ML19339C718

Rept Per ASLB 801003 Memorandum & Order Requesting Submittal of Unresolved Matters for 801202 Prehearing Conference,By 801114.No Problems of Authenticity Re Evidential Documents. Certificate of Svc Encl

ML19339C718
Person / Time
Site:	Allens Creek File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png
Issue date:	11/14/1980
From:	Copeland J, Newman J BAKER & BOTTS, HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO., LOWENSTEIN, NEWMAN, REIS, AXELRAD & TOLL
To:
References
NUDOCS 8011190176
Download: ML19339C718 (7)

Text

- _ _ _ - _ _

_ o. ,1SJ,t.qlE4

, _ . . e a ." h Novemb:r 14, 1980 jgfl/ l'4 li M g C

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 3 g\

%'-he

'. O NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y c j 1

- //g, 17 -

0/ge, -,(

BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICEUSING BOAI@-

In the Matter of ) g

) ,  %

HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-466

)

(Allens Creek Nuclear Generating )

Station, Unit No. 1) )

)

A:LICANT'S REPORT FOR DECEMBER 2, 1980 PREHEARING CONFERENCE I.

In its Memorandum and Order of October 3, 1980, the Board scheduled a prehearing conference for December 2, 1980, to consider the matters set forth in Section 2.752(a) of the NRC's Rules of Practice. The Board also directed the parties to bring to the Board's attention by November 14, 1980, any matters which remain unresolved. ,

With respect to the latter point, Applicant has two outstanding discovery requests which it has been unable to resolve by conferring with counsel for intervenors. First, Applicant has attempted to obtain workpapers and information relied upon by two of TexPirg's designated experts. Letters and phone calls to counsel for TexPirg have produced no results. Accordingly, on November 6, 1980, Applicant filed a motion to compel production of these documents. The Board has not yet ruled on the motion.

Secondly, in its order of September 26, 1980, the Board admitted a contention relating to the health effects of low tP3 99 8013 79 ojy(,

l l

level releases of radioactivity. In that order the Board directed the parties sponsoring the contention to designate a lead party for litigation. That designation has never been made by those parties. Moreover, Applicant served a set of interrogatories on Mr. Doggett, counsel for those parties, after being advised by Mr. Doggett that he would attempt to obtain the answers to the interrogatories from his clients. The answers to those interrogatories were due on November 10, 1980, and Mr. Doggett advised that responses would not be timely filed. Accordingly, Applicant filed a motion to compel answers on November 10, 1980, and the Board has not yet rule' on the motion.

II.

Applicant provides the following report with respect to items covered in Section 2.752 of the NRC's Rules of Practice:

1. Simplification of issues On July 18, 1980, the Staff submitted to the Board a restatement of the contentions, which Applicant had drafted and which the Staff concurred in, that was intended to simplify and clarify the issues. At the August 13 prehearing conference certain parties, notably counsel for TexPirg, stated that the proposed rewordings were not satisfactory, although there was no specific identification of the contentions that were deemed unacceptable. Since the prehearing conference Applicant has heard nothing from Mr. Scott or any of the other affected parties as to whether they agree or disagree i

i

with the proposed rewordings, with one exception.*/ Having heard nothing further from the other party intervenors, Applicant has proceeded on the assumption that the contentions to be litigated are those as originally submitted by the parties, or as specifically reworded by the Board.

2. Amendment of pleadings Applicant is not aware of any need to amend the pleadings in this case.

3. Stipulations / authenticity Applicant has not requested any stipulations or admissions of fact from any of the other parties in this ' proceeding and does not foresee the need to do so in order to prepare its case for trial. At this time,' Applicant is not aware of any problems of authenticity with respect to any documents which it may wish to introduce into evidence during the trial in this proceeding.

4. Witnesses Applicant is in the process of preparing its direct testimony for the environmental phase of the hearings.

Applicant has identified 17 witnesses so far which it will call during the course of the environmental hearings, and

• / On August 23, 1980, Mr. Doherty filed a one page document stating that he accepted the proposed restatement of some of his contentions. Mr. Doherty proposed an alternate wording for his contention number 47 on turbine missiles. Applicant has no objection to the counter-proposal. Accordingly, as to Doherty contentions 6, 8, 9, 14, 17, 24, 27, 29, 30, 32 38(b), 39, 42 and 47(as reworded by Mr. Doherty), Applicant requests the Board to adopt the reworded language set forth in the Staff's July 18 filing.

will be prepared to advise the Board at the December 2 prehearing conference as to the identity of these witnesses and the scope of their testimony.

5. Hearing schedule As indicated in the Board's order of October 3, the schedule for commencement of the evidentiary hearings on environmental issues has been set for January 12, 1980.

With respect to health and safety issues, the Board has stated that "[ alt the conclusion of the hearing upon environ-mental matters, the Board and the parties will confer upon the scheduling of the future hearing upon health and safety matters." (Board Memorandum and Order, October 3, 1980, p. 5, n.5.) While it may not be feasible at this time to establish a precise date for commencement of the health and safety hearings, Applicant would urge as a matter of extreme importance that the Board set at least a tentative date for the filing of testimony on health and safety contentions and the commencement of the related hearings. There are more than 60 contentions to be addressed in the health and safety hearings and there is a potential for significant delay if all parties are not put on notice that preparation of testimony should be undertaken with the expectation that it must be filed on or about a date certain.*/ Lacking an indication of the time when the health

• / Mr. Doherty in particular should be advised that he cannot wait until the last possible moment to identify his expert witnesses and then ask for extensions of time to complete testimony. Discovery on Mr. Doherty's contentions has been completed for several months, and he still has not identified a single such witness.

l l

and safety hearings might be expected to commence, it is impossible for the Applicant to estimate when a decision on its application might reasonably be expected, and therefore orderly planning of the project (if approved) is severely hampered.

Applicant intends to request the Board at the prehearing conference to establish a date not more than 30 days after the conclusion of the environmental hearings for the filing of testimony on health and safety issues, with commencement of the hearings two to three weeks thereafter.

6. Miscellaneous matters Applicant is not aware at this time of any miscellaneous matters which need to be discussed at the prehearing conference.

Respectfully submitted,

[

Y

'ack R. NewmanL Robert H. Culp David B. Raskin 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20023 J. Gregory Copeland C. Thomas Biddle Darrell Hancock 3000 One Shell Plaza Houston, Texas 77002 OF COUNSEL: - ATTORNEYS FOR APPLICANT HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY LOWENSTEIN, NEWMAN, REIS AXELRAD & TOLL 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036 BAKER & BOTTS 3000 One Shell Plaza Houston, Texas 77002

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUv M REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )

)

HOUSTON LIGHTING E POWER COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-466,

)

(Allens Creek Nuclear Generating )

Station, Unit 1) )

)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of Applicant's Report for December 2, 1980 Prehearing Conference were served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, or by hand delivery, this 14th day of November, 1980:

Sheldon J. Wolfe, Esq., Chairman Susan Plettnan, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing David Preister, Esq.

Board Panel State Attorney General's Office U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 12548 Washington, DC 20555 Austin, Texas 78711 Dr. E. Leonard Cheatum Route 3, Box 350A Watkinsville, Georgia 30677 Hon. Charles J. Dusek Mayor, City of Wallis Mr. Gustave A. Linenberger P. O. Box 312 Atomic Safety and Licensing Wallis, Texas 77485 Board Panel J.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Hon. Leroy H. Grebe Nashington, DC 20555 County Judge, Austin County 1 P. O. Box 99  :

Chase R. Stephens Bellville, Texas 77418 Docketing and Service Section.

Office of the Secretary of Atomic Safety and' Licensing the Commission . Board Panal U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccmmission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 l

e -

1 l- l 1

. . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ __ . - _ _ _ - _ ~ . _ . . .._ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ __

)

James M. Scott, Jr.

Richard Black, Esq. 13935 Ivy Mount U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Sugar Land, Texas 77478 Commission Washington, DC 20555 William Schuessler

. 5810 Darnell John f. Doherty Houston, Texas 77074 4327 Alconbury Street Houston, Texas 77021 Stephen A. Doggett, Esq.

P. O. Box 592 Rosenberg, Texas 77471 Att: Clarence Johnson Bryan L. Baker Executive Director 1923 Hawthorne Box 237 U.S. Houston, Texas 77098 University of Houston Houston, Texas 7704 J. Morgan Bishop Margaret Bishop Carro Hinderstein 11418 Oak Spring 609 Fannin Street Houston, Texas 77043 Suite 521 Houston, Texas 77002 W. Matthew Perrenod 4070 Merrick D. Marrack Houston, Texas 77024 420 Mulberry Lane Bellaire, Texas 77401 Brenda McCorkle 6140 Darnell Houston, Texas 77074 F. H. Potthoff, III 7200 Shady Villa, #110 Houston, Texas 77080 Wayne E. Rentfro P. O. Box 1335 Rosenberg, Texas 77471 s

l

.