ML20034G684

Environmental & Resources Conservation Organization Petition for Reconsideration.* Urges Commission to Reconsider & Amend 930303 Decommissioning Order.W/Certificate of Svc

ML20034G684
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	03/05/1993
From:	Mcgranery J ENVIRONMENTAL & RESOURCES CONSERVATION ORGANIZATION, MCGRANERY, J.P., JR.
To:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
CON-#193-13686 DCOM, NUDOCS 9303110019
Download: ML20034G684 (5)

Text

g i

/;36825 3-9 BEFORE THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION in r i.ii 0 UWi<C COMMISSIONERS:

'50 MT -8 All 34 Ivan Selin, Chairman Kenneth C. Rogers James R.

Curtiss

;,c.

Forrest J. Remick 2,

'J:i E. Gail De Planque

) Docket No. 50-312-DCOM i

In the Matter of

)) (Decommissioning Order)

Sacramento Municipal Utility District )

(Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating

)

Station)

)

)

i ECO'S PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 5 2.771 (1992), Environmental and Resources c-nservation Organization ("ECO") hereby moves the Commission to reconsider Paragraphs 2 and 4 of the Order portion of Sacranento Municipal Utility District (Rancho Seco Nuclear i

Generating Station), CLI-93-3, NRC (March 3, 1993) (Slip Op. at 33).

In Paragraph 2, ECO moves the Commission to delete "14 i

days of service of this order" and substitute "19 days of service upon ECO of all correspondence and other information related to decommissioning funding (including information related to SMUD's financial condition) and decommissioning submitted to the Staff by and/or on behalf of SMUD after July 14, 1992."

ECO also moves the Commission to amend paragraph 4 of its Order (

NRC at

_; Slip Op. at 33) to change "all correspondence" to "all correspondence and other information."

i i

9303110019 930305 PDR ADOCK 05000312 C

PDR 3

3

]['

i l

The reason for the requested amendment to Paragraph 2 of the Commission's Order is to provide ECO adequate time to prepare an amended contention after receipt and review the information to be provided ECO by SMUD pursuant to Paragraph 4 of i

the Commission's Order.

Currently, SMUD's time for providing information pursuant to Paragraph 4 and ECO's time for preparing an amended contention run in parallel and are coterminous.

If the Commission's order is not amended, ECO would not receive service of the SMUD information submitted to the NRC Staff on decommissioning funding and decommissioning until the time for t

submitting ECO's amended contention had expired, or substantially expired.

This would severely and unfairly disadvantage ECO in the preparation in its amended contention.

The reason why ECO seeks to have SMUD submitted information on both the Decommissioning Plan and the Decommissioning Funding Plan to fulfill ECO's responsibility pursuant to Paragraph 2 is that the adequacy of the Decommissioning Funding Plan is intimately i

l related to developments / changes in the scope, content, and scheduling of the Decommissioning Plan itself.M If By the attached letter, SMUD's counsel has suggested that there is no need to change Paragraph 2 because "the District's Nuclear Licensing staff examined [the] documentation [which will be responsive to Paragraph 4 of the Cormission's Order) and j

advised [ counsel] that none of it relates to the decommissioning funding plan."

Without addressing the reliability of such a hasty review of nine months of documentation, ECO has explained in the text of this petition why ECO's responsibilities pursuant Paragraph 2 of the Order are dependent not only on financial information but also on changes to the Decommissioning Plan which may change and invalidate premises of the Decommissioning Funding Plan previously proffered.

f l

The reason ECO seeks an amendment of Paragraph 4 of !he Commission's Order to expand " correspondence" to " correspondence i

and other information" is that applicants routinely provide the Staff with information relevant to applications other than by

" correspondence" (for example, in face-to-face meetings).

Conclusion Wherefore, ECO respectfully urges the Commission to i

reconsider and amend the above-referenced Order for good cause as shown above.

Respectfully submitted,

,o a

0

/

I'

< 't L e

March 5, 1993 gases P. McGranen /sr.

Suite 500 i

1255 Twenty-Third St.,

N.W.

Washington, D.C.

20037 (202) 857-2929 Counsel for Environmental and Resources Conservation Organization-i l

a i

SHAw, PITTMAN. PoTTs & TROWBRIDGE

.~........m...........

e 1300av sta tti, e. w

....'.s t s 'c. s. c enAss.esuctDas. O C 20037 w*.,=.g.

+

a.........,

. e.....

s..,

u,...I.,

""*;;,:? '. !"'

,, ' ;t" :...

v owas a s ste..:

March 5, 1993 BY TELEcopY James p. McGranery, Jr., E.sq.

1255 23rd Street, N.W., Suite 750 Washington, D.C.

20037 In the Matter of SACRAMENTO MINICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT (Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station)

Doctet No. 50-312-DCOM

Dear Jin:

The District is ccapiling documentation in response to para-graph 4 cf CLI-93-3, the Cotesission's Memorandum and order of March 3, 1993.

^

At ny request following our telephone conversation yester-day, the District's Nuclear Licensing staff examined that docu-nentation and advised te that none of it relates to the decommis-sioning funding plan.

Consequently, there in fact is no schedular inconsistency between paragraphs 2 and 4 pf CLI-93-3, and no need for you to seek an extension of the schbdule established by the Cor. mission in order paragraph 2.

Sincerely yours,

-- -/~

Thomas A. Baxter cc:

Service List attached

1 BEFORE THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS:

Ivan Selin, Chairman

, v i...

Aw4 Kenneth C. Rogers James R. Curtiss Forrest J. Remick 33 ' @E ~8 NI N 4 E. Gail De Planque

) Docket No. 50-312-DCOMgg3 m.

In the Matter of

)

7eMi ; %

i mr i

) (Decommissioning Order)>

Sacramento Municipal Utility District )

(Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating

)

Station)

)

)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that one copy of Environmental and Resources Conservation Organization's Petition for Reconsideration Consented Motion for Change of Venue of the Pr.? hearing Conference is being served upon the following by Telecopy and/or by first-class mail, postage prepaid (as ind."sced below) on this 5th day of March, 1993:

t

.i Office of Commission Appellate Administrative Judge Adjudication Charles Bechhoefer, Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Atomic Safety and Licensing Commission Board Washington, D.C.

20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory (by mail)

Commission Washington, D.C.

20555 (by mail)

Administrative Judge Administrative Judge Richard F. Cole Thomas D. Murphy Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing l

Board Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C.

20555 Washington, D.C.

20555 (by mail)

(by mail)

Charles A. Barth, Esq.

Thomas A.

Baxter, Esq.

Office of the General Counsel David R. Lewis, Esq.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Shaw, Pittman, Potts &

Commission Trowbrige Washington, D.C.

20555 2300 N Street, N.W.

l (by telecopy and mail)

Washington, D.C.

20037 (by telecopy and mail)

/"

-1)

))

D A ]l N1 a

puesP.McGranery/jof.

,