ML20091R460

Answer Opposing Friends of the Earth 840518 Supplemental Motion for Admission of New,Late Contentions Re Applicant Motion for Expedited Partial Initial Decision & Issuance of Low Power License.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20091R460
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	06/13/1984
From:	Conner T CONNER & WETTERHAHN, PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
NUDOCS 8406150143
Download: ML20091R460 (8)

Text

' 6;M s

$ggri UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

'84 gg 74 Mi.,56 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing BoaEd.

h.

93 In the Matter of

)

)

Philadelphia Electric Company

)

Docket Nos. 50-352

)

50-353 (Limerick Generating Station,

)

Units 1 and 2)

)

APPLICANT'S ANSWER TO SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION BY FRIENDS OF THE EARTH FOR ADMISSION OF NEW, LATE CONTENTIONS RELATED TO APPLICANT'S MOTION FOR AN EXPEDITED PARTIAL INITIAL DECISION AND ISSUANCE OF A LOW-POWER LICENSE Preliminary Statement In a motion filed May 18, 1984, intervenor Friends of the Earth

(" FOE")

sought the admission of ten new, late filed contentions in response to the motion by Applicant Philadelphia Electric Company

(" Applicant") pursuant to 10 C.F.R.

S50.57(c), which requested issuance of an expedited partial initial decision and an operating license authoriz-ing Applicant to load fuel in the Limerick Generating Station

(" Limerick"),

Unit 1

reactor and to conduct low-power operations.

Applicant filed its answer to the FOE motion for late contentions on June 1, 1984, asserting that FOE's proposed contentions are unrelated to Applicant's motion and otherwise inadmissible for failing to satisfy the Commission's requirements for late filed contentions and reopening the record.

6Qhfo O

]Y

On May 30,

1984, FOE filed a

" supplement" to its motion, seeking the admission of four new and different late filed contentions.1 FOE's supplemental contentions are equally inadmissible and should likewise be denied for the reasons discussed in Applicant's original answer 2/

and for the reasons further discussed below.

Argument In its proposed Contention 11, FOE simply asserts that it will ultimately prevail on its previously rejected contention opposing Applicant's receipt and storage of new fuel onsite.

Aside from the fact that this assertion is deficient on its face in failing to state any litigable matter, it is utterly insupportable.

The Licensing Board dismissed FOE's contentions concerning Applicant's Part 70

-1/

Additionally, FOE sought to supplement its previously submitted contentions by reference to the decision in Byron regarding quality assurance issues.

Commonwealtn Edison Company (Byron Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and

2),

Docket Nos.

50-454 OL and 50-455 OL,

" Memorandum and Order" (May 7, 1984).

Inasmuch as FOE makes absolutely no attempt to show why the Licensing _

Board's findings in Byron are applicable to Limerick,'

the case adds nothing to FOE's previously filed contentions.

l 2/

For the sake of brevity, Applicant hereby incorporates its previously filed Answer (June 1,

1984) to FOE's motion for the admission of ten late contentions with regard to its position that the request for a low-power license is predicated upon the existing record of the application.and does not automatically give rise to the submission of ' additional contentions and request for hearings, and also with respect. to the Commission's i

precedents for reopening-the record and admitting late l

contentions.

l 1

~

i f

, t,

.e l

license to receive - and store unirradiated fuel onsite,1/

and the L Appeal Board affirmed the - dismissal, also lifting

- its temporary stay of a issuance of the Part 70 license.A The Commission - denied the stay of the Appeal Board order, finding that FOE had failed to show, inter alia, that it is likely to prevail on the merits.EI I

In proposed Contention 12, FOE alleges error by the Licensing Board in certain evidentiary rulings during the hearing on its Contentions V-3(a) and (b).

FOE's remedy is j

to appeal those rulings, not to seek to ' relitigate them before the Licensing Board by way of a new contention.

The Licensing Board would, in any event, reach the same result j

inasmuch as its rulings constitute the law of the case.

i

' FOE asserts in.its proposed Contention 13 that Appli--

4 i

cant's analysis of high energy line breaks

("HELB's").is

]

inadequate because it "does not assess completely the risk i

because of the exclusion of lines which operate 2% or less i

above 200"F. and'275 psig." /

FOE asserts that these lines 3/-

Philadelphia Electric Company (Limerick ' Generating

~

Station, Units 1 and 2),.LBP-84-16, 19 NRC

.(March-

.16, 1984).

i 2

4/

Philadelphia Electric Company (Limerick Generating H

~

Station, Units 1 and 2), ALAB-765, 19 NRC (March j

30, 1984).

l

' 5/~

Philadelphia Electric Company' (Limerick-Generating

~

Station,-Units 1 and 2), Docket-Nos. 50-352-and150-353, j

" Order" (April:26, 1984)~.

6_/

Supplement to R.L.: Anthony / FOE Motion"(May 30,. 1984).

~

\\1 F

,\\,

w

,e-

+

-+- -

r c

ie e,

r, s

are "most subject to rupture because of the fluctuations in heat and pressure and they could trigger other breaks and j

abohe the FSAR Chap. 15 bring the cumulative consequences analysis."1 This proposed contention is entirely devoid of any supporting basis which would give rise to a litigable issue.

Licensing boards hav! routinely rejected similarly vague and unsupported safety contentions.8/

The proposed k

contention fails o allege any failure to meet applicable NRC safety requirements and does not assert any circum-stances or scenario which would create a safety problem; it merely asserts ipso facto that a problem might exist.9/

7/

Id.

-8/

See, e.g.,

Public Service Company' ~ of New Hampshire (Seabrook Station, Units 1.and 2), LBP-82-76, 16 NRC 1029 (1982) ; Carolina Power & Light Company (Shearon Harris Nuclear Power

Plant, Units 1

and 2),

i LBP-82-119A, 16 NRC

2069, 2088-90 (1982);

Carolina Power and Light Company.(H.B.

Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2), Docket No. 50-261-01*, " Memorandum and Order (Report on Special Prehearing Conference Held Pursuant to 10 C.F.R.

2. 751a) " (April 12, 1983). (slip op, at 22-24).

9/

FOE also appears to assert that'a HELB might " trigger'

~

other breaks" which were not considered in the referenced May 4,

1984 High Energy,, Line Break / Control Systems Failure Analysis Report.

As noted in the introduction to that Report, its sole purpose was "to determine the effects of a [HELB] on any non-safety related control systems.

TheLeffects.of a HELB on other systems are described in FSAR Section 3.6.

i specifically, Section 3.6.1.2.1.2, dated April 1983, j

analyzed'the effects of a HELB on.the main steam system l

to which FOE appears to refer.

Thus, this information has long been available and cannot support a late-filed l

contention.

l l

I.

lO 1,

6 o

.k

?>

l yt Finally, in its proposed Contention 14, FOE takes issue with Applicant's estimated dates for fuel loading and completion of construction.

FOE's speculation that Appli-7 scant will " gloss over" safety requirements in order to meet those dates raises no litigable issue.

Such allegations are also entirely vague and without any basis whatsoever.

Conclusion For the reasons discussed more fully

above, FOE's supplemental motion to admit an additional four late filed contentions should be denied.

Respectfully submitted, CONNER & WETTERHAHN, P.C.

A.

M.

4 Troy B.

Conner, Jr.

h Robert M. Rader 2e p

Counsel for the Applicant-June 13, 1984 3

A n.

it r

t.

)

sN s; :;p)r -

N,%

- J" a

? )c((I p

o 1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of

)

)

Philadelphia Electric Company

)

Docket Nos. 50-352

)

50-353 (Limerick Generating Station,

)

Units 1 and 2)

)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " Applicant's Answer to Supplemental Motion by Friends of the Earth for Admission of New, Late Contentions Related to Applicant's Motion for an Expedited Partial-Initial Decision and Issuance of a

Low-Power License" dated June 13, 1984 in the captioned matter have been served upon the following by deposit in the United States mail this 13th day of June, 1984:

• Lawrence Brenner, Esq. (2)

Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission _

Washington, D.C.

20555 Washington, D.C.

20555 Docketing and Service Section

• Dr. Richard F. Cole Office of the Secretary Atomic Safety and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Licensing Board Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Washington, D.C.

20555 a

1

-Commission Washington, D.C.

20555

• Ann P. Hodgdon, Esq.

Counsel for NRC Staff Office

• Dr. Peter A. Morris of the Executive Atomic _ Safety and Legal Director l

Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear-Regulatory _

U.S.~ Nuclear Regulatory-Commission Commission Washington,LD.C.

20555~

Washington, D.C.-

20555 I

i i

• ' Hand-Delivery m._

d

i e t Atomic Safety and Licensing Angus Love, Esq.

Board Panel 107 East Main Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Norristown, PA 19401 Commission Washington, D.C.

20555 Robert J. Sugarman, Esq.

Sugarman, Denworth &

Philadelphia Electric Company Hellegers ATTN:

Edward G. Bauer, Jr.

16th Floor, Center Plaza Vice President &

101 North Broad Street General Counsel Philadelphia, PA 19107 2301 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19101 Director, Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency Mr. Frank R.

Romano Basement, Transportation 61 Forest Avenue and Safety Building Ambler, Pennsylvania 19002 Harrisburg, PA 17120

• • Mr.

Robert L. Anthony Martha W.

Bush, Esq.

Friends of the Earth of Kathryn S. Lewis, Esq.

the Delaware Valley City of Philadelphia 106 Vernon Lane, Box 186 Municipal Services Bldg.

Moylan, Pennsylvania 19065 15th and JFK Blvd.

Philadelphia, PA 19107 Limerick Ecology Action P.O. Box 761 762 Queen Street Spence W.

Perry, Esq.

Pottstown, PA 19464 Associate General Counsel Federal Emergency Charles W. Elliott, Esq.

Management Agency-Brose and Postwistilo 500 C Street, S.W.,

Rm. 840 1101 Building Washington, DC 20472 lith & Northampton Streets Easton, PA 18042 Thomas Gerusky, Director Bureau of Radiation Zori G. Ferkin, Esq.

Protection Assistant Counsel Department of Environmental Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Resources Governor's Energy Council 5th Floor, Fulton Bank Bldg.

1625 N. Front Street Third and Locust Streets Harrisburg, PA 17102 Harrisburg, PA 17120 Jay M. Gutierrez, Esq.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406

'l

• • Federal Express k..

i :.

- l James Wiggins

. Senior Resident Inspector U.S.. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 47 Sanatoga, PA 19464 Timothy R.S. Campbell Director Department of Emergency Services 14 East Biddle Street West Chester, PA 19380 Nils N. Nichols t

4 i*

6

-. - -.