ML20154D588
| ML20154D588 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 03/04/1986 |
| From: | Vogler B NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#186-305 OLA, NUDOCS 8603060265 | |
| Download: ML20154D588 (7) | |
Text
_
00CMETED March 4SSY86 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 86 MAR -5 PI2:18 NUCLEAR llEGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE TIIE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOAQ{D"i C' Li -
vvCnli !
ia V:Cl.
In the Matter of
)
PillLADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY )
Docket Nos. 50-352
)
(Limerick Generating Station,
)
Unit 1)
)
RESPONSE OF NRC STAFF IN SUPPORT OF LICENSEE'S MOTION TO DEFER ANSWERS TO PETITIONER'S PROPOSED CONTENTIONS UNTIL A RULING UPON lilS MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE 1.
INTRODUCTION On February 25, 1986, the Philadelphia Electric Company (Licensee) filed the above captioned motion in response to a document filed on February 15, 1986, by R. L. Anthony / Friends of the Earth in the Dela-ware Valley (collectively " FOE").
The FOE document contains eleven numbered " contentions" concerning amendment number one issued by the NRC staff (Staff) to the Licensee on February 6, 1986.
For the reasons set forth below, the NRC staff supports Licensee's motion.
II.
BACKGROUND On December 18, 1985, the Licensee, in a letter to the NRC, re-l quested an amendment to its Limerick Unit 1 operating license.
The Licensee requested approval, on a one-time-only basis, for temporarily extending certain surveillance requirements in the Technical Specifica-tions, which must be performed nominally every 18 months and which can only be done when the plant is shutdown.
The change would extend the i
8603060265 B60304 PDR ADOCM 05000352 1
~
l
. 18 month surveillance interval by fourteen weeks beyond the maximum 25 percent extension allowed by the Technical Specifications.
This would permit the Licensee to delay performing this testing until a maint(nance and surveillance outage which is scheduled to begin on or before May 26, 1986.
The NRC staff after a review of the Licensee's request determined that the condition of the valves in question would not change significantly during the short extension period.
On January 30, 1986, FOE filed a petition to intervene in this matter in connection with the Licensee's request for an amendment.
On February 5, 1986, FOE filed an amended petition to intervene and request for a hearing.
The NRC staff has opposed FOE's petition in a pleading filed before the Licensing Board on February 25, 1986. On February 12, 1986, FOE, after receiving notice of the issuance of Licensee's amendment number one, filed a one page request for a stay before the Commission I
incorporating by reference its two previous petitions to intervene in this matter.
The NRC staff has opposed FO E's request for a stay in a pleading filed on February 27, 198G before the Commission.
On February 15, 1986, FOE filed its document containing eleven numbered
" contentions" concerning amendment number one to the Limerick license.
FOE notes on page one of this document that it proposes to litigate the eleven " contentions" in the hearing it expects to be held on the amendment.
In addition, FOE incorporates all of its previous petitions in this matter and concludes with yet another request for a stay. As noted earlier, the Staff has opposed FO E's petitions to intervene and its requests for a stay.
On February 25,198G, the Licensee filed its motion seeking to Defer answers to FOE's eleven " contentions" until the Licensing Board rules on i
c-n-~,
. its petition to intervene.
For the reasons that follow, the NRC staff supports the Licensee's motion.
Ill. DISCUSSION Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. S 2.714(b) O a petitioner may supplement his petition to intervene not later than fifteen days prior to the holding of the special prehearing conference or the first prehearing conference.
Thus, the filing of proposed contentions at this juncture in this proceed-ing while not specifically prohibited by the Commission's rules is not the normal procedure that is followed in the NRC's licensing or amendment proccedings.
G enerally, Licensing Boards rule upon questions regarding the Petitioner's standing and the timeliness of the petition before reviewing proposed contentions.
If the Intervenor is found to have standing and has otherwise complied with 10 C.F. R.
S 2.714, then proposed contentions are received prior to the special prehearing 1_/
10 C.F.R. 5 2.714(b) states:
(b) Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to the hold-ing of the special prehearing conference pursuant to S 2.751a, or where no special prehearing conference is held, fif teen (15) days prior to the holding of the first prehearing conference, the petitioner shall file a supple-ment to his petition to intervene which must include a list of the contentions which petitioner seeks to have litigated in the matter, and the bases for each contention set forth with reasonable specificity.
A petitioner who fails to file such a supplement which satisfies the re-quirements of this paragraph with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a par-ty.
Additional time for filing the supplement may be l
granted based upon a balancing of the factors in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
1
)
. conference or the first prehearing conference at which time the admissi-bility of proposed contentions are determined. 2/
Based upon the foregoing practices and procedures, the Licensee filed its motion to defer answers to FOE's " contentions" until af ter the Licensing Board rules upon FOE's petition to intervene.
In setting forth its reasons in support of the motion, the Licensee states:
Accordingly, Licensee requests the Licensing Board to defer answers to Mr. Anthony's proposed contentions until after it decides Licensee's objections to Mr. Anthony's intervention or the time expires for Mr. Anthony to supplement his petition, whichever is later.
Deferral of annwers will climinate the need for the Staff and the Licensee to file any answers at all if the Board finds that Mr. Anthony has not met the require-ments for intervention.
Even if the Board should grant Mr. Anthony intervenor status, it is pointless to answer Mr. Anthony's contentions until the time for supplementing his petition has expired.
Should it become necessary, any delay in answering the proposed contentions would be mini-mal.
Especially considering that Mr. Anthony is the only petitioner and that the proceeding is not otherwise required, a brief deferral is well justified.
Licensee's Motion to Defer Answers to Petitioner's Proposed Contentions Until a Ruling Upon IIIs Motion For Leave To Intervene, at 4 (February 25, 1986).
The NRC staff agrees with the Licensee's conclusions as expressed above.
As noted earlier herein, the NRC staff has opposed FOE's petitions to intervene and requests for a stay. 3/
Page 3, supra.
The Staff's bases for such opposition is predicated on FOE's failure to demonstrate standing.
In Staff's view FOE's petitions should be denied for this reason and, if the Licensing Board agrees with the Staff's position, there till be no need to respond to FOE's " contentions."
2/
Id.
3/
The Licensee has also opposed FOE's petitions to intervene and stay requests.
~.
..m.
n.
w s.
,.m 7,e. ug k'
i 1
i In the event the Licensing 11oard determines that FOE's does have standing there should be ample time for Staff to respond to FO E's
" contentions" as FOE will be the only intervenor.
In Staff's view, until the Licensing Board determines the questions of FOE's standing and sets j
a prehearing conference schedule deferral of answers to FOE's proposed i
j
" contentions" is in the best interests of all the parties.
i
)
j IV.
CONCLUSION in view of the foregoing, the NRC staff supports Licensee's motion i
to defer filing answers to Mr. Anthony's proposed contentions until after it has decided whether Mr. Anthony has standing to participate in this i
proceeding or until the time for supplementing his petition has expired, i
which ever is later.
i l
Respectfully sulinitted, 16 ~~ Y?
7 Ilenjamin 11. Vogler Counsel for NRC Staf f Dated at 13ethesda, Maryland this 4th day of March, 1986 r
3 l
i i
DOCKETED USNRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION *86 g g y g BEFORE TIIE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSINABOARD f'g'C$$TV lck 5'*'
bot
' ' d" In the Matter of
)
)
PIIILADELPlilA ELECTRIC COMPANY )
Docket Nos. 50-352
)
(Limerick Generating Station,
)
Unit 1)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " RESPONSE OF NRC STAFF IN SUPPORT OF LICENSEE'S MOTION TO DEFER ANSWERS TO PETITIONER'S
-l PROPOSED CONTENTIONS UNTIL A RULING UPON IIIS MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE" in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class, or as indicated by an asterisk through deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system. this 4th day of March,1986:
Ivan W. Smith, Chairman (2)
Mr. Edward G. Bauer, Jr.
Administrative Judge Vice President & General Counsel Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Philadelphia Electric Company U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2301 Market Street Washington, D.C.
20555*
Philadelphia, PA 19101 Dr. Richard F. Cole Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esq.
Administrative Judge Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Conner and Wetterhahn U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20555*
Washington, D.C.
20006 Mr. Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr.
Mr. Marvin 1. Lewis Administrative Judge 6504 Bradford Terrace Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Philadelphia, PA 19149 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555*
Joseph II. White,111 15 Ardmore Avenue Mr. Frank R. Romano Ardmore, PA 19003 Air and Water Pollution Patrol 61 Forest Avenue Ambler, PA 19002 3
Ms. Phyllis Zitzer, President Kathryn S. Lewis, Esq.
Ms. Maureen Mulligan 1500 Municipal Services Bldg.
Limerick Ecology Action 15th and JFK Blvd.
762 Queen Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 Pottstown, PA 19464 1
i m.
._._...___._.______.-.--.-.-..~.._.__.._...4.
)
i
. 1 Thomas Gerusky, Director Barry M. Ilartman f
a Bureau of Radiation Protection Governor's Energy Council Dept. of Environmental Resources P.O. Box 8010 5th Floor, Fulton Bank Building 300 N. 2nd Street i
Third and Locust Streets liarrisburg, PA 17105 Harrisburg. PA 17120 Spence W. Perry, Esq.
Director Associate General Counsel 4
Pennsylvania Emergency Management Federal Emergency Management Agency Agency, Room 840 Basement, Transportation & Safety 500 C Street, S.W.
Building Washington, D.C.
20472 Harrisburg, PA 17120 J
Robert J. Sugarman, Esq.
Robert L. Anthony Sugarman, Denworth & Hellegera Friends of the Earth of the 16th Floor Center Plaza j
Delaware Valley 101 North N ear' Street j
103 Vernon Lane, Box 186 Philadelphia, PA 19107 j
Moylan, PA 19065 James Wiggins j
Angus R. Love, Esq.
Senior Resident inspector r
Montgomery County Legal Aid U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l
107 East Main Street P.O. Box 47 l
Norristown, PA 19401 Sanatoga, PA 19464 Charles W. Elliott, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Brose & Poswistilo Board Panel 325 N.10 Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission j
Easton, PA 18042 Washington, D.C.
20555*
i i
David Wersan Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal j
Consumer Advocate Board Panel (5)
Office of Attorney General U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission j
1425 Strawberry Square Washington, D.C.
20555*
j Ilarrisburg, PA 17120 j
Docketing and Service Section j
Jay Gutierrez Office of the Secretary Regional Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l
USNRC, Region I Washington, D.C.
20555*
631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 Gregory Minor 1
MHB Technical Associates Steven P. Hershey, Esq.
1723 Ilamilton Avenue Community Legal Services, Inc.
San Jose, CA 95125 5219 Chestnut Street l
Philadelphia, PA 19139 Timothy R. S. Campbell, Director J
Department of Emergency Services
?
14 East Biddle Street West Chester, PA 19380
)
/
(
A y
~
' Benjamin 11. Vogler
~
Counsel for NRC Staff i
)