ML20148N198
| ML20148N198 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07002623 |
| Issue date: | 10/18/1978 |
| From: | Best B, Ketchen E, Porter W AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED, DUKE POWER CO., NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20148N169 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7811270035 | |
| Download: ML20148N198 (4) | |
Text
-
za.
- L
~
m.-
s g i
- WTED CORREAPONDENCE UNITED STATES 'OF AMERICA
'h[
p NUCLEAR. REGULATORY. COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC !!AFETY AND LICENSING BOAT 9
.bg7 C 4 +h'{ 4 v In the Matter o^f
)
g 4
DUKE POWER COMPANY
)
b
)
(Amendment to Materials Lic!ense
)
Docket No..70-2623
-SNM-1773.for Oconee Nuclear
)
.Stati n. Spent Fuel Transportation
)
and. torage at.McGuire Nuclear
)
St ion)
)
STIPULATION OF CAROLINA ACTION, THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION STAFF AND DUKE POWER COMPANY RELATING TO THE ADMISSION OF CONTENTIONS Carolina Action, - Duke' Power Company (" Licensee"), and the.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff ("NRC Staff"), subject to the approval of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (" Licensing Board") duly appointed in the captioned matter, stipulate to the-contentions contained in this document, except where expressly
).,/
limited or objected to by'the signatories of this document.
An_ appropriate notation its made where there is an express objection to a part or parts of the' stipulation.
Any contention or con-tentions which may have.been asserted by Carolina Action and which do not appear in this stipulation are to be considered 1/
This stipulation pertains solely to an agr ment reached with respect to contentions.
By-entering this stipulation, neither the NRC Staff'nor the-Licensee admit ~tha Carolina Action.
~-
presently has standing ~as an Intervenor'in this matter.
7811270oTf
~
7-abandoned and withdrawn by Carolina Action.
Substantive and procedural rights shall be governed by the rules and regulations' of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
By entering into this agreement, the NRC Staff does not agree that 'there is merit to any of the agreed contentions.
ISimilarly, Licensee does not agree that there is merit to any of the agreed contentions and is entering into the stipulation solely for. the purpose of expediting these proceedings.
Stipulated contentions Carolina Action Contention No. 1 Carolina Action contends that shipment of 'Oconee spent fuel to McGuire for storage is unacceptable as compared to other alternatives:
(a)
Modification of the existing Oconee spent fuel pools to-provide additional storage capacity; (b)
Construction of a new and separate spent fuel storage facility at the oconee site; (c)
Construction of a new and separate spent fuel storage facility away from the Oconee site, but other than McGuire.
-Carolina Action Contention No. 2 1
L
' Carolina Action contends' that transportation of spent nuclear L
l
e
~~
,. fuel from the Oconee Nuclear Station for storage at the McGuire Nuclear Station will create an unacceptable hazard by significantly increasing the radiation doses to persons in the region near the proposed transportat' ion routes between the two facilities.
~
Specifically:
(a)
There will be an unacceptable incremental burden of radiation dose to persons living in the vicinity of the transportation routes.
(b)
There will be an unacceptable incremental burden of radiation dose to persons. traveling over the trans-portation routes concurrently with spent fuel ship ment.
(c)
There is likely to be an unacceptable incremental burden of radiation dose to persons in the vicinity W
due to an accident or delay in transit.
Carolina Action Contention No. 3 Carolina Action contends that factors set forth in items 1 and 2 above require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement because the proposed action is a major federal action of the Commission significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
~
2/
Carolina Action intends to raise the likelihood of a m51t'ing or breach of cask accident.
Licensee and Staff do not stipulate to this aspect of the contention.
.o..,
.,a r*
~
c..
_ W Carolina Action Contention No. 4 Carolina Action contends that Oconee spent fuel should not be. shipped to McGuire because North Carolina has an unproven ability-to deal with an emergency accident of the proportions that a nuclear transport accident would cause.
The cost of evacuations and repairs are an unfair _ burden to the taxpayers of this state.
N Carolina Action Contention No. 5 Carolina Action contends that oconee spent fuel should not be shipped to McGuire because Duke Power has a poor record of safety in regard to nuclear technology.
The NRC has fined Duke Power.
for 41 separate unremedied flagrant violations of the safety code for their oconee plant.
Dated October 18, 1978 Carolina Action Nuclear Regulato Comm'ission Staff
}7 Wk h
Duke Power Company y
Licensee and Staff do not stipulate to these contentions.
l l
.