ML20077J579

Motion to Require Palmetto Alliance Compliance W/Terms of ASLB 830620 Memorandum & Order to Advise Other Parties of Addl Concerns within Scope of Contention 6.New Alleged Const Deficiencies Must Be Delineated.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20077J579
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	08/15/1983
From:	Mcgarry J DEBEVOISE & LIBERMAN, DUKE POWER CO.
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
NUDOCS 8308170005
Download: ML20077J579 (6)

Text

. . .

00CKETED '

USNRC S ME 16 'gi):30 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF SECRETM -

BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING B kbhghERvir.:.

i In the Matter of ) s.

) .

DUKE POWER COMPANY, et al.

-- ) Docket Nos. 50-413

) 50-414 (Catawba Nuclear Station, )

t Units 1 and 2) )

APPLICANTS' MOTION TO REQUIRE PALMETTO ALLIANCE'S COMPLIANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THE BOARD'S JUNE 20,1983 MEMORANDUM AND. ORDER s

On August 3, 1983, a conference call between the parties and the Licensing Board members in this proceed-ing was held. The subject of this conference call was

( the possibility of the Board's requesting the appointment of another Licensing Board panel to preside over the adjudication of any emergency planning contentiono ad-mitted in the proceeding, to attempt to assure that liti-gation of emergency plan issues would not impinge upon Applicants' May, 1984 fuel loading date. . . . .

f Palmetto Alliance objected to this bifurcation pro-

, posal. One of the reasons advanced by Palmetto Alliance's counsel, Mr. Guild, in opposition to such proposal.was '

that, as a result ~of what he charac'terized as a rush to

', complete construction, serious construction deficiencies exist at Catawba which have come to the attention of Palmetto' Alliance. Counsel for Palmetto Alliance provided.

0300170005j30 h3 PDR ADOCK PDR '

-- -- -3 } -ll -

no further detail concerning these allegations either during the conference call or afterwards. The clear implication of Mr. Guild's assertion was, however, that these purported deficiencies are distinct from any other concerns previously raised by Palmetto Alliance pursuant to Contention 6.

Subsequently, during an August 11, 1983 conference call, counsel for Applicants requested that Palmetto Alliance identify and explain specifically this new seri-ous construction deficiency, or deficiencies, so that these concerns could be discussed and resolved at the up-coming hearing. Speaking on behalf of the Applicants, Mr.

McGarry stated:

Now we would like Palmetto to identify this new serious construction deficiency. "What is it or what are they we think we are entitled to know because, quite frankly, one of [our] . concerns with respect to bifurcation was that in the OA area, based on our experience, it seems that you can't get the case closed because it seems like there is always a new allegation being raised either right at the beginning of the hearing, during the hearing or right after the hearing is closed and we are fearft2 that we are going to see an effort to reopen and reopen again the record on QA. (Tr. 1160)

However, Mr. Guild refused to specify the nature of the alleged deficiencies, saying, "I don't have anything further to say to Mr. McGarry. If he has a problem, he should put it in writing. I stand by our statements."

(Id.) Applicants accordingly file this Motion.

l

As Applicants pointed out during the August 11 con-ference call-(Tr. 1159), Palmetto Alliance is under a Board-imposed obligation to make known promptly to the I

other parties to this proceeding the specific nature of any additional concerns it may have that.are " based on information-first becoming available to Palmetto between May 27, 1983, and the time of hearing that are within the scope of Cbntention 6 . . . . " June.20, 1983 Memorandmu l and Order, p. 8. As to such concerns, the Board stated:

! [P]ursuant to 10 C.F.R. {-2.740(c)(3), the l Board is imposing a duty on Palmetto to supple-ment promptly its interrogatory' responses under Contention 6-to the Applicants and the Staff as to any such new areas of concern ~under that con-tention, other than welding concerns and con-

, cerns of Messrs. Hoopingarner and McAfee.

l (ld.)(emphasis added).

In accordance with the Board's clear direction,

, Applicants submit that Palmetto Alliance must now sup-plement its relevant interrogatory responses in order to -

verify and explain the exact nature of these alleged new l

construction deficiencies to which it alluded in the-August 3 conference call. In the event that Palmetto Alliance fails so to comply, within five working days, .

with the Board's June 20,-1983 order, Applicants urge that I

the Intervenor be barred from raising additional allega-tions under contention 6-in the upcoming hearing. Appli-cants also' urge that if Palmetto Alliance fails toiprovide L promptly the re. quested information, it.should be

__m . _._.._- _,.._ _. _ _ - - . ._ , - .. _ _. .- .

foreclosed from later attempting to reopen the hearing record on Contention 6 on the basis of any additional 1

allegations.

Respectfully submitted,

'i.IbidadL J.

lllL00wy%

Michael McGarry, III Anne W. Cottingham Q' Mh-DEBEVOISE & LIBERMAN 1200 Seventeenth St., N. W.

Washington, D. C. 20036 (202) 857-9833 Albert V. Carr Jr.

Ronald L. Gibson DUKE POWER COMPANY P.O. Box 33189 Charlotte North Carolina 28242 (704) 373-2570 Counsel for Duke Power Company, et al.

August 15, 1983

l DOCKETED USHRC 53 NE 16 N0:30 l

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF SECRtlAL 00CKETING & SERVI -

BRANCH BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )

)

DUKE POWER COMPANY, et al.

) Docket Nos. 50-413

) 50-414 (Catawba Nuclear Station, )

Units 1 and 2) )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " Applicants'. Motion To Require Palmetto Alliance's Compliance With The Terms Of The Board's June 20, 1983 Memorandum and Order" in the above captioned matter have been served upon the following by deposit in the United States mail this 15th day.of August, 1983.

James L. Kelley, Chairman George E. Johnson, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Office of the Executive Legal Board Panel Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D C. 20535 Dr. A. Dixon Callihan Albert V. Carr, Jr., Esq.

Union Carbide Corporation Duke Power Company 4

P.O. Box Y P.O. Box 33189 Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 Dr. Richard F. Foster Richard P. Wilson, Esq.

P.O. Box 4263 Assistant Attorney General Sunriver, Oregon 97702 State of South Carolina P.O. Box 11549 Chairman Columbia, South Carolina 29211 Atomic Safety and ' Licensing Board Panel Robert Guild, Esq.

• U.S. . Nuclear Regulatory Attorney-at-Law Commission P.O. Box 12097 Washington, D.C. 20555 Charleston, South Carolina 29412 l Chairman Palmetto Alliance Atomic Safety and Licensing 2135 1/2 Devine Street Appeal Board Columbia, South Carolina 29205 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington,_ D C. 20555

s . * -

Jesse L. Riley

• Scott Stucky 854 Henley Place Docketing and Service Section Charlotte, North Carolina 28207 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Carole F. Kagan, Attorney Washington, D.C. 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel

• U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 I ( IIGV .

hk J. Michael Mcdarry, IIIj

• Designates those hand delivered.

l

.