ML20126A014
| ML20126A014 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 06/11/1985 |
| From: | Clark H, Ferguson G, Paris O Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| References | |
| CON-#285-390 OL, NUDOCS 8506130199 | |
| Download: ML20126A014 (3) | |
Text
i
'!$70 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges:
Hugh K. Clark, Chairman 00LKETED Dr. George A. Ferguson Dr. Oscar H. Paris 1Ei Jll12 A10:15 0FFICE OF SECiidTARY 00CKETlHG & SERVICf.
y DocketNo.Sb$h0L In the' Matter of J
ILLIN0IS POWER COMPANY, et al.
SERVED JUN 121985
)
(Clinton-Power Station, Unit No. 2)
)
June 11, 1985 -
)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Requesting Additional Information On Unit 2 Excavation)
On May 17, 1985, Applicant Illinois Power Company filed a " Motion to Terminate Proceeding" (Motion) in which it requested this Board to
~
authorize the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reacter Regulation (NRR) to rescind Construction' Permit No. CPPR-138, issued for Clinton Power Station Unit 2, and terminate this proceeding without prejudice.
Applicant represented that Intervenor Prairie Alliance and counsel for the NRC Staff had indicated that they did not oppose the Motion.
On May 29, 1985, the People of the State of Illinois (State) filed an answer to. Applicant's Motion. The State does not object to the termination of the proceeding, per se, but it did question the method proposed by Applicant for remediation of the Unit 2 excavation area.
The State requested the Board to order that a detailed environmental,
1 b --safety and cost assessment be conducted for the proposed remediation method before the method is approved.
The Staff responded to Applicant's Motion on June 6, 1985, indicating _that while it had previously authorized the Applicant to represent that the Staff did not object to the grant of Applicant's Motion, it wanted to place on the record its views as to certain conditions for environmental redress of the Unit 2 site. Accompanying Staff's response was~the Affidavit of Germain Laroche (Affidavit), Land Use Analyst in NRC's NRR. The Affidavit addressed the environmental conditions of the Unit 2 site and indicated measures that the Staff proposed taking to address any detrimental environmental impacts of the site. The Affidavit did not address the safety or cost concerns raised by the State.
Before rendering its decision on Applicant's Motion, the Board wishes to have additional information about the Unit 2 excavation. We believe that we may be able to obtain the information we need by examining the photographs and maps referred to by Mr. Laroche in his Affidavit at 1 4.
The photographs and maps were prepared by the resident inspectors at Clinton Unit 1 at Mr. Laroche's request. We believe that the Staff, perhaps through the resident inspectors at the site, can also make available to the State and Prairie Alliance, should the parties so request, copies of the photographs and maps provided for the Board.
- J.
ef '
ORDER Upon consideration of the foregoing and the entire record in this matter it is this lith day of June, 1985 ORDERED 1.
That the Staff shall provide each member of the Board with the photographs, maps, and accompanying explanations referred to in paragraph 4 of the Affidavit of Germain Laroche dated June 6, 1985.
2.
That upon the request of one or more of the parties to this proceeding, the Staff shall make available to the parties a copy or copies of the material provided the Board.
THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD CWk V
g Hugh K. CTark, Chairman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE t
- s. v 1]I IDi i
George A. Fergusqtf '
ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE UVV kW $
Oscar H. Paris-ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Bethesda, Maryland