ML20076M068
| ML20076M068 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Washington Public Power Supply System |
| Issue date: | 07/13/1983 |
| From: | Bell N NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES (FORMERLY COALITION |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20076M062 | List: |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-CPA, NUDOCS 8307200134 | |
| Download: ML20076M068 (4) | |
Text
.-
._._ a pp,y.
293 J...MWi
'.g E* T' D. COr'mypo.an g
'.,YbaQA2 q~
- n..
s
' ^D %7 '.
e (D.
s u.m
,_4 MM,
f
..& $tt >. g % "? M d
t UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
/-[y j;.g-;g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g.,;;.y.;fy y "'y IQ
,e,r B E F O.R. E _ T_ H _E _ _A T_ O_ M _I C_ _S _A F_ _E T_ _Y _ _A _N D _ L_ _I C E_ N S _I N G_ _ B_
jut'yy%e a
d t
d $s),. %,.:w * %3
,~
In the Matter of
)
~
e 50[4[OChN b T.N WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM
)
Docket No.
et.
a.
)
'jl Wh{h-hh Y
)
MQi (WPPSS Nuclear Project No. 1)
)
r 4.s.y,v:,3,.,u.m a,W...g
-9 3
$. p *.w
, v.
.. ' u.?
-~
m r.g,y;,T,,,e
.;$p,' '
~
INTERVENOR'S UPDATED RESPONSES TO NRC-ST6FF'S FIRST SET OFAs-gy' 'u.
s
~~~~
"5EYEEEUGAT6EEE5[lULk 15[~5955. ~
~h.SY-
"f.
gLg
.,.g
- 6, e
'r Mk..tl it your contention that therechaagn%.gf..p INTERROGATORY 7:
Is slowing in growth rate of electric power requirementsfin b y g'O op4.
been a
^'-
the Pacific Northwest?m, 4&'@., c-[..J _ M. p(
i g,
^
- gsd L.
RESPONSE
No.
-Intervenor hereby retracts th. e ires...ponse_
.h
. n
. m.. p ty ;v+i r
.y e
4 m.:49.,x y
..g$Byf.hgg, p g g,p provided on May 24, 1983..
w 2:$.
[^;
[
..;. e :
. 4c0,. x y.o..,,,. - -
yj
~.
INTERROGATORY 8: Is.it your contention that
~
v.
thegrowthtratel.Fe(nf, of electric power requirements in the Pacific Northwes'tih'a" stopped or will stop completely before 19917 Yrd: lim 21%
'{%"f M '. ';.*w[u.;,t%.g.
n
.,4l, M
.:l%
RESPONSE: No.
,s
- &Q; >;
3 f.kpg
- j'$$
l
- gu.>nyl?hl'!y$5 aw INTERROGATORY 10(b):
If your answer to InterrogatoryfNoggjgp 10(a) is in the affirmative, set forth and explain. fully \\thag M fE factual basis or legal' authority for your statement.. C M @ g$5k.kf[
k li?iI
~ ? !.%fE Y &
e RESPONSEf ;Interveno.
response] provided.,, plLg S
r, hereby retracts the
,.c. :.fMM1.
W T W-Q k Q N R h on May 24, 1983..'E 9??% %
?.IPi g '# g @ t
,X%*
by the intervenor at t'M,[:-14'f%%ki l
The factual basesildentifi'ed
- .u mmn${aihis dat M
cre: the " Northwest Conservation a.1d Electric Power Plan", VoltimeIMM
- :.i.:..'ipMy;Mk M-I, April 27, 1983 by the Northwest Power Planning Council,CTable%46
. 4 Mn'Mfi$
6-1, the
" Analysis of Alternatives Related to WNP-3", Mayj26, g g,7 4 mgpiN"'CF 1983 by the Bonneuille Power Adminstration, the
" M o'd e l E l e c t r i c s c N_ 9.4.-
1 ' o,m,w4.B --s 9x, g
Power and Conservation Plan for the Pacific Northwest", November $1$,7gl'i
/
r.~; $ L Q E 198P by the Northwest Conservation Act Coalition (page 28)land N @
W G.2.
conversations with Jim
- Lazar, energy economist (317 E. 17th N D N 8307200134 030713
- 5Y3-M-~**/'.
PDR ADOCK 05000460 i+
~
Q PDR
,1.rau w.
_, _.- 7. n,-
- - - - -. - - - _ - - - - - - _ ~- - - - - - - ~ - - _ _.
g 2A%y
?g g.) gt q
~.r. ;s.9%
- .~ - r 5%
t
.1 @3_..,.
i q ;..;g;qbE'5ff,;y 01ynpis, WA 98501) on or about June 10, 1983.
-g
..,: e.y c
The legal basis identified by the intervenor to date is ALAB-.722c g
'~ ' S h ygE1
.- 3 f*
he j
!NTERROGATORY 11(b):
If, your answer to Interrogatory No.%
,f ilta) is in the affirmative, set forth and explain fully the
. f.)
factual basis or legal authority for this contention.
.f
~ G N._,
RESpCNSE:
ALAB-722 establishes that the
" ultimate ' good:
.jQ
.?
cause*
determination la expected to encompass a Judgement-about g 3
.. - i *M why the plant should,be completed end-is not to rest solely:lupon
- '%% di e
judgement as the applicant's fault for delay", "wheth.or; good i l
n$$.%f constru' tion completion date"..an'dSthat.
cause exists to extend the e
--- ~
[
Sg" g "a
- udgement must-still be made as to whether ' continued
- lii $,
~
d construction should nonetheless be allowed."
The Appeals,}Boird' f!2tWfM also discusses the temporary lack of need for power andulacksof Ui$Mh' financing as fac. tors which cause delay with v a'l i d.b s s i n e s s t 1
.Y$rj.'~
purposes.
Intervenor sees a distinction between a " deferral"#of t
l(jQ),5",'
l 7
need and a temporary lack of need or slowing of growth rateP wit
.. a 93 the former a more suitable description of the instant ca. e\\.,h.y-
. ww
~
4.g3
.~
~
actuaQ@deferra Wi..s INTERROGATORY 12: (a) Do you claim that the in the need for. power.in the Northwest United StateaMoes:Jno.
Justify deferring construction of WNp-17 f.?g (b) Explain fully,your answer to Interrogatory No.712C
~
(d If your answer to Interrogatory No. 12(a)~ils3kh' affirm 6tive, state relevance of your statement $thd notDthe
" petitioner...does belive the power from WNp-1 will(eOeryb"et need for power in the NorthwestM' l
Justify deferring construction of WNp-1.~^$.UnitA needed",to your claim.that States does not
$i%
o
- DMQ g
RESpDNSE:
(a)
Yes.
. (b)
The
" deferral of need". Justifies;-
cancel'.etion of the project not a deferral of constructi n
., /:f %%.}
- f there s
never a
need for the plant, the plant should'be h
'.t
% t. t.,
plant's principle purpose g a,.,,7.::"
p" m.
+-
cancelled, not deferred, because a
.J,a 4W,$$
e to provide needed electricity. The basis for the NRC's decision.x-p -R g r
i~..a l, A
m to grEnt WNp-l a
Construction permi.t has proven to be-tota { a.,'Q j 1yj d,
.m
- N" j,@$kN.
1 MEd565$15h
[. D._.. _
.m.
.E
... a. -
._..__..1.-_-
1_..,jd,75%];
_ _ g.. _
- ww
- 'kfQ W l
~3)*'
hq.-
F u
.w
- w 4.;v.
g IkdytC
'c continued construction of WNP.Q $.g @'g i without validity.
Furthermore, w W.a-g g&
.ew.
+2t might bankrupt the region.
m.,g$g.b'.dy G}YlA'i
> l-form;&f.hy?&g*!
.+:H
- NTERROGATORY 13:
What, is the factual basis yourg power.fron g g statent.nt that
" Petitioner...does not believe the
,. g ;;;,,g Q 4 UNP-1 will ever be needed"?
./pp
RESPONSE
The
" Northwest Conservation and Electric Poweri
\\
.q:f j
Plan",
Volune I, April 27, 1983 by the Northwest Power Planningy
_d
!. - ' a-o!cp
- Council, Table 6-1, and the "Model. Electric Powerj an;d-j --
" s#if,
Conservation Plan for the Pacific Northwest", November /1982 b.M.
g y, M gN-the Northwest Conservation Act Coalition (page-28) j;'
/
..'" x5 S~Ef w.
INTERROGATORY 14: Is it your contention that if and. Mon.at.h. w' e
d
~..e WNP-1 is completed and ready to operate, it will not befoperated. 3 because there would be no need for the power?
~ 2-h.@47) _
nytsyt?-k,..
h
- l+;
~
RESPONSE: Yes.
j.y. Q g%.. ']
>.cd,?f.My ff.4w
.8.6 2
.c.
.< u u.
Qu L:S T
INTERROGATORY 15:
What factors do you contend are relev'an M
will ever be needed??'N5".e.[dh;' l in assessing whether power from WNP-1 d....,*d%s{..
" g.
s,
,4
RESPONSE
The factors listed in the " Northwest Conservation 1983by[;kt.k,ME+-
'?
M@ J p
?
1Ge and Electric Power Plan",
Volume I,
April 27,
.W..stq:hH we-
" Analysis of AlternativembN,hWjf;c1h * #4W Northwest Power Planning Council, the
-,.. -n.u,a el, areb
~$@.yMG-BonnevilleMPoTier)jtx
- ')
gi Related to WNP-3",s May 26, 1983 by the Electric Power and Conservati' NkWM.. d@
' Y8N.
oiUPlan W
Adminstration, the "Model
-#3hldg.%$ 2d for the Pacific
' Northwest",
November 1982 b y' the Nol'thwe' $fb ?
. m ~}y.QQQCi}f'y Resourdd?%ne:,n{:,
f3d Conservation Act Coalition, and the "Ana. lysis of A - pO d.h?:%-.k. ft.:d$
"hs Alternet ves" dated April 19, 1982 by BPA.
,3 v;
'? NY Sf.
-.4 m. *ft*'Q:sc? e' ~
hbh.
Respectfully
- bmitted,
+
2 h w i m'?:,
'f - y.1. &.eXQi.r.
- &j -$ JEW 5:-
iA.
k. q'Ey.g_ LQf.y@
Datcd t.. : s day, the 13th Nina Bell W %'["I]
of
.'uly, 1983.
Coalition for Safe Power
-. - --} ;.}., %;;.i-f.
- c.m
- . ~
.,f.'
- f. ; _ ' ' g (.;, - }^ ).P']s y
?y
.i u j,..
t g -l
S&1
- .n.
.a
__ A,w_.d%:4
_ ~, - -.
.-:-.~..
i@.
T
.a:9 ih.
Chg.
cxcu *:.. i
"'M; '. 3-Tep
.,4.. %,.
6IL'
't k' &$
.. Js
~ Y. 'ElCN.,b
-e.Ns..h
.. yC 'pi' nsg
- wa
' ti
. ; 4. 1:4
- af Q,,hj-e i7f STATE OF CREGON
)
f y
) aa.
r:y,g County of Multnomah )
j 3) If 4
p;. }N
-eyys3.
Q.?l$d$."
Nina Bell, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
- 'Fj@.V,.,
l the Staff Intervenor of the Coalition for Safe'('htfh q
That she is Power, and that the contents of "INTERVENOR'S UPDATED.d$gl@gi
' g' l
RESPONSES TO NRC STAFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES,'JUL'Y$fi l
13, 19o.,3" and "INTERVENOR'S UPDATED RESPONSES TO APPLICANT'S.i i
FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES, JULY 13, 1983" are true and$O{ M I
correct to the best of her information, knowledge and
.M. '
ll belief.
All responses therein were prepared by herself7anibl..,
i
.i 6M."'#
I Eugene Rosolie
- S Q.t.
k-d n.
u.
,.:'.g' -
Signed:
'JM2d
[
[NN 3
' llnyn,.,w&r-YW QQ'
- &T
- Nina Bell
??@$1.dh
=
M-
^
- 1 ^ M TC '-N; m.s 'a Coalition for Safe Power v;??hs :4 I
W.Q?S$?b5$
k:hSI N
/~~~~~dayof 19 SUFRIBED AN,D SWORN to. '.)efore me this k
QwhN
- W-
, 1983.
h
- .,r.ry.px e
<-n, ~ m w
o:,;Qq
~ L'hD i
) h Mi h.
9
,/___"_____
_'.,7,pi. q g
[
- h..g..
Notery P alic for Oregon My Commission EEpires: 4 -/f.-((/ jh 4.
k g mAjg p&,i-dm; h
evky h *a 4*
,~
4:h.Wl gan
' 1,l1 s
c y. 3 e w
.(:-
-e yy
. k.T..',,i 1 :
w
.' Mi.g';,. -.
..m
- 1.,,
Y DOI
~
4, c. f u;-;
, ? #jd-:? 7;.; j[J