ML20002B850
| ML20002B850 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 12/30/1980 |
| From: | Grossman H Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | Bursey B AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED, NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD), SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20002B851 | List: |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8101070010 | |
| Download: ML20002B850 (8) | |
Text
,-
l y
C>
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DoCNETED NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION usuc
,, )
s DEC 31500 > ~-H ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
$mce of
- Seetmy
%edesmg & seryp".
f-Betore Administrative Judges:
so-*
y Herbert Grossman, Chairman Dr. Frank F. Hooper
/.w Gustave A. Linenberger 4g In the Matter of:
)
Ogg
)
8/
SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC AND GAS )
)
Docket No. 50-395 OL
)
(Virgil C. Summer Nuclear
)
December 30, 1980 Station. Unit 1)
)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Following Third Prehearine Conference)
MEMORANDUM 2
~3
~,
R
=
On November 25, 1980, a third prehearing conference was/
UE convened at the Richland County Judicial Center, Columbia, South Carolina for the purpose of considering all pending matters and further scheduling in the proceeding, as stated in the Board Orders dated October 21, 1980 and November 10, 1980 (45 Fed. Reg. 75818, Nov. 17, 1980) noticing the conference.
It was attended 1
by counsel for the Applicant, the N.R.C. Staff, and the Attorney General's Office for the State of South Carolina, and by the oro se Intervenor, Mr. Brett Bursey.
After full discussion, the Board took the following actions which it now reaffirms with certain expressed modifications where appropriate:
)3g[1 5
l l 81020700/62 G
. 1.
Applicant's Motion of November 29, 1979 for the dismissal of Intervenor Brett Bursey and his contentions or, in the alter-native, to require him to proffer summaries of testimony by a date certain or be barred from putting on an affirmative case, was pending before the Board.
After extended discussion (Tr. 282-297),
it was ordered without objection that Intervenor submit by Januarv 31, 1981 a final list of witnesses and documents, and sum-maries of testimony, that he intends to offer at the hearing.
If Mr. Bursey fails to include a witness, document, or subj ect matter in this submission on or before January 31, 1981, he will be prohibited from including that time in his affirmative case unless it arises from new subj ect matter inj ected into the proceeding by yet-to-be -co=plet' ff reports and Staff review of emergency plans expected in the early part of 1981.
The Staff and Applicant I
will be permitted additional time for discovery with regard to mat-ters presented in Intervenor's Jan. 31, 1981 sub=issions or, if insuf-l ficient time is available to discover prior to hearing, may ask for further hearing on.those matters for which. additional time is needed.
Any attempt by Intervener to include in his s;ffirmative case matters not covered in the January 31, 1981 submission must be presented to the Board by motion alleging good cause for its not beinE included in the Jan. 31, 1981 submiss.i.o.n.,. either because it -arose from new mat-ters presented in the prospective Staff reports and Staff review of emergency plan or for some other weighty reason.
Applicant has agreed to work with Intervenor in identifying documents to faci-litate Intervenor's preparation of the January 31, 1981 submission (Tr. 296), and the Board sanctions that agreement.
2.
The Staff estimated (Tr. 298-299) that it would complete the bulk of its reports in January and February of 1981, but could not give a realistic estimate of when it would conclude its review of the emergency plan because that was dependent upon the completion of a review of the State and local plans by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
In order to expedite the hearing, the Board established a schedule for discovery on new matters that might be raised by the Staff reports.
Intervenor was given 30 days frc= service of each of the Staff reports to initiate dis-covery or raise new issues arising from new matters contained in the report.
The Staff and Applicant were given 10 days to obj ect to, and 20 days to answer, the discovery requests, with the provi..o that the Board would grant extensions liberally.
Tr. 308-310.
3.
Because of problems that had arisen in the past with regard to Mr. Bursey's not receiving all enclosures to Applicant and Staff mailings, the Board directed, and counsel for Applicant and Staff agreed to undertake, whatever efforts were necessary to ensure that Intervenor receive all future mailings in their entirety.
Tr. 312-313.
' 4.
A brief discussion was held with regard to the one-year pilot program of intervenor assistance announced by the Com=ission in the Federal Register on July 25, 1980 under which the number of copies of documants needed to be filed with the Commission was reduced from an original and twenty (20) to an original and two (2), the copying and serving of certain documents would be done by the Docketing and Service Branch on behalf of intervenors, and free transcripts of proceedings would be offered intervenors.
Tr. 314-318.
The Board indicated (Tr. 336) that Intervenor would receive a free copy of the prehearing conference transcript under that provision, and the Board understands that it has been supplied.
However, on December 3,198C,- the Comptroller General of the United States issued his opinion,under cover letter of that date to the Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Co= mission, on the legality of that assistance program.
Copies of the opinion and cover letter are attached to this order.
The Comptroller General opined that only the reduction in the number of copies to be filed with the Commission from an original and twenty (20) to an original and two (2) was legal, but that the remainder of the assistance program constituted intervenor assistance that Congress had speci-fically prohibited in the N.R.C. funding bills.
By memorandum dated Dece=ber 4,
1980, a copy of which is attached, the Chairman
. directed the Secretary and Executive Director of Operations to cease inplementing that portion of the intervenor assistance program that the Comptroller General. considered illegal.
In accordance therewith, i
Intervenor is put on notice that he must serve his own copies on persons on the service list and cannot rely upon transcript assis-tance from the N.R.C.
5.
The Board indicated (Tr. 314-315) its preference for segmenting the hearing by having some fssues heard when they are ready, possibly in late March, without awaiting readiness of all other issues.
The Board set a deadline of no later than 25 days before the scheduled date for each session of hearings for the serving and filing of prefiled direct testimony.
Tr. 315-318.
In order to avail hLnself of the copying and serving assistance under the intervenor assistance program, Intervenor was required to file his direct testimony 30 days before the scheduled date of that session of the hearing.
Tr. 318.
Now that that aspect of the intervenor assistance program has been halted, each of the parties is ordered to serve and file the i
prefiled direct testimony no later than 25 days before the scheduled date of that session of hearing.in which that issue will be heard.
6.
The Board advised the parties (Tr. 318-320) of Commission guidance with regard to TMI-related requirements published at t
4 e,
---u-,.m--,e
-.ene-m,,wg-.
,sw-e,g.
-,-mm
,.-.,,----n---
,a 45 Fed., Reg. 41738 (June 20, 1980) and the fact that NUREG-0694 contains a detailed list of TMI-related requirements for issuance of operating licenses.
NUREG-0694 has been superseded by NUREG-0737,
" Clarification of TMI Action Plan Requirements" (November, 1980) and by the Commission's Statement;of Poliev: Further Ca=nission Guidance for Power Reactor Goerating Licenses, CLI-80-42, 12 N.R.C.
(Dec. 18, 1980), which now control this area.
Intervenor was fur-ther advised that any new matter he intends to raise pertaining to the TMI-related requirements would have to fit within the guidelines established by the Commission.
Tr. 330-333.
7.
Mr. Bursey indicated his intention of raising questions concerning matters contained in the November 1980 supplement to the draf t environmental statement -regarding accident sequences that arose from post-TMI requirements.
Tr. 326-332.
He was given 30 days from the date of the conference to raise new matters resulting from that supplement to the DES and advised that those matters must fall within the Commission guidelines.
Tr. 331-332.
8.
The Board advised that this third prehearing conference was not to be considered the final prehearing conference to be held under 10 C.F.R. 2.752.
A final prehearing conference or conferences will be scheduled approximately 40 days prior to the beginning of hearings.
Tr. 324-325.
9.
As precipitated by our receipt of notice of Amendment No. 2 to Applicant's construction permit which added the South Carolina Public Service Authority as a co-owner of the facility, the
1 Board indicated its concern that the addition of the co-owner not compromise management responsibility for the public health and safety.
The Board requested that it be supplied with copies of the co-ownership agreement and other agreements that encompass manage-ment responsibility for construction and operation of the facility.
It also requested a copy of Amendment No. 1, and that Applicant make 4
available at the hearing its senior corporate officers with line responsibility for construction and operation of the facility.
Tr. 321-323.
Applicant agreed to these requests.
Ibid.
Under j
cover of letter dated December 5, 1980, Applicant submitted copies of the Joint Ownership Agreement between South Carolina Electric and Gas Company and the South Carolina Service Authority, and Amendment No. 1 to the construction, permit.
10.
The Board requested that Applicant have available at the hearing a witness to testify with regard to the hydrological interaction between the Sunmer facility and the Fairfield pumped storage facility.
Applicant agreed.
Tr. 323.
l 11.
Intervenor produced copies of a set of 24 interrogatories and requested that the Board direct Applicant to respond.
Tr. 330-334 The Board per=itted service of those interrogatories at the conference but indicated that it would not rule on thoseinterroga-tories until Applicant had had a chance to object.
Tr. 334-335.
-g_
ORDER For all the foregoing reasons and based upon a consideration of all the catters discussed at the prehearing conference, it is this 30th day of December 1980 ORDERED That the above-recited Board actions shall control the sub-sequent course of the proceeding uni'ss modified for good caus;,
e
- and, That obj ections to the Order may be filed by a party within five (5) days after service of the Order, except that the Staff may file objections within ten (10) days after service FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AhT LICENSING BOARD L Y$Wmn L. L. m-ADMINISTRATIVF., JUDGF.
Attachments l
l l
l i
i i