ML20198D863

Memorandum & Order (Granting Leave to File Reply Pleadings & Requesting Info).* Board Grants Request of State & Castle Rock/Skull Valley for Leave to File Reply.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 980106

ML20198D863
Person / Time
Site:	07200022
Issue date:	01/06/1998
From:	Bollwerk G Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:	External (Affiliation Not Assigned), UTAH, STATE OF
References
CON-#198-18716 97-732-02-ISFSI, 97-732-2-ISFSI, ISFSI, NUDOCS 9801080286
Download: ML20198D863 (7)

Text

.- . ._ .__. _ . _ ~ . _ ._ _ _ . _ _

. , . ... .m. a, +n...,,.-- .

M7/4 '

DOCKETED  !

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA USNPC I

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 96 M i N Before Administrative Judges: g ,

OFFICE OF O. Paul Bollwerk, III, Chairman RULhh%. dy,et ;. g'? ' 7 Dr. Jerry R. Kline M"# '

Dr. Peter S. Lam i i '

SERVED JAN - 61998 In the Matter of Docket No. 72-22-ISFSI 4

PRIVATE FUEL STORAGE, L.L.C. ASLBP No. 97-732-02-ISFSI (Independent Spent Fuel January 6, 1998 Storage Installation)

MEMORA!!DUM AND ORDER '

(Granting Loave to File Reply Pleadings and Requesting Information)

Pending before the Licensing Board are motions filed by petitioner State of Utah (State) and petitioners castle Rock Land and Livestock, L.C., and Skull Valley Co., LTD. (Castle '

Rock / Skull Valley), on December 30 and December 31, 1997, '

respectlvely, requesting leave to file replies to the December 24, 1997, responses of applicant Piivate Fuel Storago, L.L.C. (PFS), and the NRC staff to these petitioners' contentions.1 The petitioners also request they be given until January 22, 1998, to submit these t

? Although petitioner Ensign Ranches of Utah, L.C., '

joined Castle Rock / Skull Valley in seeking intervention and  ;

in-the first five of their contentions, as PFS points out it apparencly does not' join in the' motion for leave to reply.

This has no practical effect, however, since Castle Rock / Skull-Valley joined in each of the contentions that would be covered by;any reply pleading.

2

@,ggpg hsow ;

. -~

2-pleadings. In January 5, 1998 responses to the State and l Castle Rock / Skull Valley motions, both PFS and the staff oppose the requests and the proposed filing deadline.

Houston.Liethtinq and Power Comp _ADy (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1), ALAB-565, 10 NRC S21 t (1979), the principal authority discussed by the movants, PFS, and the staff in their filings, stands for the proposition that when there is an objection to the admissibility of a proffered contention, a presiding officer generally should afford the sponsoring party some additional  !

opportunity to be heard in support of the contention. As both PFS and the staff point out, the prehearing conference scheduled to begin some three weeks hence will afford the State and Castle Rock / Skull Valley (as well as the other petitioners who have submitted contentions) just such an opportunity. Thus, denying the requests of the State and Castle Rock / Skull Valley to file a reply clearly would not run afoul of the Allens Creek guidance.

In this instance, however, there is an additional factor that supports permitting petitioners state and Castle Rock / Skull Valley to submit a written reply prior to the prehearing conference. The contenticns of the State and Castle Rock / Skull Valley run some 150 pages. PFS and the staff responses to those contentions likewise are sizable, numbering more than 500 pages. With this mass of material, it is not untoward to anticipate that prehearing conference v

..r.._ -._ - . . ,. , ., - . . ,-, _ . _ _ _ . ~ - . , . _ _ . , ._ . - , . - . . . - _ ._-_m.

arguments by the participants relative to these contentions will be lenschy. By permitting the State and Castle  ;

Rock /SkuiA Valley to file a reply, we would afford them the opportunity to identify the critical matters in dispute, thereby helping to focus and shorten the discussion at the prehearing conference. With this goal in mind, we thus are inclined to grant their request.

At the same time, we find the filing schedule proposed by the petitioners to be unrealistic. The usefulness of their reply pleading will be significantly diminished if the Board does not have an adequate opportunity to digest their submission prior to the January 27, 1998 start of the prehearing conference. Particularly given the other filings that are yet to be made, including PFS and staff responses to necurity plan and late-filed contentions submitted by the State, a somewhat shorter filing date for any reply pleadings is appropriate.

Accordingly, the Board orants the request of the State and Castle Rock / Skull Valley for leave to file a reply.

Their replies, which should be limited to the admissibility I

of the contentions each sponsored ab init.in and the propriety of their adoption by reference of other ,

participants' contentions (as opposed to the admissibility

,--wm--- -

-%. --f - - .-,,cor w gr ,--,--,i-nf.- + , . - +-o .. -- .,v.-.-is.r- - , m i m -- w w

c.a.._.--- m.r:_ _ - - >

---m n., ._;. _ _.u._..._. _ _ __,;._.

1 4- 3 of those adopted contentions),8 shall be filed on or before  ;

i Friday, January 16, 1998.

As part of their replies, petitioners State and Castle Rock / Skull Valley should address the PFS suggestions for redrafting their contentions to include subcontentions. In addition, in their replies the State and Castle Rock / Skull Valley, should provide the Board with a listing classifyir.g each of the contentions they proposed ab initio under one of the following four categories:

1. Safety -- relates primarily to matters discussed in the .i PFS Safety Analysis Report (SAR).

2. Environmental -- relates primarily to matters discussed in the PFS Environmental Report (ER).

3. Emergency Planning -- relates primarily to matters ,

discussed in the PFS Emergency Plan (EP).

4. Other -- does not fall into one of the three categories outlined above.

Finally, on or before Fridav. January 16, 1998, petitioner Ohngo Gaudadeh Devia (OGD) and petitioners Confederated Tribes of the Goshute Nation and David Pete (Confederated Tribes /Pete), who also have challenged the PFS application but have not requested the opportunity to file a reply to the PFS and staff responses to their contentions, should provide the Board with a filing that (1) indicates whether they object to the PFS suggestions for redrafting

• In this filing, the State may provide any response to the December 31, 1997

• Applicant's Answer to State of Utah's Late-Filed Contentions."

t

. -- -.,....-w., - - - - , . , y ~,w...- ,---.ww-=-.w.- ..r.-,+'. . - - . - - - m.v.,4 - - . . . v.-w. e -+- - ---,,,.,m,,.

. y- -

i 5-their contentions to include subcontentions; and (2) classifies each of the contentions they proposed ab initio under one of the four categories specified above.

The filings required or permitted under this memorandum and order should be served on the hoard, the Office of the Secretary, and counsel for the other participants by facsimile transmission, + mail, or other means that will ensure receipt by close of business (4 00 p.m. EST) on the day of filing. Egg Licensing Board Memorandum and Order (Initial Prehearing Order) (Sept. 23, 1997) at 5-6 (unpublished); Licensing Board Memorandum and Order (Additional Guidance on Service Procedures) (Nov. 19, 1997)

(unpublished).

It is so ORDERED.

FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD'

. J $0le. 5 G. Paul Bollwerk, III ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Rockville, Maryland January 6, 1998 8

Copies of this memorandum and order were sent this date to counsel for the applicant PFS, and to counsel for petitioners Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians, OGD, Confederated Tribes /Pete, Castle Rock / Skull Valley / Ensign Ranches, and the State by Internet e-mail transmission; and to counsel for the staff by e-mail through the agency'c wide area network system.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMi1ISS10N In the Matter of PRIVATE FUEL STORAGE, LLC Docket No.(s) 72-22-ISFSI (Independent Spent fuel Storage Installation)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing LB M&O (GRANTING LEAVE...)

have been served upon the following persons by U.S. mail, first class, except as otherwise noteo and in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Sec. 2.712.

Administrativa Judge Office of Commission Appellate G. Paul Bo11werk, III, Chairman Adjudication Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop - T-3 F23 Washington, DC 20555 U.S. Nuclear Flegulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Adniinistrative Judge Administrative Judge Jerry R. Kline Peter S. Lam Atomic Safety and Licensing Bcard Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Mail Stop - T-3 F23 Mail Stop - T-3 F23 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Connission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Connission Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 Sherwin E. Turk, Esq.

Catherine L. Marco, Esq. Diane curran, Esq.

Office of the General Counsel Harmon, Curran & Spielberg Mail Stop 15 BI8 2001 S Street, N.W., Suite 430 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20009 Washington, DC 20555 Denise Chancellor, Esq.

Assistant Attorney General Jay E. Silberg, Esq.

Utah Attorney General's Office Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge 160 East 300 South, 5th Floor 2300 N Street, NW P.O. Box 140873 Washington, DC 20037 Salt Lake City, UT 84114

Docket No.(s)72-22-ISFSI L8 M&O (GRANTING LEAVE...)

John Paul Kennedy, Esq. Jean Belille, Esq.

Confederated Tribes of the Goshute Ohngo Gaudadeh Devia Reservation and David Pete Land and Water Fund of the Rockies 1385 Yale Avenue 2260 Baseline Road, Suite 200 Salt Lake City, UT 84105 Boulder, CO 80302 Clayton J. Parr, Esq. Danny Quintana, Esq.

Castle Rock, et al. Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians Parr, Waddoups, Brown, Gee & Loveless Danny Quintana & Assocs., P.C.

185 South State Street, Suite 1300 50 West Broadway. Fourth Floor Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Salt Lake city, UT 84101 Dated at Rockville, Md. this 6 day of January 1998 0T1 5 re F o kmission I

4 L