ML20041F658

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Response Opposing Chapel Hill Anti-Nuclear Group Effort 820305 Motion for Extension of Time to File Contentions & for Svc of FSAR & Environ Rept.Contention Should Be Formulated Prior to Discovery.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20041F658
Person / Time
Site: Harris  Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 03/15/1982
From: Baxter T
CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO., SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE
To:
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8203170274
Download: ML20041F658 (4)


Text

March 15, 1982

.e T

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CQ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING OpRD16 NOG 2 In the Matter of

)

)

CAROLINA PO;iER & LIGHT COMPANY

) Docket Nos. 50-400 OL AND NORTH CAROLINA MUNICIPAL

)

50-40 POWER AGENCY NO. 3

)

)

O 4

(Shearon Harris Nuclear Power

)

Plant, Units 1 and 2)

)

ECS,gg )

3

"*mus,iIf,ay 7:npM ILLE*

APPLICANTS' RESPONSE TO MOTION BY CHAPE ANTI-NUCLEAR GROUP EFFORT FOR EXTENSION W TIME re QI S

/

By petition dated February 17, 1982, Chapel 111-1 i-Nuclear Group Effort (CHANGE) petitioned for leave to intervene in the above captioned proceeding.

By letter datcd February 25,' 1982, CHANGE amended its petition to intervene and requested that a copy of the Final Eafety Analysis Report (FSAR) and the Environmenta.1 Report (ER) be forwarded to CHANGE as soon as possible.

By motion dated March 5, 1982, CHANGE petitioned the Board that copies of the FSAR and ER be delivered to CHANGE and that it be allowed a minimum of thirty days following receipt to prepare and submit its conten-tions.

In a memorandum submitted in support of its Motion for Extension of Time, CHANGE argues hardship in being required to review the FSAR and ER at the Wake County Public Library and that "due process of law" requires that it be afforded copies of such documents.

Applicants oppose CHANGE's Motion.

The FSAR and ER are available for CHANGE to inspect at the Wake County Public Library, 7203170274 gggggg j

gDRADOCK 05000400 PDR

O

's

, 1/

104 Fayetteville Street, Raleigh, North Caro 3.ina.~

While CHANGE has such materials available to it to assist in formulating its contentions, they should not be necessary.

Contentions in an NRC proceeding are similar to pleadings in civil cases and are to be formulated prior to an opportunity for discovery of Applicants' documents.

Wisconsin Electric Power Company, et al.

(Koshkonong Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2), CLI-74-45, 8 AEC 928 (1974); BPI v.

Atomic Energy Commission, 502 F.2d 424, 428 (D.C. Cir. 1974).

As such, the Commission's rules to not permit discovery until after the issues in controversy are established.

See 10 C.F.R. S 2.740(b)

(1) and Part 2, App. A, S IV(a).

The intervenor's role is not to duplicate the review function of the NRC Staff, but rather to present its case regarding those matters which may affect its interest.

Any notion of due process does not require discovery as a predicate for a party's determining what matters may affect its interest.

Thus, 1/

We note that the Commission's regulations only require that such documents be available for inspection and copying at the Public Documents Room in Washington, D.C.

10 C.F.R.

SS 2.790 and 9.7; Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station), ALAB-179, 7 AEC, 184 (1974).

As a matter of convenience they have bee'n made available at the othcr location as well.

1

3-the Commission's rules do not contepplate, at.this stage of the proceeding, providing copics of the FSAR or ER to a petitioner for leave to intervene.

CHANGE's Motion should be denied.

Respectfully submitted, SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE

. George F. Trowbridge, P.C.

Thomas A. Baxter, P.C.

John H. O'Neill, Jr.

Counsel for Applicants 1800 MsStreet, N.W.

Washington, D.C.

20036 (202) 822-1000 Dated:

March 15,.1982 i

y l

r s

t

)

1 4

)

(

9 I

3r -., -

y

e UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of

)

)

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY

)

Docket Nos. 50-400 GL AND NORTH CAROLINA MUNICIPAL

)

50-401 OL POWER AGENCY NO. 3

)

)

(Shearon Harris Nuclear Power

)

Plant, Units 1 and 2)

)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I-hereby certify that copies of " Applicants' Response to Motion by Chapel Hill Anti-Nuclear Group Effort for Extension of Time," dated March 15, 1982, were served upon the following by deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, this 15th day of. March, 1982.

r l

James L. Kelley, Esq., Chairman Mr. Daniel F. Read, President Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Chapel Hill Anti-Nuclear Group U.S. Nuclear Regulatory. Commission Effort Washington, D.C.

20555 P. O. Box.524 Chapel Hill, N.C.

27514 Mr. Glenn O.. Bright Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Docketing and Service Section (3)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the Secretary Washington, D.C.

20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Wa.-hington, D.C.

20555 Dr. James H. Calptenter Atomic Safety.and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Panel Washington, D.C.

20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555 Charles A.;Barth, Esq.

Stuart A.' Treby, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Marjorie Rothschild, Esq.

Board Panel Office of Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555 Washington, D.C.

,20555

/

\\

{

}

s

/ 2().

J,ohh H. O'Neill, Jr.

('

)

5