Responds to ASLB 790116 Invitation for Memoranda Re Need for Power.Urges Thorough & Independent NRC Investigation of Issue W/O Reliance on a State Legislature'S Decision. Certificate of Svc EnclML19269C991 |
Person / Time |
---|
Site: |
Skagit |
---|
Issue date: |
01/30/1979 |
---|
From: |
Sandvik R OREGON, STATE OF |
---|
To: |
|
---|
References |
---|
NUDOCS 7902260116 |
Download: ML19269C991 (9) |
|
|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20082F7881983-11-23023 November 1983 Withdrawal of OL Application.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20082F7771983-11-23023 November 1983 Motion for Order Approving Encl Withdrawal of Application & Terminating Proceeding ML20080L9431983-09-28028 September 1983 Second Request for Addl Extension Until 840115 to Answer Intervenor Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 1. Portland General Electric Co Expects to Decide on Plant Termination by End of 1983.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20080G0731983-09-13013 September 1983 Request for Extension Until 831014 to Answer Intervenor Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 1.Motion May Be Moot If Other Owners Concur W/Util Decision to Terminate Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20071Q7201983-06-0303 June 1983 Response Opposing Applicant 830525 Request for Extension Until 830930 to Answer Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 1.No Good Cause Demonstrated.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20071M0781983-05-25025 May 1983 Request for Extension Until 830930 to Answer NRDC Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 1.Time Needed to Consider Implications of Final Northwest Conservation Electric Power Plan & Licensing Alternatives.Certificates of Svc Encl ML20023C4571983-05-12012 May 1983 Memorandum of Points & Authorities Supporting Intervenor Motion for Summary Disposition Since Contention 1 No Longer Controversial Issue.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20023C3741983-05-12012 May 1983 Statement of Matl Facts as to Which There Is No Genuine Issue Re Contention 1 ML20023C3691983-05-12012 May 1983 Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 1 Re Calculation of Demand for Electrical Energy Negating Need for Plant.No Genuine Issue of Matl Fact Exists ML20023C6971983-05-12012 May 1983 Affidavit of DB Goldstein Supporting NRDC Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 1 Re Need for Power.Four Forecasts for Energy Needs Refute Need for Power Justification Developed by Util.Prof Qualifications Encl ML20064N6681983-02-10010 February 1983 Motion to Suspend Health & Safety Prehearing Schedule Pending Adoption of Final Regional Energy Plan or Until Conclusion of Evidentiary Hearings on Need for Power. Applicant Appears Ready to Absorb Facility Costs ML20071A6671983-02-10010 February 1983 Certifies Svc of Intervenor Motion to Suspend Safety & Health Schedule on 830210 ML20070T0661983-02-0404 February 1983 Motion for Order Suspending Health & Safety Prehearing Schedule,Pending Adoption of Final Regional Power Plan & Further Order of Aslb.Suspension Would Be in Best Interest of All Concerned.W/Certificate of Svc ML20083N8101983-01-31031 January 1983 New Contentions Based on New Info in SER Suppl.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20083N1991983-01-26026 January 1983 Notice of Appeal & Exceptions to ASLB 830118 Memorandum & Order.Memorandum & Order Fails to Recognize Yakima Indian Nation Sovereignty & Treaty Rights Which Are Supreme Law of Land.Affidavit of Svc Encl ML20028F1831983-01-25025 January 1983 Notification of Intent to File New Contentions Based on New Info in SER Suppl.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20028E9701983-01-19019 January 1983 Reply to NRC & Applicant Response to Natl Wildlife Federation/Or Environ Council,Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission & Coalition for Safe Power 821213 Motion to Clarify & Amend Certain Contentions.W/Certificate of Svc ML20072A6731983-01-18018 January 1983 Motion for Extension of Time Until 830210 to File Answer to Natl Wildlife Federation/Or Environ Council 830105 Motion to Compel Discovery.Parties Attempting to Settle Matter by Informal Agreement.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20028C9581983-01-0505 January 1983 Memorandum Supporting Natl Wildlife Federation/Or Environ Council 830105 Motion to Compel Discovery.Applicants Misinterpreted 10CFR2.740(b)(1) Relevancy Std.Discovery Requests Are Relevant.W/Certificate of Svc ML20028C9501983-01-0505 January 1983 Motion to Compel Applicants to Respond in Full to Natl Wildlife Federation/Or Environ Council 821201 Interrogatories & Request for Production of Documents ML20028C3221983-01-0303 January 1983 Suppl to DOE 821126 Limited Appearance Statement.Doe Position Is That Hanford Site Is Not Open,Unclaimed Land as Defined in 1855 Treaty W/Yakima Indian Nation,Article Iii. ASLB Is Wrong Forum for Resolving Issue ML20070L5411982-12-27027 December 1982 Answer Opposing Yakima Indian Nation 821210 Motion for Reconsideration of ASLB 821029 Memorandum & Order Re Suppl to Petition to Intervene.Aslb Rejection of Contentions 7,8 & 9 Well Founded ML20070L4901982-12-27027 December 1982 Affidavit of Mv Stimac Supporting Applicant Answer to Yakima Indian Nation Motion for Reconsideration.Describes Plant Site & Location of Casements.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20079J6021982-12-23023 December 1982 Response Supporting Intervenor 821213 Motion to Clarify & Amend Contentions 7 & 8.Quantification of Environ Impacts Not Practicable Due to Subjective Nature.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20023B3081982-12-20020 December 1982 Response to 821201 Discovery Requests.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20079H3711982-12-13013 December 1982 Motion to Clarify & Amend Contentions 7 & 8.Contentions Should Be Reorganized to Facilitate Coordinated Evidentiary Presentations for Environ Matters ASLB Set Out as Contentions 4,7 & 8.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20070D1181982-12-10010 December 1982 Affidavit of R Jim Supporting Yakima Indian Nation Brief on Admissibility of Nation Reworded Proposed Contention 10 & Motion for Reconsideration.Nation Has Right to Pasture Horses & Gather Roots Even Though Us Holds Title to Land ML20070C9121982-12-10010 December 1982 Notice of Counsel New Law Firm Affiliation,As of 820901 ML20070C8181982-12-10010 December 1982 Motion for Reconsideration of ASLB 821029 Memorandum & Order Re Yakima Indian Nation Contentions 7,8 & 9.Nation Right to Enjoy Reservation Peacefully Given by 1855 Treaty Should Be Protected by ASLB ML20070C7981982-12-10010 December 1982 Brief Supporting Admissibility of Yakima Indian Nation Reworded Proposed Contention 10.Attempt to Terminate Reserved Rights of Yakima Indian Nation Violates Fifth Amend.Land Cannot Be Taken by Inverse Condemnation ML20070C7691982-12-10010 December 1982 Certifies Svc of Brief on Admissibility of Reworded Proposed Contention 10,motion for Reconsideration of ASLB 821029 Memorandum & Order,R Jim Affidavit & Notice of Counsel Law Firm Change on 821210 ML20028B9251982-12-0101 December 1982 Brief Re Admissibility of Yaking Indian Nation Proposed Contention 10.Clarification Needed on Procedural Rule of Commission & Scope of Contention.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20028B8971982-12-0101 December 1982 Request for Production of Documents & Interrogatories,Per 10CFR2.740(b) & 10CFR2.741.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20028B2631982-11-26026 November 1982 Limited Appearance Statement.Hanford Site Is Not Part of Yakima Indian Nation Reservation Established by 1855 Treaty. Indian Privilege of Hunting,Gathering Roots & Berries & Grazing Animals Does Not Extend to Hanford Site ML20066L0101982-11-22022 November 1982 Motion to Amend Accepted Contention 3.Proposed Amends Would Conform Contention 3 to Earlier Admitted NRDC Contention on Which Contention 3 Is Partially Based.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20066K9761982-11-22022 November 1982 Motion to Alter Lead Party Designation Established for Contention 3 in ASLB 821102 Memorandum & Order.All Intervenors Concur That NRDC Should Be Designated Lead Party,Since NRDC Demonstrated Greatest Expertise on Issue ML20023A8301982-10-15015 October 1982 Response to 820910 First Set of Production Requests. Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20023A8141982-10-14014 October 1982 Response to Yakima Indian Nation 820930 Suppl to Petition to Intervene,Containing List of Contentions.Objects to Contentions 4-10.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20027C1591982-10-0606 October 1982 Response to 820917 First Set of Interrogatories ML20063P4011982-10-0606 October 1982 Response to Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission 820923 Notice of Appeal of ASLB 820903 Memorandum & Order Denying Intervention.Applicants Will Not Oppose Appeal in Order to Maintain Schedule for Proceeding ML20071N3791982-10-0404 October 1982 Response to First Set of Interrogatories.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20065H5481982-09-29029 September 1982 Applicant Response to Coalition for Safe Power 820910 First Set of Interrogatories.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20065H5451982-09-29029 September 1982 Supplement to Petition to Intervene,Consisting of Contentions & Bases for Contentions ML20065J1601982-09-28028 September 1982 Responds to Util 820917 First Set of Interrogatories. Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20069F9491982-09-23023 September 1982 Notice of Appeal of ASLB 820908 Memorandum & Order Denying 820505 Petition to Intervene.Supporting Brief Encl ML20069F9541982-09-23023 September 1982 Memorandum Supporting Appeal of ASLB 820908 Memorandum & Order Denying 820505 Petition to Intervene or Alternatively, to Remand Petition to ASLB for Further Clarification on Question of Standing.Certificate of Svc & Exhibit Encl ML20137F8001982-09-17017 September 1982 Amended Subagreement 2 Between State of Wa Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council & NRC Re Protocol for Conduct of Joint Hearings on Facility Project ML20027B5661982-09-17017 September 1982 Response to First Set of Interrogatories.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20027B5631982-09-17017 September 1982 First Set of Interrogatories ML20027B5571982-09-15015 September 1982 Motion for Extension of Time Until 821004 to Respond to Applicant Interrogatories.Counsel Was Unavailable When Interrogatories Arrived. Certificate of Svc Encl 1983-09-28
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20082F7771983-11-23023 November 1983 Motion for Order Approving Encl Withdrawal of Application & Terminating Proceeding ML20080L9431983-09-28028 September 1983 Second Request for Addl Extension Until 840115 to Answer Intervenor Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 1. Portland General Electric Co Expects to Decide on Plant Termination by End of 1983.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20080G0731983-09-13013 September 1983 Request for Extension Until 831014 to Answer Intervenor Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 1.Motion May Be Moot If Other Owners Concur W/Util Decision to Terminate Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20071Q7201983-06-0303 June 1983 Response Opposing Applicant 830525 Request for Extension Until 830930 to Answer Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 1.No Good Cause Demonstrated.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20071M0781983-05-25025 May 1983 Request for Extension Until 830930 to Answer NRDC Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 1.Time Needed to Consider Implications of Final Northwest Conservation Electric Power Plan & Licensing Alternatives.Certificates of Svc Encl ML20023C4571983-05-12012 May 1983 Memorandum of Points & Authorities Supporting Intervenor Motion for Summary Disposition Since Contention 1 No Longer Controversial Issue.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20023C3741983-05-12012 May 1983 Statement of Matl Facts as to Which There Is No Genuine Issue Re Contention 1 ML20023C3691983-05-12012 May 1983 Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 1 Re Calculation of Demand for Electrical Energy Negating Need for Plant.No Genuine Issue of Matl Fact Exists ML20064N6681983-02-10010 February 1983 Motion to Suspend Health & Safety Prehearing Schedule Pending Adoption of Final Regional Energy Plan or Until Conclusion of Evidentiary Hearings on Need for Power. Applicant Appears Ready to Absorb Facility Costs ML20070T0661983-02-0404 February 1983 Motion for Order Suspending Health & Safety Prehearing Schedule,Pending Adoption of Final Regional Power Plan & Further Order of Aslb.Suspension Would Be in Best Interest of All Concerned.W/Certificate of Svc ML20083N1991983-01-26026 January 1983 Notice of Appeal & Exceptions to ASLB 830118 Memorandum & Order.Memorandum & Order Fails to Recognize Yakima Indian Nation Sovereignty & Treaty Rights Which Are Supreme Law of Land.Affidavit of Svc Encl ML20072A6731983-01-18018 January 1983 Motion for Extension of Time Until 830210 to File Answer to Natl Wildlife Federation/Or Environ Council 830105 Motion to Compel Discovery.Parties Attempting to Settle Matter by Informal Agreement.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20028C9581983-01-0505 January 1983 Memorandum Supporting Natl Wildlife Federation/Or Environ Council 830105 Motion to Compel Discovery.Applicants Misinterpreted 10CFR2.740(b)(1) Relevancy Std.Discovery Requests Are Relevant.W/Certificate of Svc ML20028C9501983-01-0505 January 1983 Motion to Compel Applicants to Respond in Full to Natl Wildlife Federation/Or Environ Council 821201 Interrogatories & Request for Production of Documents ML20070L5411982-12-27027 December 1982 Answer Opposing Yakima Indian Nation 821210 Motion for Reconsideration of ASLB 821029 Memorandum & Order Re Suppl to Petition to Intervene.Aslb Rejection of Contentions 7,8 & 9 Well Founded ML20066L0101982-11-22022 November 1982 Motion to Amend Accepted Contention 3.Proposed Amends Would Conform Contention 3 to Earlier Admitted NRDC Contention on Which Contention 3 Is Partially Based.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20066K9761982-11-22022 November 1982 Motion to Alter Lead Party Designation Established for Contention 3 in ASLB 821102 Memorandum & Order.All Intervenors Concur That NRDC Should Be Designated Lead Party,Since NRDC Demonstrated Greatest Expertise on Issue ML20063P4011982-10-0606 October 1982 Response to Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission 820923 Notice of Appeal of ASLB 820903 Memorandum & Order Denying Intervention.Applicants Will Not Oppose Appeal in Order to Maintain Schedule for Proceeding ML20069F9541982-09-23023 September 1982 Memorandum Supporting Appeal of ASLB 820908 Memorandum & Order Denying 820505 Petition to Intervene or Alternatively, to Remand Petition to ASLB for Further Clarification on Question of Standing.Certificate of Svc & Exhibit Encl ML20027B5571982-09-15015 September 1982 Motion for Extension of Time Until 821004 to Respond to Applicant Interrogatories.Counsel Was Unavailable When Interrogatories Arrived. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20063M6211982-09-10010 September 1982 Motion for Extension of Time Until 820923 to File Responses to Applicant First Set of Interrogatories.Staff Will Be Absent from Ofc 820911-23.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20063M2351982-09-0101 September 1982 Statement of Matl Fact as to Which There Is No Genuine Issue on Coalition for Safe Power Contention 26 ML20063M2291982-09-0101 September 1982 Motion for Summary Disposition of Coalition for Safe Power Contention 26.No Genuine Issue of Matl Fact Exists.Basis for Contention Was PSAR Section 3.10 Which Has Subsequently Been Amended.Related Correspondence ML20063A5051982-08-19019 August 1982 Motion for Leave to Reply to Applicant 820730 Response Opposing Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission 820716 Motion for Admission of Second Suppl to Petition to Intervene.Question of Standing Raised.W/Certificate of Svc ML20062D5201982-08-0505 August 1982 Response to Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission 820716 Motion for Admission of Second Suppl to Petition to Intervene.Good Cause Shown for Contention 4.Other Factors Favor Admission of Contention 5.W/Certificate of Svc ML20058D5401982-07-21021 July 1982 Memorandum Supporting Appeal of ASLB 820706 Memorandum & Order.Contentions 3E & 5 Should Be Accepted as Litigatable Issues.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20063H1141982-07-16016 July 1982 Motion for Admission of Second Suppl to Petition to Intervene ML20053D0651982-05-27027 May 1982 Motion for Extension of Time Until 820611 to Answer Coalition for Safe Power 820527 Amended Contentions. Washington co-counsel Has Not Received Contention & Document Is Lengthy.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20052D0561982-04-28028 April 1982 Response Opposing Deposition of MT Dana.Discovery Premature & Does Not Relate to Matters in Controversy.Reasonable Notice Not Given & Allowing Deposition Would Amount to Harassment.W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20054E1511982-04-20020 April 1982 Motion for Extension of Time for Filing Addl Contentions Since Portions of PSAR & Amend 5 to Application for Site Certificate/Environ Rept Received on 820416,4 Days Before Contentions Due ML20005B7061981-08-18018 August 1981 Motion,In Ltr Form,For Order That All Parties Fully Serve All Documents on Coalition for Safe Power & Forelaws on Board,Pending Renoticing & Rulings on Petitions to Intervene.Impractical to Gain Access to Documents at Lpdr ML19332A8871980-09-11011 September 1980 Statement Suggesting That Full Commission Review of Orders & Opinions Below Not Necessary Due to Mootness.Aslb 800827 Order Indicates Proceeding Has Terminated ML19321A6291980-07-16016 July 1980 Motion for Order Evidencing Current Status & Setting Schedule for Further Proceeding.Amend to Application Will Be Filed by 800930.Anticipated Schedule for Environ Rept & PSAR Amends May Be Filed on Same Date.W/Draft Order & Release ML19323J2211980-06-0404 June 1980 Reply Withdrawing 800508 Motion to Dismiss Application. Applicant Response to Motion & Mecca Affidavit Provided Detailed Info Re Applicant 800414 Rept.Progress Rept Must Be Filed by 800601 by Applicant.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19312E9291980-05-23023 May 1980 Reply in Opposition to Skagitonians Concerned About Nuclear Power 800508 Motion to Dismiss Application W/Prejudice Due to Lack of Diligent Pursuit.Applicants Are Engaged in Extensive Program to Locate Suitable Site ML19310A2181980-05-0808 May 1980 Motion to Dismiss Application W/Prejudice.Applicants Took No Steps to Pursue Application Despite Opportunity Given at 800122 Conference to Address Pending Geology & Seismology Issues.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19323A9731980-04-17017 April 1980 Pleading in Lieu of Brief Amicus Curiae Re Untimely Petition of Three Indian Tribes.Urges Admittance of Tribes as Full Parties Except for Fully Addressed Issues Where Serious Gaps in Existing Record Must Be Shown.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19296D5061980-02-22022 February 1980 Response in Opposition to Doi 800215 Motion for Extension Until 800414 to File Brief Amicus Curiae.Motion Filed at Last Day of Permitted Period.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19296C8801980-02-15015 February 1980 Motion for Extension Until 800114 to File Brief Amicus Curiae Re Whether Indian Tribes Status Gives Sufficient Cause for Late Intervention.Nrc Does Not Object to Such Extension.Affidavit & Certificate of Svc Encl ML19296B1471980-02-0101 February 1980 Answer in Opposition to Skagitonians Against Nuclear Power 800122 Motion to Compel Responses to Interrogatories.Motion Untimely & Questions Re Seismic Profile Outside Scope of Proceedings.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19260D5181980-01-21021 January 1980 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 ML19262C3001980-01-18018 January 1980 Motion to Compel Applicant Answers to Skagitonians Concerned About Nuclear Power Interrogatories Re San Juan Islands Seismic Profiles.Interpretation of Atomic Energy Act Holds Applicant Liable for Matl False Statements ML19257A3971979-12-12012 December 1979 Objection to Intervenor Skagitonians Concerned About Nuclear Power Interrogatories Re Seismic Profiles of San Juan Islands.Western Geophysical Seismic Profiles Not Discovered by Util Until 1979.No False Statements Made ML19256F8401979-12-0505 December 1979 Reply to Skagitonians Concerned About Nuclear Power 791109 Proposed Findings on Financial Qualifications.Intervenor Adopted short-term View Rather than long-term Considerations Re Inflation Rates & Market Ratios.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19211A1121979-11-30030 November 1979 Reply to Skagitonians Concerned About Nuclear Power 791112 Proposed Findings of Fact.Fes & Fes Final Suppl Addressed Environ Impacts & Whole Population Issues Indiscriminately Certificate of Svc Encl ML19211A1071979-11-30030 November 1979 Reply to NRC 791005 Proposed Findings of Fact.Urges Board to Reject Recommendation 3 Contained in Finding 44,Pages 27-28. Condition Re Environ Evaluation Prior to Commencement of Const Activities Is Not Authorized by NEPA & NRC Rules ML19211A0881979-11-30030 November 1979 Reply in Opposition to Intervenor Forelaws on Board/Citizens for Safe Power Findings of Fact Re Alternative Sites & Postulated Accidents.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19262A7481979-11-20020 November 1979 Response in Opposition to Indian Tribes 791105 Supplemental Petition for ALAB-552 & ALAB-559 Review.Petitioner Failed to Raise Good Cause Re Alleged ASLB Misapplication of Late Intervention Factor.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19291B8911979-11-0909 November 1979 Pleading Re Applicants' Financial Qualifications.Total Cost of Project Exceeds Applicants' Figures.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19260B1681979-11-0808 November 1979 Response in Opposition to Skagitonions Concerned About Nuclear Power 791116 Motion to Direct Certification,Stay Proceedings & Review ASLB Actions.Detriment to Public Interest as Basis for Interlocutory Review Not Established 1983-09-28
[Table view] |
Text
.
NRC PUBLIC DOCUMENT E00M UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ;; cec - '(
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION um
{.
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD C- E.Eo 1C> l G:. e*L s .n g3
' 7 l In the Matter of ) \Z
) . *M PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT ) Docket Nos. 50-522 ' k~ g CCMPANY, et g. , ) 50-523
)
(Skagit Nuclear Power Project )
Units 1 and 2) )
)
STATE OF OREGON'S MEMORANDUM REGARDING THE BOARD'S "UEED FOR POWER" QUESTION I. INTRODUCTION The State of Oregon (hereinafter " Oregon") is participating as an " interested state" in the Commission's construction permit proceedings regarding the proposed Pebble Springs and Skagit nuclear plants. Because substantial portions of both projects will be owned by two Oregon-based utilities, Oregon is particularly interested in the "need for power" issue.
With respect to that issue, at a prehearing conference held by the Skagit ASLB on January 16, 1979, the Board invited memoranda on the significance of RCW Sec. 80.50.01 to the Board's decision-making responsibilities. RCW Sec. 80.50.01 provides, in pertinent part, as follows:
"The leg.islature finds that the present and predicted growth in energy demands in the State of Washington requires the develop-ment of a procedure for the selection and utilization of sites for energy facilities. . .
ns * *
"It is the policy of the State of Washington to recognize the pressing need for increased energy facilities. . .
1/ STATE OF OREGON'S MEMORANDUM REGARDING "NEED FOR POWER" 79022601(6'
h n* **
"It is the intent to seek courses of action that will balance the increasing demands for energy facility location and operation in conjunction with the broad interests of the public. Such action will be based on these premises:
n* **
"(3) To provide abundant energy at reasonable cost."
II. CONCLUSION -
Under the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 USC 4321-4361 (hereinafter "NEPA"), the staff must thoroughly and in-dependently investigate, as part of the cost-benefit balancing process, the "need for power" question. The Board in turn must then determine the sufficiency of the staff's analysis.
Neither the staff nor the Board may reduce the rigor, or the degree of independence, of their investigations by relying in toto upon a state legislature's declaration of energy demand.
III. DISCUSSION The issue of "need for power" is the cornerstone of the cost-benefit analysis required under NEPA. As the Appeal Board has stated:
"'Need for power' is a shorthand expression for the ' benefit' side of the cost-benefit balance which NEPA mandates for a proceed-ing considering the licensing of a nuclear power plant. As we have previously pointed out:
"'A nuclear plant's principal " benefit" is of course the electric power it generates. Hence, absent some "need for power", justification for building a facility is problematical.' Duke Power 2/ STATE OF OREGON' S MEMORANDUM REGMDING "NEED FOR PCWER"
Co. (Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2), ALAB-355, 4 NRC 397,405 (October 29, 1976)." (Public Service Co. of New Hampshire (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2),
ALAB-422, 6 NRC 33,90 (July 26, 1977).
The "need for power" issue is a threshold question; without an affirmative finding thereon, the staff and the Board need not and indeed cannot proceed to further analysis. Thus, the Appeal Board has noted, in upholding issuance of a construction permit,
. . .[the licensing board] properly inquired first into whether there existed a real demand for the power to be produced by the Clinton facility. Then, having satisfied itself that there was such a need, it went on to attempt to ascertain the most beneficent means of satisfying that need."
(In the Matter of Illinois Power Company (Clinton Power Station, Units 1 and 2),
ALAB-340 (July 29, 1976)). 4 NRC 27.
The Appeal Board has described the Commission's NEPA role thusly:
"At the outset, inquiry must be made into whether there exists a genuine need for the electricity to be produced. This inquiry involves not only an analysis of existing generating capacity and of proj-ections of expected growth, but also consideration of the possibility that measures to curtail consumption will be initiated. . .
"On the basis of this information, a preliminary decision can be made as to the extent to which some form of generating facility appears to be justified. "
In the Matter of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station), ALAB-179, 7 AEC 159, 175-76 (February 28, 1974).
3/ STATE OF CREGON'S FEMORANDUM REGARDING "NEED FOR POWER"
The Applicants have the burden of showing that their demand projections are " reasonable and that additional or replacement generating capacity is needed to meet that demand." (Energy Research and Development Administation (Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant), CLI-76-13, NRCI-76/8, 67, 76-77 (1976)). Also see Seabrook, ALAB-422, 6 NRC 33, 90, n. 57. Also see 10 CFR 2.732. However, the licensing board must ultimately find that a proposed facility is needed.
(See In the Matter of Duke Power Company (Catawba Nuclear Stations, Units 1 and 2), Partial Decision, ALAB-355, (October 29, 1976), 4 NRC 397,413, where the Appeal Board stated ". . . whether a facility is needed is a question which NEPA requires the agency to answer.")
In making its need for power decision, however, the Board is entitled, in certain circumstances, to give appro-priate weight to a state decision on the same subject. In the Commission's Shearon Harris proceeding, the Board relied in part upon forecasts prepared by the North Carolina Util-ities Commission to find that four nuclear units would be needed. On appeal, intervenors contended that the forecasts accepted by the Board were unreliable. The Appeal Board had the following to say regarding ASLB reliance on the NCUC forecast:
" Irrespective of the extent to which its market segment forecasts comported with those of the applicant or the staff, we think that the NCUC total demand forecast is entitled to be given great weight. As earlier noted, . . .
that body is charged by law with the respon-sibility of providing up-to-date analyses of, 4/ STATE OF ORECCN'S MEMORANDUM REGARDING "NEED FOR POWER"
inter alia, the ' probable future growth of the use of electricity'. . . The record reflects that in January 1977, prior to the issuance of its report the following month, the NCUC conducted a public hearing on the matter of projected load growth. . . .
u* **
"The intervenors have pointed to nothing in either the 1977 or 1978 NCUC reports which might lead us to believe that that expert body committed some fundamental error in carrying out its analyses. Indeed, they declined even to cross-examine the witness. . . who had participated in the preparation of the NCUC study. . .
u* **
"We do not wish to be understood as sug-gesting that in all circumstances the electricity demand forecasts of a state public utilities commission must be presumed to be reliable and thus perforce to provide an acceptable founda-tion for need-for-power determinations. Despite that such commissions might be expected to pos-sess considerable familiarity with the primary factors bearing upon present and future demand, they are no more entitled to be treated as infallible than are other governmental agencies.
It therefore must always be open to a party to one of our proceedings to establish that, for one reason or another, the analysis underlying the utility commission's predictions of future demand is in error. By the same token, a licensing board must be free to disregard utility commission predictions which it is convinced rest upon a fatally flawed foundation.
"But where a utilities commission forecast is neither shown nor appears on its face to be seriously defective, no abdication of NRC res-ponsibilities results from according conclusive effect to that forecast. Put another way, al-though the National Environmental Policy Act mandates that this Commission satisfy itself that the power to be generated by the nuclear facility under consideration will be needed, we do not read that statute as foreclosing the placement of heavy reliance upon the judgment of local regulatory bodies which are charged with the duty of insuring that the utilities 5/ STATE OF OREGON'S MEMORANDUM REGARDING "NEED FOR PCWER"
within their jurisdiction fulfill the legal ob-ligation to meet customer demands. This is so at least where, as here, the utilities commission not merely has spread on the record a detailed development of the reasons for its conclusions but, as well, has made available for examination by the parties to our proceeding one of the principal participants in the load forecast undertaking."
In the Matter c' Carolina Power & Light Co.
(Shearon Harris duclear Power Plant, Units '.,
2, 3 & 4), ALAB- 90, NRC (1978).
The Shearon Harris opinion is essentially consistent with basic NEPA law on the need of the deciding federal agency to conduct an independent analysis which can include evaluation of pertinent material prepared by others. See, e.c., Sierra Club v. Lynn (CA Tex 1974), 502 F2d 43, reh den, 504 F2d 760, cert den, 421 US 994, 95 S Ct 2001, reh den 423 US 884, 96 S Ct 158, and see 42 USC 4332(2)(D), added to NEPA by PL 94-83, 89 Stat 424 (1975).
In light of the issue before it, much of the Appeal Board's discussion quoted above must be considered dictum. Moreover, its statement that conclusive reliance can be placed on a state regulatory commission's forecast is probably incorrect.
Furthermore, the opinion concerns reliance upon a detailed state forecast which was laid on the record and scrutinized by the parties, rather than a legislative policy declaration.
Nevertheless, the Shearon Harris opinion is instructive to this Board. Consistent with that opinion, the Board can give some, but certainly not conclusive, weight to 80.50.01 in making its NEPA decision. The forecasted rate of growth in electricity demand in Washington is a contested matter. More-6/ STATE OF OREGON'S MEMORANDUM REGARDING "NEED FOR PCWER"
over, the facts and analyses underlying RCW Sec. 80.50.01 were not placed upon the record. Therefore, the Board would abdi-cate its duty under NEPA if it treated RCW Sec. 80.50.01 as conclusive of the issue of whether the Washington utilities who will own a portion of Skagit need the output thereof.
Finally, of course, RCW Sec. 80.50.01 has absolutely no bearing on whether the Oregon utilities participating in Skagit need their portion of its output.
Respectfully submitted,
^
e - , s .
!' - /
RICHARD M. SANDVIK Assistant Attorney General Of Counsel to the Oregon Department of Energy 7/ STATE OF OREGON'S MEMORANDUM REGARDING "NEED FCR POWER"
9 %
V .i 5:)
e c2 ; t ~c7 3 > ".)
I \
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE .
.c " /-
%,.r[, Q I hereby certify that true cooies of " State of Oregon's7
~.
Memorandum Regarding the Board's 'Need for Power' Question" were served on the following parties of record by deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, on the 30th day of January, 1979:
F. Theodore Thomsen, Esq. Valentine B. Deal, Chairman Perkins, Coie, Stone, Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Olsen & Williams U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1900 Washington Building Washington, D. C. 20555 Seattle, WA 98101 Dr. Frank Hooper, Member Robert Lowenstein, Esq. Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Lowenstein, Newman, Reis & Axelrad School of Natural Resources 1025 Connecticut Avenue N.N. University of Michigan Washington, D. C. 20036 Ann Arbor, MI 48104 Mr. Lloyd K. Marbet Gustave A. Linenberger, Member Mr. Eric Stachon Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Forelaws on Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n 19142 S. Bakers Ferry Road Washington, D. C. 20555 Boring, Oregon 97009 Alan S. Rosenthal, Chairman Richard L. Black, Esq. Atomic Safety and Licensing Staff Counsel Appeal Board Office of Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cc=m'n U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Washington, D. C. 20555 Dr. John H. Buck, Member Secretary, Atomic Safety Atomic Safety and Licensing
& Licensing Board Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n Washington, D. C. 20555 Washington, D. C. 20555 Roger M. Leed, Esq. Michael C. Farrar, Member 1411 Fourth Avenue Atomic Safety and Licensing Seattle, Washington 99101 Appeal Board U ,. S . Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n Mr. Nicholas D. Lewis Washington, D. C. 20555 Chairman, Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council 820 East Fifth Avenue Olympia, Washington 98504 1/ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Docketing and Service Section Canadian Consulate General Office of the Secretary Peter A. van Brakel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n Vice-Consul Washington, D. C. 20555 412 Plaza 600 6th and Stewart Street Russell W. Busch, Esq. Seattle, WA 98101 Evergreen Legal Services 5308 Ballard Avenue NW Donald S. Means Seattle, WA 98107 Box 277 La Conner, WA 98257 Robert C. Schofield, Director Skagit County Planning Dept. Richard D. Bach, Esq.
120 West Kincaid Street Rives, Bonyhadi, Drummond & Smith Mount Vernon, WA 98273 1400 Public Service Building 920 SN Sixth Avenue Warren Hastings, Esq. Portland, OR 97204 Associate Corporate Counsel Portland General Electric 121 SW Salmon Street Portland, OR 97204
- ~
RICHARD M. SANOVIK Assistant Attorney General 2/ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE