ML20127F040
| ML20127F040 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Braidwood  |
| Issue date: | 06/21/1985 |
| From: | Brenner L Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO., NEINER, B. (BOB NEINER FARMS, INC.), NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| References | |
| CON-#285-554 OL, NUDOCS 8506240764 | |
| Download: ML20127F040 (2) | |
Text
e UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 08CyKETED g gpC Before Administrative Judges:
Lawrence Brenner, Chairman Dr. A. Dixon Callihan Dr. Richard F. Cole 0FFICE OF SECRETAF 5' 00CXETING & SEPVI'1 BRANCH
)
In the Matter of
)
Docket Nos. 50-4560 L-
)
50-457 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (Braidwood Nuclear Power Station,
)
June 21, 1985 Units 1 and 2)
)
g b JUN?AM
)
ORDER RECONSIDERING ADMISSION OF NEINER FARMS CONTENTION 4 (RAILROAD EXPLOSION)
The Board is in essential agreement with Applicant's Objections, at 4-7 (April 29,1985) and the NRC Staff's Response, at 6-11 (May 20, 1985), that paragraph (c) of Neiner Farms' Contention 4 is barred from litigation in this proceeding by 10 C.F.R. 5 50.13(a). Accordingly, the Board now rules that Neiner Contention 4(c) is rejected as an issue in controversy.
The Board is in essential agreement with the Staff that Applicant's other objections to the entire Contention 4 are not well-founded. See Staff Response, at 3-6; Applicant's Objections, at 2-4.
Applicant claims that all parts, (a) (b) and (c), of the contention are barred by Section 50.13(b). We hold that the alleged railroad shipments which are the subject of the contention are not a "use or deployment of weapons l562jgggoo 56 0
PDR S
t I
\\, incident to U.S. defense activities," given the meaning of the words and the purpose of the regulation. Therefore, Neiner Farms Contention 4(a) and (b) remain as issues in controversy in this proceeding.
The Board will issue a future memorandum and order which more fully sets forth the reasons for the rulings announced in this order.
The parties have reported that settlement negotiations on Neiner Contention 4 are in progress. Status Report, at 2 (May 31, 1985).
If the contention is not settled, the Board has some concern that given our prior ruling on the inapplicability of collateral estc.opel, the present
~
wording of Contention 4(a) and (b) does not accurately identify what is truly in controversy. The parties shall continue to pursue the possibility of settlement and shall also discuss whether the wording of the contention should be modified. The parties shall report to the Board on these matters by a received date of July 12, 1985.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Lawrence Brenner, Chairman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Bethesda, Maryland June 21, 1985