ML20153H419
| ML20153H419 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 09/29/1998 |
| From: | Marian Zobler NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#498-19582 LR, NUDOCS 9810020038 | |
| Download: ML20153H419 (5) | |
Text
SP 00CKETED USNRC September 29,1998 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 98 SEP 30 All:13 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OHL n
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD RUL ii ADJUD!D, ut
)
In the Matter of
)
Docket Nos. 50-269-LR
)
50-270-LR DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION
)
50-287-LR
)
)
(Oconee Nuclear Station,
)
Unit Nos.1,2, and 3)
)
NRC STAFF'S RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME FILED BY NORMAN " BUZZ" WILLIAMS, WILLIAM " BUTCH" CLAY, W.S. LESAN, AND THE CHATTOOGA RIVER WATERSHED COALITION INTRODUCTION Pursuant to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board's (Board) Order of September 18, 1998, the staff of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Staff) hereby responds to a motion filed by Norman " Buzz" Williams, William " Butch" Clay, W.S. Lesan, and the Chattooga River Watershed Coalition (CRWC) (collectively referred to as Petitioners) requesting an enlargement of time to file amendments to their Petition for leave to intervene (Petition). For the reasons set forth below, the request should be denied.
BACKGROUND On August 11,1998, pursuant to 10 C.F.R. i6 54.27 and 2.105, the Staff published a notice of opponunity for a hearing on the Duke Energy Corporation's application to renew the opo.iting licences for the Oconee Nuclear Station (Oconee), Units 1,2, and 3 (Notice).
" Duke Energy Corporation, Oconee Nuclear Station Units 1,2, and 3; Notice of AcceptInce for Docketing of the Application and Notice of Opportunity for a Hearing Regarding 9810020038 980929 PDR ADOCK 05000269 0'
O PDR
}b
- o Renewal of Licenses Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55 for an Additional 20-Year Period,"
63 Fed. Reg. 42,885 (1998). Pursuant to that Notice, the Petitioners filed their Petition for leave to intervene on September 8,1998.
On September 18,1998, the Board issued an Order that scheduled further filings regarding the Petition. " Memorandum and Order," (Sept. 18,1998)(Prehearing Order).The Prehearing Order provided that the Petitioners could file an amendment to " address any shoncomings in their initial pleading in addressing the requirements of 10 C.F.R. f 2.714(a)(2)" no later than September 30,1998. Id. at 2. On September 28,1998, the Petitioners sent an e-mail to the Secretary of the Commission requesting an additional 30 l
days to file their amended Petition. The Secretary of the Commission forwarded the Petitioners' Motion to the Staff on September 28,1998 at 6:05 p.m. As discussed below, the Petitioners have not demonstrated unavoidable and extreme circumstances to warrant an l
enlargement of time. Therefore, the motion should be denied.
i DISCUSSION l-The Prehearing Order specifically sets forth the standards for a motion for extension i
j of time. A request for additional time must be made "at least three (3) business days before 1
j the due date of the pleading or other submission for which an extension is sought." See l
Prehearing Order at 7. The motion must " indicate whether the request is supported or opposed by the other participants" and " demonstrate ' unavoidable and extreme 1
l l
circumstances' that support permitting the extension." Id.
l The Petitioners have failed to demonstrate " extreme and unavoidable circumstances" 4
warranting a 30 day extension to file an amendment to their Petition. The Petitioners state 3
?
1
B i< only that they need additional time to " find and retain counsel." The Petitioners have already had over two months to do so. The notice of receipt of application for renewal was published in the Federal Register on July 14,1998 and indicated that an opportunity to request a hearing would be the subject of a subsequent notice. See 63 Fed. Reg. 37,909 (1998). The notice for an opportunity to request a hearing was published on August 11,1998. See 63 Fed. Reg. 42,885 (1998). The Petitioners have had ample time to enlist the aid of counsel.
The Petitioners have not set forth one reason why they could not have found and retained counsel earlier. Accordingly, no extension is warranted.
CONCLUSION Petitioners have failed to establish sufficient cause for delaying the submission of amendments to their Petition. Accordingly, the Motion should be denied.
Respectfully submitted, Marian Zobler Counsel for Staff Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 29* day of September,1998 l
i
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 00CKEIED NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION USNRC e
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD w SEP 30 All :13 In the Matter of
)
)
OEHi, <
T o -
DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION
)
Docket Nos.
L269-LR'
)
Cd70-LR h.
(Oconee Nuclear Station,
)
50-287-LR Units 1,2, and 3)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF'S RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME FILED BY NORMAN " BUZZ" WILLIAMS, WILLIAM l
" BUTCH" CLAY, W.S. LESAN, AND THE CHATTOOGA RIVER WATERSHED l
COALITION" in the above captioned proceeding have been served on the following by electronic mail, with conforming copies deposited in Nuclear Regulatory Commission internal mail system, or as indicated by an asterisk, by e-mail with conforming copies deposited in United States mail, first class, or as indicated by a double asterisk by deposit in NRC internal mail system or as indicated by triple asterisk by deposit in the United States mail, first class, this 29th day of September,1998.
B. Paul Cotter, Jr., III, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Administrative Judge Panel **
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington,DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 (E-mail copy to bpe1 @nrc.cov)
Office of the Secretary ATrN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Dr. Peter S. Lam Staff Administrative Judge U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Washington, DC 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (E-mail copy to hearinedocket@nre.cov)
Washington, DC 20555 (E-mail copy to psl@nrc.cov)
Office of the Commission Appellate **
Adjudication Richard F. Cole Mail Stop: 16-G-15 OWFN Administrative Judge U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Washington, DC 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Adjudicatory File (2)**
(E-mail copy to rfcl @nrc.cov)
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington,DC 20555
l t Chattooga River Watersh:d Coalition
- J. Michael McGarry, DI*
P.O. Box 2006 David A. Repka Clayton, GA 30525 Anne W. Cottingham (E-mail copy to crwe@ acme-brain.com)
Winston & Strawn 1400 L Street, NW Washington, DC 20005 (E-mail copy to jmecarrv@winston.com drepka@winston.com acottine@winston.com)
Paul R. Newton
- W. S. Lesan* *
- Lisa F. Vaughn P.O. Box 66 Assistant General Counsel Long Creek, SC 29658 Duke Energy Corporation 422 South Churen St.
Norman " Buzz" Williams *"
(Mail Code PB05E) 190 Mountain Cove Rd.
Charlotte, North Carolina,28202 Mountain Rest, SC 29664 (E-mail copy to nrnewton @ duke-enerev.com.
William " Butch" Clay * *
- Ifvauch@ duke-enerev.com)
P.O. Box 53 Long Creek, SC 29658 N
- /)
' Marian L. Zobler Counsel for NR aff
,