|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20211A1801999-08-16016 August 1999 Forwards Comments on Draft Geig Re NUREG-1437 ML20205M8401999-04-15015 April 1999 Memorandum & Order.* Orders That Petitioner Appeal of Board Ruling Be Denied.Commission Affirms LBP-98-33 in Entirety. with Certificate of Svc.Served on 990415 ML20199K8101999-01-25025 January 1999 Duke Energy Corp Brief in Opposition to Appeal of Chattooga River Watershed Coalition.* Informs That Licensing Board Decision in LBP-98-33 Should Be Affirmed.With Certificate of Svc ML20199K8231999-01-25025 January 1999 NRC Brief in Opposition to Appeal of Nb Williams,Wb Clay, Ws Lesan & Chattooga River Watershed Coalition.* Licensing Board Decision in LBP-98-33 Should Be Affirmed.With Certificate of Svc ML20199D7021999-01-14014 January 1999 Notice of Appeal.* Chattooga River Watershed Coalition Files Notice of Appeal to Commission for Review of ASLB 981230 Memorandum & Order Denying Petitioner Petition for Leave to Intervene ML20199D7241999-01-14014 January 1999 Chattooga River Watershed Coalition Brief in Support of Appeal of Order Denying Intervention Petition & Dismissing Proceeding.* Commission Should Grant Petition for Review & Remand ASLB Memorandum & Order ML20198K9911998-12-29029 December 1998 Memorandum & Order (Denying Petition to Intervene).* Denies Petitioners Requests for Intervention Because Proffered Contentions Failed to Meet Requirements for Admissability. with Certificate of Svc.Served on 981230 ML20198D2601998-12-22022 December 1998 NRC Staff Response to Petitioners New Info.* Informs That Info Provided by Petitioners Not New & Does Not Support Proposed Contentions.Recommends Proposed Contentions Be Dismissed & Proceeding Terminated.With Certificate of Svc ML20198D2191998-12-21021 December 1998 Duke Energy Corp Response to New Info Submitted by Chattooga River Watershed Coalition in Support of Processed Contentions.* Petitioner Submittal of New Info Should Be Stricken for Procedural Reasons.With Certificate of Svc ML20197J9201998-12-14014 December 1998 Order (Requests by Staff & Applicant to File Responses). Motions of 981211 Re Applicant & Staff Request for Leave to Respond to Petitioner Filing of 981209 Granted.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 981214 ML20197J9441998-12-11011 December 1998 NRC Staff Motion for Leave to Respond to Petitioner Filing.* Staff Requests Leave from Board to Respond to Info.Staff Will File Response within 3 Days After Board Order Issued,If Board Grants Request.With Certificate of Svc ML20197K1131998-12-11011 December 1998 Duke Energy Corp Motion for Leave to Respond to New Info Submitted by Chattooga River Watershed Coalition.* Requests Leave to Respond to Petitioners New Info Based on Listed Grounds.With Certificate of Svc ML20196J9051998-12-0909 December 1998 Response of Duke Energy Corp to Licensing Board Order Requesting Info Concerning high-level Radioactive Waste Transportation Rulemaking.* Util Requests That Board Certify Question Immediately.With Certificate of Svc ML20197J8691998-12-0909 December 1998 Petitioners Response to ASLB Request for Addl Info & New Info for ASLB to Consider with Petitioners First Suppl Filing.* Response Filed on Behalf of Ws Lesan,B Clay, B Williams & Chattooga River Watershed Coalition ML20196E0091998-12-0202 December 1998 NRC Staff Response to Order Requesting Information.* in Staff View,Impacts of Transportation of HLW Not Appropriate Issue for Litigation in This Proceeding ML20196E0191998-11-30030 November 1998 Affidavit.* Affidavit of Dp Cleary in Response to Licensing Board Questions Re Environ Impacts of Transportation of High Level Waste.With Certificate of Svc ML20195G5621998-11-19019 November 1998 Order (Requesting Addl Info from Staff).* Based on Directives in SRM M970612,staff Should Furnish Listed Info by 981202.Applicant & Petitioners Have Until 981209 to File Response.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 981119 ML20195D5281998-11-16016 November 1998 Response of Duke Energy Corp to Supplemental Petition to Intervene Filed by Chattooga River Watershed Coalition & Nb Williams,Wb Clay & Ws Lesan.* Request for Hearing Should Be Denied for Reasons Stated.With Certificate of Svc ML20195C1601998-11-16016 November 1998 NRC Staff Response to Petitioner First Supplemental Filing.* Petitioners Failed to Submit Admissible Contention.Iaw 10CFR2.714,petition Should Be Denied & Petitioners Request for Stay Should Be Denied.With Certificate of Svc ML20155F5041998-10-30030 October 1998 Declaration of N Williams.* Declaration Expresses Concerns Re Duke Power Co Application for License Renewal for Oconee Nuclear Station,Units 1,2 & 3.Application Inadequate to Protect from Unacceptable Risk of Radiological Accidents ML20155F4791998-10-30030 October 1998 Petitioners First Supplemental Filing.* Petitioners Request That Chattooga River Watershed Coalition Be Admitted as Party to These Proceedings & That Contentions Be Admitted for Adjudication.Unsigned Declaration for Wb Clay Encl ML20155F4951998-10-30030 October 1998 Declaration of Ws Lesan.* Declaration Expresses Concern Re Duke Power Co Application for Renewal of License for Oconee Nuclear Station,Units 1,2 & 3.Application Inadequate to Protect from Unacceptable Risk of Radiological Accidents ML20154H0771998-10-0909 October 1998 NRC Staff Answer to Petition for Leave to Intervene Filed by N Williams,W Clay,Ws Lesan & Chattooga River Watershed Coalition.Petition Should Be Denied for Listed Reasons. with Certificate of Svc ML20154A9371998-10-0101 October 1998 Order (Ruling on Request for Extension of Time).* Motion for 30-day Extension to File Amended Petition to Intervene Denied.Petitioners Have Addl 11 Days Until 981030 to File Suppl to Petition.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 981002 ML20154A0401998-09-30030 September 1998 Response of Duke Energy Corp to Request for Enlargement of Time of Chattooga River Watershed Coalition & Messrs, N Williams,W Clay & Ws Lesan.* Petitioner Request Should Be Denied for Listed Reasons.With Certificate of Svc ML20153H4191998-09-29029 September 1998 NRC Staff Response to Motion for Enlargement of Time Filed by N Williams,W Clay,W Lesan & Chattooga River Watershed Coalition.* Petitioners Failed to Establish Sufficient Cause for Delaying Submission of Amends.With Certificate of Svc ML20153F3131998-09-25025 September 1998 Notice of Appearance.* Informs That ML Zobler,Rm Weisman & Je Moore Will Enter Appearances in Proceeding Re Duke Energy Corp.With Certificate of Svc ML20153H0801998-09-22022 September 1998 Comment on Draft NUREG-1633, Assessment of Use of Potassium (Ki) as Protective Action During Severe Reactor Accidents. Emergency Plan Calls for Evacuation of Population of EPZ in Timely Fashion to Prevent Exposure to Radiation from Oconee ML20151Z7051998-09-18018 September 1998 Memorandum & Order.* Applicant & Staff Shall File Respective Answers After Petitioners File Any Amend to Intervention Petition.Answers Shall Be Filed IAW Schedule as Submitted. with Certificate of Svc.Served on 980918 ML20151Z5681998-09-18018 September 1998 Notice of Reconstitution of Board.* Provides Notification of Reconstitution by Appointing P Cotter as Board Chairman in Place of T Moore in Duke Energy Corp Proceeding.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 980918 ML20151X9911998-09-16016 September 1998 Establishment of Atomic Safety & Licensing Board.* Board Being Established in Proceeding Re Application by DPC to Renew Operating Licenses for Units 1,2 & 3,per 10CFR54.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 980917 ML20077E8231994-12-0808 December 1994 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR2,51 & 54 Re Rev to NRC NPP License Renewal Rule ML20044G7371993-05-25025 May 1993 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR170 & 171, FY91 & 92 Proposed Rule Implementing Us Court of Appeals Decision & Rev of Fee Schedules;100% Fee Recovery,FY93. Opposes Rule ML20101R5931992-07-0606 July 1992 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Loss of All Alternating Current Power & Draft Reg Guide 1.9,task DG-1021.Opposes Rule ML20070E6291991-02-28028 February 1991 Comment Opposing Petition for Rulemaking PRM-73-9 Re Regulations to Upgrade Design Basis Threat for Radiological Sabotage of Nuclear Reactors ML20215D6741987-06-12012 June 1987 Suppl 4 to Petition for Immediate Action to Relieve Undue Risk Posed by Nuclear Power Plants Designed by B&W.Ucs Reply to Responses from NRC & B&W Owners Group.* Certificate of Svc Encl ML20210C4191987-04-0606 April 1987 Principal Response of B&W Owners Group to Petition Filed Under 10CFR2.206 by Ucs.* Petition Should Be Denied ML20205F2911987-03-23023 March 1987 Suppl 3 to Petition for Immediate Action to Relieve Undue Risk Posed by Nuclear Power Plants Designed by B&W.* Requests That Listed Names Be Added to List in Paragraph 1 of 870210 Petition ML20210C2691987-03-0606 March 1987 Initial Response of B&W Owners Group to Petition Filed Under 10CFR2.206 by Ucs.* Request for Immediate Suspension Should Be Summarily Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20211F5091987-02-20020 February 1987 Suppl 2 to Petition for Immediate Action to Relieve Undue Risk Posed by Nuclear Power Plants Designed by B&W.* Lists Names to Be Added to 870210 Petition & Corrects Address for Save Our State from Radwaste ML20210N4861987-02-10010 February 1987 Petition for Immediate Action to Relieve Undue Risk Posed by Nuclear Power Plants Designed by B&W Co.* OLs & CPs for Facilities Should Be Suspended Until Listed NRC Actions Taken DD-85-19, Order Extending Time Until 860303 for Commission to Review Director'S Decision DD-85-19.Served on 8602201986-02-19019 February 1986 Order Extending Time Until 860303 for Commission to Review Director'S Decision DD-85-19.Served on 860220 ML20137L5911985-09-10010 September 1985 Response Opposing Jf Doherty 850611 Petition for Show Cause Order Requesting NRC to Institute Consolidated Proceeding Per 10CFR2.202.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20126A3531985-06-11011 June 1985 Petition/Request for Order to Show Cause Why Plants Should Not Be Shut Down Until CRD Mechanisms Inspected ML20067B2391982-12-0202 December 1982 Response to Interrogatories & Document Requests Re Commission Questions 2 & 5.Related Correspondence ML15219A0471980-04-28028 April 1980 Statement of Board of Commissioners' Position in Opposition to Radwaste Transportation Through Gaston County,Nc.Urges Transportation Via Interstates 77 & 85.Encourages Expending Energy & Money for Recycling.W/Correspondence ML19259C4811979-05-10010 May 1979 Ucs Petition for Immediate Reconsideration of Errors in Commission 790508 Order & for Immediate Shutdown of Oconee Units 1 & 2 ML19312B8171978-03-15015 March 1978 Statement of Util as to Available Sources of Funds to Satisfy Possible Liability Not Exceeding $30 Million ML19317E0201977-12-20020 December 1977 Endorsement 8 to Nelia Policy NF-248 ML19317D2511977-08-19019 August 1977 Petition for Rulemaking by Wi Electric Power Co,Wi Public Svc Corp & Bg&E Requesting Amend of 10CFR73.55(d)(1) Re Access & Physical Searches 1999-08-16
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20199D7021999-01-14014 January 1999 Notice of Appeal.* Chattooga River Watershed Coalition Files Notice of Appeal to Commission for Review of ASLB 981230 Memorandum & Order Denying Petitioner Petition for Leave to Intervene ML20198D2601998-12-22022 December 1998 NRC Staff Response to Petitioners New Info.* Informs That Info Provided by Petitioners Not New & Does Not Support Proposed Contentions.Recommends Proposed Contentions Be Dismissed & Proceeding Terminated.With Certificate of Svc ML20198D2191998-12-21021 December 1998 Duke Energy Corp Response to New Info Submitted by Chattooga River Watershed Coalition in Support of Processed Contentions.* Petitioner Submittal of New Info Should Be Stricken for Procedural Reasons.With Certificate of Svc ML20197K1131998-12-11011 December 1998 Duke Energy Corp Motion for Leave to Respond to New Info Submitted by Chattooga River Watershed Coalition.* Requests Leave to Respond to Petitioners New Info Based on Listed Grounds.With Certificate of Svc ML20197J9441998-12-11011 December 1998 NRC Staff Motion for Leave to Respond to Petitioner Filing.* Staff Requests Leave from Board to Respond to Info.Staff Will File Response within 3 Days After Board Order Issued,If Board Grants Request.With Certificate of Svc ML20196J9051998-12-0909 December 1998 Response of Duke Energy Corp to Licensing Board Order Requesting Info Concerning high-level Radioactive Waste Transportation Rulemaking.* Util Requests That Board Certify Question Immediately.With Certificate of Svc ML20197J8691998-12-0909 December 1998 Petitioners Response to ASLB Request for Addl Info & New Info for ASLB to Consider with Petitioners First Suppl Filing.* Response Filed on Behalf of Ws Lesan,B Clay, B Williams & Chattooga River Watershed Coalition ML20196E0091998-12-0202 December 1998 NRC Staff Response to Order Requesting Information.* in Staff View,Impacts of Transportation of HLW Not Appropriate Issue for Litigation in This Proceeding ML20195D5281998-11-16016 November 1998 Response of Duke Energy Corp to Supplemental Petition to Intervene Filed by Chattooga River Watershed Coalition & Nb Williams,Wb Clay & Ws Lesan.* Request for Hearing Should Be Denied for Reasons Stated.With Certificate of Svc ML20195C1601998-11-16016 November 1998 NRC Staff Response to Petitioner First Supplemental Filing.* Petitioners Failed to Submit Admissible Contention.Iaw 10CFR2.714,petition Should Be Denied & Petitioners Request for Stay Should Be Denied.With Certificate of Svc ML20155F4791998-10-30030 October 1998 Petitioners First Supplemental Filing.* Petitioners Request That Chattooga River Watershed Coalition Be Admitted as Party to These Proceedings & That Contentions Be Admitted for Adjudication.Unsigned Declaration for Wb Clay Encl ML20154A0401998-09-30030 September 1998 Response of Duke Energy Corp to Request for Enlargement of Time of Chattooga River Watershed Coalition & Messrs, N Williams,W Clay & Ws Lesan.* Petitioner Request Should Be Denied for Listed Reasons.With Certificate of Svc ML20153H4191998-09-29029 September 1998 NRC Staff Response to Motion for Enlargement of Time Filed by N Williams,W Clay,W Lesan & Chattooga River Watershed Coalition.* Petitioners Failed to Establish Sufficient Cause for Delaying Submission of Amends.With Certificate of Svc ML20215D6741987-06-12012 June 1987 Suppl 4 to Petition for Immediate Action to Relieve Undue Risk Posed by Nuclear Power Plants Designed by B&W.Ucs Reply to Responses from NRC & B&W Owners Group.* Certificate of Svc Encl ML20210C4191987-04-0606 April 1987 Principal Response of B&W Owners Group to Petition Filed Under 10CFR2.206 by Ucs.* Petition Should Be Denied ML20205F2911987-03-23023 March 1987 Suppl 3 to Petition for Immediate Action to Relieve Undue Risk Posed by Nuclear Power Plants Designed by B&W.* Requests That Listed Names Be Added to List in Paragraph 1 of 870210 Petition ML20210C2691987-03-0606 March 1987 Initial Response of B&W Owners Group to Petition Filed Under 10CFR2.206 by Ucs.* Request for Immediate Suspension Should Be Summarily Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20211F5091987-02-20020 February 1987 Suppl 2 to Petition for Immediate Action to Relieve Undue Risk Posed by Nuclear Power Plants Designed by B&W.* Lists Names to Be Added to 870210 Petition & Corrects Address for Save Our State from Radwaste ML20210N4861987-02-10010 February 1987 Petition for Immediate Action to Relieve Undue Risk Posed by Nuclear Power Plants Designed by B&W Co.* OLs & CPs for Facilities Should Be Suspended Until Listed NRC Actions Taken ML20137L5911985-09-10010 September 1985 Response Opposing Jf Doherty 850611 Petition for Show Cause Order Requesting NRC to Institute Consolidated Proceeding Per 10CFR2.202.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20126A3531985-06-11011 June 1985 Petition/Request for Order to Show Cause Why Plants Should Not Be Shut Down Until CRD Mechanisms Inspected ML15219A0471980-04-28028 April 1980 Statement of Board of Commissioners' Position in Opposition to Radwaste Transportation Through Gaston County,Nc.Urges Transportation Via Interstates 77 & 85.Encourages Expending Energy & Money for Recycling.W/Correspondence ML19259C4811979-05-10010 May 1979 Ucs Petition for Immediate Reconsideration of Errors in Commission 790508 Order & for Immediate Shutdown of Oconee Units 1 & 2 ML19317D2511977-08-19019 August 1977 Petition for Rulemaking by Wi Electric Power Co,Wi Public Svc Corp & Bg&E Requesting Amend of 10CFR73.55(d)(1) Re Access & Physical Searches ML19317E2621975-03-28028 March 1975 Settlement Agreement Between Applicant,Municipal Intervenors,Nc Electric Membership Corp & Blue Ridge Electric Membership Corp ML19317E2431975-03-28028 March 1975 Joint Motion of Applicant & Municipal Intervenors to Accept Settlement & Terminate Proceeding.Settlement Agreement Dtd 750328, & Order on Joint Motion of AEC & DOJ to Place Conditions on Facility OLs Encl ML19317E2041974-05-24024 May 1974 Motion by Municipal Intervenors to Suspend Procedural Schedule.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19317E3591974-02-0707 February 1974 Joint Motion by DOJ on Behalf of Aec,Intervenors & Applicant Requesting Changes in Schedule of Proceeding Per ASLB Request.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19308B2411974-01-21021 January 1974 Intervenors' Response to Applicant 740115 Motion Compelling Answers to Certain Interrogatories & Document Requests, Providing Sanctions for Noncompliance, & Allowing Addl Time for Further Motion to Compel.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19317E3641973-12-0707 December 1973 States That Doj,Aec & Intervenors Do Not Oppose Applicant Request for Extension of Time to File Motion to Compel Responses to Supplemental Interrogatories.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19317E3701973-12-0707 December 1973 Supplemental Memorandum of DOJ on atty-client Privilege.Asks That Carolina-VA Power Pool Agreement Documents Not Be Considered Privileged.Certificate of Svc & atty-client Correspondence Encl ML19317E4401973-12-0707 December 1973 Requests Extension of Time Until 731227 to File Motions to Compel Responses to Applicant Supplemental Interrogatories & to Answer Intervenors' Objections to Same.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19317E7631973-12-0707 December 1973 Motion for Leave to Respond Out of Time to Applicant'S Interrogatories ML19317E7671973-12-0707 December 1973 Responds to Applicant'S Objections to Joint Discoverors' Interrogataries, Document Request & Motion for Protective Orders.Urges Denial of Applicant'S Objections.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19308B1921973-11-30030 November 1973 DOJ Objections to Applicant'S Interrogatories & Document Production Requests & Motion for Protective Order. Certificate of Svc Encl ML19308B1901973-11-30030 November 1973 DOJ Answers to Interrogatories of Applicant ML19317E8131973-11-20020 November 1973 Applicant'S Answers to Interrogatories of Joint Discoverers. Verification Encl ML19317E5571973-09-17017 September 1973 Applicant'S Motion to Compel Epic,Inc to Comply W/Subpoena ML19312C6071973-08-0606 August 1973 Application for Issuance of Subpoena Duces Tecum to VEPCO, Requiring Document Production.Schedule for Insp & Copying, 710123 Util Ltr Re Nc Municipalities & Certificate of Svc Encl ML19312C6051973-07-31031 July 1973 Responds to Applicant Motion for Protective Orders.Applicant Should Not Be Permitted to Withhold Entirely from Discovery Documents for Which It Seeks Protective Orders.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19308B2811973-07-30030 July 1973 Responds to Applicant'S Motion to Amend Prehearing Order 2. Requests Denial.Responses to Atty General Questions & Certificate of Svc Encl ML19317E8081973-07-30030 July 1973 Cities of High Point,Et Al Response to Applicant Motion for Protective Orders.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19317E8071973-07-25025 July 1973 Cities of High Point,Et Al Response to Applicant'S Motion to Amend Prehearing Order 2.Requests Denial.App a & Certificate of Svc Encl ML19317E8031973-07-19019 July 1973 Applicant'S Motion for Protective Orders.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19317E7971973-07-18018 July 1973 Applicant'S Motion to Amend Paragraph B(2)(b) of Prehearing Order 2,App a & Certificate of Svc Encl ML19317E7951973-07-10010 July 1973 Applicant'S Motion to Amend 730615 Board Order,Suspending 730720 Filing Date for Certain Discovery Requests. Certificate of Svc Encl ML19312C7421973-06-0606 June 1973 Approves Applicant'S Motion to Amend Prehearing Order 6 & Moves to Further Amend Order 6,extending Deadline for Requesting Addl Discovery to 730730.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19312C6521973-05-30030 May 1973 Applicant'S Motion to Amend Prehearing Order 6 to Provide That Outstanding Discovery Requests Be Completed by 730615. Certificate of Svc Encl ML19312C6081973-05-16016 May 1973 Applicant'S Statement Re Outstanding Items Subpoenaed from Epic.App A,App B & Certificate of Svc Encl ML19312C6901973-04-24024 April 1973 Responds to Applicant'S Objections & Motion to Strike Revised DOJ Interrogatory Dtd 730416.Moves to Compel Response to Revised Interragatory.Certificate of Svc Encl 1999-01-14
[Table view] |
Text
l jqgol ,
s" ,
i l 0 t l
4 00CEETED 5 ;- USNRC
~4.. c*
98 DEC 14 A8 :50 Chauooga River Watershed Coalgn P. O. Box 2006 o Clayton, GA 30525 ROJ * - >
(706) 782.6097 o Fan (706) 782 6098 ADJLL MF l crwc@ acme brain.com l
December 9,1998 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE Ti{E ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD in the Matter of )
)
Duke Energy Corporation ) Docket Nos. 50-269-LR
) 50 270-LR Oconec Nuclear Station ) 50-287-LR I Units I,2 and 3 ) ASLBP No. 98-749-01 LR PETITIONERS' RESPONSE TO Tile ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING BOARD'S (ASLB)
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND NEW INFORhiATION FOR Tile ASLB TO CONSIDER WITil DIE PETITIONERS' FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL FILING Introduction & Background On October 30,1998, W. S. Lesan, Butch Clay. Buu. Williams and the Chattooga River Watershed Coahtion (the
" Petitioners") filed their "First Supplemental Filing" in the above captioned proceedings. On November 19.1998, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ( ASLB) issued an Order requesting add.itional information from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff. regarding the contents of the petitioners' filing. This ASLB Order was specific to the NRC staff s response to the Petitioners' Contention #4, u hich addressed the management and transport of high-level waste (11LW). The ASLB indicated that their ruling on the Petitioners' Contention #4 would also consider responses from the Petitioners and attorneys for Duke Energy Corporation on the IILW issue, with December 9,1998, set as the deadline for these responses.
Discussion A. Petitioners' Rc_sjonse To The ASLB's Request for Additional Information l
l The Petitioners' Contention #4 asserted that Duke Energy Corporation's application for renewing the operating licenses for the Oconec Nuclear Station, units 1. 2 and 3 (herein referred to as the application") failed to comply I
9812160016 981209 PDR ADOCK 05000269 / i G PDR 3 Jc)3
~ . - -. _, . - . _ . -. - . . __-_ -. - - - -
with the existing requirements of Section S t.53(c)(1)(ii)(M) Indeed, Duke Energy Corporation (herein referred to as the " applicant") explicitly states, " Duke has not addressed the existing requirements of Section S t.53(c)(3)(ii)(M) in this Ernironmental Report"(application, sol. 4, p.4-55). The Petitioners have revieued the NRC counscl's defense of this omission, and is aware that the agency is sccking to have these regulations changed at some time during the license renewal procccdings. Ilowescr, at this time, the regulations have not been changed The proposed rule has not been published in the Federal Register. Furthermore, there is no guarantcc that the stated proposal to change the llLW rule will proceed unimpeded. HLW management a nd transportation is a scry contentious issue, and it is reasonable to expect opposition to the NRC's intent to j dow ngrade this very contentious issue to the status of a " generic" consideration. If opposed through litigation, it is reasonable to expect that the NRC's proposed timeline for changing the HLW management and transportation rule would be delayed, and possibly thwarted altogether. Thus, the Petitioners hold that existing regulations, which mandate that Duke Energy Corporation's application disclose their plan for
- management and transportation of HLW, must be followed. Ifin the course of these proceedings the Petitioners are to be strictly bound by the letter of the law, then so should Duke Energy Corporation be bcund.
In consideration of 10 C.F.R. section 2.788, the Petitioners' interests of protecting and promoting the natural !
ccological integrity of the Chattooga River watershed would be irreparably damaged, should a major radiological accident occur as a result of the applicant neglecting to detenninc and follow an approved plm for the management and transportation of Oconce Nuclear Station's repository of HLW, as required by law.
l Certainly, the public interest is best served by the requisite examination and disclosure of the applicant's
)
l l proposed plan to safely manage and transport HLW, as required by law. While the NRC counsel states that l " ..the public interest lies with the prompt resolution of proceedings," the Petitioners cannot accept this i
l statement. It is abundantly clear that it is not the public's interest but the industry's interests that lie with the j
" prompt resolution" of the re licensing proceedings. In any case, this resolution must comply with existing I law, and not a law that may or may not be codified at some point in the future. Therefore, the Petitioners respectfully request that the above-captioned proceedings be stayed, until such a time as Duke Energy Corpomtion completes their application, which by law must include a plan for management and transportation of HLW. This plan is not to be found in the applicant's current Emironmental Report.
B. New Infonnation For The ASLB to Consider With The Petitioners' First SuJplemental Filina Meann hile, in the time period from October 30,1998 (w hich was the deadline for the Petitioners to file contentions based on material issues oflaw and fact), through December 7,1998, the Petitioners received copics of numerous Requests for Additional Information (RAI) that were issued by the License Renewal Project Directorate of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. These RAls are based on the contents of Duke Energy Corporation's license renewal application for renewing the operating licenses for the Oconec Nuclear Station, Units 1. 2 and 3, and contain detailed questions about much of the application's material issues of fact and law, while also identifying portions of the application where critical infonnation is missing.
Since the Petitioners expect that the ASLB will issue their ruling soon on their Contentions, the Petitioners now take this opportunity to introduce new information that has bearing on their Contentions.
, The Petitioners respectfully suggest that it is necessary for the ASLB to resiew all of the RAls to date, in l order tojudge the validity of the Petitioners' current Contentions. Three of the Petitioncts' Contentions tre i based on the extent to which safety evaluations and aging management programs are essentially missing from l the application. Many of the recently issued RAls augment and directly name the matters oflaw and fact that
, are discussed in the Petitioners' Contentions. Here, it is important to note that the information contained in i the RAls cited below was not available to the Petitioners at the time of the October 30th deadline.
( In order to illustrate the type of basic information that is missing from the application, please refer to RAI
- 3.7.7-2, w hich (in reference to the Reactor Building Internal Structural Components) states: " Degradation or corrosion of embedded stect and rebars in concrete is not listed as an applicable aging cITect for Reactor Building Structumt Components in Table 3.7-5.. Discuss your plan for managing the aging cITects resulting ,- ,
from structural steel and rebar corrosion that are embedded in concrete due to accumulation and ingress of d' %
e :
S 2
l l
l water through concrete cracks." Further, RAI #3 7.7-4 states: "Considermg the relatisely sescre atmospheric emironment to w hich the missile shicids and other reinforced concrete elements (including reactor building internal structures) are exposed, discuss w hy cracking is not treated as an applicable aging effect and is not 1 listed in Table 3.7-5T RAI #3.5.3 2 states: "Thennal fatigue has not been identified as an applicable aging j cffect for the components of the Containment IIcat Removal System.. " RAI # 3.4.5 2 (b), which pertains to l the reactor vessel, questions the aging management resicw program for the lower control rod drive i mechanism scrsice support structure, noting: "flowever, the B&WOG has decided to exclude them from the l scope of topical report BAW 2251. Identify which aging clTects are applicable to these components and i describe your aging management program for these components in the license renewal application." RAI #'s l 3.4.5-4 and 3.4.5-5 also address the reactor vessci components and pertain, respectively, to the reactor vessel '
flow stabili/crs and the austenitic stainless steel wcld cladding in reactor vessel forgings. Both of these RAls request that an aging management program be provided for these components, w hose functions are inextricably linked to the " integrity of the reactor vessel."
The RAls to date also identify specific areas w here the application employs parameters of analysis that are deficient in providing essential information, information that weighs heavily in evahiating issues of safety and applicable aging effects that are of primary importance in assessing the question of w hether or not to re-license Units I,2 and 3 of the Oconce Nuclear Station. For exampic, RAI #3.7.1-2 states: "Section 3.2, referred to in sections 3.7.1 and 3.7.2, provides tables for structures and components subjected to thermal and radiation environment. The section does not provide a systematic discussion of structures and components subjected to high humidity / moisture / water. liigh humidity / moisture presents [a] challenging environment for concrete and steel structures and components, as well as for the caulking and scalants. Explain why the process to identify applicable aging clTects in sections 3.2 and 3.7 should not consider high humidity / moisture as one of the dominant challenging emironments." Another example would be RAI #3.2-3, which states:
" Table 3.2 2 prmides assessments of structures for 40 year and 60 year radiation exposure in tenns of the integrated doses in ' rads.' However, the important parameters affecting the structural praperties are high.
l flux neutrons and integrated ganuna doses. Provide the Table in terms of these parameters. For the reactor l
cavitics, the steam generator cavitics, and the spent fuct (Auxiliary Buildings) provide an assessment of syncrgistic clTects of temperatures and radiation on the structural properties of the structures and components (e.g., concrete walls, concrete reactor supports, steel supports, and anchor bolts) and address as such as part of the aging management programs in these areas."
The RAls persist in identifying broad deficiencies in the application's aging management programs. For example, RAI #4.3.9-2 states: "The Reactor Building Spray S3 stem will be completed by February 6,2013 (the end of the initial license of Oconce Unit 1). The staffinds this date to be unacceptable without additional information. Prmide a justification for not completing the inspection activities at the time of application. Along with yourjustification, describe the methodology, identify any applicable acceptance criteria, identify planned correctise actions, and provide a schedule for implementation." In addition, General Question G-2 states: " Sections 4 3 2 4 3 3 and 4 3 8 all describe new one time inspection programs to verify the presence or absence of sarious degradation mechanism specific to certain components. These sections all deal with time dependant mechanisms. However, given that Oconee has been operating /br approximateh Nyears, discuss the rationaleJbr delaying these inspections to the time period betueen the issuance ofa license extension and the expiration of the existing license. The stafT recognizes the financial constraints in the utility business, however, given some of the mechanisms specified, it is not clear uhy some programs are not advancedin schedule.. "
Thus, the RAls identify numerous, specific portions of the application where critical mformation, w hich is clearly within the scope of the license renewal proceeding, is missing. The absence of'his information renders portions of the application incomplete; thus, the current document camnot serve for meaningful public resicw, or as a complete document from which to identify potential contentions. Due to the large volume of
- missing information, the current application hinders the Petitioners' comprehensive evaluation of nutcrial
! issues of law and fact. Furthennore, assuming that the missing information may be forthcoming. this situation indicates that the time schedule dictated for the abo c-captioned adjudicatory proceeding is ,.- ,
inherently premature. In sum, the validity and usefulness of the hearing process to serve the public interest t -
. e :
9d(
,. . . . . 4_-,. __ .____ _ __ _ _ , __ .
_..,.__,.m. -. _. . . - . . . _ _ , - _ , _ _ . - , , , - , _ . , _ , _ .
f, i
suffers considerably, since the projected resolution of important safety issues is timed to occur well after the established timelinc for opportunitics to resolve these issues through adjudicatory proceedings.
J With regard to the Petitioners' current Contentions, the Petitioners appreciate the ASLB's due consideration .
of the information discussed abosc.
I i
gW Res"% fly submitted. - -
Norman " Bun" Williams. Executive Director i
! W. S. Lesan l William " Batch" Clay Chattooga River Watersluxi Coalition i
i l i
, i l
t l
l l l
i I
1 1
l l
8
~
l .
4 l
i
- , _-