|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20195H1911999-06-15015 June 1999 Application of Montaup Electric Co & New England Power Co for Transfer of Licenses & Ownership Interests.Requests That Commission Consent to Two Indirect Transfers of Control & Direct Transfer ML20204H9901999-03-24024 March 1999 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50.54(a)(3) Re Changes to Quality Assurance Programs ML20206T9731998-05-27027 May 1998 Citizens Awareness Network'S Formal Request for Enforcement Action Against Vermont Yankee.* Requests That OL Be Suspended Until Facility Subjected to Independent Safety Analysis Review,Per 10CFR2.206 ML20247G8501998-04-0909 April 1998 Petition Demanding That Commission Issue Order Stating That Administrative Limits of TS 88 Re Torus Water Temp Shall Remain in Force Until Listed Conditions Met ML20217P5481998-04-0606 April 1998 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Proposed Changes to Industry Codes & Stds ML20199A3121998-01-20020 January 1998 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR70.24 Re Criticality Monitors to Ensure That Personnel Would Be Alerted If Criticality Were to Occur During Handling of Snm.Exemption Granted ML20198L1791997-12-29029 December 1997 Final Director'S Decision DD-97-26 Pursuant to 10CFR2.206, Granting in Part Petitioners Request in That NRC Evaluated All of Issues Raised in Two Memoranda & Suppl Ltr Provided by Petitioner to See If Enforcement Action Warranted ML20217G7151997-10-0808 October 1997 Director'S Decision DD-97-25 Re J Block 961206 Petition Requesting Evaluation of 961205 Memo Re Info Presented by Licensee at 960723 Predecisional Enforcement Conference & 961206 Memo Re LERs Submitted at End of 1996.Grants Request ML20140C2511997-03-31031 March 1997 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR170 & 171 Re Rev of Fee Schedules ML20134L5701996-12-0606 December 1996 Petition for Commission & EDO Evaluation of Encl Documents Pursuant to 10CFR2.206 to See If Enforcement Action Warranted Based Upon Info Contained Therein DD-93-23, Director'S Decision DD-93-23 Re M Daley & J M Block Requesting Per 10CFR2.206,that NRC Reconsider Civil Penalty Assessed Against Vynp for Operating Station Outside TS from 921015-930406.Request Denied1993-12-28028 December 1993 Director'S Decision DD-93-23 Re M Daley & J M Block Requesting Per 10CFR2.206,that NRC Reconsider Civil Penalty Assessed Against Vynp for Operating Station Outside TS from 921015-930406.Request Denied DD-93-19, Final Director'S Decision DD-93-19 Under 2.206.Denies Request That NRC Take Immediate EA to Require That Reactor at Plant Remain in Cold Shutdown Until Licensee Could Provide Proof That EDGs at Plant Meet Safety Function1993-12-14014 December 1993 Final Director'S Decision DD-93-19 Under 2.206.Denies Request That NRC Take Immediate EA to Require That Reactor at Plant Remain in Cold Shutdown Until Licensee Could Provide Proof That EDGs at Plant Meet Safety Function ML20057C1321993-09-16016 September 1993 Memorandum & Order (CLI-93-20).* Reverses Board Conclusion That NRC Staff Action Had Effect of Terminating Proceeding. W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 930916 ML20045H3741993-07-0909 July 1993 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR55 Re Operators Licenses.Proposed Change Would Eliminate NRC Requirement to Conduct & Supervise Individual Operator Requalification Exams During Term of Opeerator 6-yr License ML20128P9821993-02-24024 February 1993 Affidavit of Rd Pollard Re New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution Comments in Opposition to Proposed Finding of NSHC ML20128Q0101993-02-22022 February 1993 New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution Request for Hearing on Proposed Amend to Vermont Yankee OL ML20128Q0041993-02-22022 February 1993 New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution Comment in Opposition to Proposed Finding of NSHC BVY-91-106, Comments on NRC Proposed Amend to Policy Statement Re Cooperation W/States at Commercial Nuclear Power Plants. Consistent W/Mou,Util Established Position of State Liaison Engineer to Communicate W/State of VT1991-10-23023 October 1991 Comments on NRC Proposed Amend to Policy Statement Re Cooperation W/States at Commercial Nuclear Power Plants. Consistent W/Mou,Util Established Position of State Liaison Engineer to Communicate W/State of VT ML20085H8331991-10-23023 October 1991 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re NRC Proposed Amend to Policy Statement Concerning Cooperation W/States at Commercial Nuclear Power Plants ML20082G8961991-08-0909 August 1991 Memorandum of State of Vermont Concerning Withdrawal of Contention.* Contentions Re Maint & Proferred late-filed Contention Re Qa.W/Certificate of Svc ML20082G9071991-07-30030 July 1991 Withdrawal of Contention & Intervention.* Withdraws Contention,Motion (Pending) for Admission of late-filed Contention & Intervention ML20066G9981991-02-0808 February 1991 Notice of Withdrawal of Appearance.* Requests Withdrawal of Jp Trout as Counsel for Applicant in Proceeding. W/Certificate of Svc ML20065U0421990-12-12012 December 1990 State of VT Reply to NRC Staff Response to Vermont Yankee Fifth Motion to Compel.* Motion Should Be Denied on Basis of NRC Misciting Cases.W/Certificate of Svc ML20062H6711990-11-0101 November 1990 NRC Staff Response to State of VT Motion to File Reply.* Staff Believes That Matter Should Be Resolved as Soon as Possible & Not Defer Resolution of Matter Until After Not Yet Scheduled Prehearing Conference.W/Certificate of Svc ML20065K4021990-10-29029 October 1990 Answer to State of VT Motion for Leave.* Unless State of VT Substantially Suppls,In Timely Manner,Prior Responses,Then Staff Citation to Stonewalling by Intervenors in Shoreham Proceeding Would Seem Well on Point.W/Certificate of Svc ML20065K3961990-10-29029 October 1990 Answer to State of VT Motion to Compel (Document Request Set 3).* Motion Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20062C2321990-10-22022 October 1990 Answer of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp to State of VT Motion to Compel (Interrogatories,Set 3).* Motion Should Be Denied.W/Supporting Info & Certificate of Svc ML20062C2371990-10-18018 October 1990 State of VT Motion for Leave to File Reply to NRC Staff Response to Vermont Yankee Motion to Compel.* Alternatively, State Requests That Licensee Motion Be Included for Oral Arqument in Prehearing Conference.W/Certificate of Svc ML20062C0221990-10-12012 October 1990 State of VT Motion to Compel Answers to Document Production Requests (Vermont Set 3).* W/Certificate of Svc ML20059N8671990-10-0404 October 1990 Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories (State of VT Set 3).* Requests That Board Enter Order Compelling Licensee to Give Proper Answers to Interrogatories.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059M6461990-10-0202 October 1990 NRC Staff Response to Licensee Motion to Compel Production of Documents.* Supports Licensee Motion Due to State of VT Objections Not Well Founded.Notices of Appearance & Withdrawals & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20059M5591990-09-27027 September 1990 State of VT Answer in Opposition to Vermont Yankee Nuclear Corp Fifth Motion to Compel & State of VT Application for Protective Order.* Protective Order Should Be Issued So State Need Not Suppl Responses.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059M5711990-09-26026 September 1990 Supplemental Response to Applicant Interrogatories by State of VT (Set 3).* W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20059M6301990-09-21021 September 1990 Transcript of 900921 Affirmation/Discussion & Vote Public Meeting Re Termination of Plant Proceedings & Motions on ALAB-919 & Amends to 10CFR40 in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-5 ML20059L8791990-09-21021 September 1990 Memorandum & Order.* Motion to Dismiss Proceeding Granted & Proceeding Terminated.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 900921 ML20059M6221990-09-21021 September 1990 Notice.* Notifies That Encl Request for Clarification from Commission Will Be Reported in NRC Issuances. Certificate of Svc Encl.Served on 900924 ML20059L8721990-09-14014 September 1990 Responses of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp to Document Requests Propounded by State of VT (Set 3).* Util Objects to Request on Grounds That Request Not Relevant to Admitted Contention.W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20059L8241990-09-14014 September 1990 Answers of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp to Interrogatories Propounded by State of VT (Set 3).* Supporting Info Encl.Related Correspondence ML20059L7241990-09-12012 September 1990 Motion to Compel Production of Documents (Set 1).* State of VT Should Be Compelled to Produce,In Manner Requested,Documents Requested in Util Requests 1-15 ML20059L7431990-09-12012 September 1990 NRC Staff Response to State of VT Motion for Leave to File Reply.* Licensing Board Should Grant State Motion.W/ Certificate of Svc ML20059C4891990-08-28028 August 1990 Responses to Document Requests by State of VT to Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp (Set 1).* Certificate of Svc Encl. Related Correspondence ML20059C5341990-08-27027 August 1990 Memorandum & Order (Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories,Set 3).* State of VT Need Not Answer Interrogatories 1,5,14 or 15 Presently But Obligated To,If Further Info Develops.Served on 900827.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059C5931990-08-23023 August 1990 State of VT Motion for Leave to File Reply to Vermont Yankee Nuclear Corp & NRC Staff Answers to State of VT late-filed Contention.* Requests Permission to File Written Reply to Filings of Util & Nrc.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059C5471990-08-22022 August 1990 Stipulation Enlarging Time.* Parties Stipulate That Time within Which Licensee May Respond to State of VT Third Interrogatories & Requests for Production of Documents Enlarged to 900910.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059A8641990-08-17017 August 1990 State of VT Answer in Opposition to Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp Fourth Motion to Compel & State of VT Application for Protective Order.* Board Should Deny Util Motion to Compel & Issue Protective Order.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059A9151990-08-13013 August 1990 NRC Staff Response to Motion to Amend State of VT Suppl to Petition to Intervene & Accept & Admit Addl late-filed Contention.* Licensing Board Should Reject Proposed Contention X.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059A9491990-08-13013 August 1990 Notice of Postponement of Prehearing Conference.* Conference Scheduled for 900821 & 22 in Brattleboro,Vt Postponed to Date to Be Determined Later.Certificate of Svc Encl.Served on 900814 ML20059A9031990-08-13013 August 1990 Responses to Interrogatories by State of VT to Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp (Set 5).* Related Correspondence. W/Certificate of Svc ML20056B2221990-08-0808 August 1990 Answer of Vermont Yankee to State of VT Motion for Leave to Submit late-filed Contention.* Motion of State of VT for late-filed Contention Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20056B2141990-08-0606 August 1990 Supplemental Responses to Applicant Interrogatories by State of VT (Set 2).* Clarification Re Scope of Term Surveillance Program as Used in Contention 7 Provided.W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence 1999-06-15
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20206T9731998-05-27027 May 1998 Citizens Awareness Network'S Formal Request for Enforcement Action Against Vermont Yankee.* Requests That OL Be Suspended Until Facility Subjected to Independent Safety Analysis Review,Per 10CFR2.206 ML20247G8501998-04-0909 April 1998 Petition Demanding That Commission Issue Order Stating That Administrative Limits of TS 88 Re Torus Water Temp Shall Remain in Force Until Listed Conditions Met ML20134L5701996-12-0606 December 1996 Petition for Commission & EDO Evaluation of Encl Documents Pursuant to 10CFR2.206 to See If Enforcement Action Warranted Based Upon Info Contained Therein ML20065U0421990-12-12012 December 1990 State of VT Reply to NRC Staff Response to Vermont Yankee Fifth Motion to Compel.* Motion Should Be Denied on Basis of NRC Misciting Cases.W/Certificate of Svc ML20062H6711990-11-0101 November 1990 NRC Staff Response to State of VT Motion to File Reply.* Staff Believes That Matter Should Be Resolved as Soon as Possible & Not Defer Resolution of Matter Until After Not Yet Scheduled Prehearing Conference.W/Certificate of Svc ML20065K3961990-10-29029 October 1990 Answer to State of VT Motion to Compel (Document Request Set 3).* Motion Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20065K4021990-10-29029 October 1990 Answer to State of VT Motion for Leave.* Unless State of VT Substantially Suppls,In Timely Manner,Prior Responses,Then Staff Citation to Stonewalling by Intervenors in Shoreham Proceeding Would Seem Well on Point.W/Certificate of Svc ML20062C2321990-10-22022 October 1990 Answer of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp to State of VT Motion to Compel (Interrogatories,Set 3).* Motion Should Be Denied.W/Supporting Info & Certificate of Svc ML20062C2371990-10-18018 October 1990 State of VT Motion for Leave to File Reply to NRC Staff Response to Vermont Yankee Motion to Compel.* Alternatively, State Requests That Licensee Motion Be Included for Oral Arqument in Prehearing Conference.W/Certificate of Svc ML20062C0221990-10-12012 October 1990 State of VT Motion to Compel Answers to Document Production Requests (Vermont Set 3).* W/Certificate of Svc ML20059N8671990-10-0404 October 1990 Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories (State of VT Set 3).* Requests That Board Enter Order Compelling Licensee to Give Proper Answers to Interrogatories.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059M6461990-10-0202 October 1990 NRC Staff Response to Licensee Motion to Compel Production of Documents.* Supports Licensee Motion Due to State of VT Objections Not Well Founded.Notices of Appearance & Withdrawals & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20059M5591990-09-27027 September 1990 State of VT Answer in Opposition to Vermont Yankee Nuclear Corp Fifth Motion to Compel & State of VT Application for Protective Order.* Protective Order Should Be Issued So State Need Not Suppl Responses.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059L7431990-09-12012 September 1990 NRC Staff Response to State of VT Motion for Leave to File Reply.* Licensing Board Should Grant State Motion.W/ Certificate of Svc ML20059C5931990-08-23023 August 1990 State of VT Motion for Leave to File Reply to Vermont Yankee Nuclear Corp & NRC Staff Answers to State of VT late-filed Contention.* Requests Permission to File Written Reply to Filings of Util & Nrc.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059A8641990-08-17017 August 1990 State of VT Answer in Opposition to Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp Fourth Motion to Compel & State of VT Application for Protective Order.* Board Should Deny Util Motion to Compel & Issue Protective Order.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059A9151990-08-13013 August 1990 NRC Staff Response to Motion to Amend State of VT Suppl to Petition to Intervene & Accept & Admit Addl late-filed Contention.* Licensing Board Should Reject Proposed Contention X.W/Certificate of Svc ML20056B1741990-08-0202 August 1990 NRC Staff Motion to Enlarge Time within Which to Respond to State of VT Late Filed Contention.* Response Period Extended to 900813.W/Certificate of Svc ML20056B2101990-08-0202 August 1990 NRC Staff Motion to Enlarge Time within Which to Respond to State of VT Late Filed Contention.* Response Period Extended to 900813.Served on 900806.Granted for ASLB on 900803.W/ Certificate of Svc ML20056B1941990-08-0202 August 1990 Answer of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp to State of VT Motion to Compel (Interrogatories Set 2).* Motion Should Be Denied Based on Listed Reasons.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20056B1981990-08-0202 August 1990 Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp Set 4).* Util Moves That Board Enter Order Compelling State of VT to Give Proper Answers to Interrogatories Propounded by Util.W/Certificate of Svc ML20056A3731990-07-24024 July 1990 Motion to Suppl Answer of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp to State of VT Motion to Compel (Document Requests,Set 1).* Util Moves That ASLB Grant Leave to Suppl Motion to Compel by Adding Encl as Howard Ltr.W/Certificate of Svc ML20058K7391990-06-26026 June 1990 Motion to Compel Answers to Document Production Requests (Vermont Set 1).* State Moves to Compel Licensee to Produce Documents Denied to State of VT Because of Licensee Limited & Improper Interpretation of Scope.W/Certificate of Svc ML20055D9211990-06-22022 June 1990 Response of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp to State of VT Motion to Enlarge Discovery Period.* Request for Indeterminate Enlargement of Discovery Period Fatally Premature & Should Be Dismissed.W/Certificate of Svc ML20043H2921990-06-18018 June 1990 State of VT Answer in Opposition to Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp Third Motion to Compel & State of VT Application for Protective Order.* Board Should Deny Util Motion to Compel.W/Certificate of Svc ML20043H1931990-06-14014 June 1990 Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories (State of VT Set 1).* Licensee Should Be Ordered to Give Proper Answers to Encl Interrogatories.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20043C7211990-06-0101 June 1990 Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories,Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp Set 3.* Certificate of Svc Encl ML20043C2881990-05-22022 May 1990 State of VT Answer in Opposition to Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation Second Motion to Compel & State of VT Application for Protective Order.* Board Should Deny Util Motion & Issue Protective Order.W/Certificate of Svc ML20043A6961990-05-16016 May 1990 Reply of Vermont Yankee to State of VT Answer in Opposition to Motion to Compel & Motion for Leave to File Same.* Std Lament Featured in State of VT Final Note Has Already Been Authoritatively Rejected. W/Certificate of Svc ML20042G8281990-05-0909 May 1990 State of VT Answer in Opposition to Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp Motion to Compel & State of VT Application for Protective Order.* Motion Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20012F7021990-04-13013 April 1990 Motion for Reconsideration (CLI-90-04).* Reconsideration of Remand to Obtain Factual Info Requested Due to Proposed Contention Lacking Sufficient Basis & Remand Found Unnecessary & Inappropriate.W/Certificate of Svc ML20247Q7081989-09-25025 September 1989 NRC Staff Response to Necnp Request to Set Briefing Schedule.* Request Opposed on Basis That Briefing Would Only Serve to Rehash Arguments Already Addressed at Length.W/ Certificate of Svc ML20247Q4501989-09-20020 September 1989 Response of Licensee,Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp,To Necnp Ltr of 890828.* ALAB-919 Should Be Summarily Affirmed or Referral Declined,Unless Aslab Misperceived Commission Policies on NEPA Undertakings.W/Certificate of Svc ML20247B4771989-07-19019 July 1989 Necnp Motion for Leave to Amend Environ Contentions 1 & 3.* Amended Basis of Contentions Should Be Admitted & Held in Abeyance Until Aslab Ruling.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20245D6251989-06-19019 June 1989 Necnp Reply to Opponents Motions to Strike Vermont Yankee Motion to Dismiss Environ Contention 3.* Board Need Not Await Aslab Decision in Order to Find That NRC Erred in Recommending Spent Fuel Pool Expansion.W/Certificate of Svc ML20245A4641989-06-12012 June 1989 NRC Staff Response to Necnp Motion for Leave to File Memorandum Addressing Significance of Recent Supreme Court Decisions & NRC Staff Response to Necnp Memorandum Addressing Significance of Recent....* W/Certificate of Svc ML20244D3661989-06-0909 June 1989 New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution Reply to NRC Staff,Vermont Yankee & Questions of Board on Environ Contention 3.* Alternative of Dry Cask Storage Must Be Considered Due to Unresolved Conflicts.W/Certificate of Svc ML20245A7771989-06-0909 June 1989 NRC Staff Motion to Strike Testimony of G Thompson.* Thompson Testimony Considered Irrelevant & Immaterial to Any Issue in Proceeding.Testimony Should Be Stricken & Environ Contention 3 Dismissed ML20245A7881989-06-0909 June 1989 NRC Staff Reply to Briefs of Necnp & Vermont Yankee on Environ Contention 3.* NRC Has Met Proof on Environ Contention 3 & Entitled to Decision in NRC Favor on Contention as Matter of Law ML20244D5231989-06-0909 June 1989 Memorandum of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp in Support of Motion to Strike & to Dismiss & in Response to Board Questions.* Facts Demonstrate That Environ Contention 3 Deemed Invalid & Should Be Dismissed ML20244D5401989-06-0909 June 1989 Motion to Strike Necnp Testimony Submitted on Environ Contention 3 & to Dismiss Environ Contention 3 for Lack of Contest.* ML20245A7981989-06-0909 June 1989 NRC Staff Response to Licensing Board Memoranudm (Issued for Consideration at 890621 Oral Argument), .* Discusses Environ Contention 3.W/Certificate of Svc ML20247K8171989-05-25025 May 1989 NRC Staff Response to Necnp Memorandum on NUREG-1353 & NRC Staff Response to Necnp Motion for Leave to File Memorandum on NUREG-1353.* LBP-89-06 Should Be Reversed Due to Necnp Argument Reiterating Other Arguments.W/Certificate of Svc ML20247L0561989-05-25025 May 1989 Necnp Motion for Leave to File Memorandum Addressing Significance of Recent Supreme Court Decisions.* Recent Cases Cited by Applicant Have No Bearing on Instant Proceeding.W/Certificate of Svc ML20247K9671989-05-25025 May 1989 Necnp Motion for Leave to File Memo Addressing Significance of Recent Supreme Court Decisions.* Requests Leave to File Memorandum Addressing Significance of Recent Supreme Court Decisions.W/Certificate of Svc ML20247F3871989-05-23023 May 1989 Advice to Board Re Commonwealth of Ma Position Re Dry Cask Storage.* Commonwealth of Ma Atty General Joins in Arguments in Necnp 890523 Summary of Facts & Arguments That Will Be Relied on Re Environ Contention 3.W/Certificate of Svc ML20247F4841989-05-23023 May 1989 NRC Staff Brief & Summary of Relevant Facts & Arguments on Which Staff Intends to Rely at Oral Argument on Necnp & Commonwealth of Ma Environ Contention 3.* No Issue of Matl Fact in Contention Exists.W/Certificate of Svc ML20247F6131989-05-23023 May 1989 Necnp Brief & Summary of Relevant Facts & Arguments on Which Necnp Intends to Rely at Oral Argument on Environ Contention 3.* ML20247L5151989-05-23023 May 1989 Memorandum of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp on Existence of Genuine & Substantial Question of Fact Re Environ Contention 3.* Contention Considered Invalid & Should Be Dismissed ML20246H4781989-05-10010 May 1989 Necnp Memorandum on NUREG-1353.* Addresses NUREG-1353 Applicability to Case in Response to Applicant & NRC Arguments.W/Certificate of Svc 1998-05-27
[Table view] |
Text
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.JUN 0 9 1989-C'OcKETED
._ USHRC UNITED STATES'0F AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.gg g BEFORE-THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD OFFIO DUCn, ' '
In the Hatter of '
W '
VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR Docket No. 50-271-0LA POWER CORPORATION '(Spent' Fuel Pool Amendment)
(Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station)
-NRC STAFF RESPONSE'TO THE LICENSING BOARD'S-MEMORANDUM'(ISSUED FOR CONSIDERATION
.AT 6/21/89 ORAL ARGUMENT), DATED MAY 25, 1989 QUESTION 1 Does NECNP's claim concerning the environmental superiority of dry-cask storage rest solely on severe-accident considerations?
RESPONSE
Insofar as this question concerns .CNP's contention, it is for NECNP 1 to answer. As regards NECNP's documents, its "Brief and Summary of Relevant Facts and Arguments on Which NECNP Intends To Rely at Oral ArgumentonEnvironmentalContention3"(NECNP's'Brief)andthe accompanying " Testimony of Gordon Thompson," rely solely on severe-accident considerations. No basis other than severe-accidents is provided or documented. f QUESTION Ia j If so, may we take those considerations into account prior to the j Appeal Board's granting authority for us to consider the severe-accident basis to this contention, which we admitted in LBP-89-6, 29 NRC.127. i (February 2,1989). but concerning which we' deferred effectiveness pending Appeal Board action on our referral of the ruling? Do we have to' defer any consideration of such a. claim until after the Appeal Board's decision on LBP-89-6? Should we defer any ruling on Environmental Contention 3 pending the Appeal Board's determination on our referral ruling?
8906220186 890609 PDR O ADOCK 05000271 '
PDR t
i _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ ______a
4
- 2'-
RESPONSE
No. It is unnecessary for the Licensing Board to defer considering and ruling on Contention 3 until the Appeal Board issues.a decision on LBP-89-6...The Licensing Board should proceed with consideration'of-Environmental Contention 3 as admitted' byLthe October 11, 1988 Memorandum and Order. Vermont' Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation (Vermont Yankee' Power Station),LBP-88-26A,28NRC440,448(1988).
In the Staff's view the_. severe-accident basis does'not support-Environmental Contention 3. The basis i:: unrelated to NECNP's assertion that Licensee's proposal to increase ~the number of fuel assemblies stored in the Vermont Yankee Spent Fuel Pool involves-unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources. "New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution's Brief and Summary of Relevant Facts and Arguments on Which NECNP_ Intends to Rely at Oral Argument on Environmental Contention 3," dated May 23, 1989.
l2 QUESTION lb i
l If not, what other environmental attributes of dry cask storage, j should we take into account in assessing that alternative and addressing Environmental Contention 3? i RESPONSE ->
j
.First, the severe-accident basis cannot be considered an-i
" environmental _ attribute" of dry cask storage.- Secondly, the Interveners have not set forth a legal basis for their Environmental Contention 3. !
Moreover, the Licensing Board need not consider any " environmental-attributes of dry cask storage" in this amendment proceeding on a proposal l toexpandexistingwet(pool) storage.
l
'l 1
i lSTION Ic Apart from the Appeal Board's ruling on the referred ruling, are the
?ere-accident risks propounded by NECNP a permissible response to the Cf's discussion of severe accidents in its Environmental Assessment'
- 5) (at p.,11) and hence to the adequacy of the EA?
60NSE No. In the Staff's view, the issue of the admissibility of the Gre-accident contention is before.the Appeal Board; no part of.it is ere the Licensing Board, that Board having referred the ruling. NECNP.
not now enlarge its contention to embrace other aspects of severe Cdents that might not be before the Appeal Board. The time for filing Sentions on the EA has passed.
BTION 3 Because of the applicability to this proceeding cf the so-called
@ rules, and because physical reracking was authorized under those 9s prior to the resolution of various issues in this proceeding, are er are we not required to consider the impacts of reracking de novo, ter than merely the incremental impacts yet to be experienced las Drently advocated by the Applicant)?
DONSE The Licensing Board is not required to consider the impacts of -- I
}cking de novo. The Interveners have raised no issues which involve Environmental impacts or consequences concerning the' design of the J
- s themselves. Environmental Contention 3, the only contention tining in this proceeding, involves the alternative use of resources;- I Res not-involve the design of the spent fuel pool racks. The Licensee 0 the approval of an increase in storage capacity from 2000 fuel i
mblies to 2870 fuel assemblies. This proceeding concerns the impacts !
end consequences of the additional 870 fuel assemblies. In its Environmental Assessment the Staff examined the environmental impacts of 1870 fuel assemblies loaded in the spent fuel pool and concluded there rould be no significant impact on the environment.
JUESTION 4 Assuming we were to determine that the EA must include a brief 2escription of the environmental impacts of dry cask storage, are the Descriptions provided by the parties in their testimony adequate for this Durpose?
tESPONSE The Staff restates its position that there is no basis for a
,1 censing Board determination that i 102(2)(E) of NEPA, requiring a liscussion of alternative use of resources, requires a discussion of dry ask storage in an EA on a proposal for wet pool storage. The requirements of 10 C.F.R. 9 51.30(a)(1)(ii) are not triggered because here are no unresolved conflicts concerning available resources. The Saff's EA meets the requirements of Part 51 of the Cocinission's Igulations.
The Staff and the Licensee have provided detailed descriptions of the pneric environmental impacts of dry storage in their testimony.
Sffidavit of Frederick C. Sturz of the NRC Staff Regarding NECNP's tvironmental Contention 3," dated May 26,1989 (Sturz Affidavit); " Sworn
>itten Testimony of Donald A. Reid, Michael J. Marian, Randolph M. Grube, phn M. Buchheit, Richard P. Pizzuti, and Peter S. Littlefield," submitted r
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation, dated May 23, 1989.
The Staf f's EA, and the testimony filed by the Staff and the Licensee evide sufficiently detailed descriptions of the environmental impacts of
i- i
^
.)
l fi
[
dry cask storage to meet a Licensing Board determination that a brief) ';l description is required,'and the requirements of 10.C.F.R. Part SIL l c j
-QUESTION 4a -+ 0 1
In that connection, in what manner, if at all. do they factorjin the' 1 benefits attributable to the passive' nature of dry cask storage.and the attendant operational benefits, as set forth in'the proposed rulemaking on j dry 3asx storage (54 Fed.l Reg.- 19379,19380~(May:5,.1989))-(providedby- j NECNP as Attachment 2 to its filing)? j RESPONSE .-
'Yes. The Staff is ' aware of. the ' benefits Lof dry . cask storage andl '
factored in those benefits in its conclusion that the potential environmental impacts from dry cask storage areL small and.will not - k significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Sturz Affidavit e+ 11 9, 33-36, 38-39.
i The fact that the Staff points'out:the benefits of dry cask storage in no way implies that the method is environmentally superior or-environmentally preferable'to wet storage. Wet and dry storage' methods have benefits and shortcomings; that the' Staff concluded both methods have no significant environmental impact indicates that any shortcomings are negligible and are outweighed by benefits. The Staff in its p.roposed rulemaking concludes that dry cask storage is an environmentally acceptable method for storing spent fuel, as is expanded. spent fuel pool-storage.
QUESTION'4b In what manner, if at all, do the descriptions of dry cask storage-factor in a comparison of potentia 1' accidents, both within and beyond l
design basis, comparable to that appearing on p. 11 of the EA with respect t to the proposed expansion of pool storage?
RESPONSE
As discussed above and in other documents filed by the Staff today, the subject of severe accidents is before the Appeal Board in the referral of LBP-89-6.
Respectfully submitted, bCLib-Patricia Jehle Counsel for NRC Staff Date at Rockville, Maryland this 9th day of June, 1989.
l
N 0 9 1989 q ;t r, t
.uc UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.89 JUN 14 PS :01 y BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD j bckikiA W H"
'I in the Matter of {
jERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR ) Docket No. 50-271-OLA POWER CORPORATION (Spent Fuel Pool Amendment) -l 1
[Varmont Yankee Nuclear Power '!
Station)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE j
jh:rIbycertifythatcopiesof"NRCSTAFFMOTIONTOSTRIKETHETESTIMONY {
F GORDON THOMPSON", "NRC STAFF REPLY TO BRIEFS OF THE NEW ENGLAND COAL
[N NUCLEAR POLLUTION AND VERMONT YANKEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL -l CONTE j AFFIDAVIT OF FREDERICK C. STURZ AND MORTON B. FAIRTILE OF THE NRC STAFF f'EGARDINGNECNPANDTHECOMMONWEALTHOFMA
/
IONTENTION 3" and "NRC STAFF RESPONSE TO THE LICENSING BOARD'S MEMORANDUM 1
j lSSUED FOR CONSIDERATION AT 6/21/89 ORAL ARGUMENT), DATED MAY 25, 1989 in fheabove-captionedproceedinghavebeenservedonthefollowingbydep i fntheUnitedStatesmail,firstclass,orasindicatedbyanasteriskthrough eposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system, this 1 th day of June, 1989:
(harles Bechhoefer, Esq.* Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr.*
.ministrative Judge Administrative Judge temic Safety and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Board-
.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission ,
Dshington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 ,
g.m.JamesH. Carpenter
inistrative Judge Senior Assistant Attorney General .t 60mic Safety and Licensing Board Environmental Protection Bureau 3 5. Nuclear Regulatory Comission 25 Capitol Street shington, D.C. 20555 Concord, NH 03301-6397 oomic Safety and Licensing Board Diane Curran, Esq.
Panel (1)* Harmon, Curran & Tousley S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission 2001 S Street, N.W.
$shingt:n,D.C. 20555* Washington, DC 20009
[orgaYoung,Esq.
John Traficonte, Chief heialAssistantAttorneyGeneral Nuclear Safety Unit grmont Depart. of Public Service Office of the Attorney General-(OStateStreet One Ashburton Place untpelier, VT 05602 Boston, MA 02108
R.K. Gad, III, Esq. Jay Gutierrez, Esq.*
Ropes and Gray Regional Counsel One International Place USNRC, Region I Boston, MA 02110-2624 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel (5)* Docketing and Service Section*
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of.the Secretary Washington, D.C. 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D.C. 20555 Adjudicatory File
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Bashington, D.C. 20555 ht W *N '
Patricia A. Jehle Counsel for NRC Staff l
_ _ _ _ , _ _ , _ ___ __ - - - - _ _ , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -