ML19344B258
| ML19344B258 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07002909 |
| Issue date: | 08/20/1980 |
| From: | Cowan B, Kenrick J, Marcucci D ECKERT, SEAMANS, CHERIN & MELLOTT, WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP. |
| To: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8008260042 | |
| Download: ML19344B258 (7) | |
Text
s UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION Docket No. 70-2909 (Alabama Nuclear Fuel Fabrication Plant Special Nuclear Material License)
ANSWER OF WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION TO "PROPOSZD VALID CONTENTIONS OF INTERVENOR 4
DAVID L. ALLRED" AND " MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME" Westinghouse Electric Corporation
(" Westinghouse")
or Applicant") files the following Answer to the " Proposed Valid Contentions of Intervenor David L. Allred" and " Motion For An Extension of Time in Which To File Valid Contentions."
1.
Proposed Allred Contention I alleges that West-inghouse in its Environmental Report "has failed to address any of the environmental issues involved in storing, handling and shipping intermediate products (e.g., U0 Pvader or pel-2 lets.
This contention is invalid on its face since Section 3 of the Environmental Report describes plant opera-tions (e.g.,
storing and handling) and makes specific refer-ence to such intermediate products as UO Powder and pellets; 2
Section 4 of the Environmental Report describes environmental impacts of normal plant operations, including transportation, while making specific reference to such intermediate products as UO Powder and pellets; and Section 5 of the Environmental 2
8008260 C._.
. 0%
Report describes the environmental impacts of postulated ac-cidents, including transportation accidents, involving inter-mediate products such as UO2 powder and pellets.
Further-more, S 2.714(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice (10 l
C.F.R.
S 2. 714 (b) ) provides, inter alia, that a contention supplement must set forth the bases for each contention with reasonable specificity.
Proposed Allred Contention I wholly fails to comply with the reasonable specificity requirements l
of S 2.714 (b).
Finally, Commission regulations currently in
~
effect cover the transportation of all licensed material to and from all. nuclear facilities (see 10 C.F.R. Part 71).
This contention insofar as it relates to transportation of intermediate products directly challenges those-regulations without asserting or establishing special circumstances or including the appropriate affidavit required under 5 2.758.
Accordingly, for all the foregoing reasons, this contention should be denied.
2.
Proposed Allred Contention Il alleges that Westinghouse in its Environmental Report at page S-5 has claimed that uranium concentration in the Alabama River ranges from about 0.01 to 0. 05 mg/l but that Westinghouse has cited New Mexico river uranium concentration data in support of its position.
This contention is erroneous on its face.- Petitioner Allred has misunderstood the footnote appearing on page S-5 of the Environmental Report.
That footnote'does not refer to rivers in New Mexico but rather
~2-
to Alabama River uranium concentration data transmitted to Westinghouse by a firm located in New Mexico.
Water samples collected from the Alabama River were analyzed by the New Mexico firm and showed that uranium concentrations in that river range from about 0.01 to 0.05 mg/1.
Accordingly, pro-posed Allred Contention II should be denied.
3.
Proposed Allred Contention III alleges that
"[i]n view of events which have occurred since Westinghouse prepared its environmental report (e.g., Three Mile Island),
the need for a new fabrication facility is questionable" and further alleges that "[e]xpansion of existing facilities is economically and environmentally more desirable."
This con-tention is based on an erroneous factual premise.
Westing-i house in fact drafted its Environmental Report after the in-cident at Three Mile Island and submitted its Report to the Commission in December 1979, some nine months after that in-cident.
Moreover, in Section 7 of the Environmental Report, Westinghouse has reviewed the matter of the possible expan-sion of existing fuel fabrication facilities.
Finally, this contention fails to satisfy the reasonable specificity re-quirement of S 2. 714 (b).
Petitioner Allred has wholly failed to provide any basis for his conclusory allegation that ex-pansion of existing facilities is economically and environ-mentally more desirable.
Accordingly, proposed Allred Con-tention III should be denied.
4.
Proposed Allred Contention IV contends that a -.-
conflict of interest exists with respect to the Commission's
" contracting Oak Ridge National Laboratories and/or Union Carbide to prepare the Environmental Impact Statement for the ANFFP."
Ccmmission regulations currently in effect cover conflict of interest restrictions, see 10 C.F.R.
SS 0.735-20, et seg, This contention challenges those regula-tions without asserting or establishing special circumstances or including appropriate affidavits required under S 2.758.
Accordingly, this contention should not be accepted as rais-ing an issue in this license proceeding.
5.
For the reasons discussed above, Westinghouse respectfully urges that the proposed contentions submitted by petitioner Allred be rejected.
6.
By Motion dated August 5,1980, petitioner All-red sought a 90-day extension of time in which to file addi-tional contentions in this proceeding.
As purported justifi-cation for his extension request, petitioner Allred stated that he has been awaiting receipt of a response from the Regulatory Staff to a letter requesting "a statement as to conflicts of interest related to the preparation of the en-vironmental impact statement for the proposed facility."
Westinghouse opposes this Motion for all une reasons set forth in the " Opposition of Westinghouse Electric Corpora-tion to SEACA Motion for an Extension of Time in Maich to File Valid Contentions" which was filed by Westinghouse on August 14, 1980.
With regard to the purported justification -
supplied by petitioner Allred in support of his extension of time request, Westinghouse submits that there is no re-lationship between Mr. Allred's concern regarding a con-flict of interest and his ability to file contentions in a timely manner as required by S 2.714 (b).
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Barton Z. Cowan
/s/ John R.
Kenrick Eckert, Seamans, Cherin & Mellott
[s/ Donald R. Marcucci Law Department Westinghouse Electric Corporation Counsel for Westinghouse Electric Corporation Dated:
August 20, 1980 1.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION Docket No. 70-2909 (Alabama Nuclear Fuel Fabrication Plant Special Nuclear Material License)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the " Answer of Westinghouse Flectric Corporation to roposed Valid Con-d tentions of Intervenor David L. Allred' and ' Motion for an Extension of Time'" were served upon the persons listed on to this Certificate of Service by deposit in the United States Mail (First Class), postage prepaid, or by hand delivery, this 20th day of August, 1980.
/s/ John R. Kenrick John R.
Kenrick Counsel for Westinghouse Electric Corporation
ATTACHMENT 1 John F. Wolf, Esquire, Chairman David L. Allred, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 231 Oak Forest Drive U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Montgomery, Alabama 36109 3409 Shepherd Street Chevy Chase, Maryland 20015 Dr. Ira L. Myers State Health Officer Dr. Harry Foreman, Member State of Alabama Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Department of Public Health Box 395, Mayo State Office Building University of Minnesota Montgomery, Alabama 36104 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Dr. Martin J. Steindler, Member' Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Argonne National Laboratory Washington, D. C.
20555 9700. South Cass Avenue Argonne, Illinois 60439 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel Barton Z. Cowan, Esquire U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissicn Eckert, Seamans, Cherin & Mellott Washington, D.
C.
20555 42nd Tloor, 600 Grant Street Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219 Docketing & Service Section Office of the Secretary Donald R.
Marcucci, Esquire U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Law Department Washington, D.
C.
20555 Wastinghouse Electric Corpo' ration P. O. Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Julian L. McPhilipps, Jr., Esquire P. O. Box 64 516 South Perry Street Montgomery, Alabama 36101 Sherwin E. Turk, Esquire Office of the Executive Legal Director U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.
C.
20555
,