ML20010J581

Response Opposing Licensee 810918 Proposed Hearing Schedule.Premature to Establish Schedule & Unrealistic Until Issues to Be Adjudicated Established.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20010J581
Person / Time
Site:	Point Beach
Issue date:	09/23/1981
From:	Falk K WISCONSIN'S ENVIRONMENTAL DECADE
To:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
NUDOCS 8110050372
Download: ML20010J581 (4)

Text

.--a m- - %

N.

\.

qm, '

u Q7- ILt , f Ed, c- '

, ~/ i.

WED-09/22/81-P: 5 0 266 NRC . P03 N,

A

. bh UNITED STATES OF At-1 ERICA BEFORE THE NUCLEAR REGULATOPY Coll!!ISSION ,

==-==-= - -- . _ ... _ ... _ .a.:....c QLLC

~

POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1 & 2 DOCKET NOS. SC-266 and 50-301 Lj (}CT Z 1931" OL Amendment -

u.s. "n#x* "'

(Steam Generator Tube Sleeving Program) ( '

,_ p2 INTERVENOR'S RESPONSE TO LICENSEE'S PROPOSED HEARING SCHEDULUA \ '

$$\

Intervenor Wisconsin's Environmental Decade, Inc.(" Decade")

opposes the Licensee's motion captioned " Licensee's Proposed Hearing Schedule", dated September 18, 1981, for the reasons set forth below.

F j.. r s t; , it is wholly premature to establish a hearing schedule in this matter. At this point in time, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Boa r d (" Boa r d") has not yet made a determination on the certain basic pre-hearing issues in this proceeding. For example, at the September 16, 1981 telephonic conference of parties, the Licensee and Staff argued that Intervenor's Contentions 1 and 2 (See Petition of Wisconsin's Environmental Decade, dated July 20, 1981, at p. 3, til and 2) are beyond the scope of the proceeding. The Decade demurred, and the Board Chairman took the question under advisement. ,e Indeed, because of opposition f rom NRC staf f, it has not even been determined by the board whether the Decade will be admitted as a party.

In additien, both the Licensee and NRC staf f dispute whether 8110050372 810923 PDR ADOCK 03000266 -

G PDR i

W m

~

t there is any basis for Decade's contentions 3 through 7 (See Petition of Wisconsin's Environmental Decade, dated July 20, 1981 a t pp. 3 -4, s % 3 -7 ) . The Board has not made any determination on e

this major question. It is unrealistic to establish a schedule for discovery, hearing, etc. if it is unknown as of this date how many and what issues will be adjudicated by the parties. .

Also, the full application in support of the license amendment has not yet been filed, is not expected to be tiled I

until September 25, 1981, and may contain material that warrants the necessity for further pre-hearing actions, such as trade secret limitations and expansion of Decade contentions.

Only after these preliminary matters have been resolved will it be possible to rationally establish a workable schedule.

Second, even if this were the appropriate time to establish ,

some schedule, it is improper to expedite the schedule as the Licensee requests. Steam generator tube degradation and sleeving of intense controversy in this programs have been the subject country sufficient to alert the Licensee of the possible necessity for a hearing. If the Licensee did not file its l

application in time for the normal procedures to run their i due course, then it is not in a position to request an This abbreviated schedule that restricts the rights of others.

is especially the case when the other party has extremely limited financial resources and when shorter ti ne periods of tectively acts to bar meaningf'il public participation.

It should be noted, as well, that the Licensee makes no claim that there is any compelling need to couplete the sleeving program for Point Beach Unit 2 in March 1982, other than the

.4 l

f act that this apparently is the time which has been scheduled for the overhaul. A matter of apparent convenience to the Licensee is not a sufficient grounds to override a matter of meaningful participation for members of the public; this is especially true in a case involving a controversial projoct of the size and nature proposed by the Licensee.

For the foregoing reasons, the Decade respectfully requests that the Licensee's Proposed IIea r ing Schedule be denied and that the question of scheduling await disposition of the outstanding prerequisite preli.minary matters.

DATED at llacison, Wisconsin, this 23nd day of September, 1981.

WISCONSIN' S EtJVIRON!!EtJTAL DECADE, I tJC .

By /> .

'h Th (L c ,

/)Gd[c.< ,

K A T H L E E11 II. FALK Director of Legal Affairs 114 IJorth Carroll Street Suite 208 11adison, Wisconsin 53703 (608) 251-7020 1

i 1

. o

.A l UNITED STATES OF A!! ERICA BEFORE THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COf!!!ISSION POINT BEACil NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1 & 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-266 and.50-301 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

- - - - = - - - - - = = = - - _ , , _ _ _ , _ _ . , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

I hereby certify that copies of Intervenor's Response to Licensee's Hearing Schedule, dated September 23 , 1981, were served this 24 b day of September, 1981, by deposit in the U.S.

It a il , first class, postage prepaid, on:

Peter B. Bloch, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Dr. Hugh C Paxton 1229 - 41 3b Street Los Alamos, New !!exico 87544 Dr. Jerry R. Kline Atcmic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Docketing & Service U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Charles A. Barth, Esq.

Office of the Executive Legal Director U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 ,

Bruce W. Churchill, Esq. I 1800 !! Street N.W. -

Washington, D. C. 20036. I

. / --'

)

{. ( . N

'~ '

PETER' ANDERSON Director of Public Affairs l