ML19347A696
| ML19347A696 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 09/24/1980 |
| From: | Bechhoefer C Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | Citizens Concerned About Nuclear Power, INC., HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO., NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| References | |
| CLI-80-32, ISSUANCES-OL, ISSUANCES-SC, NUDOCS 8009300030 | |
| Download: ML19347A696 (3) | |
Text
_.
tta b
p\\
g S'
n.
bt sca 2 51980 > {:
n C 2 W p/,/
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA M'p,N'#'#
9 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/
'b
(/
~
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Charles Bechhoefer, Chairman Dr. James C. Lamb Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke Rr,.
In the Matter of 7,b
,g HOUSTON LIGHTING AND Docket Nos. STN 50-498 OL POWER COMPANY, ET AL.
STN 50-499 OL (South Teuas Project, Units 1 and 2)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (September 24, 1980)
\\
On September 22, 1980, the Ccmmission issued a Memorandum and Order which denied the request of Citizens Concerned About Nuclear Power Inc. (CCANP) and Citizens for Equitable Utilities i
(CEU) for a hearing with respect to a show-cause order issued by the Staff on April 30, 1980.
CLI-80-32, 12 NRC In doing so, it directed this Licensing Board to conduct an expedited hearing on certain QA/QC issues (Contentions 1 and 2) which have been admitted into controversy here at the behest j
of CCANP and CEU (and which include many of the same questions as were raised in the show-cause order).
The Commission also i
defined several additional broad issues which we are to explore in this operating license proceeding (comprising such matters l
l 9 50 %
8009300 5o/
r
3
- as the technical competence and character competence of the Applicants, including the assertedly false statements made by the Applicants in their FSAR).
Further, it approvingly cited our Memorandus and Order of August 1,1980, in which we indi-cated that, if the Commission were to determine (as it has) that the QA/QC issues should be heard in this proceeding rather than a show-cause proceeding, "we would * *
- be pre-pared to adsic into controversy any issues comprehended by the show-cause order but not presently included in Contentions 1 and 2."
Our Order of August 1,1980 also extended the discovery period to December 1, 1980.
In its Memorandum and Order, the Co= mission indicated that the intervenors might be able to obtain some of the same information through discovery in this proceeding which they were seeking through a hearing in the show-cause proceeding.
We call upon the parties for their suggestions on imple-menting the instructions of the Cossission.
We ask the parties to atte=pt to agree upon additional contentions or parts of contentions which should be admitted into this proceeding to reflect the =atters encompassed by the show-cause order but not presently included in Contentions 1 and 2, as well as to comply with the Cocmission's mandate to consider additional questions.
Further, we call upon the parties to ascertain l
a
' what further discovery, if any, they may need, given the expanded scope of the QA/QC issues, and whether the December 1, 1980 cutoff date now in effect would allow for completion of such l
discovery.
Finally, we ask the parties for their recommenda-tions as to future scheduling of a prehearing conference and evidentiary hearings on the QA/QC issues comprehended by the Cocunission Order, taking into account the expedition which the Cocznission found to be appropriate.
The information we are seeking should be furnished to us as soon as possible, but we request the parties (either individually or collectively) to provide us at least a.prelimi-nary report by no later than October 15, 1980.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Jcb'b v
CharlesBechhoefer,hairman Dated at 3ethesda, Maryland, this 24th day of September 1980.
t i
.,, ~
,r
- -