and drainage water, and Central Arizona Project water have not been compared to the proposed sewage pipeline on a cost-benefit basis.
Contention 4.
Arizona Public Service has not demonstrated that it is financially qualified to design and construct Palo Verde 4 and 5 because it does not have adequate funds at present and because it has not demonstrated reasonable assurance of its ability to obtain the necessary funds.
During the course of the arguments presented relating to Mr.
Bard's contentions, the Board put the Applicants on notice that the Board would at a later date ask specific questions concerning Arizona Public Service Company's technical qualifications to design and construct the proposed facilities, direct the Applicants to prepare written direct testimony in response to such questions, and permit Mr. Bard to conduct cross-examination of that testimony during the evidentiary hearing.
The Board ruled that Mr. Bard's contention relating to trans-portation of hazardous materials was not admissible as presently drafted.
Petitioner was granted the right to file an amended conten-tion on that subject by March 5,1979. Responses by Staff and Appli-cant are to be filed within five (5) days after receipt of the amended contention.
The Board thereupon concluded that on the basis of the previous filings and of the stipulation, which it approved, petitioner Larry Bard has met all the requirements for intervention and should be ad-mitted as a party to this proceeding. Accordingly, the petition for leave to intervene filed by Mr. Larry Bard is granted.
2.
Petitions for Leave to Participate Pursuant to 10 CFR S 2.715(c)
Petitions for leave to participate in this proceeding as an
" interested State" pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 5 2.715(c) have been filed by:
a)
California Energy Recources Conservation and Development Commission; b) Arizona Atomic Energy Commission; c)
Public Utilities Commission of the State of California; and d)
City of El Paso.
. The Board hereby grants the petitions filed by each of the above peti tioners.
In this regard, the Board concurs with the belief expressed by counsel for Applicants during the prehearing conference, that the Board is entitled to insist that the City of El Paso and the three State agencies indicate with reasonable specificity, in advance of the hearing, the subject matters on which they desire to participate.
Accordingly, each of the participants admitted to this proceeding pur-suant to the provisions of 10 CFR 5 2.715(c) is directed to file a statement of any issues it wishes to raise within sixty (60) days after the Staff issues the Draft Environmental Statement (DES).
Each issue raised must be framed with sufficient detail and preciseness to define a concrete issue which is appropriate for adjudication in this proceed-ing.
3.
Schedule for Completing the Public Hearina Process During the prehearing conference, the Board in consultation with the parties considered proposals concerning a schedule for com-pleting the public hearing process. We have been guided by the sug-gestions received in developing the schedule set forth below which we believe will accommodate the wishes of all of the parties and partici-pants and lead to the orderly disposition of this proceeding.
If in the course of events it becomes necessary to make adjustments to the schedule now being established, we will consider the wishes of the
. parties at that time and make appropriate changes. The time periods set forth in the schedule run from the date of issuance of the DES and of the FES.
Schedule for Comoleting Public Hearing No. of Days 0
DES issued 30 First round discovery requests filed by the three parties 60 Statement of issues filed by " interested State" participants 90 First-round discovery requests filed by parties and participants regarding state-ment of issues filed by " interested State" participants 95 Second prehearing conference (estimated) 0 FES issued 10 Board's questions filed Discovery completed 15 Motions for Summary Disposition filed 30 Written direct testimony filed 60 Start of evidentiary hearing
. The Board plans to set a time during the next prehearing confer-ence which will probably be scheduled for mid-June 1979 for receiving limitad appearances by members of the public. Any person may request permission to make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of the Commission's Rules of Practice (10 CFR 3 2.715). A person making a limited appearance may present an oral or written statement which states their interest and raises questions which they would like to have an-swered to the extent that the questions are within the scope of the matters under consideration in this proceeding.
Persons desiring to make a limited appearance are requested to inform the Board by May 15, 1979.
Requests to make a limited appear-ance shall be filed by mail or telegram addressed to the Secretary of the Commission, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention: Docketing and Service Section, or may be filed by delivery to the Commission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20555.
It is so ORDERED.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD k
GAN Robert M. Lazo, Chairrgh Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 6th day of March,1979.
-