ML20052G165
| ML20052G165 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Skagit |
| Issue date: | 05/12/1982 |
| From: | Black R NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Hooper F, Linenberger G, Wolf J Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8205140367 | |
| Download: ML20052G165 (2) | |
Text
.
May 12,1982 John F. Wolf, Esq., Chairman Mr. Gustave'A. Linenberger-Administrative Judge Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Board Panel 3409 Sheperd Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chevy Chase, MD 20015 Washington, D.C.
20555 DISTRIBUTION Dr. Frank F. Hooper Black Administrative Judge Repka Atomic Safety and Licensing 4
Dewey Board Panel Reis School of Natural Resources
- /
liECE;YED C unningham/'1urray University of Michigan Christenbury/Scinto Ann Arbor, MI 48190
'05 W
.l 3 IO82 h.~1
- ~
FF (2)
NRC Docket File:PDR/LPDR E.Adensam (41 6)
In the Matter of 6
g M. Mallory (116)
PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, ET AL.
6 (Skagit/Hanford Nuclear Power Project, Units f and 2) 4 d'
Docket Nos. STN 50-522 and STN 50-523
Dear Administrative Judges:
At the special prehearing conference on May 5,1982, Judge Wolf invited the parties to submit additional comments on how this case should proceed given the uncertainty surrounding the need for power issue and other related matters (Tr. 27-29). Based on a letter from F. Theodore Thomsen to Judge John F. Wolf, dated April 26, 1982, it is apparent that the Applicants wish to postpone all evidentiary hearings on environmental matters until the Spring of 1983 when the regional need for power plan becomes available.
This desire was reiterated by Mr. Thomsen at the special prehearing con-ference (Tr. 4-7). Although there is some uncertainty surrounding the viability of this project with respect to need for power and a related question concerning the interrelationship between the Skagit/Hanford units and the cancelled or deferred WPPSS nuclear projects, the Applicants maintain prehearing and other licensing activities should proceed in a normal fashion.
The NRC Staff has also recognized the uncertainty of this project. At the special prehearing conference, the Staff outlined what it considered to be a fair and reasonable schedule in light of these uncertainties (Tr.19-24).
Simply stated, we believe the proceeding should continue on a step-by-step hD7 9205140367 820512 DR ADOCK 05000
/f D
-2_
basis. -The first step would be to frame contentions that would ultimately be admitted by the Board as issues in controversy. As currently scheduled, the Coalition for Safe Power and the National Wildlife Federation / Oregon Environmental Council would submit revised contentions on May 26, 1982.
Applicant and Staff would submit responses to the revised contentions on June 2,1982 (Tr. 73_74). Thereafter, it is contemplated that the Board would consider the contentions and responses and submit a prehearing conference order setting forth the admitted contentions.
The second step involved in prehearing activities would be the scheduling of discovery. This schedule would be totally dependent on'the scope of the admitted contentions but invariably should last 11 to 2 months. After discovery is completed, motions for summary disposition would be filed and ruled on by the Board.
The last step after determining what issues survive _ discovery would be to establish a hearing schedule. The Staff contemplates that discovery and rulings on summary disposition motions could be completed around November 1982. Accordingly, a hearing schedule could be established by that' time with testimony to be prefiled by approximately January 1983, and hearings to commence by February 1983. Of course, these schedules are all tentative and could be affected by future developments.
The Staff believes that the above tentative schedule is fair and reasonable to all parties under the circumstances. Although the hearing may comence by February 1983, it could be subject to changes based upon discussions and negotiations between the parties, the Board, and the State of Washington.
The schedule also recognizes that the litigation of the issue of need for power would await the publication of the final regional plan. -In addition, this schedule contemplates that Staff reviews of environmental and safety-issues will continue and the FES and the final supplement to the SER will be issued when appropriate.
Sincerely, Richard L. Black Counsel for NRC Staff l
cc:
Kevin M. Ryan, Esq.
Warren Hastings, Esq.
fir. Lloyd K. 11arbet Robert Lowenstein, Esq.
Mr. Nicholas D. Lewis, F. Theodore Thomsen, Esq.
i Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Appeal Board Coalition for Safe Power James W. Durham, Esq.
Docketing and Service'Section Richard D. Bach, Esq.
Terence L. Thatcher Raloh Cavananh, Eso.
{ OFC
- 0 ELD
_____:____% y :0 ELD L_
_ _ _ _ _ : _ _ _ _ _ _f NAME :RBlack/dkw :EReis7 l _____:____________:_______,._______________:____________:____________:____________:___________
l DATE :05/l'E 82
- 05/(;/85
/
l
_