ML19260D518

Motion in Opposition to NRC 791102 Motion to Postpone Hearings on Geology & Seismology Issues.Proposed Evidence Twice Rejected as Inconclusive.Applicants Have Failed to Carry Burden of Proof Re Issues.W/Certificate of Svc

ML19260D518
Person / Time
Site:	Skagit
Issue date:	01/21/1980
From:	Gendler M LEED, R.M., SKAGITONIANS CONCERNED ABOUT NUCLEAR POWER (SCANP)
To:	NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP)
References
NUDOCS 8002110203
Download: ML19260D518 (5)

Text

pg =%5: y

' -

. .

.

'. 21

-

@ 3%a:*

Stsw M

$$b f ?[f UNITED STATES OF AMERICA #

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION D 4 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD In the Matter of )

)

PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT ) DOCKET NOS. STN 50-522 COMPANY, et al., ) 50-523

)

~~ *

)

(Skagit Nuclear Power Project, )

Units 1 and 2) )

)

)

SCANP'S RESPONSE TO STAFF MOTION TO POSTPONE HEARINGS ON GEOLOGY AND SEISMOLOGY ISSUES (DATED NOVEMBER 2,1979)

In the Board's Schedule of Conf erance dated December 21, 1979, the Board notes that there have been no responses to Staff's Motion to Postpone Geology Hearing. SCANP had assumed that the passage of time had overtaken the motion, but welcomes the Board invitation to of fer its views regarding the motion.

SCANP submits that the motion should not be granted, and that applicants should not be af forded a further opportunity to carry their burden of proof regarding the geology and seismology issues presented. Applicants twice previously have presented evidence on these issues, which the Board has aund to be poorly prepared and inconclusive. While applica.ts never were at liberty to carry their burden of proof regarding the most important saf ety issue in this proceeding with

,,4 -"7

,,

8 00211 g

..

. .

,

.

.

insufficient evidence, the lessons of their first two attempts to do so certainly put them on notice that a third such presentation would not be tolerated. Yet applicants persisted in perf orming the minimum amount of studies and analysis, instead of the complete and thorough analysis obviously called for, an_d,were not even able to bring their case to hearing when the U.S.G.S. demontrated conclusively the inadequacy of their work. Even now SCANP does not understand applicants to accede to the U.S.G.S. conclusion that further fieldwork is essential. Given their past perf ormances regarding geology in this proceeding, can applicants contend seriously that they should be given yet another opportunity to demonstrate the ability of their proposed design to withstand earthquake hazards? SCANP thinks not.

SCANP needs not remind the Board that, in the wake.of the Three Mile Island accident, staff manpower has become a most precious and scarce resource. Staff has committed an inor-dinate ameint of time to this proceeding, and in particular to reviewing applicants' submiss' ions regarding geology, and it is clear that the public interest would not just,1fy committing

~

further staff resources on behalf of an applicant so unwilling to commit a sufficient amount of its own resources to achieve resolution of the most important safety iss,ues. SCANP takes no great liberty with facts in anticipating the cries of protest and accusations of delay from applicants if SCANP

,qn

,,,,

i<

t

,-

. .

,

.

.

requested three or four opportunities to prove any of its contentions. Thus, principles of due process and fair play, as well as the public interest in allocating staff manpower to tasks which reasonably can be expected to further the purposes

.

of the commission, mandate the conclusion that no further opportunity to carry their burden of proof on geology and seis-

-,

mology issues should be of fered to applicants who have failed to make the necessary ef fort in three previous attempts.

DATED this c1 19 day of January, 1980.

Respectfully submitted, LAW OFFICES OF ROGER M. LEED By -

Micnael W. Gendler Counsel for SCANP

.

,.4 - ^n i,

.

.

~

'

.

,

. p 14 C.,co C " .,; )

'

,

'I 3

3 fSP _

UNITED ST5TES OF AMERICA .%. tSh /

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION D

\ t gge /

\g C BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD q., a In the Matter of )

)

PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT ) DOCKET NOS. STN 50-522 COMPANY, et al., ) 50-523

)

)

(Skagit Nuclear Power Project, ) January 21, 1980 Units 1 and 2) )

)

)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of:

SCANP'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES TO APPLICANT REGARDING SAN JUAN ISLANDS SEISMIC PROFILES and SCANP'S RESPONSE TO STAFF MOTION TO POSTPONE HEARINGS ON GEOLOGY AND SEMISMOLOGY ISSUES dated January 18 and 21, 1980 have been served on the fol-lowing by depositing the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, on this 21 st day of January,1980.

Docketing and Service Section Robert Lowenstein, Esq.

Office of the Secretary Lowenstein, Newman, Reis &

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Axelrad Commission 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20036 Nicholas D. Lewis, Chairman James W. Durham, Esq.

Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council Portland General Electric Co.

121 S .W. Salmon Street 820 East Fif th Avenue TB 17 Olympia, Washington 98504 Portland, Oregon 97204

'

Richard M. Sandvik, Esq., Canadian Consulate General Assistant Attorney General Peter A. van Brakel Department of Justice Vice-Consul 500 Pacific Building 412 Plaza 600 520 S. W. Yamhill 6th and Stewart Street Portland, Oregon 97204 Seattle, Washington 98101

.n ,i ~D l e

- .- - ,, ,

.

t

.

Alan P.'O' Kelly Paine, Lowe, Cof fin, Herman

& O' Kelly 1400 Washington Trust Financial Center Spokane, Washington 99204 Russel W. Busch Evergreen Legal Services 520 Smith Tower Seattle, Washington 98104 Thomas Moser Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Skagit County Courthouse Mt. Vernon, Washington 98273 Warren Hastings Portland General Electric Co.

121 S .W. Salmon Street TB 13 Portland, Oregon 97204 DATED: '/, /[N

/

ROGER M. STEED

'

V 4 dJ Certificate - 2 ,

i e, a 1 '7

"

j i -

.