ML19290F129

Response in Opposition to Applicant'S 800211 Pleadings to Strike State of Ok Response to ALAB-573.Urges Commission to Reject Applicants Late Responses Re Need to Consider Class 9 Accident Consequences

ML19290F129
Person / Time
Site:	Black Fox
Issue date:	02/26/1980
From:	Farris J FARRIS, J.R.
To:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML19290F130	List: ML19290F129 ML19290F132 ML19290F135 ML19290F137
References
ALAB-573, NUDOCS 8003180157
Download: ML19290F129 (3)

Text

<

. .

i. 9

\ bI 1% /

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA '

, A NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION d- 's '

~.

~

.'

.?.g/

.

-

Before the Commission y G" ~h

_

4 ,;b * -

\"

.s

' d In the Matter of the Application of ) j Public Service Company of Oklahoma, ) 4) c3 Associated Electric Cooperative, *nc. )

and )

Western Farmers Electric Cooperative ) Docket Nos.

) STN 50-556 l Black Fox Units 1 and 2) ) STN 50-557 INTERVENORS' RESPONSE TO APPLICANTS' MOTION TO STRIKE RESPONSE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO ALAB-573 In the event the Commission declines to strike the Applicants' three pleadings fi'ed on February 11, 1980, herein , Intervenors, in response to Applicants' Motion to Strike the Response of the Attorney General to ALAB-573, move to adopt the State of Oklahoma's Response to ALAB-573 in its entirety. In the event the Commission decides that the State of Oklahoma's Response should be stricken, Inter-venors submit that their adoption of the Response of the Attorney General leaves the State of Oklahoma's Response before the Commission for its consideration.

1. (1) Motion to Strike Response of the Attorney General to ALAB-573 (2) Applicant's Response to Inquiry by Appeal Board Concerning the Need to Consider the Consequences of Class 9 Accidents in this Proceeding (3) Motion to Dismiss Class 9 Accident Inquiry.

8 o 0 3 I s 015 7

.

. .

Although this adoption by Intervenors is beyond the time specified by the Appeal Board in ALAB-573, Intervenors respectfully submit that if the Commission declines to strike the Applicants' Responses filed out of time concerning the need to consider the consequences of Class 9 accidents, Intervenors should be granted a similar dispensation and their Motion to Adopt the Response of the State of Oklahoma should be considered on its merits.

Unlike the State of Oklahoma, it is unquestioned that the Intervenors have been a party to this proceeding since the hearings on the environmental and site suitability issues were held in 1977 and 1978, and, as such, have every right to respond to the Appeal Board's direction in ALAB-573. Inter-venors further submit that the State of Oklahoma's Response contains important and substantive comments bearing upon the history of the proposed Annex to 10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendix D, and the need to consider C1. ass 9 accidents generically and in the case of Black Fox specifically. These important statements and the detailed research of the State of Oklahoma need to be considered by the Commission on their merits and should not be disregarded on the technical ground that the State of Oklahoma was not a " party" at the time the environmental and site suitability hearings were held.

2

.-

. .

For the foregoing reasons, Intervenors move to adopt the Response of the State of Oklahoma to ALAB-573 as fully as if set forth herein.

.

Respectfully submitted, n

/h J s ph F/ Farris /

cf the Attorneys for tervenors