ML20010B148
| ML20010B148 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 08/12/1981 |
| From: | Barth C, Johari Moore NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8108140136 | |
| Download: ML20010B148 (4) | |
Text
~.
0 1
d (O
D' l
q UNITED STATES 0. AMERICA p~
c NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/c
{U l 3 Jgg([8 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD "D* '
In the Matter of 1
MI \\g CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING Docket Nos. 50-44 COMPANY, g al.
50-441 (Perry Nuclear Power Plant,
)
Units 1 and 2)
)
NRC STAFF MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION OF, AND RESPONSE T0, LICENSING BOARD SPECIAL PREHEARING CONFERENCE ORDER Introduction The NRC Staff moves the Licensing Board to clarify its special prehearing conferenca order (SPC Order) of July 28, 1981, in regard to the status of Lake County Disaster Services Agency and Lake County Board of Commissioners; to identify which of the admitted contentions belongs to each admitted Intervenor; and to identify which admitted Intervenor shall be responsible for discovery by the Staff for each admitted contention. The Staff also hereby provides the Board with its written discovery plan and submits its position concerning the admissibility of contention 6.
Discussion (1) By Petition dated March 11, 1981, Lake County Board of Commissioners and Lake County Disaster Services Agency petitioned to intervene in this proceeding.
The NRC Staff determined after extensive discussions with their attorney, that both petitioners wanted to be admitted pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 62.715 - the interested state provision -
rather-than as parties pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 92.714. The Staff supported j
hD kDocPo!000kko S
1 0
PDR ff b507
r.
their admission as they requested it.
See Staff answer dated April 7, 1981. The Licensing Board's order dated April 9,1981 apparently (page 8) admitted Lake County Board of Commissioners and Lake County Disaster Services Agency as parties in a paragraph which admitted other parties pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 92.714. On June 9,1981, Lake County Board T
of Commissioners and Lake County Disaster Services agency filed a brief 1
indicating on page 1 their understanding that they were admitted pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 92.715. The Licensing Board's Order of July 28, 1981 on page 2 again lists Lake County Board of Commissioners and Lake County Disaster Services Agency as parties to this proceeding. The Board did not indicate whether Lake County Board of Commissioners and Lake County Disaster Services Agency were admitted as parties under 92.714, or were admitted as participants under the " interested state" provisions of 62.715. The Staff requests that the Licensing Board issue a memorandum clearly delineating whether Lake County Board of Commissioners and Lake County Disaster Services Agency are parties admitted pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 62.714 or participants pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 52.715(c).
(2)
It appears to the Staff from the transcir' of the special prehearing conference and from the use of the term " Sunflower" in the SPC Order that the Licensing Board and all of the parties intended that the Sunflower Alliance, Inc., Northshore Alert, Citizens for Scfe Energy, Evelyn Stebbins, Richard Sering, David Nash, Gail Caduff Nash, Linda Qualls, David Qualls, Wes Gerlosky, Margaret Gerlosky, William Brotzman and Cummings Homsted Park Corp. all be consolidated as one interve,ing party to be referred to as " Sunflower."
In addition the above-mentioned people filed only one petition.
Tha individuals named in that petition
did not file any contentieres. The Board's order does not mention whether or not these individua n are to be consolidated under the name of l
" Sunflower." The Stafh therefore, requests that this Licensing Board clarify it's or(er by fort:lly consolidating these parties.
(3) The Commission's regulations provide that a petitioner for leave to intervene shall be mado a party only upon satisfying the interest and aspects requirements o'f 10 C.F.R. 62.714(a) and the conten-tion requirement of 10 C.F.R. 52.714(b). Since the requirements of both Sections 2.714(a) and 2.714(b) must be satisfied to become a party, the Board always identifies those contentions of a petitioner it has found ad eissible when it grants Intervenor status to the petitioner.
In its SPC Order the Board identified 17 party intervenors.3/ The Board has found seven valid contentions and set them forth on pages 97 and 98 of the SPC Order, to be interpreted in pari materia with the rest of the order. However, the Board has not identified for each listed party intervenor the contention or contentions it found to be valid for that party so as to authorize intervention.
Such identification is necessary for the orderly conduct of future activities in this proceeding. The Staff requests the Board to set forth for each intervenor its admitted contention or contentions.
(4) On pages 94 and 95 of its SPC Order the Board established a scheme for intervenors to submit their discovery request through a Board 1/
Thi s list includes Lake County Board of Commissioners and Lake Coui:ty Disaster Services Agenqy about whose status the Staff has reque:ted clarification. See, paragraph (1), supra.
1 4-
" designated lead intervenor" for purposes of discovery by intervenors.
However,the Board does not discuss whether that lead intervenor would also be responsible for providing responses to discovery by the Staff upontheintervenors.U The Staff requests a designation by the
~
Board of the intervenor or intervenors responsible for responding to discovery by the Staff concerning each contention.
(5) The SPC Order (page 92) requires the service of a " written plan for the order's discovery of information." - As we stated in our brief on Parties and Contentions dated May 27,1981, page 13, the Staff i
1 will timely seek by interrogatories the identity of persons and graphics which support the contentions of intervenors and thereafter seek all bases, facts, and analyses of.intervenors which support their position, either by interrogatories or deposition or both. The results of the aforesaid discovery may lead the Staff to subpoena documents or file requests for admissions.
(6) The SPC Order, page 96, also requested advice as to whether contention 6 (regarding ATWS) should be excluded "because of the effect of a proposed rulemaking on the subject." While it is true that the i
Staff has submitted a proposal f rulemaking relating to the ATWS issue to the Comission (SECY-80-409, dated September 4,1980), the Commission has not acted upon the proposal. Thus, as of the date of this filing, there is not pending a proposed rulemaking on the ATWS issue appropriately noticed in the Federal Register.
In these circumstances, 4
Discovery by intervenors or the applicants upon the Staff is, of 2_/
course, governed by 10 C.F.R. 692.720(h), 2.740(f)(3), 2.740a(j),
1 l
2.741(e) and 2.744.
n
considerations as to admissibility of a contention where the contention involves a matter which is the subject of a proposed rulemaking is not pertinent as to a contention regarding ATWS and should play no part in determir$1ng the admissibility of contention 6.
Conclusion For the reasons set forth above, the Staff moves the Board:
1) to clarify its special prehearing conference order of July 28, 1981,.
in regard to the status of Lake County Disaster Services Auency and Lake County Board of Commissioners; 2) to clarify its order by consolidating all admitted parties which sponsored the petition to intervene filed March 15, 1981 by Sunflower, g a_1_.;
3) to identify which of the admitted contentions belongs to each admitted Intervenor; and 4) to identify which admitted Intervenor shall be responsible for discovery by the Staff for each admitted contention.
Respectfully submitted, N
I Charles A. Barth i
l Counsel for NRC Staff E %
Janice E. Moore Counsel for NRC Staff Dated at Bethesda, Maryland l
this 12th day of August,1981.
l l
e o
' NITED STATES OF A'MERICA J
NUO. EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATsNG
)
Docket Nos. 50-440 COMPANY, et al.
50-441 (Perry Nuclear Fower Plant,
)
Units 1 and 2)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of NRC STAFF MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION OF, AND RESPONSE T0, LICENSING BOARD SPECIAL PREHEARING CONVERENCE ORDER in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class or, as indicated by an asterisk, through deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail this 12th day of August,1981 Peter B. Bloch, Chairman Donald T. Ezzone, Esq.
Administrative Judge Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 105 Main Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Lake County Administration Center Washington, D.C.
20555
- Painesville', Ohio 44077 Dr. Jerry R. Kline Tod J. Kenney Administrative Judge 228 South Coll.ege Apt. A Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Bowling Green, Ohio 43402 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
- Daniel D. Wilt Wegman, Hesiler & Vanderberg Mr. Frederick J. Shon 7301 Chippewa Road, Suite 102 Administrative Judge Brecksville, Ohio 44141 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Jeff Alexander Washington, 0.C.
20555
- 920 Wilmington Ave.
Dayton, Ohio 45420 Jay Silberg, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts, Trowbridge Terry Lodge, Esq..
& Madden Attorney for Intervenors 1800 M Street, N.W.
915 Spitzer Building
. Washington, D.C.
20036 Toledo, OH 43604 1
1
2-Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington,;.D. C.
20555 7
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Bo~ard Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Docketing and Service Section-Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 1
i i
. Charles A. Barth-Counsel for NRC Staff i%
e G
w w
~ ' '
~
-,--v m
--- - - - - - -