|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20196J3291999-06-28028 June 1999 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Industry Codes & Standards ML20206M7291999-04-30030 April 1999 Comment Supporting Draft RG DG-1083, Content of UFSAR IAW 10CFR50.71(e). Licensee of Listed Plants in Total Agreement with Comments Provided to NRC by NEI HL-5717, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50,52 & 72 Re Changes, Tests & Experiments.Util in Total Agreement with NEI Comments to Be Provided to NRC1998-12-18018 December 1998 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50,52 & 72 Re Changes, Tests & Experiments.Util in Total Agreement with NEI Comments to Be Provided to NRC HL-5715, Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Nuclear Power Plants.Util Is in Total Agreement with NEI Comments1998-12-14014 December 1998 Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Nuclear Power Plants.Util Is in Total Agreement with NEI Comments HL-5702, Comment Supporting NEI Comments Totally on Proposed Draft RG DG-4005, Preparation of Supplemental Environmental Repts for Applications to Renew Nuclear Power Plant Ols1998-10-23023 October 1998 Comment Supporting NEI Comments Totally on Proposed Draft RG DG-4005, Preparation of Supplemental Environmental Repts for Applications to Renew Nuclear Power Plant Ols HL-5695, Comment Supporting Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Comments on 10CFR50.55(a) Pr, Streamlined Hearing Process for NRC Approval of License Transfers1998-10-13013 October 1998 Comment Supporting Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Comments on 10CFR50.55(a) Pr, Streamlined Hearing Process for NRC Approval of License Transfers HL-5690, Comment on Integrated Review of Assessment Process for Commercial Nuclear Plants. Util in Total Agreement with NEI Comments Provided to NRC1998-10-0505 October 1998 Comment on Integrated Review of Assessment Process for Commercial Nuclear Plants. Util in Total Agreement with NEI Comments Provided to NRC HL-5983, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Reporting Requirements for Nuclear Power Reactors. Snoc in Total Agreement with NEI Comments,To Be Provided to Nrc.Requests That NRC Provide Guidance to Application of NUREG-1022,rev 1 as Listed1998-09-21021 September 1998 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Reporting Requirements for Nuclear Power Reactors. Snoc in Total Agreement with NEI Comments,To Be Provided to Nrc.Requests That NRC Provide Guidance to Application of NUREG-1022,rev 1 as Listed ML20153B2391998-09-15015 September 1998 Comment on Draft NUREG-1633, Assessment of Use of Ki as Protective Action During Severe Reactor Accidents. Endorses NEI Comments HL-5682, Comment Opposing Draft NUREG-1633, Assessment of Use of Potassium Iodide (Ki) as Protective Action During Severe Reactor Accidents, & Endorsing Comments Submitted by Nuclear Energy Institute1998-09-15015 September 1998 Comment Opposing Draft NUREG-1633, Assessment of Use of Potassium Iodide (Ki) as Protective Action During Severe Reactor Accidents, & Endorsing Comments Submitted by Nuclear Energy Institute HL-5602, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Industry Codes & Stds1998-04-0303 April 1998 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Industry Codes & Stds HL-5586, Comment on Proposed Generic Ltr, Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Sys at Npps1998-03-0404 March 1998 Comment on Proposed Generic Ltr, Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Sys at Npps HL-5582, Comment on Draft Reg Guide DG-5008, Reporting of Safeguards Events1998-02-27027 February 1998 Comment on Draft Reg Guide DG-5008, Reporting of Safeguards Events HL-5564, Comment on Draft NUREG 1555, Updated Environ Standard Review Plan1998-01-30030 January 1998 Comment on Draft NUREG 1555, Updated Environ Standard Review Plan HL-5554, Comment Supporting NEI Comments on PRM 50-63A by P Crane Recommending Emergency Planning Standard for Protective Actions Be Changed to Require Explicit Consideration of Prophylactic Use of Potassium Iodide for General Public1998-01-15015 January 1998 Comment Supporting NEI Comments on PRM 50-63A by P Crane Recommending Emergency Planning Standard for Protective Actions Be Changed to Require Explicit Consideration of Prophylactic Use of Potassium Iodide for General Public HL-5546, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule & Direct Final Rule on 10CFR50.68 & 10CFR70.24, Criticality Accident Requirements1997-12-31031 December 1997 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule & Direct Final Rule on 10CFR50.68 & 10CFR70.24, Criticality Accident Requirements HL-5529, Comment Opposing Rule 10CFR50 Re Codes & Standards,Ieee National Consensus Standard1997-12-0101 December 1997 Comment Opposing Rule 10CFR50 Re Codes & Standards,Ieee National Consensus Standard ML20199J0031997-11-24024 November 1997 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule Re Financial Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Power Reactors & Draft RG 1060 HL-5424, Comment on NUREG-1606, Proposed Regulatory Guidance Re Implementation of 10CFR50.59 (Changes,Tests or Experiments). Encourages NRC Not to Abandon 30 Yrs of Effective Implementation of 10CFR.50.59 for New Positions1997-07-0707 July 1997 Comment on NUREG-1606, Proposed Regulatory Guidance Re Implementation of 10CFR50.59 (Changes,Tests or Experiments). Encourages NRC Not to Abandon 30 Yrs of Effective Implementation of 10CFR.50.59 for New Positions ML20148N0741997-06-19019 June 1997 Comment on Proposed Suppl to Bulletin 96-001 Re Control Rod Insertion Problems.Util in Complete Agreement That Incomplete Rcca Insertion Not Acceptable HL-5407, Comment Opposing NRC Proposed Strategies to Address Licensees Need to Establish & Maintain safety-conscious Work Environ1997-05-27027 May 1997 Comment Opposing NRC Proposed Strategies to Address Licensees Need to Establish & Maintain safety-conscious Work Environ ML20137C2581997-03-18018 March 1997 Summary of Director'S Decision Under 10CFR2.206 of Mb Hobby & AL Mosbaugh, ML20137C4261997-03-18018 March 1997 Director'S Decision Under 10CFR2.206 Re Petition Re Allegation of Illegal Transfer of OLs to Southern Nuclear Operating Co.Petitions Filed by Mb Hobby & AL Mosbaugh Denied HL-5268, Comment Supporting Draft RG DG-1047, Std Format & Content for Applications to Renew NPP Ols1996-11-27027 November 1996 Comment Supporting Draft RG DG-1047, Std Format & Content for Applications to Renew NPP Ols ML20133H1131996-11-25025 November 1996 Petition for Enforcement,Per 10CFR2.206,to Revoke Northeast Utils Operating Licenses for CT Nuclear Power Stations Due to Chronic,Systemic Mismanagement Resulting in Significant Violations of NRC Safety Regulations ML20129J5481996-10-30030 October 1996 Order.* Extends Time within Which Commission May Take Sua Sponte Review of Memorandum & Order LBP-96-16 to 961129. W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 961030 ML20129K4291996-10-0202 October 1996 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR25 & 95, Access to & Protection of Classified Info HL-5247, Comment on Proposed Generic Communication, Primary Water Stress Corrosion Cracking of Control Rod Drive Mechanism & Other Vessel Head Penetrations1996-10-0101 October 1996 Comment on Proposed Generic Communication, Primary Water Stress Corrosion Cracking of Control Rod Drive Mechanism & Other Vessel Head Penetrations ML20128K2791996-09-30030 September 1996 Order.* Time within Which Commission May Take Sua Sponte Review of Memo & Order LBP-96-16 Extended Until 961030. W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 960930 ML20116J8921996-08-0202 August 1996 Withdrawal of AL Mosbaugh.* AL Mosbaugh Voluntarily Withdraws Intervention,Opposition & Contention in Proceedings.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20116J8551996-08-0202 August 1996 Joint Notice of Termination.* AL Mosbaugh Voluntarily Withdrew Intervention,Opposition & Contentions in Proceeding.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20116J8431996-08-0202 August 1996 Intervenor Response to Georgia Power Motion for Reconsideration.* Intervenor Supports Motion for Reconsideration.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20116N5881996-07-31031 July 1996 Comment Re Proposed Rule 10CFR26, Mods to Fitness-For-Duty Program Requirements. Supports NEI Comments ML20116A4931996-07-15015 July 1996 Georgia Power Company Motion for Reconsideration of 960628 Memorandum & Order Or,In Alternative,For Certification.* Gpc Requests That Board Not Require Submittal or Approval of Settlement Between Gpc & Mosbaugh.W/Certificate of Svc ML20115H2671996-07-0808 July 1996 Comment Supporting Final Rule 10CFR51, Environ Review of Renewal of Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses HL-5195, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Financial Assurance Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Power Reactors1996-06-24024 June 1996 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Financial Assurance Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Power Reactors ML20114E6491996-06-20020 June 1996 Joint Motion to Defer Issuance of Initial Decision.* Requests That ASLB Defer Issuance of Decision in Proceeding Until 960920,in Order to Allow Gpc & Mosbaugh to Reach Settlement Agreement.W/Certificate of Svc IA-95-211, Transcript of 920507 Interview of Mc Wilkins in Waynesboro, Ga.Pp 1-391996-05-0707 May 1996 Transcript of 920507 Interview of Mc Wilkins in Waynesboro, Ga.Pp 1-39 ML20129H7151996-05-0707 May 1996 Transcript of 920507 Interview of Mc Wilkins in Waynesboro, Ga.Pp 1-39 HL-5103, Comment Supporting NEI Comments on Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-63 Re Planning Std for Protective Actions for General Public Includes Stockpile or Predistribution of Ki for Prophylactic Use1996-02-0606 February 1996 Comment Supporting NEI Comments on Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-63 Re Planning Std for Protective Actions for General Public Includes Stockpile or Predistribution of Ki for Prophylactic Use ML20096A4911995-12-22022 December 1995 Georgia Power Co Reply to Intervenor & NRC Staff Proposed Findings of Facts & Conclusions of Law.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20095D9821995-12-12012 December 1995 Georgia Power Co Motion to Correct Record of Exhibits of Diesel Generator Reporting Issues Allegation Hearing.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20095D9771995-12-0808 December 1995 Comment on Proposed Generic Ltr Boraflex Degradation in Spent Fuel Pool Starage Racks. Request for Licensees to Demonstrate Subcriticality Margin in Unborated Water,Seems Inconsistent W/Stated Benefit of Borated Water ML20094S2751995-11-30030 November 1995 Intervenor Final Statement of Fact & Conclusions of Law.* Board Finds That Util & Applicant Failed to Meet Burden of Proof Re Ultimate Issue of Character,Competence & Integrity. W/Svc List ML20094S2411995-11-22022 November 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Intervenors Motion for Continuance.* Intervenor Motion Unjustified & Prejudicial & Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20094S2931995-11-21021 November 1995 Intervenor Motion for Continuance for Good Cause.* Requests Deadline for Filing Post Hearing Brief Be Extended Until 951130.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20094K1161995-11-0909 November 1995 Intervenor Motion to Admit Supplementary Exhibits.* Moves That Naslp Admit Encl Documents Into Evidence for Listed Reasons.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20094J9301995-11-0606 November 1995 Georgia Power Company Motion to Correct Record of Diesel Generator Reporting Issues Allegation Hearing.* Moves Licensing Board to Order That Corrections Be Made to Transcript.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20094J9281995-11-0606 November 1995 Gap Proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law on Diesel Generator Reporting Issues.* Findings of Fact & Conclusion Accepted.W/Certificate of Svc ML20094J9201995-11-0101 November 1995 Affidavit of Ck Mccoy to Correct Info Contained in Intervenor Exhibit II-97,which Consists of Portions of Deposition in a Mosbaugh Complaint Against Gap 1999-06-28
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20133H1131996-11-25025 November 1996 Petition for Enforcement,Per 10CFR2.206,to Revoke Northeast Utils Operating Licenses for CT Nuclear Power Stations Due to Chronic,Systemic Mismanagement Resulting in Significant Violations of NRC Safety Regulations ML20116J8431996-08-0202 August 1996 Intervenor Response to Georgia Power Motion for Reconsideration.* Intervenor Supports Motion for Reconsideration.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20116A4931996-07-15015 July 1996 Georgia Power Company Motion for Reconsideration of 960628 Memorandum & Order Or,In Alternative,For Certification.* Gpc Requests That Board Not Require Submittal or Approval of Settlement Between Gpc & Mosbaugh.W/Certificate of Svc ML20114E6491996-06-20020 June 1996 Joint Motion to Defer Issuance of Initial Decision.* Requests That ASLB Defer Issuance of Decision in Proceeding Until 960920,in Order to Allow Gpc & Mosbaugh to Reach Settlement Agreement.W/Certificate of Svc ML20095D9821995-12-12012 December 1995 Georgia Power Co Motion to Correct Record of Exhibits of Diesel Generator Reporting Issues Allegation Hearing.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20094S2411995-11-22022 November 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Intervenors Motion for Continuance.* Intervenor Motion Unjustified & Prejudicial & Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20094S2931995-11-21021 November 1995 Intervenor Motion for Continuance for Good Cause.* Requests Deadline for Filing Post Hearing Brief Be Extended Until 951130.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20094K1161995-11-0909 November 1995 Intervenor Motion to Admit Supplementary Exhibits.* Moves That Naslp Admit Encl Documents Into Evidence for Listed Reasons.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20094J9301995-11-0606 November 1995 Georgia Power Company Motion to Correct Record of Diesel Generator Reporting Issues Allegation Hearing.* Moves Licensing Board to Order That Corrections Be Made to Transcript.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20093F9171995-10-13013 October 1995 Georgia Power Co Position on Effect of DOL Case 90 ERA-30.* Recommends Board Should Refrain from Considering or Giving Any Effect to Secretary of Labor Determination in 90 EAR-30. W/Certificate of Svc ML20093F9441995-10-13013 October 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Intervenor Motion to Conduct Discovery Re Dew Point Instruments.* Recommends That Intervenor Motion to Conduct Discovery Re Dew Point Instruments Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20093F8681995-10-13013 October 1995 Intervenor Response to Board Memorandum & Order (Effect of DOL Case 90-ERA-30).* Bloomburg & Comanche Peak Precedents Demonstrate Applicability of Issue Preclusion to Matl Fact Containing to Hobby Decision.W/Certificate of Svc ML20093F9901995-10-12012 October 1995 Ga Power Company Response to Intervenor Motion to Admit Certain Admissions of Ga Power.* Intervenor Motion to Admit Certain Admissions of Ga Power,Dtd 951006,should Be Denied. W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20093G1081995-10-12012 October 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Intervenors Motion to Conduct Further Discovery Against NRC Staff.* Motion to Conduct Further Discovery Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20093F9751995-10-12012 October 1995 Ga Power Company Response to Intervenors Motion to Admit Exhibit II-247 (Transcript of Tape 99B).* Intervenor Motion to Admit Intervenor Exhibit II-247 Into Evidence Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20093F9541995-10-12012 October 1995 Ga Power Company Response to Intervenor Motion to Strike Affidavit of H Handfinger.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20093B9301995-10-0606 October 1995 Intervenor Motion to Admit Certain Admissions of Georgia Power.* Intervenor Requests That Admission Responses & Corresponding OI Paragraphs Listed Be Admitted Into Record. W/Certificate of Svc ML20093B8901995-10-0606 October 1995 Intervenor Motion to Conduct Discovery Re Dew Point Instruments.* Intervenor Requests to Conduct Addl Discovery & to Obtain Further Relief.W/Certificate of Svc ML17311B3631995-10-0505 October 1995 Intervenor Motion to Admit Exhibit II-247 (Transcript of Tape 99B).* Intervenor Requests That Intervenor Exhibit II-247 Be Admitted Into Evidence.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20093B7101995-10-0505 October 1995 Intervenor Motion to Complete Discovery Against NRC Staff Expert Witness (Mgt Panel).* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20093B8291995-10-0505 October 1995 Intervenor Motion to Strike Affidavit of H Handfinger.* Affidavit of H Handfinger Should Be Stricken,In Entirety, from Record of Proceeding.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20098B7981995-10-0303 October 1995 Georgia Power Company Supplemental Response to Intervenor Addl Discovery Request Dtd 950905.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20098B4671995-10-0202 October 1995 Intervenor Request for Continuance to File Response to Georgia Power Co Petition for Review.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20098B4691995-10-0202 October 1995 Intervenor Opposition to Georgia Power Company Petition for Review of Order to Produce Attorney Interview Notes.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20092M6071995-09-26026 September 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Intervenor Addl Discovery Request Dtd 950905.* Request Granted.W/Certificate of Svc ML20092H6571995-09-11011 September 1995 Georgia Power Company Opposition to Intervenor Motion to Strike Testimony of Hill & Ward & to Conduct Addl Discovery.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20092H6771995-09-11011 September 1995 Ga Power Company Motion for Stay of Licensing Board Order Requiring Production of Attorney Notes of Privileged Communications.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20092A4821995-09-0505 September 1995 Intervenor Motion to Strike Expert Testimony of Hill & Ward & to Conduct Addl Discovery.* Intervenor Requests That Hill & Ward Testimony Be Stricken & Gap File Expedited Responses to Requested Discovery.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091S3861995-08-22022 August 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Intervenor Motion to Admit Certain Admissions & Sections of OI Rept Into Evidence.* Georgia Power Neither Admit Nor Deny Admissions.W/ Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20087K2911995-08-15015 August 1995 Response to Licensee Motion for Reconsideration Re Notes of E Dixon Noted & Brief on Attorney Client Privilege.* Requests That Board Order Immediate Production of Interview Notes.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20087K2801995-08-14014 August 1995 Intervenor Response to Georgia Power Company Motion to Exclude Admission of OI Conclusions.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20087K4731995-08-0808 August 1995 Gap Opposition to Intervenor Supplemental Motion to Compel Interview Notes & Other Documents Known to Gap Counsel When Preparing Response to Nov.* Informs That Motion Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20087K4021995-08-0808 August 1995 Georgia Power Co Motion for Reconsideration of Order Re Request for Discovery Re E Dixon.* Believes That Board Should Deny Intervenor Motion.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20087K3501995-08-0404 August 1995 Licensee Position on Admissibility of Staff Exhibits II-5 & II-10.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20087A6961995-07-28028 July 1995 Georgia Power Company Motion to Exclude Admission of OI Conclusions.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20087A6871995-07-28028 July 1995 Ga Power Company Motion for Issuance of Subpoena.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20087A5711995-07-24024 July 1995 Intervenors Supplemental Motion to Compel Interview Notes & Other Documents Known to Ga Power Company Counsel When Preparing Response to Nov.* Board Should Order Production of Notes of E Dixon.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20086P7801995-07-17017 July 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Intervenor Motion to Compel Production of Licensee Notes of Interview of Ester Dixon.* Intervenor Motion Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086P5961995-07-10010 July 1995 Intervenor Motion to Clarify Record.* Requests Board to Clarify Record to Reflect That on 950517,exhibits Identified in List of Stipulated Exhibits,Were Received Into Evidence. W/Certificate of Svc ML20086H2271995-06-30030 June 1995 Intervenor Motion to Compel Production of Licensee Notes of Interview of Ester Dixon.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20085C8871995-05-29029 May 1995 Intervenor Response to Motion to Quash Subpoenas of C Coursey,M Hobbs & RP Mcdonald.* Motion to Quash Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20084L2871995-05-24024 May 1995 Motion by Georgia Power Company Cl Coursey,Ml Hobbs & RP Mcdonald to Quash Subpoenas of C Coursey,Ml Hobbs & RR Mcdonald.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20083R0291995-05-18018 May 1995 Georgia Power Company Brief on Inadmissibility of OI Rept or in Alternative Motion for Certification to Commission.* Advises That Exhibits Should Not Be Admitted Into Evidence in Proceeding.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20083C8421995-05-12012 May 1995 Intervenor Response to Util Motion for Order Preserving Licensing Board Jurisdiction.* Intervenor Requests That Commission Deny Util Motion for Order Preserving Licensing Board Jurisdiction.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20083C8461995-05-10010 May 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Board Question Re 900410 IIT Questions.* Licensing Board Requests That Util Advise Board of Response to a Chaffee 900410 Request for Calcon Sensor Data.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20083C8241995-05-0909 May 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Board Question Re Diesel Testing Transparency.* Util Believes That Cash Did Not Include Start 128-131 Since Starts Were Not Included on Typed List.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20083L7781995-05-0909 May 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Board Question Re Definition of Successful Start.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20083L7251995-05-0707 May 1995 Intervenor'S Response to Gpc Motion to Strike Partially Intervenor'S Prefiled Testimony.* Requests That Gpc Motion to Strike Partially Intervenor'S Prefiled Testimony Be Overruled in Entirety.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20083K2971995-05-0202 May 1995 Intervenor Motion for Enlargement of Time.* Requests Enlargement of Time to Respond to Georgia Power Co Motion to Strike Partially Prefiled Testimony.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20082T3871995-04-27027 April 1995 Georgia Power Co Motion for Order Preserving Licensing Board Jurisdiction.* Requests That Commission Grant Relief Request.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List 1996-08-02
[Table view] |
Text
. 93/ 9 DOCMETED March 3, 2386 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION .iB6 NAR -4 All :54 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARDggggg : .
00C.60 s '
Dns:, !
In the Matter of )
)
GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, et al. ) Docket Nos. 50-424
)
50-425 [7/sj (Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, )
Units 1 and 2) )
APPLICANTS' MOTION FOR
SUMMARY
DISPOSITION OF JOINT INTERVENORS' CONTENTION EP-2/EP-2(a)
(ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS OVER ENN USE)
Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 5 2.749, Aoplicants hereby move the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (" Board") for summary disco-sition in Applicants' favor of Joint Intervenors' Contention EP-2/EP-2(a). Apolicants base this motion on the grounds that no genuine issue exists to be heard as to any material fact with resoect to Contention EP-2/EP-2(a) and that Apolicants are entitled to a decisionEin their favor as a matter of law on this contention.
In support of this motion for summary disoosition of Con-tention EP-2/EP-2(a), Apolicants rely upon:
(1) " Applicants' Statement of Material Facts As to Which No Genuine Issue Exists to Be Heard Regarding Contention EP-2/EP-2(a)";
(2) " Affidavit of Jean M. DiLuzio on Contention EP-2/EP-2(a)," dated March 3, 1986 ("DiLuzio Affidavit");
B603050205 860303
$DR ADOCM 05000242 l PDR m
}SC D
i
. \
(3) " Affidavit of Richard L. Bryant on Contention EP-2/EP-2(a)," dated March 3, 1986 ("Bryant Affidavit");
(4) " Affidavit of Billy J. Clack on Contention ! .
EP-2/EP-2(a)," dated March 3, 1986 (" Clack Affidavit");
(5) " Affidavit of Bobby R. Mauney on Contention EP-2/EP-2(a)," dated March 3, 1986 ("Mauney Afildavit");
(6) " Affidavit of Harold W. Awbrey on Contention EP-2/EP-2(a)," dated March 3, 1986 ("Awbrey Affidavit");
i (7) " Affidavit of Herman E. Wald on Contention EP-2/EP-2(a)," dated March 3, 1986 ("Wald Affidavit");
(8) " Affidavit of Thomas A. Gardner on Contention EP-2/EP-2(a)," dated March 3, 1986 ("Gardner Affidavit");
(9) " Affidavit of Kevin P. Twine on Contention EP-2/EP-2(a)," dated March 3, 1986 (" Twine Affidavit"); and (10) all filings in this croceeding, deoositions, and an-swers to interrogatories, together with the statements of the parties.
I. Background As initially oroposed by Joint Intervenors, Contention EP-2 alleged generally:
Applicants fail to show that provisions ,
exist for oromot communications among orin-cipal response organizations to emergency personnel and the oublic as required by 10 CFR 50.47(b)(6).
The thrust of Joint Intervenors' concern was soecified in suboart (h) of EP-2, which asserted:
. . _. - - _ _ .__ _ _ _ _ m
.1 i
[T]he Burke County plan states that the
.; means of communication among local govern- 1 ments and respective department / agency cer- l sonnel within the Plume Exposure Pathway EPZ are, primarily, dedicated circuits and : .
commercial phone lines, and secondly, radio systems. This plan ignores the probability that both dedicated and commercial phone lines will quickly become overloaded and
! incapacitated and in the event of a ra-diological accident at the plant the limited radio bands made available to emer -
gency response vehicles will just as quickly become congested.
See " Joint Intervenors' Revised Contention Relating To Emergen-i cy Response" (June 24, 1985), at 3. '
In its August 12, 1985 " Memorandum and Order (Ruling On Joint Intervenors' Propose'd Contentions On Emergency Planning)"
(" August 12 Order"), the Board noted that commercial ohone lines and radio channels serve as secondary means of communica-tion. Thus, while it is conceivable that commercial chone lines could become overloaded after public notification of an emergency at Vogtle, the Board considered it "unlikely" that
, such a situation "could seriously interfere with emergency com-munications because of the existence.of dedicated phone lines and emergency radio channels." The Board further observed that, while radio channels "might become quite busy" in an emergency, "the low population density around VEGP and the small size of the response organizations" make it " extremely unlikely that the emergency radio' channels would become over-loaded." August 12 Order, at 13. With respect to the dedi-cated phone lines, the Board noted its agreement with 1
i
Applicants and the Staff that the dedicated lines could not be overloaded by calls involving non-emergency personnel. How-ever, the Board expressed concern as to whether "adminis.trative controls are in place to restrict the use of the dedicated lines to the transmission of official and necessary messages."
August 12 Order, at 12-13. The Board therefore admitted Con-tention EP-2/EP-2(a) "on the limited basis that Applicants have not shown that such administrative controls exist." August 12 Order, at 14. Thus, the gravamen of EP-2/EP-2(a), as admitted, is the existence of administrative controls over the use of the Emergency Notification Network ("ENN"),
Since the admission of Joint Intervenors' Contention EP-2/EP-2(a), the parties have undertaken discovery related to that contention. The written discovery pursued by the carties has consisted of:
"Apolicants' First Set of Interrogatories and Requests For Production of Documents on Emergency Planning Contentions" (September 20, 1985), at 8-10, 38-39; "NRC Staff's Emergency Planning Interroga-tories To Joint Intervenors Camcaign For A Prosperous Georgia (CPG) and Georgians Against Nuclear Energy (GANE)" (October 7, 1985), at 6-7; "Intervenors' First Set of Interrogatories and Requests To Produce Relating To Emer-gency Planning" (October 15, 1985), at 4-5; "Intervenors' Response to Apolicants ' First Set of Interrogatories and Requests To Pro-duce Concerning Emergency Resoonse Conten-tions" (October 28, 1985), at 2-3; s _
i
" Applicants' Response To Intervenors' First Set of Interrogatories and Requests For Production of Documents on Emergency Plan-ning Contentions" (November 13, 1985), at .
' ~
24-28; "Apolicants' Second Set of Interrogatories
~
and Requests For Production of Documents on Emergency Planning Contentions" (November 15, 1985), at 7; "Intervenors' Response to Applicants' Sec-ond Set of Discovery Relating to Emergency Response" (January 5, 1986), at 1; and "Intervenors' Response to NRC Staff's In-terrogatories Relating to Emergency Plan-ning" (January 24, 1986) at 2.
On January 6, 1986, Applicants deposed Mr. Seymour Shaye, whom Joint Intervenors had indicated would testify on the subject of emergency planning. "Intervenors' Response To Applicants' First Set of Interrogatorics and Requests to Produce Concerning Emergency Response Contentions" (October 28, 1985), at Response to Interrogatory G-5(a).
II. Legal Standards for Summary Discosition The admission of a contention for adjudication in a li-censing proceeding under the standards enunciated in 10 C.F.R.
5 2.714 does not constitute an evaluation of the merits of that contention. Instead, such a ruling reflects merely the deter-mination that the contention satisfies the criteria of specif- -
icity, asserted basis, and relevance. The admission of a con-tention also does not dictate that a hearing be held on the issues raised. Section 2.749(a) of the NRC's Rules of Practice l
l 1
1 l
l
authorizes a licensing board to grant a party to the proceeding summary disposition of an admitted contention without oroceed-ing to a hearing. i .
That section provides that "[a]ny party to a proceeding
~
may move, with or without supporting affidavits, for a decision by the presiding officer in that party's favor.as to all or part of the matters in the proceeding." 10 C.F.R. S 2.749(a).
Delineating the standard to be aoplied by a licensing board in ruling upon such a motion, that section further states:
The presiding officer shall render the de-cision sought if the filings in the pro-ceeding, depositions, answers to interroga-s tories, and admissions on file, together with the statements of the parties and the '
affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue of fact and that the moving party is entitled to a decision as a matter of law.
10 C.F.R. 5 2.749(d).
J The standards governing summary disposition motions in an NRC licensing proceeding are quite similar to the standards applied by federal district courts to summary judgment motions under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Alabama Power Co. (Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2), t ALAB-182, 7 A.E.C. 210, 217 (1974); Tennessee Valley Authority P
(Hartsville Nuclear Plant, Units lA, 2A, 1B and 2B), ALAB-554, 10 N.R.C. 15, 20 n.17 (1979). Where,-as here, a motion for summary disposition is properly supported pursuant to the Com-mission's Rules of Practice, a party opposing the motion may i
not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of its answers.
Rather, an opposing party must set forth specific facts showing that a genuine issue of fact exists. 10 C.F.R. S 2.74'9('b).
Where the movant has made a oroper showing for summary'disoosi-tion and has supported his motion by affidavit, the opposing party must proffer countering evidentiary material or an affi-davit explaining why it is impractical to do so. Public Service Co. of New Hamoshire (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2),
LBP-83-32A, 17 N.R.C. 1170, 1174 n.4 (1983), citing Adickes v.
Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 160-61 (1970).
The Commission and its adjudicatory boards have encouraged the use of the summary disposition orocess where the proponent of a contention cannot establish that a genuine issue exists, so that evidentiary hearing time is not unnecessarily devoted to such issues. Statement of Policy on Conduct of Licensing Proceedings, CLI-81-8, 13 N.R.C. 452, 457 (1981); see also Houston Lighting and Power Co. (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1), ALAB-590, 11 N.R.C. 542, 550 (1980) ("[T]he i
Section 2.749 summary disposition procedures provide in reality 4
as well as in theory, an efficacious means of avoiding unneces-i sary and possibly time-consuming hearings on demonstrably I
insubstantial issues.")
In the case of contested offsite emergency planning issues, there is special reason to give the summary disposition process the diligent effort required to scrutinize the parties' I
pleadings and eliminate all matters as to which there is no genuine issue to be heard. The expenditure of hearing time on truly baseless allegations would be contrary to not odly.the interests of the public at large and the parties to the pro-ceeding, but also the numerous non-party State and local agency personnel (and perhaps representatives of private response or-ganizations) whose participation would be required.
III. Argument The issue to be litigated in Contention EP-2/EP-2(a), as admitted by the Board, is the existence of administrative con-trols over the ENN, to assure its ready availability for "the transmission of official and necessary messages." August 12 Order, at 12-14. Acolying the Commission's summary disposition standards to the facts of this case, it is clear that the in-stant motion for summary disposition should be granted.
The ENN is a dedicated, "hard-wired" telecommunications system exclusively for use in a radiological emergency. The ENN system links Plant Vogtle with the principal organizations for emergency response within the Vogtle plume exposure pathway Emergency Planning Zone ("EPZ") -- specifically, the States of Georgia and South Carolina; Burke County, Georgia; Aiken, Allendale, and Barnwell Counties, in South Carolina; and the Savannah River Plant. DiLuzio Affidavit at 1 3. As the Board has recognized, because the ENN system involves dedicated lines, it cannot be overloaded by calls involving non-emergency personnel. August 12 Order, at 12. I I
Further, physical access to the ENN is restricted. Clack Affidavit at 1 4; Bryant Affidavit at 1 3; Gardner Affidavit at 1 4; Mauney Affidavit at 1 4; Awbrey Affidavit at 1 4'; Wald Affidavit at 1 3; Twine Affidavit at 11 4-5; DiLuzio Affidavit at 1 6. In addition, all ENN terminals will be subject to ad-ministrative controls, to assure the ready availability of the ENN during an emergency for the transmission of official and necessary messages. Clack Affidavit at 1 5; Bryant Affidavit at 1 4; Gardner Affidavit at 1 5; Mauney Affidavit at 1 5; Awbrey Affidavit at 1 5; Wald Affidavit at 1 4; Twine Affidavit at 1 5; DiLuzio Affidavit at 1 7.1!
Moreover, because of the physical characteristics of the ENN system, it cannot be " overloaded" even by ENN users. Once the ENN system is activated, all parties at ENN terminals would automatically hear everything said at any of the other connect-ed terminals, and would physically be able to speak up at any time. Thus, the ENN system is designed to assure the constant physical capability to transmit official and necessary mes-sages. DiLuzio Affidavit at 1 4.
1/ It is of no moment that the administrative controls, as set out in the procedures, are not available for review. The Commission's regulatory scheme does not contemplate its adjudi-catory hearings being " bogged down with litigation about such details." Accordingly, the detailed procedures for imple-menting the emergency plans are not subject to scrutiny in li-censing proceedings. Louisiana Power & Light Co. (Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3), ALAB-732, 17 N.R.C. 1076, 1107 (1983). ;
1 1
In summary, all ENN terminals will be both physically and administratively controlled. The physical controls will pre-vent unauthorized access to the ENN. The administratihe' con-trols will assure its ready availability during an emergency v for the transmission of official and necessary messages. Clack ,
l Affidavit at 1 6; Bryant Affidavit at 1 5; Gardner Affidavit at 1 6; Mauney Affidavit at 1 6; Awbrey Affidavit at 1 6; Wald Affidavit at 1 5; Twine Affidavit at 1 5; DiLuzio Affidavit at 1 8. Joint Intervenors cannot avoid summary disposition on the basis of mere guesses or suspicions, or on the hope that at the hearing Applicants' evidence may be discredited or that "something may turn up". See Gulf States Utilities Co. (River Bend Station, Units 1 and 2), LBP-75-10, 1 N.R.C. 246, 248 (1975). The undisputed facts presented here conclusively demonstrate the orovisions for administrative controls over the use of the ENN -- the sole issue of Contention EP-2/EP-2(a) --
and compel a decision in Applicants' favor.
f IV. Conclusion Because there is no genuine issue of material fact to be heard on the issue of the existence of administrative controls over use of the Emergency Notification Network, Apolicants
]
l 1
i
. , - . - - - - - - , - - - , - ,_ .- . . - . , . - . . , , . , . - - , , - , , - -r - . - . .
i respectfully request that the Eoard grant their motion for sum-mary disposition of Contention EP-2/EP-2(a).
Respectfully submitte'd, 1
t
,1
,% } f '
Brute W. Churchill, P.C.
Delissa A. Ridgway David R. Lewis SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE 1800 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 822-1000 James E. Joiner, P.C.
Charles W. Whitney Kevin C. Greene Hugh M. Davenport TRCUTMAN, SANDERS, LCCKERMAN G ASIIMORE 1400 Candler Building Atlanta, Georgia 30043 (404) 658-8000 Counsel for Applicants Dated: March 3, 1986
- . - - , . . - . - . .-.