2009/08/14-Motion to Permit Late Addition of Co-Petitioners to Southern Alliance for Clean Energy'S Petition to Intervene and Admit Them as IntervenersML092260787 |
Person / Time |
---|
Site: |
Watts Bar ![Tennessee Valley Authority icon.png](/w/images/c/ce/Tennessee_Valley_Authority_icon.png) |
---|
Issue date: |
08/14/2009 |
---|
From: |
Curran D Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, Harmon, Curran, Harmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg, LLP, Sierra Club, Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, Tennessee Environmental Council, We The People |
---|
To: |
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
---|
SECY RAS |
Shared Package |
---|
ML092260786 |
List: |
---|
References |
---|
50-391-OL, ASLBP No. 09-893-01-OL-BD01, RAS 16203 |
Download: ML092260787 (4) |
|
|
---|
Category:Legal-Pleading
MONTHYEARML21287A6592021-10-14014 October 2021 Notice of Withdrawal of Samuel Reeves Lehman on Behalf of Tennessee Valley Authority ML21070A3612021-03-11011 March 2021 NRC Staff Answer to the Tennessee Valley Authority'S Motion Regarding Disclosures ML15173A0332015-06-22022 June 2015 Southern Alliance for Clean Energy'S Reply to Oppositions to Petition for Review of LBP-15-14 Denying Admission of a New Contention Concerning Tva'S Failure to Comply with 10 C.F.R. Section 5.34(b)(4) ML15163A2142015-06-12012 June 2015 Tennessee Valley Authority'S Answer Opposing Southern Alliance for Clean Energy'S Petition for Review of LBP-15-14 ML15163A1452015-06-12012 June 2015 NRC Staff Answer Opposing the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy Petition for Review of Board Decision LBP-15-14 ML15138A4522015-05-18018 May 2015 Sace Petition for Review of LBP-15-14 ML15127A2512015-05-0707 May 2015 Reply by Beyond Nuclear, Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Seed Coalition and Southern Alliance for Clean Energy to Oppositions by Applicants and NRC Staff to Motions to Admit New Contentions ML15126A3832015-05-0606 May 2015 Reply by Beyond Nuclear, Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Seed Coalition and Southern Alliance for Clean Energy to Oppositions by Applicants and NRC Staff to Motions to Admit New Contentions ML15126A4782015-05-0606 May 2015 Reply by Beyond Nuclear, Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Seed Coalition and Southern Alliance for Clean Energy to Oppositions by Applicants and NRC Staff to Motions to Admit New Contentions ML15121A4532015-05-0101 May 2015 NRC Staff Answer to Southern Alliance for Clean Energy'S Hearing Request and Petition to Intervene and Motion to Reopen the Record in the Operating License Proceeding for Watts Bar Unit 2 ML15121A7902015-05-0101 May 2015 TVA Answer to Sace Motions to Reopen and Admit a New Contention ML15111A3562015-04-21021 April 2015 Southern Alliance for Clean Energy'S Hearing Request and Petition to Intervene in Operating License Proceeding for Watts Bar Unit 2 Nuclear Power Plant ML15069A4922015-03-10010 March 2015 Southern Alliance for Clean Energy Reply to Oppositions to Motion for Leave to File a New Contention Concerning Tva'S Failure to Comply with 10 C.F.R. Section 50.34(b)(4) ML15062A3782015-03-0303 March 2015 Tennessee Valley Authority'S Answer Opposing Southern Alliance for Clean Energy'S Motion for Leave to File a New Contention ML15062A1142015-03-0303 March 2015 NRC Staff'S Answer to Southern Alliance for Clean Energy'S Motion for Leave to File a New Contention ML15049A6182015-02-18018 February 2015 Petitioners' Reply to Oppositions to Petition to Supplement Reactor-Specific Environmental Impact Statements to Incorporate by Reference the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Spent Fuel Storage ML15049A3652015-02-18018 February 2015 NRC Staff'S Answer to Southern Alliance for Clean Energy'S Motion to Reopen the Record ML15048A0612015-02-17017 February 2015 Tennessee Valley Authority'S Answer Opposing Southern Alliance for Clean Energy'S Motion to Reopen the Record ML15043A7792015-02-12012 February 2015 NRC Staff Opposition to Petition to Supplement Reactor-Specific Environmental Impact Statements to Incorporate by Reference the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Spent Fuel Storage ML15043A5572015-02-12012 February 2015 Tennessee Valley Authority'S Answer Opposing Petition to Supplement Reactor-Specific Environmental Impact Statements to Incorporate by Reference the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Spent Fuel Storage ML15037A5492015-02-0606 February 2015 Southern Alliance for Clean Energy'S Unopposed Motion to Permit Corrected Filing ML15037A3182015-02-0505 February 2015 Refiled Motion for New Contention and Motion to Reopen ML15028A1132015-01-28028 January 2015 Petition to Supplement Reactor-Specific Environmental Impact Statement Incorporate by Reference the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Spent Fuel Storage ML14311A9752014-11-0707 November 2014 Petitioners' and Intervenors' Consolidated Reply to Answer to Petitions to Suspend Final Reactor Licensing Decisions, Motions, to Admit a New Contention, and Motions to Reopen the Record ML14304A7652014-10-31031 October 2014 Tennessee Valley Authority'S Answer to Opposing Petition to Suspend Final Decisions in All Pending Reactor Licensing Proceeding Pending Issuance of Waste Confidence Safety Findings and Motions for Leave to File New Contention ML14304A7162014-10-31031 October 2014 Tennessee Valley Authority'S Answer Opposing Southern Alliance for Clean Energy'S Motion to Reopen the Record ML14304A6742014-10-31031 October 2014 Inc.'S Motion for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief ML14304A6682014-10-31031 October 2014 NRC Staff Consolidated Answer to Petitions to Suspend Final Reactor Licensing Decisions, Motions to Admit a New Contention and Motions to Reopen the Record ML14080A4582014-03-21021 March 2014 Tennessee Valley Authority'S Answer Opposing Petition to Suspend Reactor Licensing Decisions & Reactor Re-Licensing Decisions Pending Completion of Rulemaking Proceeding Regarding Environmental Impacts of High-Density Pool Storage of Spent ML14080A4602014-03-21021 March 2014 Tennessee Valley Authority'S Answer Opposing Petition to Suspend Reactor Licensing Decisions and Reactor Re-licensing Decisions Pending Completion of Rulemaking Proceeding Regarding Environmental Impacts of High-Density Pool Storage of Spen ML14080A2542014-03-21021 March 2014 NRC Staff Answer to Opposing Suspension Petition ML14058A6802014-02-27027 February 2014 Petition to Suspend Reactor Licensing Decisions and Reactor Re-Licensing Decisions Pending Completion of Rulemaking Proceeding Regarding Environmental Impacts of High-Density Pool Storage of Spent Fuel and Mitigation Measures ML13196A3552013-07-15015 July 2013 Southern Alliance for Clean Energy'S Unopposed Motion to Withdraw Contention 7 ML13127A3492013-05-0707 May 2013 Notice of Appearance for Anita Ghosh on Behalf of NRC Staff, in the Matter of Tennessee Valley Authority (Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 2) ML12362A3162012-12-27027 December 2012 Joint Response to Board Order Notifying Parties of Amendments to Rules of Practice ML12216A1592012-08-0303 August 2012 Tennessee Valley Authority'S Answer Opposing New Contention Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate Disposal of Spent Reactor Fuel at Watts Bar, Unit 2 ML12215A4652012-08-0202 August 2012 NRC Staff'S Answer to Southern Alliance for Clear Energy'S Motion for Leave to File a New Contention Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate Disposal of Spent Reactor Fuel at Watts Bar, Units 2 ML12198A3942012-07-16016 July 2012 Certificate of Service for a Letter from Diane Curran to Counsel for TVA and the NRC Staff Regarding Saces Thirtieth Supplement to Its Mandatory Disclosures ML12191A3832012-07-0909 July 2012 Southern Alliance for Clean Energy'S Motion for Leave to File a New Contention Concerning Temporary Storage and Ultimate Disposal of Spent Reactor Fuel at Watts Bar Unit 2 ML12177A1582012-06-25025 June 2012 Tennessee Valley Authority'S Answer Opposing Petition to Suspend Final Licensing Decisions Pending Completion of Remanded Waste Confidence Proceedings ML12177A0852012-06-25025 June 2012 NRC Staff'S Answer to Petition to Suspend Final Decisions in All Pending Reactor Licensing Proceedings Pending Completion of Remanded Waste Confidence Proceedings ML12170B0412012-06-18018 June 2012 Petition to Suspend Final Decisions in All Pending Reactor Licensing Proceedings Pending Completion of Remanded Waste Confidence Proceedings ML12118A5402012-04-27027 April 2012 Notices of Appearance of Paul M. Bessette and Stephen J. Burdick ML12118A5412012-04-27027 April 2012 Joint Answer Opposing Hearing Requests Regarding Sufficiency of Order EA-12-051 Modifying Licenses with Regard to Spent Fuel Pool Instrumentation ML11354A4732011-12-20020 December 2011 Certificate of Service of Copies of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy'S Opposition to Tva'S Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 7, Statement of Disputed Material Facts, and Declaration of Shawn Paul Young, Ph.D ML11354A4722011-12-20020 December 2011 Declaration of Shawn Paul Young, Ph.D. on Behalf of Southern Alliance for Clean Energy ML11354A4702011-12-20020 December 2011 Southern Alliance for Clean Energy'S Opposition to Tennessee Valley Authority'S Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 7 Regarding Aquatic Impacts of Watts Bar Unit 2 ML11354A4712011-12-20020 December 2011 Southern Alliance for Clean Energy'S Statement of Disputed Material Facts ML11354A4032011-12-20020 December 2011 NRC Staff'S Answer to Tva'S Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 7 Regarding Aquatic Impacts ML11311A3352011-11-0707 November 2011 Tennessee Valley Authority'S Opposition to Sace'S Motion for Leave to Supplement Its Fukushima-Related New Contention 2021-03-11
[Table view] |
Text
August 14, 2009 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
____________________________________
)
In the Matter of )
)
Tennessee Valley Authority ) Docket No. 50-391
)
(Watts Bar Unit 2) )
____________________________________)
MOTION TO PERMIT LATE ADDITION OF CO-PETITIONERS TO SOUTHERN ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY'S PETITION TO INTERVENE AND ADMIT THEM AS INTERVENORS On July 13, 2009, the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy ("SACE), Sierra Club, Blue Mountain Environmental Defense League ("BREDL"), Tennessee Environmental Council
("TEC"), and We the People, Inc. ("WTP") (collectively "Petitioners") submitted a Petition to Intervene and Request for H earing regarding the Tennessee Valley Authority's ("TVA's") application for an operating license for the Wa tts Bar Unit 2 nuclear power plant ("WBN2"). The Petition to Intervene itself was timely under a June 24, 2009, Order by the Secretary of the Commission which had granted SACE a two-week extension of the original June 30, 2009, deadline. However, because only SACE sought the extension, the Secr etary's Order applied only to SACE. Therefore participation in the petition by BREDL, TEC, and WTP (collectively "Co-Petitioners") was arguably untimely under 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(b). Petitioners now seek to ensure that if the Petition to Intervene is granted, all five petitioners will be admitted as intervenors.
2 Accordingly, pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(c) and 10 C.F.R. § 2.323(a), Petitioners respectfully request the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ("ASLB") to permit Co-Petitioners to join in SACE's Petition to Intervene and admit them as late-filed intervenors. As discussed below, the Co-Petitioners satisfy each of the factor s listed in 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(c) for the granting of untimely petiti ons to intervene.
First, as to the requirement for a showing of "good cause . . . for the failure to file on time," 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(c)(i), Co-Petitioners assert that their failure to file a petition to intervene by the June 30, 2009, deadline posted in the Federal Register was justified, for all the reasons stated in SACE's June 16, 2009, motion to th e Secretary for an exte nsion of the deadline (ie., that the hearing notice, the NRC's website for the WBN2 licensing proceeding, and the NRC's collection of WBN 2-related documents on ADAMS each contained significant deficiencies that required SACE and its Co-Petitioners additional time to review and respond to; and that two of the expert consultants relied on by SACE and its Co-Peti tioners for support of their contentions had scheduling conflicts). By granting SACE's motion, the Secretary implicitly approved these reasons as adequate to justify the Co-Petitioners' failure to meet the June 30, 2009 deadline for petitions to intervene. Co-Petitioners did not join SACE in seek ing a two-week extension of the June 30 deadline, because at that time they had not yet decided to join SACE in the Petition to Intervene. Subsequently, when the Co-Petitioners decided to join SACE in petitioning to intervene, counsel should have requested the Secret ary to expand the scope of her June 24, 2009, Order to include the Co-Petitioners; however, due to the significant pressures of preparing the Petition to Intervene, counsel overlooked this requirement.
As discussed below, counsel's administrative 3 error has had no effect on the leng th or breadth of this proceedi ng, and therefore Co-Petitioners should not be penalized for it. Second, as to the requirements for showing the "nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the [Atomic Energy] Act to be made a party to the proceeding;" the "nature and extent of the requestor's/petiti oner's property, financial or other interest in the proceeding;" and the "possible effect of any order that may be entered in the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest,"
10 C.F.R. § 2.309(c)(ii)-(iv), Co-Petitioners re-assert each of the reasons given in the Petition to Intervene as to why these gr oups have standing to participate in the proceeding. Petition to Intervene at 4-5. Co-Petitioners note that neither the Staff nor TVA opposed representational standing of any of the Co-Petitioners. Staff Answer at 10-12; TVA Answer at 8. Third, as to the "availability of other means whereby the requestor's/petitioner's interest will be protected," 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(c)(v), Co-Petitioners will have no other means of protecting their interests if they are not permitted to intervene because the filing of admissible contentions is the only method under NRC regulations whereby an intervenor may participate in a licensing proceeding.
See generally 10 C.F.R. § 2.309.
Fourth, as to the "extent to which the requestor's/petitioner's interests will be represented by existing parties," 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(c)(vi), SACE is the only intervenor presently admitted in this proceeding. If the Co-Petitioners are not admitted, and if for a ny reason SACE is later forced to withdraw from this proceeding, no other parties will be left in this proceeding to represent the interests of the Co-Petitioners. Fifth, as to the "extent to which the requestor's/petitioner's participation will broaden the issues or delay the proceeding," 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(c)(vii), because Co-Pe titioners seek only to 4join a Petition to Intervene that has already been submitted, their participation cannot be expected to have any effect on the breadth or length of the proceeding.
Sixth, as to the "extent to which the requestor's/petitioner's participation may reasonably be expected to assist in developing a sound record," 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(c)(viii), Co-Petitioners have demonstrated their ability to assist in developing a sound reco rd by co-sponsoring four contentions that are supported by expert declarations; and by submitting other contentions that are supported by both factual and lega l bases. Co-Petitioners plan to coordinate with SACE on the development of testimony and legal briefs regarding their admitted contentions. In this respect, Co-Petitioners, which are environmental and civic groups in the vicinity of the Watts Bar Unit 2 nuclear power plant, expect to contribute their knowledge of local environmental and economic conditions to the development of the Petitioners' case on Contentions 4 (Inadequate Discussion of Need for Power and Energy Altern atives) and 7 (Inadequate Consideration of Aquatic Impacts).
For these reasons, Co-Petitioners request that the ASLB to permit Co-Petitioners to join in SACE's Petition to Intervene and admit them as late-filed intervenors. Respectfully submitted, Diane Curran Matthew D. Fraser HARMON, CURRAN, SPIELBERG & EISENBERG, L.L.P.
1726 M St. NW, Suite 600
Washington, D.C. 20036
Tel: (202) 328-3500
Fax: (202) 328-6918 dcurran@harmoncurran.com mfraser@harmoncurran.com
August 14, 2009