ML20126K957

Motion to Strike Portions of 850626 Prefiled Testimony. Quadrex Findings & Whether Reportable Per 10CFR50.55(e) Not Subj of Hearing.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence

ML20126K957
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	07/08/1985
From:	Sinkin L Citizens Concerned About Nuclear Power, INC.
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
CON-#385-988 OL, NUDOCS 8507300531
Download: ML20126K957 (3)

Text

"

E%ATED COllRESPONDEMf2 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 7/8/85 88CKETED NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION USMC BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD JUL 29 Ali:15 In the Matter of (

HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER ( Docket Nos. 50-498 OL OCHYT?t W NCH Gfshv r

COMPANY, ET AL. ) 50-499 OL (SouthTexasNuclearProject, (

Units 1 and 2) )

CCANP MOTION TO STRIKE On June 26, 1985, CCANP received the prefiled testimony of the Applicants and the NRC Staff. CCANP herein files its motion.to strike portions of said testimony.

The substance of Quadrex findings and whether they were in fact reportable pursuant to 10 C.F.R. Section 50.55(e) is not the subject of this hearing. The Board's Memorandum and Order (Phase II Hearings on Quadrex-Report Issues) dated February 26 sets forth at page 24 the contentions at issue in this proceeding. Regarding 10 C.F.R. Section 50.55(e) the contention is as follows:

9. The Applicants failure to notify the NRC (Region IV) of the Quadrex Report, and many findings beyond those actually reported, within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> from the time HL&P became aware of the findings or pFospective findings of the Report (including drafts) violates 10 C.F.R. Section 50.55(e)(2) ...." (emphasis added. .

The Board's use of the word notify and the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> time period clearly limits the issue to the preliminary notification. The fact that a finding was ultimately not reportable is irrelevant.

Furthermore, permitting such testimony raises an issue for which CCANP had no notice, i.e. the adequacy of HL&P's ultimate determination as-to reportability.

CCANP, therefore, moves to strike all testimony by Applicants and the NRC Staff on whether a given finding was ultimately reportable.

Specific testimony sought to be struck is:

1. Goldberg: page 36, line 20 - Sentence beginning "After the NRC."

page 37, line 23 - Sentence beginning " Subsequently, Bechtel" continuing to page 38, the end of Answer 46 [under 10 CFR Section50.55(e)].

8507300531 850708 ADOCK 0500 8 hM ]

page 47, line 1 - Sentence beginning "Bechtel has since."

2. Bernsen and Lopez: Page 33, line 5 - Sentence beginning "As a result" to end of answer (" redesign or reanalysis").

page 50, line 14 - Sentence beginning "However, HL&P."

page 52, line 15 - Sentence beginning "Bechtel's review" to end of answer (" safety-related component"),

page 67, line 7 - Sentence beginning "In any case."

page 93,.line 27 - Sentence beginning "It was later" to end of answer ("significant safety issue").

page 104, line 11 - Sentence beginning "However, the design" to end of answer ("to the contrary").

page 105, line 10 - Sentence beginning " Subsequently, this finding."

3. Taylor: page 5, Ans. 13 - The words "or as a reportable item."

page 10, Ans. 23 - The words "and subsequent evaluation demonstrated this item to be not reportable."

page 44, Ans. 133 - Sentence beginning "It was subsequently."

page 46, Ans. 138 - Sentence beginning "As a final outcome."

page 51, Ans. 155 - The phrase beginning "but later withdrew" to the end of the sentence [" requirements of 50.55(e)"].

CCANP moves the Board to strike the specified testimony.

Res ectfully submitted, b

Lanny inkin Representative for Intervenor, Citizens Concerned About Nuclear Power, Inc.

3022 Porter St., N.W. #304 Washington, D.C. 20008 (202) 966-2141 Dated: July 8, 1985 Austin, Texas

. .,- uN 11 E 1. E l a.T iT D a t: W : t r, Nt CLUA PEUUL A T CF; '~ M*11151 Jr.

III URE 1 HE AlDMIC. SA;ET Y AND LICENDING f(DARU In the Matter of (

ICCGTjo .

HOU3 TON LIGHTING AND ( Docket Nos. 50-499 OL POWER COMPANY, ET AL. ) 50-499 OL .

(South Texas Project, (

Units 1 and 2) (

'85 R 29 All:15 CESI1E1C91E DE SE6 MICE [0CK T?tfg [ h ['

BRANCH I hereby certify that copies of CCANP's Motion to Strike were served by hand delivery (*) or deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage paid to the following individuals and entities on the lith day of July 1985 n . q;1 (q35 (p),

+ Charles Bechhoeier, Esquire h Bri an Berwi ck , Ecquiie Chairman Asst. Atty. Gen.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board State of Texac U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Environmtl. Protection Washington, D.C. 20555 P. O. Box 12548, Capitol Sta.

Austin, Tenas 78711

• D r . James C. Lamb, III Administrative Judge + Oreste Russ Pirfo, Esquire 010 Woodhaven Road Office of the Enec. Leg. Dir.

Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

Washington, D.C. 20555

• Frederick J. Shon Administrative Judge + Jack R. Newman, Esquire U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1615 L Street, NW, suite 1000 Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20036

%Melbert Schwarc, Esquire Baker and Botts

• Mr s . Peggy Buchorn 300 One Shell Pl s::a Executi ve Director , C.E.U. Houston, Texas 77002 Route 1, Box 1694 Bracoria, Tenas 77422 gAtomic Lafety and Licencing Bd.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

hWilliamS. Jordan, III, Esq. Washington, D.C. 20555 Harmon, WeiEs & Jordan

- 2001 S Street, N.W.. Suite 400 N Atomic Safetv and Liconsing Washington, D.C. 20009 Appeal Board U.S. Nuc1 car Regulatory Comm..

Washington. D.C. 20555

%' Pat Coy 5106 Casa Oro Service Section San Antonio, Tenas 70253 p'Docketingand Office of the Secretary

• Ray Goldstein U.S. Nucleer Regulatory Comm.

1001 Vaughn Bldg. Washington, D.C. 205$5 807 Dra::os Austin, Texas 78701 Lanny :31nkin