ML20063P373

Answer Supporting NRC 820929 Motion for Summary Disposition of Intervenor Contentions 6(a) & (B) & 7(a)(1).No Genuine Issue of Matl Fact Exists.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence

ML20063P373
Person / Time
Site:	Clinch River
Issue date:	10/12/1982
From:	Bergholz W, Edgar G ENERGY, DEPT. OF, PROJECT MANAGEMENT CORP.
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
NUDOCS 8210130343
Download: ML20063P373 (8)

Text

l

. - l b

,/' F ED Coluu:Mu:maca DOhkh2/82 1 lv l IMITED STATES OF AMERICA Y2 00112 PiiO9 l N G EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION .... l BEFORE THE $00El ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )

)

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY )

l )

l PROJECT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION ) Docket No. 50-537 l

) l l TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY ) i

) I l (Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant)) j l )

APPLICANTS' ANSWER IN SUPPORT OF  !

l NRC STAFF MOTION FOR

SUMMARY

DISPOSITION OF INTERVENORS' CONTENTIONS ,

i Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 52.749(a), the United States l Department of Energy and Project Management Corporation, .

l i acting for themselves and on behalf of the Tennessee 1 Valley Authority (the Applicants), hereby file this answer l l in support of the NRC' Staff Motion for Summary Disposition i l

l of Intervenors' Contentions 6(a) and (b) and 7(a)(1), dated ,

1 September 29, 1982. For the reasons contained in the Staff 1 1 ,

Motion and those set forth below, the Applicants agree with the Staff that no genuine issue of material fact as to l those contentions exists and that the Staff therefore is entitled to a decision granting summary disposition of  !

those contentions as a matter of law.

l l

~

f8210130343 B21012 ,

j PDR ADOCK 05000537 qp_ PDR TSO 3

fI Contention 6(a)

Intervenors' Contention 6(a) states that the ER and FES do not include an adequate analysis of the environmental impact of the CRBRP fuel cycle because the estimate of environmental impacts contained therein is based on a scale-down of analyses presented in the LMFBR Program Environmental Statement and Supplement. As Staff's Material Facts A.3 and 14 demonstrate, that contention is no longer correct since the analyses contained in the ER and draft FES Supplement are now specific to the CRBRP fuel cycle. These analyses are now based on demonstration fuel cycle facilities being provided to fabricate and reprocess CRBRP fuel (i.e. , SAF line in FMEF and the DRP),

not on any scale-down of large hypothetical commercial facilities. Therefore, since no issue of material fact exists as to Contention 6(a), the Staff's Motion for Summary Disposition of 6(a) should be granted.

i Contention 6(b)

Intervenors' Contention 6(b) states that the ER and FES do not include an adequate analysis of the environ-mental impact of the fuel cycle because the impact of reprocessing of spent fuels, transportation of plutonium, w

k disposal of wastes, acts of sabotage, terrorism or theft, and impacts of measures intended to prevent sabotage, theft or diversion are not included specifically for the CRBRP or are not adequately assessed. Staff Material Facts A.3-14 demonstrate that CRBRP-specific assessments are now contained in the ER and FES Supplement for each of the subject matter areas listed above. Thus, the issue of specificity no longer exists. To the extent that Intervenors claim the assessments are inadequate, Intervenors have presented nothing beyond sweeping, unsubstantiated allegations to l justify their contention. In short, there is no basis stated for the allegations. Therefore, since no genuine issue of material fact exists as to Contention 6(b), the Staff's Motion for Summary Disposition should be granted.

l Contention 7(a)(1)

Intervenors' Contention 7(a)(1) states that alternatives for the CRBRP have not been adequately analyzed because neither Applicants nor Staff have demonstrated that the CRBRP will achieve the programmatic obj ectives of the CRBRP in a timely fashion. The timing of CRERP, as established by the LMFBR progrannatic statement, has now been changed from operation in 1983 to completion "as expeditiously as possible." See, Staff Material Facts B.2-4; LMFBR Final

Environmental Impact Statement (Supplement to ERDA-1535),

DOE /EIS-0085-FS, 57; LMFBR Record of Decision, 47 Fed. Reg. 33771 (Au 't 4, 1982). The need for and timing of the LMFBR prog ..an, as contained in the LMFBR programmatic statement, are assumed to be established for the purposes of these proceedings. United States Energy Research and Development Administration (Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant), CLI-76-13, 4 NRC 67, 92 (1976).

Given the programmatic timing of CRBRP, NRDC has not specifically identified, nor is there known to exist,

. any alternative demonstration breeder reactor proposal which could be developed to mee; the timing objective of "as expeditiously as possible." Staff Material Fact B.7.

Hence, there is no basis advanced by NRDC in support of its contention that any other proposal would be a "substantially better" alternative for achieving the programmatic timing of CRBRP. 4 NRC at 92. Consequently, no genuine issue of material fact exists as to the ability of alternative demonstration reactors to meet the programmatic tiniing l objective, and the Staff's Motion for Summary Dispostion of Contention 7(a)(1) should be granted.

f - 5-Respectfully submitted, 24A karren E. Bergholz, Jf/. /

AttorneyfortheU.f. drtment of Energy GEorgg2L. Edghr Attorney for Project Management Corporation DATED: October 12, 1982 k

e ie e

- - , , , - g e ,m-- - - , v -- -- -- - - ,- n-e - -- -- . - - - -

I UNITED STATES OF, AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

)

In the Matter of UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY )

)

PROJECT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION ) Docket No. 50-537

)

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY )

. )

(Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant) )

)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Service has been effected on this date by personal delivery or first-class mail to the following:

• • • Marshall E. Miller, Esquire Chairman Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U: S. Nuclear Regulatory (Commission Washington, D. C. 20545 2 copies)

Dr. Cadet H. Hand, Jr.

Director Bodega Marine Laboratory University of California l P. O. Box 247 Bodega Bay, California

- 94923 l

• • • Mr. Gustave A. Linenberger Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Wa.shington, D. C. 20545 l **** Daniel Swanson, Esquire l ,

Stuart Treby, Esquire Office of Executive Legal Director U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l

l Washington, D. C. 20545 (2 copies)

}

l

1

• Atomic Safety & Licensing Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20545

• Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20545

• Docketing & Service Section Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20545 (3 copies)

William M. Leech, Jr. , Attorney General William B. Hubbard, Chief l Deputy Attorney General l Michael D. Pearigen, Assistant l

Attorney General

State of Tennessee Office of the Attorney General 450 James Robertson Parkway Nashville, Tennessee 37219 l

Oak Ridge Public Library Civic Center Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37820 Herbert S. Sanger, Jr. , Esquire Lewis E. Wallace, Esquire W. Walter LaRoche, Esquire James F. Burger, Esquire Edward J. Vigluicci, Esquire Office of the General Counsel Tennessee Valley Authority 400 Commerce Avenue Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 (2 copies)

• • Dr. Thomas Cochran Barbara A. Finamore, Esquire Natural Resources Defense Council 1725 Eye Street, H. W., Suite 600 Washington, D. C. 20006 (2 copies)

Ellyn R. Weiss, Esquire Harmon & Weiss 1725 Eye Street, N. W., Suite 506 Washington, D. C. 20006

3-Lawson McGhee Public Library 500 West Church Street ,

Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 William E. Lantrip, Esq.

Attorney for the City of Oak Ridge Municipal Building P. O. Box 1 Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830

• • Leon Silverstrom, Esq.

Warren Bergholz, Jr., Esq.

U. S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Ave., S. W.

Room 6B-256, Forrestal Building Washington, D. C. 20585 (4 copies)

• • Eldon V. C. Greenberg Tuttle & Taylor 1901 L Street, N. W., Suite 805 Washington, D. C. 20036 Commissioner James Cotham Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development Andrew Jackson Building, Suite 1007 Nashville, Tennessee 37219 t

M&Wh A George L. Edgar i

Attorney for l Project Management Corporation DATED: October 12, 1982 l

• / Denotes. hand delivery to 1717 "H" Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.

1

• • / Denotes hand delivery to indicated address.

• • • / Denotes hand delivery to 4350 East-West Highway, Bethesda, Md.

• • • • / Denotes hand delivery at Maryland National Bank Building, Bethesda, Maryland.

..