|
---|
Category:INTERROGATORIES; RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES
MONTHYEARML20098D1831983-09-0606 September 1983 Licensee Addl Response to Intervenor 830609 Second Set of Interrogatories,Per ASLB 830815 Memorandum & Order. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20098D1281983-07-14014 July 1983 Second Updated Response to Applicant 830713 First Set of Interrogatories.No Good Cause Exists to Extend CP Because Power from Project Will Never Be Needed & Too Costly, Financing Impossible & Extension Unrealistic ML20098D0681983-06-0909 June 1983 First Set of Interrogatories & Request for Identification of Persons Considered as Witness in Event Hearing Held in Proceeding.News Broadcasts & Articles Encl ML20236A9201977-05-17017 May 1977 Responses of PG&E to Certain of Interrogatories Propounded by Intervenors Re Geology,Seismicity Qualification.* Responds to Questions Re Hosgri Fault ML20236B2781977-03-22022 March 1977 Interrogatories Propounded to PG&E by Several Intervenors Re Geology,Seismicity Qualification.* Requests Util Respond to Interrogatories in Writing,Under Oath & within 15 Days ML20236B1161977-03-22022 March 1977 Interrogatories Propounded to NRC by Several Intervenors Re Geology,Seismicity Qualification.* Requests NRC Answer Interrogatories,In Writing,Within 15 Days of Receipt ML20236B5601976-07-20020 July 1976 Responses of Jj Forster to Interrogatories Propounded by NRC Staff Dtd 760621.* ML20236B5471976-07-20020 July 1976 Responses of Jj Foster to Interrogatories Propounded by PG&E Dtd 760616.* ML20236B5391976-07-20020 July 1976 Responses of San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace to Interrogatories Propounded by NRC Staff Dtd 760621.* ML20236B5221976-07-20020 July 1976 Response of San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace to Interrogatory Propounded by PG&E Dtd 760616.* Section 3.4 of Addendum to Fes & Section 5.4.2 Inadeuate ML20236F8631975-09-26026 September 1975 Responses of PG&E to Interrogatories Filed by San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace (Snms).* W/Certificate of Svc ML20236C3471975-09-26026 September 1975 Responses of PG&E to Interrogatories Filed by San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Dtd 750911.* Certificate of Svc Encl ML20236C4341975-07-18018 July 1975 Responses of PG&E to Interrogatories & Discovery Requests Filed by San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Dtd 750619.* ML20236C6301975-07-0707 July 1975 NRC Staff Response to Interrogatories of San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace.* Certificate of Svc Encl ML20236C7201975-06-25025 June 1975 Response of PG&E to Request by Scenic Shoreline Preservation Conference,Inc for geological-seismological Data.* ML20236D4011974-10-28028 October 1974 Interrogatories Propounded by San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace of AEC Regulatory Staff.* Statement of D Chipping & Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence 1983-09-06
[Table view] Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARELV-01267, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR71 Re Compatibility of Pu Air Transport Regulations W/Iaea Stds.Supports EEI-UWASTE/NUMARC Comments to Be Provided to NRC by 9002091990-02-0707 February 1990 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR71 Re Compatibility of Pu Air Transport Regulations W/Iaea Stds.Supports EEI-UWASTE/NUMARC Comments to Be Provided to NRC by 900209 ML20011E4861990-02-0707 February 1990 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR71 Re Compatibility of Pu Air Transport Regulations W/Iaea Stds.Supports EEI-UWASTE/NUMARC Comments to Be Provided to NRC by 900209 ML20248D2831989-09-28028 September 1989 Notice of Appearance.* Advises That Author Will Enter Appearance in Proceeding on Behalf of Nrc.W/Certificate of Svc ML20247Q2661989-09-26026 September 1989 Establishment of Aslb.* Board Will Comprise of Mb Margulies, Chairman & Oh Paris & Fj Shon,Members.W/Certificate of Svc. Served on 890926 B13367, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR30,40,50,60,70,72 & 150 Re Preserving Free Flow of Info to Commission.Nrc Made Wise Choice to Not Impose Any Obligation on Private Parties to Include Affirmative Statement in Employment Agreements1989-09-20020 September 1989 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR30,40,50,60,70,72 & 150 Re Preserving Free Flow of Info to Commission.Nrc Made Wise Choice to Not Impose Any Obligation on Private Parties to Include Affirmative Statement in Employment Agreements ML20248C8751989-09-13013 September 1989 Response to Order Modifying Licenses & Order to Show Cause Why Licenses Should Not Be Revoked.* Requests Hearing on Issues,Including Funds for Equipment.Supporting Info Encl ML20246C7141989-08-18018 August 1989 Order to Show Cause Why CPs CPEP-1 & CPEP-2 Should Not Be Revoked & Requiring Licensee to Notify Commission at Least 30 Days Before Taking Possession of Any Classified Equipment ML20245G0721989-08-0303 August 1989 Comment on Draft Reg Guide, Assuring Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors. Recommends That NRC Recommendation on Trust Agreement Wording Be Deleted or NRC Should Grandfather Existing Trusts Such as for Plants ML20248B6201989-08-0202 August 1989 Comments on Draft Reg Guide, Assuring Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors. NRC Should Permit Use of Potential Tax Refund as Source of Decommissioning Funds ELV-00674, Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. 10CFR72.6(c) Should Be Revised to Provide for Storage W/O ISFSI Requirement1989-07-0707 July 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. 10CFR72.6(c) Should Be Revised to Provide for Storage W/O ISFSI Requirement ELV-00679, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Agrees W/Numarc Comments Provided to NRC on 8906261989-07-0505 July 1989 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Agrees W/Numarc Comments Provided to NRC on 890626 ML20246K4801989-07-0505 July 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components ML20246D8811989-06-30030 June 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components ML20245D2481989-06-16016 June 1989 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. NRC Must Consider Provision in Rule to Permit Indiscriminate Storage of Spent Fuel at Reactors ML20246Q2971989-05-15015 May 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20245J0191989-04-14014 April 1989 Comment Re Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20244B3241989-04-10010 April 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20247A2971989-04-0404 April 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20246M2771989-03-20020 March 1989 Decision.* Affirms Board Decision LBP-89-05 Granting CP & OL to Licensee.Certificate of Svc Encl.Served on 890321 B13113, Comments on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants. Reg Guide Does Not Provide Flexibility1989-03-0808 March 1989 Comments on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants. Reg Guide Does Not Provide Flexibility ML20246N9471989-03-0808 March 1989 Comment on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9 Re Selection Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants ML20235V8541989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants. Util Committed to Goal of Achieving Improved Reliability & Safety Through Better Maint JPN-89-008, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants1989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20235T3581989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Util Endorses Comments Filed by NUMARC & Nuclear Util Backfitting & Reform Group.Rule Fails to Provide Basis for Determining Effective Maint Program B13136, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Proposed Rule on Maint Will Not Improve Maint in Plants Nor Improve Safety or Reliability of Plants.Proposed Rule Much Too Vague1989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Proposed Rule on Maint Will Not Improve Maint in Plants Nor Improve Safety or Reliability of Plants.Proposed Rule Much Too Vague ML20235T1861989-02-24024 February 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants, Extension of NRC Authority to BOP Portion of Plant & Misapplication of Adequate Protection Std of Backfit Rule ML20235T7391989-02-23023 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors at Nuclear Power Plants ML20235N8531989-02-14014 February 1989 Comment Supporting Chapter 1 Re Policy Statement on Exemptions Below Regulatory Concern.Policy Development for Criteria for Release of Radioactive Matl Needed for Development of Consistent Waste Mgt Practices ML20235L5921989-02-0606 February 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule on Chapter 1 Re Proposed Policy Statement Exemptions from Regulatory Control.Extreme Care Will Be Needed in Establishing State Role Both in Developing Rule & in Subsequent Implementation ML20247R4091988-12-31031 December 1988 Transcript of Commission 881221 Press Conference in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-31 ML20196F5981988-12-0101 December 1988 Notice of Hearing.* Notifies That Hearing to Be Held in CP Application Proceedings on 881221 Cancelled & Rescheduled to Commence on 890104.Served on 881202 ML20196F5831988-12-0101 December 1988 Memorandum Memoralizing 881129 Telcon.* Applicant & NRC Agreed to Submit Joint Proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law.Served on 881202 ML20196A5991988-12-0101 December 1988 Transcript of 881201 Hearing in Bethesda,Md.Pp 143-152 ML20206M9181988-11-22022 November 1988 Memorandum Memorializing Telcon of 881121.* Discusses Board 881121 Telcon W/Counsel for Parties Re Prehearing & Scheduling Matters.Served on 881123 ML20206J3701988-11-21021 November 1988 Transcript of 881121 Telcon in Bethesda,Md Re Alchemie. Pp 70-100 ML20206M5321988-11-21021 November 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re fitness-for-duty Program ML20195H0331988-11-21021 November 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program Which Includes Random Drug Testing.Util Strongly Favors 180- Day Period for Implementation of Rule & 360-day Implementation Period for Random Drug Testing JPN-88-063, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program.Util Has Constitutional Concerns Re Proposed Random Testing Which Should Be Fully Addressed Prior to Rule Being Promulgated.Endorses NUMARC & EEI Comments1988-11-18018 November 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program.Util Has Constitutional Concerns Re Proposed Random Testing Which Should Be Fully Addressed Prior to Rule Being Promulgated.Endorses NUMARC & EEI Comments ML20195H0111988-11-18018 November 1988 Comment Supporting NUMARC Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re NRC Fitness for Duty Program Which Includes Random Drug Testing ML20206C6321988-11-14014 November 1988 Withdrawal of Request of State of Tn to Participate as Interested State,Per 10CFR2.715(c).* Certificate of Svc Encl ML20206C6131988-11-14014 November 1988 Withdrawal of Request of State of Tn to Participate as Interested State,Per 10CFR2.715(c).* Certificate of Svc Encl ML20206C3271988-11-10010 November 1988 Memorandum Memorializing Telcon of 881109.* Licensee Request to DOE to Extend Deadline for Receipt of CPs Until 890131 Not Officially Passed Upon.Further Prehearing Telcon Scheduled for 881121.Served on 881114 ML20206C0851988-11-0909 November 1988 Transcript of ASLB 881109 Telcon in Bethesda,Md.Pp 44-69 ML20205R7111988-11-0404 November 1988 NRC Staff Testimony of Jj Swift Addressing ASLB Inquiries Dtd 881018.* Supporting Info Encl.Related Correspondence ML20206C1081988-11-0404 November 1988 Requests for Renewal or Extension of Exemption from 10CFR50.54(w)(i) Re Property Insurance Regulations ML20205N2711988-11-0101 November 1988 Memorandum Memorializing Telcon of 881031.* Board Approved Prehearing Telcon on 881109 to Discuss Future Scheduling & Agreed to Start Hearing Prior to 881120 to Accomodate Alchemie.Served on 881102 ML20205Q2061988-10-28028 October 1988 Comment Opposing Petition for Rulemaking PRM 50-52 Re Exemption of Financial Qualifications of Applicants from Review of OL Applications.Petition Presents No Compelling Reason to Amend Current Rules ML20205Q1501988-10-28028 October 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re NUREG-1317, Regulatory Options for Nuclear Plant License Renewal. Safety Sys Functional Insps & Configuration Mgt Programs Support Renewal Basis as Opposed to Relicensing Process ML20205Q6661988-10-27027 October 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re NUREG-1317, Regulatory Options for Nuclear Plant License Renewal. Endorses NUMARC Nuplex Working Group Comments,Including Use of Licensing Basis at Facility When Renewal Application Submitted ML20205P9691988-10-26026 October 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re NUREG-1317, Regulatory Options for Nuclear License Renewal. Supports Contents of NUREG-1317 & Endorses NUMARC Comments on Rulemaking & Position Paper by NUMARC Nuplex Working Group 1990-02-07
[Table view] |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:1
- 4e E35C97
\\
G E
.e w~
.j " T'.,;
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
.~
i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.s.
1.. :_
EYE 9BE IBE_6IQUIG_E8EEIY_oND_blgggsIgg_ggang
-- 2.1G;';l, c.
s j.g;pd..
.' 'G,M'9*,(.
In the "atter of
)
)
WASHINGTCN PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM
)
Docket No. 50-460CPA7Vg;/.h Nl.7)$f, M;.
et. al.
)
C
)
p h6 "9 h..,; 7,;;
(WPPSS Nuclear Project No. 1)
)
hr6 5.'.'.N'?.';il FW 4.r.w -, Y. :L.,
c.
IEIEEYs398'.E_EE99E9_ME96IE9_BEEE9EEEE_IQ_6EELIcagI'g_EIBEI EEI_9E 7...f:
4 7,idip 6' '-
INIEBB996I9BIEEt_2VLY_12t_1202i r
.., O. 9 ex.w +
=' r'.J h*2'y$ Jeh, h h
~
. f.s ?iQpg ~ [Qy that Licensee". hee i,[..
INTERROGATORY 11:
Why do you contend f o r a n e x t e n s i o n o f.th. e.W.N. P.>..
...?rs.
failed to establish good cause
,M
.'.'i.)y".
%ff%
,N}'~
construction permit?
.5:/ @. -:W _IG$
RESPONSE
There exists no good cause to ex nd 7
construction permit for WNP-1 because the power from the:progect D {
' e '* * '.. t 'aX
'4%
will never be needed (in part due to its high cost), financing':$Mp BPAcannotbe[legalif'f.Y[X
.%.t.j.QQ for the project will never be possible,
<w v
. :. W -s.
y3 responsible for halting the
- project, and the period..of'. tie e d.
.@:. f j :'U ' My
. tu'yd requested for the extension is entirely unrealistic and who11
.c....
- m.E. 14
W:bk*,Y,MTU7J iaposaib1e for WPPSS to meet.
1&[t'b
~~%
G g/.yy.l pirm
"$.N,
% i;/ %-
.g
...i.
INTERROGATORY 18:
What is the basis for your responsifM6 2W h Yf hfit;y.or interrogatories 16 and 177
. ~. -
.. / 9.I.% Mb..y
- Nb-c
" Northwest Conservation and Electric Power Plan".%
f,
RESPONSE
+ ~ g. -4;.
t.
...s) 1983 by the Northwest Power Planning Council',p$*T.d.'.
'/
Volume I, April 27,
- fdw the " Analysis of Alternatives Related to WNP-3",)Maye;Ja.n Table 6-2,
-{ :'n u.:pl**y*C 26, 1983 by the Bonn.eville Power Adminstration, and page,28 ofyg..,
~
r ;;t.i,.,.,
'. f.$
Electric Power and Conservation Plan for the Pacificyh{*!.
the
""odel
- ,...i
- o r.-.
Con servation ~ Act.g;" ' O..'
Northwc r' ",
November 1982 by the Northwest v.
8409270376 840824 9
d
^-
PDR FOIA
,g. ::a COHEN 84-603 PDR W
F m- _. _ _ _
.a
'g
,l s
,?.
.4
'.- (
z, -
e fn
')
Coa'it.on.
g.,.. l.
s.1; -
~
J.'- ih.. '
.s' -:., [.y;-.,,..
5
.;4.s. %~
Respectfully submitted, f.%... - J nJ'n.* %i ; i
.y yr
.:3~y :
'\\; h; *;('W24fcT:; As G.,Qi.*,5 )m.~;s
.., t
.3 :s.
,.n NM%u.
~
.,p
< wd.
7...e ;.3
.r..
.,.9,6
..h
.; w h f,.3-2
~
. ;.,W 7 r$.,l, $.gE Dated this day, the 13th na Be11 y
of July., 1983.
Coalition for Safe Power.
.=
. m.. q o.. w..s..:r.,. m...
.w
.... _.t.m %.pw.i e.. ;;di'.h:4WPSE
.. >it W
.h W
...... m.+nf&i.:.%
J.'_r :
+ w p n 6.T. % jPt.y 9
,N s,.%s.A.
. 3
,y.ha%p:7, g'k.qt) 4 it.:.%h.
gy s.& ~.f.WsAPsi
..;w. :k.:4.Mn.w q -;;.: Q G E.
... :y ye n 1:n. $ '.t.~; y,.9.;.Q.g, u
- ?.' 9- ):.9$$hit
-.' c..g rgM........rg.
s.
t
~'W,.-
t V
. Ti %4 7,; h W
- -~ -V ~,. 'i
>m/R
,.. w... cd x.1,...k,s. f.
- N.- M..f
-T >?M'G':.d hhh%%y n4.i c1 r.Q. viWMMHT,!.6 69.4JQ w --?p ~tik ^
a.....
. M. sp
.....,e:
..-'; y..
N.yl:
..-: ' ?a..-. jH,i &q@;0 f.*
?.
.p-M; ;,.:.
,;, r.
.. ~ co s n,cr? *.
-. e. o,.
W ' J.3*g e. !I s h,*vm e, 6 a 9.
. d.4.1.3.i.xikelik,
'. +. g gg,f.M...
t
- .I h%,3*. Irf,
'f 3=
t w;e,.
M 1 SiW, :n r,,
1 w:
w.
..,.. r%, ; ;r s.
,.,., ?,
.,s,. ;
b
't'
- ?
.h,,. h
= #3 -
s l *
- t :,Qs ;'b. sh W.. e.. ; *.. g,.S..
.$,.. :-t+p g r*,
l.
.#.,2L b e
-41
, f.u,.4 c.. -F Id
-r v,+
s
.\\
j.
t
.*w
. s 7 ! = ? * '.';. -
..u...
0
. S*
d D
..h '
g.
g
' b.' h A
.6 a
w.
r:
1
..-)
O
^#
,:n 1/
,g
.1
. 4 o-
...n,..-
),.~< g,: '
' s. '
- t *y M ' '-.
$ :.j.p'
. :. 3.7.,L R 3
m,..
x X..ilf.;p;..u.
k un.r;...J;
=
.t 0
f,,1chQ:. sn' q S~ ATE OF OREGON
)
) as.
- N F., 4.1
.s County of Mu;tnomah )
- q, g- <.
- s....;.,.,,.?;
s.
W,. a,,
a
..,,2..-
& =.4 *,r 3
. ' f".[M(* * #.'
. j MJ,fk ;
Nana Swll, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
That she is the Staff Intervenor of the Coalition for Safe
,4 ;-
y
-Power, and that the contents of "INTERVENOR'S UPDATED
.J,I?".'.'is'?fl RESPONS~~.S TO NRC STAFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES, JULY' i.*,4T' %
13, 190,3" and "INTERVENOR'S UPDATED RESPONSES TO APPLICANT'S 'NI.hif *'t!
FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES, JULY 13, 1983" are true and 5.,.;f,@.Yi correct to the best of her information, knowledge and
. ) j.1},0.'.'
belief.
All responses therein were prepared by herself and t Ck.. 'M Eugerie Rosolie
.4.('re.f.,' d y
-s 3
s.., = %
.. w*
.4-.:, %... \\+4 4
S1gned:
. ; ;.;g % *.,,, g y s e
.y,)4.o.:v.7,,,,
..4
> c.~.
L;/ >
,g
,19 bh;;. 7.,
.. y..g,e,,. g
.s.-
s
.. g r
-1rM% _
Nina Bell
- -WM..-M.
gh 4 i,9, Coalition for Safe Power sp;
.g. v.
thia / __ __ day of k "-
SU " R T B 'I D AND SWORN to before me 4
..N. ' W C
>b 1983.
[
2; y ' :.,.
..1. Y! N ;,7, f
i,[$ '.yth a
~ b t.s<n t. e
-w
.o J.,..... Jr-MyCommissionExpires:$-/[-((i-}{e' t;'
Notary P lic for Oregon
{.$
j
- y. j,e.
r
'?..; y. yjy
- f.,
r;
, s 4
)~<h
[
.d 'i N 4. 's
's i
'l f
g.
'g t
.i I
,,j'.
- e.,
11 -
,d! r. ',.\\.
t
,l i
i i [,'
I 0.
e.>
g
.g l
[ fi ) e,. s
, t. Y.
g I
l-
.n g,j i
'l
$.,.1
,t.i
+.
)..
.6
,.g i
. ; - [.: s.-
.r; 4.q
... - -...l. J ',. M :-
.9-.-
-.-2
Ib
.s. J
- 3. -
i.
s...<.
/
j, g-.,:,
4.;*. n c
' 5 m-4. J; *'..
g
- e
! ^ t{'. V, -f. -
-.,.w t,: v.c,
?w
.s
..' * % %..-) 1 s.u
...a e,, i. <..s c..
.y..h.*W4i.- M
....... ] } ; Q ~J 7-;f:r
- l1 4 p>+.6-
,, t 5 TATE OF OREGON
)
.,. 0. '. G V... -n...:
) aa.
County of Multnomah )
4/ 4 l 1,%. q ',,!
.. Y ' 3.*i4(??h
. ;f! 4 h.Pis.yE:
iW4F ' ' y 4.ON;iCQ7v Bell, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
- 4. 'N,.p.'e 4-CO4 N2na the Staff Intervenor of the Coalition for Safe" i J i?4Gi..'1 Thst she is
' N $. 5.A..;I['[
Power, and that the contents of "INTERVENOR'S UPDATED 4
RESPONSES TO NRC STAFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES, JULY E.,-./.'-ev f,/ ;
4 gj.
c and "INTERVENOR'S UPDATED RESPONSES TO APPLICANT'S }.y Q Q 13, 19 * '3 "
INTERROGATORIES, JULY 13, 1983" are true and
'4 e d. j FIRST SET OF best of her information, knowledge and
$4 responses therein were. prepared by herself and..i.d.y.h,14.ij w correct to the j.
belief.
All
- i. p h '@...k. 'f... '.f..A.,.
Eugene Rosolie t
-~m,7
.el1,.'O.yE.n?!
g-
- r
-y..
.F 4
/. h' ' ' = e.
Si9ned:
p.;;;-:tM.,.,e%'. '
,..s
... m
. s m a., e.1
- s.,6$.',e,,-t[
- g
~
c.,
..s o 3
~
.%c'@ m, M_
__ ____ - } $ T.P,Q j'!',
' < ' { 4 E ' "r,.M Nina Be11
.t ' +..,., c Coalition for Safe Power
-i.,.,
- i.-l.-hi
- ..Q f Idhik EUPR! BED AND SWORN to before me this /,,,_.,_ day of
- 4.. :h.b..... . t.*v.
__ _, 1983.
v.;c@ -.a 2~
. ;i :~.'y
't../*l
.~,.- f:.' '.*h Notary P olic for Oregon My Commiasion Expires: 4 -/f-(( '.'
"* M '-
- 9. #-,
, L
's
,...a....,
x w..
3 gjy-r
\\. r.. p :.
y -
- f. *.'.y.'
- s. -
. 7.> g. *. '
._..-.--,,'s
~
.t.. '. - t
1
-4
.c L
y 3-1-.
/
. v.
~
without velidity.
Furthermore, continued construction of UNP.'V
- c. y.lh i-NI night bankrupt the region.
c:. 4 %. Yiw
)
g
- S
- k for --: yourf';:.-.a,i ry INTERROGATORY 13:
What la the factual baala p o w e r f r cu n ~l. C :?
~
statement that
" Petitioner...does not believe the y.' S' 75".4 YOF J
WNP-1 will ever be needed"?
n.
.s
...... -T.x. :,;.s.r. y c and Electric' Powe.@;;.a. >, [~
j
RESPONSE
The
" Northwest Conservation t
.!a-
- s
-a:
Plan",
Volume
.I, April 27, 1983 by the Northwest Power Planning),gC.'.l'.
s m
.a.. if A;..;. i P o w e r a n d '. W.
.S - ~<
- Council, Table 6-1, and the "Model Electric A
Conservation Plan for the Pacific Northwest", Nove mber.'1982, #.' bpf.91Y
~
e f
.. Yh.'O '.t,-2
~.5 s.
the Northwest Conservation Act Coalition (page 28).
< i.c
. w p$.. a v.
W.
..., $, s.~y INTERROGATORY 14: la it Your contention that if and when,}the,. W'"E
.>s
'2 WNP-1 la completed and ready to operate, it will not be oper,ated,rcI,.75; because there would be no need for the power?
...;g j.g%~.@-
g.
- E'l.*<m M" %ju RESPONSE: Yes.
i=
~
e n
.e
.a You contend are releva.n.t.p<
7-
'NTIRFOGATORY 15:
What'factora do 2,: 's.-
j,g@.,t[;t 7 an est-ts.ng whether power from WNP-1 will ever be needed?,
" Northwest Conservat. ion Q,-;.'.
i 3.
f, 6 RIS?ONSE:
The factors listed in the
.1 n &. er
- .
- i 1983 by. t.h.,e. ', :.?
and E;ertric Power Plan",
Volume I,
April 27, s
....3
~
~ h ' 5.NG...)*:k.
Northwes Power Planning Council, the " Analysis of Alternatives}g;;.,
a
. ~.. -
4 - -+.;,#
.1,..
Re ated to WNP-3",
May 26, 1983 by the Bonneville Powere,. g
- k-4 '<bWtlh' Adminstratien, the "Model Electric Power and Conservation. Plan..JA.:#.
y; w.
..A for th-Pacific Northwest",
November 1982 by the Northwest' 4 -.. W;7'b '.ll C o n s.t r v 3 t :.,n Act Coalition, and the
" Analysis of R e s o u r c e $,.>.::
,s.
.....->c.
a:
A ; t e : r. : *.. v o r."
dated April 19, 1982 by BPA.
.'.M.y :v M... c-6#.6
.I
-n.
,u.
l ',
Respectfully
- bmitted, i
6< s,-. r.-
s
'. ?l:! ^.w','
5 l
t l
.~
l
)...,. r.
[.
1',
C a t e.d
.o d..s y, the 13th Nina Bell cf Ju;y,
Coalition for Safe Power
[.
i l
! - 5. l..
'f X.-
6.
--2 t
1 e,
o s.,
s
- f. !
- 9. O ympia, WA 98501) on or about June 10, 1983.
3
...".T.. z., -
i s A L A B,7 2 2,,.,.'.y,. +,
The legal basis identified by the intervenor to date
.a.. w ~
< %, : W(. '
onswer to Interrogatory.*.No N. v INTERROGATORY 11(b):
If yourset forth and explain fully / ho.wy' y.
w.
11(a) is in the affirmative, D I'
.T. 4 %jr t, factual basis or legal authority for this contention.
m ; t :.
h.
Q ~t-s N
" u l t i m a t e '
R* I?
RESPONSE
ALAB-722 establishes that the
. S.w El I. ; i u.+ t cause" d'etermination is expected to encompass a Judgement:- about r;. 4.;,n
.. 4 * + n. '.?; r M 4 ;; 34>
.t.
not to rest solely uport:rg.;yv
....w.:
- fi why the plant should be completed and is
,.,: y
.v..a n
I, the' applicant's fault for delay", "whether good. y ;,,. g a
judgewnt as s.t p p:.
- r..
- , ~ -
- a cause e
- u sts to egend the construi: tion completion date".and t at y / '.
continued f'w..i.wh "a
u d '3 + m e n t must still be made as to whether T
<.i
? A'o
.t.;
2 q construe-ion should nonetheless be allowed."
The Appeals Board...h r,m ?
t.
2
- w. -
k ?. M y
also discusses the temporary lack of need for power anct lackjof4 g;&c 1 G.,M$b financina ac factors which cause delay with valid businesag,.f.f3 2
- C,l....%
a distinction between a " deferral"4 ofl*f'j -!fQ purposes.
Intervenor sees s ' r E.n. /f '
W-lack of need or slowing of growth rate,.with yl%:f %.
need and a temporary a, 3. +
. u.
t.
the former a more suitable description of the instant case.
4.cfpq f
$ :* '.'idC&
5 'l.;&MQ
!N'ERROGATORY 12: (a) Do you claim that the actual deferrel.[if ruig in the need for power in the Northwest United States does'. not G I'.jp justify deferring construction of WNP-17 j
ac'dm').f (b) E:< plain fully your answer to Interrogatory No. 12(a).F 34:sr.',
t is in the p.}CC' te)
If your answer to Interrogatory No. 12(a) that l.p:,
affirmative, state the relevance of your statement NorthwestUnited,6.'.,p[
will ever.be.i.%.,Al "Potitioner...does not belive the power from WNP-1 needed" to your claim that need for pow'er in the States 9.es not justify deferring construction of WNP-1.
. j...':. ;;,
.( a )
Yes.
(b)
The
" deferral of need" austifies N' O.o d, W 5..
e s..
. c ) p.r'.',,-
(
canceliction of the project not a deferral of construction.
If there as never a
need for the plant, the pla'nt should'be C -
'ep,Id rS.)
plant's principle purposejis,,t.*c.:/
i cancelled, not deferred, because a 5 '.$9 W to provide needed electricity. The basis for the NRC's decisionl '. W
, - e.:.%
construction permit has proven to be totally,.';.),
to grant WNp-1 a
i y.,.
s e
h
,,,.}}