ML20197K113
| ML20197K113 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 12/11/1998 |
| From: | Repka D DUKE POWER CO., WINSTON & STRAWN |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#498-19802 LR, NUDOCS 9812160087 | |
| Download: ML20197K113 (5) | |
Text
. _ _.
00CKETED USNRC December 11,1998
% DEC 14 A8:47 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFiU.
' SE :
m RULO.C 10 ADvUDn WF BEFORE THF ATOMIC SAFFTY AND I ICENSING ROARD In the Matter of
)
)
Duke Energy Corporation
)
Docket Nos. 50 269/270/287 LR
)
(Oconee Nuclear Station,
)
Units 1,2, and 3)
)
DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO RESPOND TO "NEW INFORMATION" SUBMITTED BY CHATTOOGA RIVER WATERSHED COAI ITION On November 16, 1998, Duke Energy Corporation (" Duke") responded to the October 30,1998 supplemental petition to intervene submitted by the Petitioners in this proceed Duke opposed admission of all four contentions proposed by the Petitioners on g others) that there was not adequate basis offered to demonstrate a genuine issue in material matter.
By a filing dated December 9,1998, but actually received by Duke on December 1998, the Petitioners offered what they assert to be "new information" to support the contentions. This "new information" does not support admission of the proposed contentions.
Rather, Petitioners are merely continuing their attempt to piggyback the NRC Staff's review i
I i
9812160087 981211 PDR ADOCK 05000269
\\
G PDR
(
license renewal application. Petitioners have still failed to specify precise technical issues or t
, provide any basis, documentary or otherwise, to support such issues.
Duke herein requests leave to respond to Fetitioners' "new information," on the following grounds. First, the December 10,1998 supplemental filing by the Petitioners har not b authorized by the Licensing Board. On November 19,1998, the Licensing Board requested ce information from the NRC Staff regarding the agency's rulemaking on transportation of hig; i
radioactive waste ("HLW"). Both Duke and the Petitioners were invited to respond to the Staff's l
information by December 9,1998. Pursuant to the terms of that Order, Duke responded on December 9,1998. The Petitioners' filing, though dated December 9,1998, was actually unti in that it was not received until December 10. Be' more importantly, beyond simply respond the Licensing Board's invitation to comment on the NRC Staff's infonnation on the HLW transportation rulemaking, Petitioners volunteered the additional discussion on "New Information For the ASLB to Consider With the Petitioners' First Supplemental Filing." This unsolicited i
discussion exceeds the scope of the Lit.ensing Board's invitation, and in effect constitutes a without leave to file. Fairness dictates that Duke have the opportunity to respond.
In addition, the Petitioners' filing does not proffer any new, albeit late-filed, contentions. Although several specific technical issues are mentioned, drawn exclusively from the NRC Staff's Requests for Additional information ("RAIs") on the Oconee license renewal application, the pleading by its terms does not propose any contentions on these points. If the Petitioners were proposing new contentions at this time, they would need to address the factors for assessing the admissibility oflate filed contentions in 10 C.F.R. 2.714(a)(1), and Duke would have the opportunity te respond.V While the Petitioners have directed their pleading at supporting the i
V Indeed, several of the RAIs are unrelated to matters addressed in the proposed contentions, and as such should actually be styled as new, late-filed contentions.
2-
prior proposed contentions, Duke believes thatjust as with a late-filed contention, have the opportunity to respond to the "new information" and the specious theory t l
i.
advance the cause of the previously proposed contentions.
Finally, if the Licensing Board grants this Motion for leave to respond, Duke wou be prepared to respond expeditiously, following the Licensing Board's Order granting Respectfully submitted, k
at d k hr David A. Repka
\\
N WINSTON & STRAWN 1400 L Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20005-3502 202/371-5726 or 202/371-5724 Paul R. Newton Lisa F. Vaughn DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION 422 South Church Street i
P.O. Box 1244 Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 ATTORNEYS FOR DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION Dated at Washington, D.C.
This 1Ith day of December,1998 l
l.
i s
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 00CKETED USHRC NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY-AND T ICENSING BOARD % DEC 14 A8:47 i
OFnCc a T"
Q RULEF 3
)
ADJUDO. ' ',. STAFF In the Matter of
)
DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION
)
)
Docket Nos. 50-269/270/287-LR (Oconee Nuclear Station,
)
l, Units 1,2 and 3)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing " DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION'S MOTION FO LEAVE TO RESPOND TO "NEW INFORMATION" SUBMITTED BY CHATTO WATERSHED COALITION" in the above captioned proceeding have been served upon th following by electronic mail or facsimile as noted, with conforming copies and additional service deposited in United States Mail, first class, this I lth day of December 1998 Office of Commission Appellate Chief Administrative Judge Adjudication B. Paul Cotter, Jr., Chairman U S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel One White Flint North U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conunission 11555 Rockville Pike Two White Flint North,3rd Floor Rockville, MD 20852-2738 11545 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 (E-mail copy to bpel@nrc. gov)
Administrative Judge Administrative Judge Richard F. Cole Peter S. Lam Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Two White Flint North,3rd Floor Two White Flint North,3rd Floor 11545 Rockville Pike 11545 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Rockville, MD 20852-2738 (E-mail copy to rfc1(dnre. gov)
(E-mail copy to psl@nre. gov) i,
Marian L. Zobler Norman " Buzz" Williams i
Robert M. Weisman 190 Mountain Cove Rd.
l Office of the General Counsel Mountain Rest, SC 29664 l
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North William " Butch" Clay 11555 Rockville Pike P.O. Box 53 Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Long Creek, SC 29658 (E-mail copies to oconee@nre gov W.S. Lesan Chattooga River Watershed Coalition P.O. Box 66 P. O. Box 2006 Long Creek, SC 29658 Clayton, GA 30525 (facsimile copy to (706)782-6098; e-mail copy to enve@ acme-brain com)
Adjudicatory File Office of the Secretary Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North Two White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike 11545 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Attn: Rulemakings and Adjudications (original & 2 copies)
(E-mail copy to hearingdocket@nrc. gov) l k
David A. Repka
\\'
Winston & Strawn Counsel for Duke Energy Corporation i
.