ML20028B923
| ML20028B923 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 12/03/1982 |
| From: | Wolfe S Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OLA-1, ISSUANCES-OLA-2, NUDOCS 8212070236 | |
| Download: ML20028B923 (4) | |
Text
.
DOCHETED L'WC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges:
{gg,j0pg,fg 3
Sheldon J. Wolfe, Chairman DRANCH Dr. Jerry R. Kline Dr. George A. Ferguson SERVED DEC 61982
)
Docket Nos. 50-338 OLA-1 In the Matter of
)
yn 110 OLA-1
)
50-338 OLA-2 ~
VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY
)
50-339 OLA-2
)
(North Anna Power Staticn,
)
' December 3, 1982 Units 1 & 2)
MEMORANDUM (Memorializing Conference Call)
On December 2,1982, the Board initiated a conference call which is memorialized herein.1/ Participants were:
Judges Ferguson, Kline, and Wolfe; Michael Maupin, Esq. for the Applicant; James Dougherty, Esq. for Concerned Citizens of Louisa County; J. Marshall Coleman, Esq. for the County and the Board of Supervisors of Louisa County, Virginia; Daniel Swanson, Esq. for the NRC Staff.
The Chairman advised that the Board soon would issue and publish Notices of Hearing in each of the two cases, which, among other things, would schedule a joint special prehearing conference, 1/ Citations have been added to assist counsel.
8212070236 821203
{DRADOOK05000
4 and would state that the Board would decide whether to consolidate the two cases after the conference.
Counsel had no objection to scheduling the joint 2.751a special prehearing conference to begin at 10:00 a.m.
in the NRC Public Hearing Room, Bethesda, Maryland.
Said Notices will provide for the taking of limited appearance statements at later dates.
In order that the Board would have adequate time within which to review proposed contentions and the Applicant's and Staff's responses, the Chairman stated that, pursuant to 5 2.711, the time for filing of contentions would be extended to thirty days before the commencement of the 2.751a conference, Further, Applicant and Staff would have ten days after service of the proposed contentions within which to '
respond.
In response to the Chairman's inquiry concerning the scheduling of the date for the special prehearing conference, counsel respectively responded as follows:
(1) Mr. Swanson stated that the Staff's environmental and safety documents would not be issued until late June, 1983, at the latest.
He suggested that contentions should be filed by January 14 and : hat the 5 2.751a conference be held on February 15, 1983.
(2)
Mr. Coleman advised that he intended to file a motion to stay these proceedings until the " waste confidence" rule-making has been completed.
He added that his firm has been very busy in the District Court defending the Board of Supervisors against a suit brought by VEPC0 challenging an ordinance precluding the shipment of spent fuel into Louisa County.
Mr. Coleman further stated that he needs l
more time to secure consultants to assist in the amending of currently
i e proposed contentions and to assist in the drafting of auditional contentions. Messrs. Coleman and Dougherty suggested that contentions be filed on April 15. 1983, with the special prehearing conference to follow.
(3) Mr. Maupin objected to Messrs. Coleman's and Dougherty's suggestions, but he and Mr. Swanson then suggested that contentions be filed by February 1, 1983, with the prehearing conference to follow in thirty days.
The Chairman stated that the Board is determined to proceed in an, expeditious but fair manner, and that, prior to the issuance of the Staf t's safety and environmental documents in June 1983, as much
" spadework" as possible will be accomplished in a timely manner'. The Chairman also stated that other litigation pending before the District Court will not be permitted to delay the instant proceedings and observed that, at most, the District Court litigation only involved the OLA-1 requested amendments.
Further, Judge Wolfe informally indicated that, in light of the Commission's recent policy statement,2/
the Board would probably deny any motion to stay relying upon the argument that " waste confidence" rulemaking has not been completed, but that such a motion could be filed.
The Chairman stated that the petitions of the County of Louisa in the two cases had already proposed some contentions, which past effort reduced the pressure and/or hardship upon Mr. Coleman.
Judge Wolfe also advised that, pursuant 2] 47 Fed. Reg. 50,591, 50,592 (1982).
l
('
o to 2.714(a)(3), the petitioners must show good cause and meet the four other factors set forth in 2.714(a)(1) if they desire to amend contentions out-of-time; however, where relevant documents of the Staff or Applicant were non-existent or were publicly unavailable, that f actor is controlling and cannot be overridden by the five factors in 2.714(a).
Duke Power Co., et.al. (Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2), ALA8-687 (Memorandum and Order, August 19,1982).
Because counsel could not agree, the Chairman ruled that each Notice of Hearing would schedule the 2.751a special prehearing conference for February 16, 1983 and would provide that amended contentions and/or a supplemental list of contentions must be filed by no 1ater than January 17, 1983.
Before ending the conference call, Judge Wolfe suggested that counsel confer informally prior to and subsequent to the submission of contentions.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD M
Sheldon
- s. $ fe, Chatman ADMINISTRATIYi_ JUDGE Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 3rd day of December, 1982.
.