ML20052B617

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Update to 770316 Responses to NRDC & Sierra Club 770223 Fourteenth Set of Interrogatories.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML20052B617
Person / Time
Site: Clinch River
Issue date: 04/29/1982
From: Longenecker J
JOINT APPLICANTS - CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR
To:
National Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club
References
NUDOCS 8205030377
Download: ML20052B617 (10)
v • d • e


Text

e

,7 . 4/29/82

~

D"O'UJD l

~- .,

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA m s

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION p REcggygg D W8 198h 7'8

$ D$2/ll?'.[

)

In the Matter of )

)

)

4 9 \ gf UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY PROJECT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION ) Docket No. 50-537 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY ) -

)

(Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant))

)

APPLICANTS' UPDATED RESPONSE TO NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC.

AND THE SIERRA CLUB FOURTEENTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO APPLICANTS i Pursuant to 10 CFR S 2.740b, and in accordance I with the Board's Prehearing Conference Order of February 11, 1982, the United States Department of Energy, Project Management Corporation, and the Tennessee Valley Authority (the Applicants) hereby file their updated responses to the Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. and the Sierra Club Fourteenth Set of Interrogatories to the Applicants, dated February 23, 1977. /

  • / Applicants previously responded to these interroga-tories on March 16, 1977. Applicants have prepared these updated responses to establish a current base of information for the CRBRP for the purpose of expediting these proceedings. Accordingly, in providing these Continued 8205030377 05@8'

r l

Answers to General Questions (a) - (f)  !

(a) Provide the direct answer to the question.

ANSWER: See the direct answers below under heading " ANSWER".

(b) Identify all documents and studies, and the particular parts thereof, relied upon by Applicants, now or in the past, which serve as the basis for the answer. In lieu thereof, at Applicants ' option, a copy of such document and study may be attached to the answer.

ANSWER: See the direct answers below under heading " DOCUMENTS".

(c) Identify principal documents and studies, and the particular parts thereof, specifically examined but not cited in (b) . In lieu thereof, at Applicants' option, a copy of responses, Applicants do not concede that the informa-tion contained therein admissible in or necessary to a decision in the LWA proceeding. Applicants have not furnished copies of or made available for inspection and copying those documents referenced in this response which were previously referenced and made available pursuant to the Applicants' previous responses. Docu-ments referenced for the first time in this update response will be made available upon reques t. General questions and responses follow the protocol agreed upon by the parties and attached to Mr. Greenberg's March 8, 1982 letter to Counsel for PMC.

each such document and study may be attached to the answer.

ANSWER: Unless otherwise indicated below in regard to the answer under the heading

" DOCUMENTS"; none.

(d) Identify by name, title and affiliation the primary Applicant employee (s) or consult-ant (s) who provided the answer to the question.

ANSWER: See the attached affidavits.

(e) Explain whether Applicants are presently engaged in or intend to engage in any further, ongoing research program which may affect Applicants' answer. This answer need be provided only in cases where Applicants intend to rely upon ongoing research not included in Section 1.5 of the PSAR at the LWA or construction permit hearing on the CRBR. Failure to provide such an answer means that Applicants do not intend to rely upon the existence of any such research at the LWA or construction permit hearing on the CRBR.

ANSWER: If not in Section 1.5 of the PSAR and the direct answer below; none.

'~

', \; .

s -

.c - ,

~ '

t, 2~

'3_q (f) Identify the expert (s) ifsany, which Appli- ,C cants intend to have testify on the subject _ .

matter questioned, and state the qualifica- _' s.

tions of each such expert.

This answer may

. , s , _

be provided for each separate question or for' s

,, +

a group of related questions. This answer 2 , ,~

need not be provided until Applicants have in fact identified the expert (s) in question or ,

determined that no expert will testify, as u"- _

long as such answer provides reasonable, notice to Intervenors, g ANSWER: Applicants have not yet identified ther -

N s s expert (s) in question. ,

s i-Interrogatory. ,

b. A
1. Describe in detail the impact on continuation of CRBR, includingimpactonorderingequipmentandsuppifes and meeting current obligations, if the proposed budget for FY 1978 announced on February 22, 1977 is adopted. Spbh'if.1-cally identify what items for the CRBR originally planned for FY 78 under the Ford Administration would not now be ,,

funded.

' ~ i Answer.

The proposed budget for FY 1983 announced in f '; - "

February 1982 provides for continuation of the CRBR, includ; '\ ,s *

,& *s.

ing the ordering of equipment and supplies and meeting  ; -

f3;

, 1. 7 .o

3 g

s

_,g* .

a , r; ,

4  % ,

w .c -. r ..

r

t. ~ p.\ - , . .

q -- s i - ,

L (k. :..

2

\' s- j. -

i'i current obligatipqs as originally planned under the Reagan '

2 -

N -

Administration. y - ,-

s (N., s e

x y, .. -

a g s , t ,..-

,_'t ' -

Interrogac m . ,

i

\

. . . .; i V ,

t ' 2. s ~Descr.ibe how the. proposed FY 78 budget would, c- -  :,-  % -

~.

i adopted, imppcCugon the 3f [l'ity of the CRBR to meet its w- ,s w.

obj ective, partiettrarly ,the, titning of the CRBR in light of s s the objective o'f 13863 as the date.on which three years of operation wquid,.,be~coupleted.

A. .C i x g ., ,,,

' { h .; - \;~

Answer.

~

\.

.I

~

Th proposeciit 1983 budget, if adopted, would

._ s

, permit the con \ duct of activitie's necessary to advance the

- t- u.

w,o project con,sistent with current objectives.

s - -

There is no

- ~

.~

current oli, jec&y\ ,

tid --to complete 3 years of operation by 1986.

r

'ig

)' y. 3 s.-

so hg Interrogatory .~

s- y..

3. Dhseribe in detail h'ow the comparison of site alternativesfErtheCRBR,particularlytheHanfordand

. w. y Idaho sites would r be impactid by the changes identified in your answers to ss gites.t.i.ons '1 and 2.- Focus on comparative

g. ._m.

costs and camparativg,ytiming?for the .-

s alternatives.

, g ,

4 s

4 Answer. s s g -

m

(

3. _

The A,opticants' comparison of site alterna-s i ,. m ,

g k -

3 t'ives' fFr y t.ha;GR3RP,

,g ,

particularly the'Hcnf,o. es rd and Idaho

( , ..

s s

~[ sites,<would ~not be impa'cted by the answers provided to

.g ,

g. -,

3 n - N.

, ,s ,k

'{ f h- g;

,4 i h ,+

a 1

> t..e

\..r.

+

y I

,. .<Q.- ,

, .,_ s. ;  %

1  %

v

g. .

2

-- 1, -. . s. .

) k <'

\

% Questions.I and 2 above. The costs and timing associated  !

a.

l ->Y with the alternative sites would not be changed 4s a result  ;

'I of the answers to 1 and 2 above. l t

t

/ I

  • 1 4 . [

4  !

_f i

s 1

I <

s i% ?r -

1- )-

i 1

a t

s t

^

l 1

g .. I i'

t L

I.

-' . }

ij~.  % j ' r- . ,

f [. q .

'. % g *

g. <

l' f' , : .s, . * . .,s- . ll M

, _ . . . . , . . _ ~ _ _ _ _ . . , _ . , _ , _ , - , , ._ . , - . , _ , , _ _ _ . _ - _ , , , , . . ... _. ,.. _ . . _ - -

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the matter of ,)

Department of Energy ,)

DOCKET NO. 50-537 PROJECT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION and,)

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY ,)

AFFIDAVIT OF John R. Longenecker, bei.7g duly sworn, deposes and says O

as follows:

1. That he is employed as Manager, Licensing and Environmental Coordination, Office of Nuclear Energy, U.S. Department of Energy, and that he is duly authorized to update the replies to Items 6 and 8 in the first set, items V.9 and V.10 in the tenth set and items 1, 2, and 3 in the fourteenth set of interrogatories propounded by the Natural Resources Defense Council, et. al.
2. That the above-mentioned and attached answers are true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief.

. @d V f Signagre SUBSCRIBED and SWORN to before me this /? day of $ v4*, C , 1982.

.. .~ .

- / . { ~;. i ; i , I,.. ( ', l, ,,, ). i ; j Notary /Public ,J' My Commission expires ,

19_.

l PA 7..'t .

t:or,w y .. . - .c. e ..,,....-..'s v., g L

1.' ;  ;'- 7,'

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

)

In the Matter of )

)

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY )

)

PROJECT MMIAGE. WNT CORPORATION ) Docket No. 50-537

)

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY )

)

(Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant) )

)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Service has been effected on this date by personal delivery or first-class mail to the following:

  • Marshall E. Miller, Esquire Chairman Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20545 Dr. Cadet H. Hand, Jr.

Director Bodega Marine Laboratory University of California P. O. Box 247 Bodega Bay, California 94923

  • Mr. Gustave A. Linenberger Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20545 ,
  • Daniel Swanson, Esquire
  • Stuart Treby, Esquire a

Office of Executive Legal Director U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20545 (2 copies)

-2_

  • Atomic Safety & Licensing Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20545
  • Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Com=ission Washington, D. C. 20545
  • Docketing & Service Section Office of the Secretary 4

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Com=ission Washington, D. C. 20545 (3 copies)

William M. Leech, Jr., Attorney General William B. Hubbard, Chief Deputy Attorney General Lee Breckenridge, Assistant Attorney General State of Tennessee Office of the Attorney General 450 James Robertson Parkway Nashville, Tennessee 37219 Oak Ridge Public Library Civic Center Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37820 Herbert S. Sanger, Jr., Esquire Lewis E. Wallace, Esquire W. Walter LaRoche, Esquire James F. Burger, Esquire Edward J. Vigluicci, Esquire Office of the General Counsel Tennessee Valley Authority 400 Commerce Avenue Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 (2 copies)

Mr. Joe H. Walker 401 Roane Street Harriman, Tennessee 37748 Ellyn R. Weiss Harmon & Weiss 1725 Eye Street, N. W., Suite 506 Washington, D. C. 20006 l

l 1

3-Lawson McGhee Public Library 500 West Church Street

. Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 William E. Lantrip, Esq.

Attorney for the City of Oak Ridge Municipal Building P. O. Box 1 Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Leon Silverstrom, Esq.

Warren E. Bergholz, Jr., Esq.

U. S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Ave., S. W.

Room 6-B-256, Forrestal Building Washington, D. C. 20585 (2 copies)

    • Eldon V. C. Greenberg Tuttle & Taylor 1901 L Street, N. W., Suite 805 Washington, D. C. 20036

, Commissionar James Cotham Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development Andrew Jackson Building, Suito 1007 Nashville, Tennessee 37219 A

Geor M . Edg F Attorney for Proj ect Management Corporation DATED: April 29, 1982

  • / Denotes hand delivery to 1717 "H" Street, N.W., Washington, D. C.
    • / Denotes hand delivery to indicated address.

L t

,- - n -_.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20052B617&oldid=2547713"