ML20078F985

Answer Opposing Air & Water Pollution Control 830926 Motion to Reword Contentions I-62 & V-4

ML20078F985
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	10/06/1983
From:	Wetterhahn M CONNER & WETTERHAHN, PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML20078F982	List: ML20078F980 ML20078F985 ML20078F993 ML20078F998 ML20078G005
References
NUDOCS 8310110277
Download: ML20078F985 (3)

Text

A UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )

)

Philadelphia Electric Company ) Docket Nos. 50-352

) 50-353 (Limerick Generating Station, )

Units 1 and 2) )

APPLICANT'S ANSWER TO MOTIONS TO REWORD CONTENTIONS I-62 AND V-4 By a pleading served on September 28, 1983, intervenor Marvin I. Lewis moved the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board

(" Licensing Board") to accept a proposed rewording of Contention I-62.1/ On September 26, 1983, intervenor Air &

Water Pollution Patrol ("AWPP") submitted its " Motion to Reword Contention V-4. Applicant opposes both such motions.

The Licensing Board's September 13, 1983 Memorandum and Order requires, inter alia, that each intervenor shall state whether its contention "should be reworded to more specifically focus on what is still in contention . " -

Neither of the intervenors has more specifically focused the contentions. While some wording in each has been changed,

-1/ Motion to Reword Contention I-62 in Response to the Board's Memorandum and Order of September 13, 1983.

-2/ Memorandum and Order Regarding Establishment of Hearing Schedule and Granting AWPP Motion to Compel Discovery (September 13, 1983) (slip op. at 3).

D KONOOOh2 PDR

neither contention has been narrowed in the sense that issues for litigation have been eliminated or reduced.

The Licensing Board itself restated Contention V-4.-

As so specified, the contention deals with aircraft flying into the Limerick cooling tower plumes. AWPP would change this to aircraft " flying into the airspace that may be affected by emissions from the Limerick cooling towers." No definition of such airspace is given nor is any justification presented for this change which could broaden the issues.

Mr. Lewis states that his proposed charge is the result of " material disclosed during discovery," but does not specify what material or how such material requires the proposed changes. As restated, the contention makes unsupported statements regarding the manner or Staff review of pressurized thermal shock in boiling water reactors.

i 3/ Philadelphia Electric Company (Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2), LBP-82-43A, 15 NRC 1423, 1514-15 (1982).

The two motions do not fulfill the Board's requirement that intervenor's more specifically focus their contentions are otherwise unsupported, and should be denied.

Respectfully submitted, CONNER & WETTERHAHN, P.C.

Mark J. Wetterhahn Counsel for Philadelphia Electric Company October 6, 1983

.- , - - . .r- , , - . _ _ , _, . _ . , _ . _ , _ - _ _ _ _ , _ , . , , , _ , , . , ,

, _ . _ , ,