ML20133J021

Motion to Establish Listed Schedule for Phase III of ASLB 811216 Fourth Prehearing Conference Order Re Issue F Concerning QA for Operations & Contention 3 Re Overpressurization.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20133J021
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	10/16/1985
From:	Newman J HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO., NEWMAN & HOLTZINGER
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
CON-#485-799 OL, NUDOCS 8510180230
Download: ML20133J021 (7)

Text

. ..

C DOCKETED pn -

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA '85 ECT 16 N1 :14 4

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORETHEATOMICSAFETYANDLICENSINGBOXRbf,([.,[Y . -

1 In the Matter of )

)

HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER ) Docket Nos. 50-498 OL COMPANY, _ET _AL. ) 50-499 OL

)

(South Texas Project, Units 1 )

and 2) )

APPLICANTS' MOTION TO ESTABLISH SCHEDULE FOR PHASE III I

I. Introduction The Board's Fourth Prehearing Conference Order (December 1

16, 1981), divided this hearing into three phases. Phase i I is complete and has resulted in the issuance of the Board's 1

.l Partial Initial Decision of March 14, 1984 (LPB-84-13, 19 NRC 659). In Phase II, the record has been closed, proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law were filed by Applicants on September 30, 1984, and subsequent filings by CCANP, the NRC Staff and Applicants are scheduled for November 4, November 18, and November 26, respectively. No schedule has been established for Phase III, which is limited to consideration of Issue F (QA for operations) /and CCANP Contention 3 (over-pressurization). *

• / The Board has indicated that "during the consideration of Issue F (QA for operations) in Phase III, the Appli-cants and Staff will update (as appropriate) the testi-mony presented with respect to Issue C dealing with HL&P's organization for operations." 19 NRC at 668.

8510180230 851016 c PDR ADOCK 05000498 3 -

G PDR ,

t

II. Motion

.; _ Applicants hereby move the Board for an Order establishing i

a schedule for Phase III as follows:  ;

2

a. Discovery for Phase III begins on the date that ,

the NRC Staff files its proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law for Phase II.

b. Discovery ends 60 days later (i.e., all interroga- i

, tories, requests for production of documer.ts,  ;

etc., must be filed in sufficient time to permit l

response by that date in accordance with NRC i i

regulations).

1 l

i

c. Pre-filed testimony is filed by all parties

. f 15 days.after the end of discovery. l

+

d. Phase III hearing begins 15 days after the filing Ic i

j of pre-filed testimony.  !

l

)

III. Discussion h

'  ?

Applicants have discussed the proposed schedule with  !

the NRC Staff and CCANP. The NRC Staff has authorized us

! [

to state that it has no objeebions to the schedule. The

['

CCANP representative has stated that he does not agree with '

the schedule and that no effort should be spent on Phase .

III until a Partial Initial Decision (PID) has beein issued for Phase II. Applicants believe that CCANP's position is i totally unacceptable. I k

t First, there is absolutely na reason why the period 3

i between the filing of proposed findings and conclusions in l

! Phase II and the' issuance of the Phase II PID should not l I t

s

--- , -y- ,,._, . , . . . , ,- ,we. +,. . - . , , - . . . . , ,

. -i, - - - - . - > _ , - ,,,e.. . , - , , ..-~.we- .;6--. . w,--,. %----,r-. --. .,

be gainfully utili. zed in advancing the conduct of Phase III.

The activities proposed by Applicants create no dual burden for CCANP or the Staff. Since they will have submitted their proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law for Phase l II, they will be free to conduct discovery and prepare testi-

mony. Although Applicants will still be preparing their reply findings, they voluntarily accept that dual burden in order to commence Phase III expeditiously. Furthermore,

{ since the Board has only limited involvement during the dis-covery phase, it will not be distracted from writing its Phase II PID.

Second, NRC regulations contemplate that "the hearing process for the resolution of controverted matters (will be] conducted as expeditiously as possible, consistent with i

the development of an adequate decisional record." 10 C.F.R. Part 2, App. A, S V. Fuel load for STP Unit 1 is presently scheduled for December, 1986. Prompt. initiation of Phase III discovery will permit such discovery to be completed prior'to the time that Phase II appeals (if any) and responsive

pleadings are prepared and submitted. Unless discovery for

Phase III is initiated promptly, there is a substantial possi-bility that it will be difficult to prepare for and hold i

the Phase III hearings on a basis consistent with a timely i

1 decision on issuance of the operating license.

Third, the issues remaining for Phase III are quite distinct from the issues heard in Phase II. Accordingly, j

i there is no reason to wait for the Phase II PID before com-mencing Phase III.

, , _ - , , - . _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ . _ . - , . , _ _ _ _m .. _ . _ . . __- _ . _ _ .- , , - , - . _ . _ - - .

_4_

Finally, a discovery period of 60 days is appropriate in view of the limited scope of the two issues in controversy.

As to Issue F (QA for operations), the parties have been served with both the pertinent amendments to the FSAR and the Staff's draft SER. Discovery was conducted with respect to Contention 3 (overpressurization) prior to the Phase I hearing and thus, any remaining discovery on this limited issue should not be extensive.

< +

IV. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, Applicants' Motion to Establish Schedule for Phase III should be granted. Applicants respect ~

fully request that a conference call to discuss the Motion be scheduled by the Board within a week after its receipt j of CCANP's response thereto.-/

I Respectfully submitted,

! 7Z.g[ [ [ fces-  !

i Jack R. Newman Maurice Axelrad i

f- Alvin H. Gutterman l Steven P. Frantz Donald J. Silverman .

i 1615 L Street, N.W. I Washington, D.C. 20036 1

Finis E. Cowan <

3000 One Shell. Plaza f '

Houston, Texas 77002 i

e

< l

~*/ Since the NRC Staff has authorized us to state its

position, we have-b4en advised by the Staff that it I

will not be filing a response.  !

t

• i

' i

.- . . _ _ - - , _ _ .. - __ . _ _ - . . . _ _ . . . , . . _ ._ _. . ~ - ~ _ _ , . . . , .- . , -

1 Dated: October 14, 1985 1 NEWMAN & HOLTZINGER, P.C. ATTORNEYS FOR HOUSTON LIGHTING

'. 1615 L Street, N.W. & POWER COMPANY, Project Manager Washington, D.C. 20036 of the South Texas Project acting herein.~on behalf of itself and BAKER & BOTTS the other Applicants, THE CITY OF 3000 One Shell Plaza SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS, acting by and Houston, Texas 77002 through the City Public Service c: e. Board of the City of San Antonio, CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY,

,_s and CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS ,

i 4

• , 1 1

1 3

L

,_, , , . _ , ~ . _

i . .

I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

^

BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD

In the Matter of )

)

J HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER ) Docket Nos. 50-498 OL COMPANY, ET AL. ) 50-499 OL  :

)

,l (South Texas Project, Units 1 )

and 2) )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of " Applicants' Motion to Establish Schedule for Phase III," dated October 14, 1985, has i

been served on the following individuals and entities by deposit in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid, on this 14th day of October, 1985.

Charles Bechhoefer, Esq. Brian Berwick, Esq.

Chairman, Administrative Judge Assistant Attorney General Atomic Safety and Licensing for the State of Texas Board Environmental Protection U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Division Washington, D.C. 20555 P. O. Box 12548, Capitol Station Austin, TX 78711 Dr. James C. Lamb, III Administrative Judge Kim Eastman, Co-coordinator 313 Woodhaven Road Barbara A. Miller Chapel Hill, NC 27514 Pat Coy Citizens Concerned About Frederick J. Shon Nuclear Power Administrative Judge 5106 Casa Oro Atomic Safety and Licensing Board San Antonio, TX 78233 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Lanny Alan Sinkin 3022 Porter St., N.W., #304 Mrs. Peggy Buchorn Washington, D.C. 20008 Executive Director

! Citizens for Equitable Ray Goldstein, Esq.

! Utilities, Inc. Gray, Allison & Becker Route 1, Box 1684 1001 Vaughn Building

Brazoria, TX 77422 807 Brazos Austin, Texas 78701-2553 4

I e

_ . . _ - . , _ _ .--,-~,_ _ . . . - . . _ , _ ,-- _ - - -. . ._ - _ . . , _

, -. ++

3-Oreste Russ Pirfo, Esq.

Robert G. Perlis, Esq.

Office of the Executive Legal 1 Director

, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

, Washington, D.C. 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i Washington, D.C. 20555 4

Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Docketing and Service Section Office of_the Secretary J U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 ,

h /'

W i,

1 i

I t

)

i e

{

i

__, _ _ . . . _ , _ - , _ _ - _ __ _ - . , _ _ . _ - _ . . _ _ - - . . . , . . _ , -