ML20042C565

Motion for Deferral of Proposed Issuance of Notice of Hearing Date,Pending Investigation & Clarification of Recent NRC Disclosures Re Contract for Reactor Cooling Water

ML20042C565
Person / Time
Site:	Palo Verde
Issue date:	03/22/1982
From:	Hourihan P HOURIHAN, P.
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
NUDOCS 8203310529
Download: ML20042C565 (3)

Text

.' *% -

/ C, C :i 9 9_..w

\

-. .-. .,. 3 .e. ,. 1 . -sm g .e . r- -. e. a c. em7 s .7, _.

v . . 7 - g5 n v e- .mi

c. [,,, o. , . , ,

1w v 1.. 3. e I w a.11 V . ..f

.. m,,*-.-7....%.V.

v b .a . .

f >

t r

-c -a c.'. v.,r _~,, ... . , , - , , . . , . , , ,

.._v.1s 4 . s . a _ _,

.w, L1v4.Q1au L '? 3-

- )

. Aw4.s o n.a ., A

• ,, e ,. o .c .

)

.s.._t.,

..3. _yv s:* _,u. - n, ,.-, . . :.r.s

- -' - vnnu *.,._ ) '

s" o c .r. e ~. v.s o g . 5 m",

.. ,2 0 .*, o so PAX'J, et 21. , Palo 'lerde 5T:I

) 50-529 Ruclear Generating 3tation, 5 .'s

v. ..:m. ,- , .o , s.a .,, , .

-. ) 50-5' ,p s \

S ef

/

OJ S

-1 . ., ..- . . /~.'s ,C .. ,. . e -a . .C .n _ c, . . +- yn - e, ,

-t $ F.EW, .. an 4 .,0 1..; : e. 7_ o . .+ 3.e a- -u . a v _, v. .v 1 ~ 0.- u_ ~ __

. _ .q. _ .; r_. .

p p..- ao Q \gSV ~.C -

'atricia ',ee Hourihan (hereinafter referred to as M[-en d" ,77 c, 1~ n "Intervenor") =cves for an. c: der deferring the proposed ,g\

issuance of the notice of hearing date pending investigation and clarification of recent dicciosures made by the Staff cf the Nuclear 3egulatory Commission (Staff) . These discicsures concern matters which must be understood and dealt with prier A,

.t .,a .- a. ,-.,,,. C G oa a.,,4 o,p,e.,

ow

- w,*:

.e 1.t CO 4c e. 1..

m. e ._ , 4 A.c.w we s; .,,: . .: Ot.

a , , , ,

.s

., m A..k.e a Aa e c.. a.e

• t

.. Iv.o. c o r. "a c ^w u..da--' . * . . _

• e* .b. F.-.e

.3.0

' . ~_..'.,

- 2'.=. ,

4 to obtain reactor cocling water is being renegotiate $; the . . -

u J

extentoftheApplicant'scontractrightsfiith.theCh.tyof )..

t Phoeni:t and other cities has not yet been determined. This I problem is disclosed in the 3taff letter to the Ator.ic Safety i E

and ,.,icensing Board (the 3oard) dated :.: arch .15,1932, and I.J

._ ~

the letter from the Arizona :.*unicipal '.!ater Users' Associ-ation to the Chairman of the Board dated March 16, 1982. .

1

2. The validity of the Acolichh._t.'s contract --  :

g I

8203310529 820322 hh <

PDR ADOCK 05000528 fg h O PDR o

.-m for the cooling water is the subject of litigation in the United States Distric- Ocurt for the District of Oclumbia, case no. 32-0145 This fact was disclosed to the 3 card by

' the Staff's letter dated Zarch 15, 1982. These recent problems come as a surprise to the Intervenor. Of particular concern is the allegations in the coop.'aint in case no.

32-O'.45 that the water for cooling the ceactors is subject to the reclamation laws and that responsible officials of the United States consider the contract of the sale of this water to the Applicant to be illegal. I:

These are not minor or periphery problems. They relate j directly to the question of whether there is an assurance of adequate cooling water for normal and emergency oper-ational requirements.

The lateness in considering this problem results from the Applicant's lack of candor. Apparently these are old 15 sues. In a Phoenix report of the new Jistrict of Columbia ,

suit which appeared in the Mesa Iribune on January '.9,1932, a lawyer for the Interior Department is quoted as saying.

"this is something that has been kicking around the Interior' Jepartment."

The Interver.or does not seek any unreasonable delay.

Frior consider 2 tion of this critical issue does, hcwever, require the Applicant to come clean; that the Staff send inquiries to the Interior Department regarding the terits of the clain that the cooling water contract ic illegal; that the 2taff give testimony.

Is p -- _

4

, .~ The Intervenor will inmediately seek to discover the truth. Intervenor is now preparing to pursue Discovery purcuant to sections 2 740 - 2 741 to assure that the Board is properly informed.

There is another important basis for deferring the licensing hearing. Section 50 57 of the regulations requires that before a license can be issued there must be a finding that " Construction of the facility has been substantially completed." tio determination can properl/ be made at this time that all three units have been properly constructed because they have all not been "substantially" constructed.

e.. , , ,.  : u. ..: n.o.. e t. w _. ec e .ua 2 .. o _, ....-. a..., e 4 y . .e. ,

. a o p e c . _ .. , c_ ..._o s 3y l tICNw ok.u- Hm%A ratricia ;ee :-:ourihan Intervenor S_ ,r.

1, . n eo. -ot

, , , . .w;. ~.

.. . e e +,,

a ,.r.c e e nix , c. r. :ona

. e .v ,v

- ,,m 4

y.

i,. d *

%-