ML20076C980

Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 9(g) Re Emergency Plans.No Genuine Issue of Matl Fact Exists

ML20076C980
Person / Time
Site:	Clinch River
Issue date:	05/19/1983
From:	Edgar G, Luck W ENERGY, DEPT. OF, PROJECT MANAGEMENT CORP.
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML20076C989	List: ML20076C980 ML20076D019
References
NUDOCS 8305200636
Download: ML20076C980 (4)

Text

5/19/63 L

DCLKETED

' UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION '83 MY 19 P2:12 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )

)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ) Docket No. 50-537 PROJECT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION )

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY )

)

(Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant) )

APPLICANTS' MOTION FOR

SUMMARY

DISPOSITION ON INTERVENORS' CONTENTION 9(g)

Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 52.749, the United States Department of Energy and Project Management Corporation, for themselves and for the Tennessee Valley Authority (the Applicants), hereby file this Motion for Summary Disposition on Intervenors' Contention 9(g). */ In support of this motion, Applicants show the following:

1. Intervenors' Contention 9(g) alleges the following:

Neither Applicants nor Staff have demonstrated that Applicants' plans for coping with emergencies are ade-quate to meet NRC requirements.

(g) Applicants and Staff have failed to provide adequate assurance that the proposed emergency plans will meet the requirements and stan-dards of 10 CFR 50.47(b).

• / Applicants understand that pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 52.749(a) any other party may serve an answer supporting or opposing this motion within twenty days after service of the motion.

8305200636 B30519 PDR ADOCK 05000537 bD]

2 L

's

2. Intervenors admit that Contention 9(g) is f nothing more than a summary statement which raises no sub-stantive issues. In the April 22, 1983 Response of Inter-  !

venors to NRC Staff First Set of Construction Permit Inter-rogatories and Requests for Admissions to Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. and the Sierra Club Concerning Conten-tion 9 (Emergency Preparedness), Intervenora made the following response:

Interrogatory 9-31(a) State with particularity each item of Applicants' emergency plans which NRDC contends fails to provide adequate assurance that 10 C.F.R. 550.47(b) will be met.

(b) For each item identified in NRDC's answer to Interrogatory 9-31(a), identify the planning standards of 10 C.F.R. 50.47(b)

( that NRDC contends the item does not satisfy.

Response

9-31 Contention 9(g) is a summary statement which tracks the language in the first full paragraph of 10 CFR 50 Appendix E.II. The substantive issues raised are covered in Contention subparts 9(c) and (f).

Id. at 12.

3. Moreover, Intervenors concede that considera-tion of Contention 9(g) calls for a legal conclusion. i In their A~pril 22, 1983 response to Staff interrogatories, Intervenors made the following statement: l l

l l

l l

l i

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

9 Admission 9-26 The preliminary description con-cerning emergency preparedness in CRBR PSAR Section 13.3, as set forth in Admission 9-25, in part provides adequate assurance that the proposed emergency plans will meet the requirements of 10 C.F.R. 50.47(b).

Response

Intervenors can neither admit nor deny this statement since calls for a legal conclusion.

Id. at 24.

4. 10 C.F.R. 52.749(d) states:

The presiding officer shall render the decision sought (for summary disposi-tion) if the filings in the proceeding, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the statements of the parties and the affidavits, if any, show that there is

.no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a decision as a matter of law.

5. Since by Intervenors' own admissions, Conten-tion 9(g) raises not substantive, but only legal issues, there is no genuine issue of material fact to be considered regarding that contention. This being the case, Applicants' respectfully request that the Board enter an Order pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 52.749 summarily disposing of Contention 9(g) i

t.

3 as an issue in this proceeding. A statement of material facts as to which there is no genuine issue to be heard is annexed to this motion.

Respectfully submitted, JP - m GEorg G Ed' gar f Attorney for Preflect Management Corporation

/' .. If [ '

William D. Luck Attorney for the U.S. Department of Energy Dated: May 19, 1983

- _ - _ ._ __ _ _ . - . . _ - - - _