ML20126B810

Order Scheduling Supplemental Oral Argument on Pending Appeals on 850628 in Bethesda,Md Re Public Notice of Hearing Concerning Use of Facility for Receipt & Storage of Spent Fuel from Oconee & Mcguire.Served on 850613

ML20126B810
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	06/13/1985
From:	Shoemaker C NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP)
To:	DUKE POWER CO., NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD)
References
CON-#285-417 OL, NUDOCS 8506140219
Download: ML20126B810 (3)

Text

f UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD Administrative Judges:

Alan S. Rosenthal, Chairman June 13,02945ED Thomas S. Moore UAkc Howard A. Wilber

'85 JW 13 Pl2::03

)

In the Matter of ) 0FFICE C; 3ECie i

) 00C.4ETING & SEi"!K i.

DUKE POWER COMPANY, ~~ -~ET AL. ) Docket Nos. 50-41 BOY

) 50-414 OL (Catawba Nuclear Station, )

Units 1 and 2) ) -

) .

SEPNs JLa 1%,,

ORDER Supplemental oral argument on the pending appeals in this operating license proceeding will be heard at 9:30 a.m.

on Friday, June 28, 1985, in the NRC Public Hearing Room, Fifth Floor, East-West Towers Building, 4350 East-West Highway, Bethesda, Maryland. The argument will be strictly limited to a single question raised (among others) by the Board sua sponte in its April 25, 1985 order (unpublished):

Was the Nuclear Regulatory Commission required to issue a public notice of opportunity for hearing with respect to the planned use of the Catawba facility for the receipt and storage of spent fuel generated at the Oconee and McGuire facilities?

In this connection, the Board is particularly interested in exploring the sharp difference of opinion between the applicar ts and the NRC staff respecting whether h

8506140219 850613 PDR ADOCK 05000413 g PDR

'N

F 2

the storage of spent' fuel generated at another facility constitutes a "use" of a commercial utilization facility within the meaning of Sections 101 and 103a. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2131, 2133 (a) .1 Each party to the proceeding is allotted 30 minutes for the presentation of argument.2 The applicants will be heard first, and will be followed by the intervenors and the staff in that order.

By letter mailed no later than June 21, 1985, each party is to provide the Secretary to this Board with the name of the counsel who will present argument on its behalf.

See NRC Staff Views on Whether Notice of the Proposal to Use Catawba to Store Oconee and McGuire Fuel was Required or Discretionary (May 29, 1985) at 5-7; Response of Licensees Duke Power Company, Et Al. Concerning "Use" of a Commercial Utilization Facility (June 7, 1985). Needless to say, we will expect all counsel participating in the argument to be familiar with the legislative history of the 1956 amendment to the Atomic Energy Act that added the term "use" to Sections 101 and 103a. (Public Law 84-1006, 70 Stat. 1069). In addition, staff counsel will be expected to respond in full to the applicants' claim in their June 7 filing (at 9-10) that the staff's current interpretation of the term "use" is contrary to the Commission's conduct of a separate Part 70 proceeding with regard to the transshipment of spent fuel from the Oconee to the McGuire facility.

2 The two intervenors constitute a single party for this purpose.

3 It is so ORDERED.

FOR THE APPEAL BOARD 1

. W - . . - Y l C. Je$n Shoemaker Secretary to the Appeal Board Mr. Wilber did not participate in this order.

t l

l