ML20148G597
| ML20148G597 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07002623 |
| Issue date: | 11/02/1978 |
| From: | Lazo R Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20148G602 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7811130118 | |
| Download: ML20148G597 (7) | |
Text
'4 s.\\<' g Y
7' 2, 4
w
$ ot f
NRC PUBIAC DOCUMENT ROOM p_
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA N ' 7 N'# /['j NUCLEAR RFGULATORY COMMISSION ys, v BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD cu, g \\
/~
)
L In the Matter of
)
DUKE POWER COMPANY
)
Docket No. 70-2623 (Amendment to Materials License
)
SNM-1773 for Oconee Nuclear Station
)
Spent Fuel Transportation and Storage
)
at McGuire Nuclear Station)
)
)
ORDER FOLLOWING PREHEARING CONFERENCE (November 2, 1978)
Pursuant to notice, a prehearing conference in the above-identified proceeding was held by this Atomic Safety and Licensing Board designated to rule on petitions for leave to intervene (Inter-vention Board) in Charlotte, North Carolina, on October 24, 1978. All parties and petitioners were represented and participated in the con-ference during which the Intervention Board heard oral argument regard-ing the petitions for leave to intervene and the contentions which petitioners seek,a have litigated in this proceeding.
The Interven-tion Board's rulings on matters which can be disposed of at this time are set forth below.
7snia o /7 r
, a
> 1.
Petitions for Leave to Intervene Filed by (i) Carolina Environmental Study Group (CESG),
l (ii) Safe Energy Alliance (SEA) and (iii)
Carolina Action in Charlotte (Carolina Action)
During the course of the prehearing conference, three stipula-tions each bearing the date October 18, 1978, were submitted to the Intervention Board.
The stipulations pertain solely to an agreement reached by the Applicant and the NRC Staff with the three petitioners, CESG, SEA and Carolina Action, with respect to contentions.
Each docu-ment sets forth three contentions which have been stipulated to subject to the objection of Applicant and Staff to part of Stipulated Conten-tion 2 c.
In addition to the three contentions which are the same in each document, the stipulation entered into by Applicant, Staff and Carolina Action references two contentions identified as Carolina Action Conten-tions Nos. 4 and 5 which Applicant and Staff object to in their entirety.
Another contention concerning psychological worry over the fear of an accident which was raised for the first time at the Prehearing Confer-ence (Tr.15-16) has been identified as Carolina Action Contention No. 6.
All three stipulations noted by footnote that by entering the stipulation, neither Applicant nor Staff admitted that the petitioner presently had standing as an Intervenor in this matter.
- - - " - ~ - ~ - - - - ^ - - - - - - - - - - -
t This Intervention Board, before whom the above-referenced pre-hearing conference was held, concluded that on the basis of the previous filings and of the stipulations, which it approved, the petitioners CESG, SEA and Carolina Action have met all of the requirements for inter-vention and should be admitted as parties to this proceeding.
Each petition, as amended, has demonstrated the requisite interest in the proceeding.
In each case the petitioner has identified individual members of the organization living, working or engaging in activities near the proposed transportation routes and stated how their interests may be affected by the proposed administrative action.
We have affi-davits from each which establish that petitioners are authorized to represent such members of the organizations, collectively and individ-ually before the Commission.
In addition to establishing their interest in this proceeding, petitioners CESG, SEA and Carolina Action each have by way of stipula-tion, stated at least one contention 1/ which meets the requirement of 1/ ee Stipulated Contention Nos.1 and 2.
S
. particularity set forth in 10 CFR H2.714.
Accordingly, the petitions for leave to intervene filed by CESG, SEA and Carolina Action are granted.
2.
Objection of Applicant and Staff to Part oi Stipulated Contention 2 c j
and Carolina Action Contentions Nos. 4, l
5 and 6 l
l As set forth in the stipulations relating to admission of :on-tentions, Applicant and Staff have objected to a part of Stipulated Contention 2 c and to Carolina Action Contentions 4 and 5.
Ii) addi-l tion, both parties have objected to Contention 6 which Carolina Action raised for the first time at the prehearing conference of October 24, 1978.
It was agreed that Applicant would file written comments on its objections to these contention-by October 27, 1978 (Tr. 104).
Counsel for the Staff stated its objections to Contentions 4 and 5 in oral argument (Tr. 105-114) and was granted fifteen (15) days within which to file a written response to new Contention 6 (Tr. 115).
- - - - ' ~ - - - - -
i
, 3.
Petition for Leave to Intervene Filed by Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. (NRDC)
NRDC's petition for leave to intervene has been opposed by the Applicant and the NRC Staff for failure to establish that it has stand-ing to intervene in this proceeding.
The matter at issue concerns the need for the identification of NRDC members living, working or engaging in activities near the proposed transportation routes, near the Oconee facility, or near the McGuire facility and how their interest may be affected by the outcome of the proceeding.
Counsel for NRDC asserts that there is no legitimate reason to disclose names and addresses of its members "since we have already in our petition indicated that we do in fact have members who live in the geographic area, and have indicated how they would be affected." Staff and Applicant argue that a necessary condition to conferring standing for intervention by organizations is the identification of specific members and a particularization of a specific injury to such members of the organization that might result from the proposed licensing action.
The Intervention Board deferred ruling on the question of NRDC's standing to intervene in this proceeding pending the receipt of briefs from the petitioner, the Staff and the Applicant on the matter.
Each
. was directed to file its brief with the Intervention Board on or before November 8, 1978.
Other participants may file a similar brief by the same date if they so desire.
As to the matter of contentions, counsel for Applicant stated that Applicant had on October 23, 1978, filed a written response to NRDC's statement of Contentions. Counsel for NROC requested and was granted seven (7) days from the date of the prehearing conference to file a reply to Applicant's response.
1 4.
Untimely Petition for Leave to Intervene Filed by the Davidson College Chapter of N.C. Public Interest Research Groups (Davidson Chapter -- PIRC)
A two-page petition dated October 7,1978,S/ signed by Mr. Chuck Gaddy on behalf of the Davidson College chapter of the North Carolina Public Interest Research Group (Davidson chapter -- PIRG) was received in the mail by the chairman of the Intervention Board on October 10, 1978. At the prehearing conference on October 24, 1978, it was learned that none of the participants had been served with a copy of the letter.
S/ r. Gaddy's letter bears the date " September 7, 1978".
However, Mr.
M Gaddy has since written to state that the date on the letter is in-correct and that the letter was actually mailed on October 7,1970.
~
Mr. Gaddy provided copies later in the day.
It was agreed the period for response would run from October 24 (Tr. 59-65) and that all responses must be filed within ten (10) days of that date (Tr. 149).
5.
Petition for Leave to Intervene Filed by the State of South Carolina The unopposed petition of the State of South Carolina for leave to intervene in this proceeding as an interested State pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 92.715(c) is hereby granted.
A notice of hearing implementing this decision is appended to this Order as Attachment A.
It is so ORDERED.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD DESIGNATED TO RULE ON PETITIONS FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE Y.
Mi Robef t M. Lazo; Chair'ma~n '
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 2nd day of November,1978.
_