ML19351F434

Answers to Applicant First Set of Interrogatories & Requests to Produce Per ASLB 801219 Memorandum & Order.Most Responses to Be Supplemented at Later Date.Certificate of Svc Encl. Related Correspondence

ML19351F434
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	01/05/1981
From:	Gay G ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS FOR REFORM, WEST TEXAS LEGAL SERVICES
To:	TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC)
References
NUDOCS 8101130037
Download: ML19351F434 (13)

Text

__ _ .

s IM.E2 2. :::y.7,r.  ?.-

UNITED STATES OF AI'. ERICA EWACY I' # b' NCCLEAR REGULATORY CO!!'CSSION '

3

~~

BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY A:ID LICENSING BOARD c .

i q

> 7 - y

't In the Matter of S ~

3 --i Fj l TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY, S DocketCNos. O-445 l

ET AL S 50-446 S

(Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, S Units 1 and 2) S

. ACORN'S ANSWERS TO APPLICANTS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES i

ACOPli files this its Original Answer to Applicants' First Set of Interrogatories to ACORN and Requests to Produce pursuant to the Board's Memorandum and Order, dated December 19, 1930.

Most responses herein will be supplemented at a later date af ter ACOP3 has .a clearer idea of available resources and witnesses, and after meetings are arranged with other inter-vening parties on response to the Board's Memorandum and Order of Decerber 31, 1980, regarding consolidation and designation of Lead Party-Intervenors.

'i '

~."

~

2

• a : ~~~ y N.'. .

4

, s,

~ ~~

u.. JL

-]

~

g 'g". \

w ge7

?l Q l

'"D;.

\

n. l'.,_. N/ i bl** y[::'et'nco#r' i

l- $ >*'

'., 14 ,' ' / .,

Ig q \

8 3 0118 00Y1 c,

~

ANSWERS

1. The CPSES structures have not been property constructed and pose a danger to the health, safety, security and defense of the public.

2. The basis has previously been provided to the NRC in pleadings, including selected I&E Reports. Additionally, ACORN has had conversations with prior employees of Brown & Root who worked at CPSES.

3. Not at this time.

4. Not known, records not kept. Parties have had contact with each other primarily through intervention in Texas Utility operating company rate proceedings in Austin, Texas. With regard to Contention 5, ACORN has contributed a few hours of time to preparation of CFUR's trend analysis on I&E Reports.

5. No meetings.specifically with respect to contention 5.

I Prior to the framing of Contention 5, several meetings were had with prior employees of Applicants contractor.

6. Not at this time.

l i 7. Y,s, but definite preparations have not been made.

l

8. Not known at this time.

9. Not known at this time 6

(

l L

I

10. Yes.

a. Provision 4 regarding compliance with 10 CFR Part 51 and other portions regarding compliance with regulations and statutes and generally inferring proper and safe construction completion prior to August 1, 1981.

b. Failure to comply to regulatory requirements of 10 CFR Part 51.

c. Irrelevant, but see responses to 1 and 2 above.

11. Applicants have failed to comply with regulatory require- '

ments.

12. Comply with regulatory requirements; specific recommendations cannot be made at this time.

13. Cannot answer at this time.

14. Yes.

a. ACORN contends that the wording of Contention 5 and bases previously provided the Board demonstrate that provisions I-XVIII have not been satisfied.

t

b. Not prepared to detail at this time,

c. See response to Question 2.

l

15. Not prepared to make recommendation at this time; to be supplemented when witness is known.

16. Response inappropriate at this time.

17. All, since Intervenors are now joined on this contention.

13. S9e generally ACORN's prior filings regarding basis for this contention. ACORN contends the construction practi'ces do not me.et 10 CFR Part 50, App. B in at least the following particulars:

i I. Applicant has been irresponsible in its quality assurance program.

II. Applicant has not suitably controlled conditions necessary for Q.A.

III. Inappropriate measures have been approved.

IV. Contractors and subcontractcrs have not provided Q.A.

v. Quantitative and qualitative acceptance criteria have not been met.

VI. Measures prescribing quality have not been fo!' owed at site where work is performed.

VII. Purchased material, equipment, and services has not cor. formed to procurement documents.

t VIII. Measures for identification and control of materials are not appropriate, and incorrect and defective parts have been used.

IX. Welding procedures are inappropriate.

X. Inspections have not been properly executed.

Further and amended resp 2me will be forthcoming once ACORN has had an opportunity to meet with other intervenors regarding Contention 5.

_4

19. See 15 abo're.

20. Unkn:.n at this time.

21. .ill depend upon the desires cf CFr?. and CASE.

22. Unknown.

23. Unknown.

24. Unknown at this time.

25. Unknown at this time. .

26. Questions of the nature, degree, or seriousness that create doubt as to whether CPSES should receive an operating license.

27. Apprcpriateness or ability to protect health and safety.

28. (1), (3), (6).

29. See responses 1-27 inclusive.

30. Unk.cwn at this time.

31. Content'on 12 is my wording.

32. Basis re. reins the same as at the time of admission of this contention: ACOPl; is aware of Research and Technical Assistance Reports on this topic, but they have not been reviewed as of this time.

33. No.

34. None.

35. No records are kept regarding meetings or contracts and nona can be recalled.

36. Yas; probably both cross-examination and presentation of direct testimony.

37. Yes, if we can find a sponsor. Sponsor unknown at this point.

35. Unknown at this point.

39. Unknown.

40. Yes. a., b., & c. unknown at this time; will supplement response when it's known whether we can retain an expert.

41. Those of greatest concern are ones which would affect safe shutdown. l

42. Yes.

43. See response to 32.

44. Not sufficient and/or able.

45. Common sense and plain meaning of the words.

46. Keep as low as possible.

47. Unknown at this time.

48. Unknown at this time.

49. Unknown at t.his time.

50. Does not apply.

51. Disabling of systems, components and structures important to safety.

52 - 70. Responses are unknown or otherwise inappropriate at this time; answer to be supplemented.

71. These are my words.

72. Basis remains the same as the time of admission of this contention.

73. No.

74. Scne.

t 75. No records are kept of meetings and none are recalled. .

76. Yes, cross-examination and, hopefully, presentation l of a direct case.

77. It is our fondest hope, but sponsor is presently unknown.

! 78. Unknown at this time.

79. Unknown.

80. Yes. a., b., & c. unknown at this time; will supplement response when it's known whether we can retain an expert.

81 - 100. Responses are unknown or otherwise inappropriate at this time; answer to be supplemented.

101. Those are my words.

102. Basis has been previously provided.

103. Not at this time.

ACORN har. had no meetings or contact with the other 1

104.

j intervening parties with respect to Contention 20.

105. See Answer to #104 above.

106. Yes; cross-examination.

107. Not known at this time.

108.  :;ot known at this time.

109. Not known at this time. .

110. Yes. a., b., & c. specific objections cannot be presented at this time. Answer will be supplemented when specific objections are developed.

111. Cannot provide specific response at this time. Answer will be supplemented.

I l

112. Cannot detail specific conditions at this time. Answer l

will be supplemented.

i 1:0:( 113. Response would be premature at this time. Response will 0:0 be supplemented when developed.

dir 114. No different from that which was developed in previous l

s ou pleadings filed in this case. We have not had the town opportunity to identify or consult with an appropriate

-:Wn- expert with respect to Interrogatories 111 through 113.

a 115. See answer to 113 above.

ns 116. See answer to 113 above.

i Re 117. See answer to 113 above.

this 118. We have not had the opportunity to identify or consult with

'3e 2 an appropriate expert with respect to Interrogatories

'is 1 115 through 117.

at. 119. Cannot p ovide specific response at this time. Answer C RN will be supplemented.

3rV 120. Response would be premature at this time. Response will i

• AT be supplemented when developed.

5; ' See answer 120 above.

121.

l :: kt 122. See answer 120 above.

k 123. See anssrur 120 above.

Ot h 124. No different from that which was developed in previous 13- pleadings filed in this case. ACORN has not had tho

il opportunity to identify or consult with an appropriate

'" expert with respect to Contentiens 119 through 123.

, .. a n I

c.11

\

- - . . , . . , , ___. m.- ,__..m., , _ _ - . _ . _ _ . . _ . . _ . , , _ _ ., m . _ . _ _,_. _ ._

O 125. ACORN's contention specifically provides that the CPSES design does not adequately insure that safety-related water supplies will be available for plant operation in the event of ice buildup at the service water intake

, structere. However, ACORN would also note that Applicants' FSAR fails to adequately detail Applicants' response in a

the event of ice buildup at the service water, intake structure.

] 126. Cannet provide a particular sequence of events at this time. Response will be supple. Tented when developed.

, 127. ACORN has not had the opportunity to identify or consult with an appropriate expert with respect to Interrogatory 126.

123. That is a possibility.

129. Historic weather conditions.

130. Unknown _t this time.

i 131. Unknown at this time.

132. Unknown.

133. Specific measures have not been identified at this time.

ACORN's response will be supplemented when developed.

134 - 141. ACORN has not had the opportunity to identify or consult with an appropriate expert with respect to this contention. Response would be premature or is otherwise l unknown at this time.

142 - 188. In light of the Board's order designating CASE as Lead Party-Intervenor en this contention, ACORN wishes to defer answers until it has had an opportunity to consult

_9

1 I

1

with CASE. Answers will be supplemented.

. 139. "As low as is reasonably achieveable" is a term of art i

! in the regulatory process which ACORN believes would be t

inappropriate and impossible to redefine "in our own words."

i 190. ACORN is not prepared to add any basis beyond that which was l

supplied prior to admission of the contention.

i 19 1. No.

l 192. No.

193. There have been none.

l 194. There have been not.e.

l l 195. Yes, but the extent beyond cross-examination is unknown i

at this time.

I 196 - 198. Unknown at this time.

1 1

199. Yes. Parts a,b,c&d - Unknown at this time. To be supplemented when ACORN has an expert available for consultation.

l I

200. Yes. Parts a,b&c - Same as response to 199.

l 201. No.

i 202.  ::ot applicable.

203 - 213. Unknown at this time or prejudicially premature. To i be supplemented when ACORN knows whether it can retain an 1

L expert for consultation or testimony.

T l 214. Applicants have not fully considered the total costs of 3

j. safely decommissioning CPSES and protecting the general public during.that' process within the cost / benefit analysis required-bf statute and regulations and, therefore, a positive i ccst/ benefit balance cannot be sh:wn.

i i -

l e

215. The basis remains the same as of the time of the admission of this contention.

216. No.

217. No.

218. No.

219. No.

220. Yes.

221 - 224. Not known at this time. .

225. Specifically with respect to contention 24a, both the quantitative and qualitative environmental and economic costs to safely decommission CPSES.

226, 10 Cra section 51.20(b).

227. Environmental, Economic, Technical and Social 223. 10 CTR Section 51.20 (b).

229. Yes , with respect to 24a.

230. The curren methodology employed does not adequately consider the costs mentioned in response to questions 225 and 227.

231 - 238. In light of the Board's order designating CASE as lead party - intervenor on this contention, responses will be deferred until ACORN has had an opportunity to consult with CASE.

239. No.

240. Does not apply at this time.

241 - 258. See response under question 231. Answer will be supple-mented.

Respectfully submitted, OATED, Januar 3,

, 1961- [,h //,, g.C/

(Geofyvey /.. Gay c7f West Texas Legal Services Lawyers Bldg., 100 Main St.-

Fort Worth, Texas 76102

. ( 317) 336-3943 Attorney for ACORN

CERTIFICATE I, Geoffrey M. Gay, Attorney for ACORN, am authorized by them to certify, and I do now declare and certifv, that the foregoing responses in the document "ACOPJ's Answers to Applicants' First Set of Interrogatories" are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Executed, this 5th day of January, 1981, s ,

N } '

< .k *{ - # / &

il l .

Geoffrey M. Gay o

P

i l

l l

12 t.

( .

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing " ACORN's ANSWERS

, TO APPLICASTS'FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES" in the captioned i

matter were served upon the following persons by deposit in the United States mail, first class postage prepaid this 5th day of January, 1981:

Valentine B. Deale, Esq. Richard Fouke

! Chairman, Atomic Safety and 1668-B Carter Dr.

Licensing Board Arlington, Texas 76010 t 1001 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036 Chairman, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Dr. Forrest J. Remick, Member U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Washington, D.C. 20555 305 E. Hamilton Avenue State College, PA. 16801 Chase R. Stephens Docketing & Service Branch Dr. Richard Cole, Member U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cc=m.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Washington, D.C. 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i

Washington, D.C. 20555 Juanita Ellis, President CASE Nicholas S. Reynolds 1426 South Polk Street Debevoise & Liberman Dallas, Texas 75224 1200 Seventeenth St., N.W.

Washington, D.C. Chairman, Atomic Safety and' Licensing Appeal Panel David J. Preister U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

l Assistant Attorney General Washington, D.C. 20555 Environmental Protection Division P.O. Ecx 12548, Capitol Station Jeffery L. Hart l

! Austin, Texas 78711 4021 Prescott Avenue 75219 Dallas, Texas Marjorie Ulman Rothchild Office of Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

.i i (

. . S c.a.,. ~)4 ! O fu.u GeoffEey k. Gay 'I I

l West Texas Legal Services Lawyers Bldg., 100 Main Pt. Ucrth, Texas -76102 l

! (817) 336-3943 l

Texas Bar # 07774300

__