|
---|
Category:INTERVENTION PETITIONS
MONTHYEARML20098D0471983-12-13013 December 1983 Answer to NRC & Applicant Motions for Summary Disposition. Neither NRC Nor Applicant Have Met Burden of Proof.Board Should Deny Motions for Summary Disposition & Convene 83110 Evidentiary Hearing ML20098C9761983-02-11011 February 1983 Amend to Contention 2 Re Deferrence of Facility Const. Request for Extension of Const Completion Date to 1991 Does Not Constitute Reasonable Period of Time,Per 10CFR50.55(b). Certificate of Svc & Related Info Encl ML20235D6981970-09-15015 September 1970 AEC Regulatory Staff Answer to Js Turner Petition to Intervene on Issue of Migration of Plant Radiation of Food. Js Turner Has Not Established Good Cause for Delay & Petition Should Be Denied.Incomplete Order of I Like Encl ML20235D5531970-09-11011 September 1970 Answer of Suffolk Scientists for Cleaner Power & Safer Environ to Petition to Intervene on Issue of Migration of Plant Radiation of Food by Js Turner.Petition Would Introduce Further Unnecessary Delay in Proceedings ML20235D3841970-09-10010 September 1970 Petition for Intervention by Connecticut Action Now,Inc & Fairfield County Citizens for Environ Control,Inc Requesting 700921 Hearing Be Postponed Until AEC Has Statements on Full Range of Environ Impact of Plant.W/Certificate of Svc ML20235D4191970-09-10010 September 1970 Reply of AEC Regulatory Staff to Petition of Suffolk County for Intervention.Aec Does Not Object to Admission of County as Party Subj to Stated Condition 1983-02-11
[Table view] Category:RESPONSES & CONTENTIONS
MONTHYEARML20098D0471983-12-13013 December 1983 Answer to NRC & Applicant Motions for Summary Disposition. Neither NRC Nor Applicant Have Met Burden of Proof.Board Should Deny Motions for Summary Disposition & Convene 83110 Evidentiary Hearing ML20098C9761983-02-11011 February 1983 Amend to Contention 2 Re Deferrence of Facility Const. Request for Extension of Const Completion Date to 1991 Does Not Constitute Reasonable Period of Time,Per 10CFR50.55(b). Certificate of Svc & Related Info Encl ML20235D6981970-09-15015 September 1970 AEC Regulatory Staff Answer to Js Turner Petition to Intervene on Issue of Migration of Plant Radiation of Food. Js Turner Has Not Established Good Cause for Delay & Petition Should Be Denied.Incomplete Order of I Like Encl ML20235D5531970-09-11011 September 1970 Answer of Suffolk Scientists for Cleaner Power & Safer Environ to Petition to Intervene on Issue of Migration of Plant Radiation of Food by Js Turner.Petition Would Introduce Further Unnecessary Delay in Proceedings ML20235D3841970-09-10010 September 1970 Petition for Intervention by Connecticut Action Now,Inc & Fairfield County Citizens for Environ Control,Inc Requesting 700921 Hearing Be Postponed Until AEC Has Statements on Full Range of Environ Impact of Plant.W/Certificate of Svc ML20235D4191970-09-10010 September 1970 Reply of AEC Regulatory Staff to Petition of Suffolk County for Intervention.Aec Does Not Object to Admission of County as Party Subj to Stated Condition 1983-02-11
[Table view] Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20011E4861990-02-0707 February 1990 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR71 Re Compatibility of Pu Air Transport Regulations W/Iaea Stds.Supports EEI-UWASTE/NUMARC Comments to Be Provided to NRC by 900209 ML20248D2831989-09-28028 September 1989 Notice of Appearance.* Advises That Author Will Enter Appearance in Proceeding on Behalf of Nrc.W/Certificate of Svc ML20247Q2661989-09-26026 September 1989 Establishment of Aslb.* Board Will Comprise of Mb Margulies, Chairman & Oh Paris & Fj Shon,Members.W/Certificate of Svc. Served on 890926 B13367, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR30,40,50,60,70,72 & 150 Re Preserving Free Flow of Info to Commission.Nrc Made Wise Choice to Not Impose Any Obligation on Private Parties to Include Affirmative Statement in Employment Agreements1989-09-20020 September 1989 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR30,40,50,60,70,72 & 150 Re Preserving Free Flow of Info to Commission.Nrc Made Wise Choice to Not Impose Any Obligation on Private Parties to Include Affirmative Statement in Employment Agreements ML20248C8751989-09-13013 September 1989 Response to Order Modifying Licenses & Order to Show Cause Why Licenses Should Not Be Revoked.* Requests Hearing on Issues,Including Funds for Equipment.Supporting Info Encl ML20246C7141989-08-18018 August 1989 Order to Show Cause Why CPs CPEP-1 & CPEP-2 Should Not Be Revoked & Requiring Licensee to Notify Commission at Least 30 Days Before Taking Possession of Any Classified Equipment ML20245G0721989-08-0303 August 1989 Comment on Draft Reg Guide, Assuring Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors. Recommends That NRC Recommendation on Trust Agreement Wording Be Deleted or NRC Should Grandfather Existing Trusts Such as for Plants ML20248B6201989-08-0202 August 1989 Comments on Draft Reg Guide, Assuring Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors. NRC Should Permit Use of Potential Tax Refund as Source of Decommissioning Funds ELV-00674, Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. 10CFR72.6(c) Should Be Revised to Provide for Storage W/O ISFSI Requirement1989-07-0707 July 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. 10CFR72.6(c) Should Be Revised to Provide for Storage W/O ISFSI Requirement ML20246K4801989-07-0505 July 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components ELV-00679, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Agrees W/Numarc Comments Provided to NRC on 8906261989-07-0505 July 1989 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Agrees W/Numarc Comments Provided to NRC on 890626 ML20246D8811989-06-30030 June 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components ML20245D2481989-06-16016 June 1989 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. NRC Must Consider Provision in Rule to Permit Indiscriminate Storage of Spent Fuel at Reactors ML20246Q2971989-05-15015 May 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20245J0191989-04-14014 April 1989 Comment Re Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20244B3241989-04-10010 April 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20247A2971989-04-0404 April 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20246M2771989-03-20020 March 1989 Decision.* Affirms Board Decision LBP-89-05 Granting CP & OL to Licensee.Certificate of Svc Encl.Served on 890321 ML20246N9471989-03-0808 March 1989 Comment on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9 Re Selection Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants B13113, Comment on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units.... Util Recommends Rule Be Revised to Incorporate Addl Flexibility in Considering Age of Diesel1989-03-0808 March 1989 Comment on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units.... Util Recommends Rule Be Revised to Incorporate Addl Flexibility in Considering Age of Diesel ML20236B4641989-03-0808 March 1989 Comments on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants. Reg Guide Does Not Provide Flexibility JPN-89-008, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants1989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants B13136, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Proposed Rule on Maint Will Not Improve Maint in Plants Nor Improve Safety or Reliability of Plants.Proposed Rule Much Too Vague1989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Proposed Rule on Maint Will Not Improve Maint in Plants Nor Improve Safety or Reliability of Plants.Proposed Rule Much Too Vague ML20235V8541989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants. Util Committed to Goal of Achieving Improved Reliability & Safety Through Better Maint ML20235T3581989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Util Endorses Comments Filed by NUMARC & Nuclear Util Backfitting & Reform Group.Rule Fails to Provide Basis for Determining Effective Maint Program ML20235T1861989-02-24024 February 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants, Extension of NRC Authority to BOP Portion of Plant & Misapplication of Adequate Protection Std of Backfit Rule ML20235T7391989-02-23023 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors at Nuclear Power Plants ML20235N8531989-02-14014 February 1989 Comment Supporting Chapter 1 Re Policy Statement on Exemptions Below Regulatory Concern.Policy Development for Criteria for Release of Radioactive Matl Needed for Development of Consistent Waste Mgt Practices ML20235L5921989-02-0606 February 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule on Chapter 1 Re Proposed Policy Statement Exemptions from Regulatory Control.Extreme Care Will Be Needed in Establishing State Role Both in Developing Rule & in Subsequent Implementation ML20247R4091988-12-31031 December 1988 Transcript of Commission 881221 Press Conference in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-31 ML20196A5991988-12-0101 December 1988 Transcript of 881201 Hearing in Bethesda,Md.Pp 143-152 ML20196F5831988-12-0101 December 1988 Memorandum Memoralizing 881129 Telcon.* Applicant & NRC Agreed to Submit Joint Proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law.Served on 881202 ML20196F5981988-12-0101 December 1988 Notice of Hearing.* Notifies That Hearing to Be Held in CP Application Proceedings on 881221 Cancelled & Rescheduled to Commence on 890104.Served on 881202 ML20206M9181988-11-22022 November 1988 Memorandum Memorializing Telcon of 881121.* Discusses Board 881121 Telcon W/Counsel for Parties Re Prehearing & Scheduling Matters.Served on 881123 ML20206J3701988-11-21021 November 1988 Transcript of 881121 Telcon in Bethesda,Md Re Alchemie. Pp 70-100 ML20206M5321988-11-21021 November 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re fitness-for-duty Program ML20195H0331988-11-21021 November 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program Which Includes Random Drug Testing.Util Strongly Favors 180- Day Period for Implementation of Rule & 360-day Implementation Period for Random Drug Testing JPN-88-063, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program.Util Has Constitutional Concerns Re Proposed Random Testing Which Should Be Fully Addressed Prior to Rule Being Promulgated.Endorses NUMARC & EEI Comments1988-11-18018 November 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program.Util Has Constitutional Concerns Re Proposed Random Testing Which Should Be Fully Addressed Prior to Rule Being Promulgated.Endorses NUMARC & EEI Comments ML20195H0111988-11-18018 November 1988 Comment Supporting NUMARC Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re NRC Fitness for Duty Program Which Includes Random Drug Testing ML20206C6131988-11-14014 November 1988 Withdrawal of Request of State of Tn to Participate as Interested State,Per 10CFR2.715(c).* Certificate of Svc Encl ML20206C6321988-11-14014 November 1988 Withdrawal of Request of State of Tn to Participate as Interested State,Per 10CFR2.715(c).* Certificate of Svc Encl ML20206C3271988-11-10010 November 1988 Memorandum Memorializing Telcon of 881109.* Licensee Request to DOE to Extend Deadline for Receipt of CPs Until 890131 Not Officially Passed Upon.Further Prehearing Telcon Scheduled for 881121.Served on 881114 ML20206C0851988-11-0909 November 1988 Transcript of ASLB 881109 Telcon in Bethesda,Md.Pp 44-69 ML20205R7111988-11-0404 November 1988 NRC Staff Testimony of Jj Swift Addressing ASLB Inquiries Dtd 881018.* Supporting Info Encl.Related Correspondence ML20206C1081988-11-0404 November 1988 Requests for Renewal or Extension of Exemption from 10CFR50.54(w)(i) Re Property Insurance Regulations ML20205N2711988-11-0101 November 1988 Memorandum Memorializing Telcon of 881031.* Board Approved Prehearing Telcon on 881109 to Discuss Future Scheduling & Agreed to Start Hearing Prior to 881120 to Accomodate Alchemie.Served on 881102 ML20205Q1501988-10-28028 October 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re NUREG-1317, Regulatory Options for Nuclear Plant License Renewal. Safety Sys Functional Insps & Configuration Mgt Programs Support Renewal Basis as Opposed to Relicensing Process ML20205Q2061988-10-28028 October 1988 Comment Opposing Petition for Rulemaking PRM 50-52 Re Exemption of Financial Qualifications of Applicants from Review of OL Applications.Petition Presents No Compelling Reason to Amend Current Rules ML20205Q6661988-10-27027 October 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re NUREG-1317, Regulatory Options for Nuclear Plant License Renewal. Endorses NUMARC Nuplex Working Group Comments,Including Use of Licensing Basis at Facility When Renewal Application Submitted ML20205P9691988-10-26026 October 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re NUREG-1317, Regulatory Options for Nuclear License Renewal. Supports Contents of NUREG-1317 & Endorses NUMARC Comments on Rulemaking & Position Paper by NUMARC Nuplex Working Group 1990-02-07
[Table view] |
Text
g wum UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION hou BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD k In the Matter of kf[f n WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM, ) Docket No. 50-460 CPA
. )
43
_e t . _a_l_.
)
(WPPSS Nuclear Project No. 'l) )
COALITION FOR SAFE POWER AMENDED CONT _ENTION NO. 2 - FEB 11, 1983 Pursuant to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Order of January 26, 1983 Petitioner Coalition for Safe Power hereby submits its amended contention No. 2. TR at 69.
CFSP 2 Petitioner contends that the Permitee's decision in April 1982 to
" defer" co nstruction for two to five years, and the subsequent cessation of construction at WNP-1, was dilatory. Such action was without " good cause" as required by 10 CFR 50.55(b). Moreover, the modified request for extension of completion date to 1991 does not constitute a " reasonable period of time" provided for in 10 CFR 50.55(b).
On April 29, 1982, the Board of Directors of the Washington Public .
Power Supply System voted to suspend construction of WNP-1,for a two
\ .
to five year period. This decision was made upon reviewing the recommen-dations of the Bonneville Power Adminstration (BPA), rev'iewing alternative proposals and taking public coment. Letter to H. Denton., Director-of NRR, NRC from G.D. Bouchey, WPPSS, April 30, 1982. Eight and one half months later, following receipt of Petitioner's contention 2 in this case, Permittee notified the NRC that it was modifying its ,
jh request from a completion date of 1986 to 1991. Letter to H. Denton, fn Director NRR, NRC from G.D. Bouchey, WPPSS, January 11, 1983. This ncy S action (along with its requisite paperwork) was taken with the full D intention of delaying completion of the plant and thus was " dilatory" W within the definition provided by Black's Law Dictionary, o2E Such actions also were without " good cause" as required by Section 50.55(b). Permittee has not specified exactly what it believes constitutes
2- -
its basis for " good cause". In its Letter, supra of April 1983. WPPS$
states:
. Because BPA support is essential to the financing of cil three Surnly System projects, the Board (of Directors) voted to acc'ept the BPA reconnendations [to halt construction).
The January,1983 Letter, supra merely states that BPA had recommended suspension of construction of WNP-1 from two to five years and it was in view of that recommendation that the WPPSS Board voted to suspend construction. At the Prehearing Conference on January 26, 1983, Permittee's Counsel stated that the reason was lack of need for power from WNP-
) 1. TR at 60. Counsel also stated that BPA has the authority to disapprove i
any further financing of WNP-1 construction. TR at 70 BPA is not a part of WPPSS management, as was pointed out by Permit-
, tee's Counsel.' TR at 77. ll wither does BPA have the authority to control WPPSS finances. The Intial Decision of the licensing board for WNP-1 (Construction Permit), LBP-75-72, 2 NRC 922 at 926 states:
Permanent financing is effected by the issuance of tax
- exempt long term debt securities. WPPSS debt securities i
are of the revenue note (short term) and revenue bond (long
! term) variety. State of Washington law provides that WPPSS may issue revenue bonds or warrants payable from the revenues of the Utility properties operated by it. ,
The Initial Decision does not include a finding that 8PA need approve or can disapprove any financing for WNP-1. Furthermore, Permittee has never stated in its submittals to the ERC that BPA could or might disapprove financing for the plant. The vague, conclusionary and unsubstan-4 tlated statement that BPA support is essential to the financing of the WPPSS projects, as quoted above, is all Permittee offers. While this may be Permittee's suggestion of what constitutes " good cause" for its actions, it is neither clear that it is nor is it supported by fact. -
Need for power was offered as a reason for " good cause" by Permittee's I a
e- .,
e Counsel at the Prehearing conference. TR at 60. Nowhere else, including the SPA's Report " Analysis of Resource Alternatives" dated April 19,
'1982, has this arguement been advanced. IN fact WPP55 asserts the s
need for power from the plant does exist. See Letter, supra of April, "1982 . The Pacific Northwest Utiliti.es Conference (PNUCC), in its " Northwest Regional Forecast of Power Loads and Resources. July 1982-June 1983" issued in May, 1982 and relied upon by Permittee and other Northwest ,
utilities (See n Skagit/Hanford Environmental Report) shows that WNP-1 will be needed prior to the dates of completion. Forecast, Table 1.1 and Figure 1-2. Furthmore, the SPA Report, supra at 3 states:
A number of utility executives and experts believe it is prudent utility practice to plan resources to meet loads in the high portion of the forecasting range. Under these circumstances, and using the high range recomended, all three not billed projects could prove to be needed on schedule.
Section 50.55(b) of Title Ten, Code of Federal Regulations states explicitly that a completion date can be extended by the Comission "for a reasonable period of time." Construction of the plant is little over half completed. By 1981. Permittee had already projected the -
need for another 65 months over an original expected construction schedule of 60 months. WPP55 Inquiry at 20. Now Permittee wishes to add another _
two to five years resulting in a delay (over the expected completion data) of seven to ten years, and a delay (past the Construction Permit expiration date) of six to nine years. This latter calculation is
. in the range of double the outside anticipated construction period. ,
Six to nine years cannot have been contemplated as a " reasonable period of time" by the writers of 10 CFR 50.55(b). ,
Furthermore, there is ample reason to believe that the dates for
/ constructi A
completion as they stand presently will not be adequate,
- retttioner does not subscribe to either the BPA or PNUCC forecasts and does not believe the power from WNP-1 will ever be needed.
4 necessitating further unreasonable extentions. At the time of con
? struction halt at WNP-1, work had progresscJ at approximately 9)% per year. If, construction is halted for the full five years contemplated, four years will remain to complete the remaining 40% of the plant. ,
This will not be sufficient taking into consideration Permittee's history.
Moreover, the WPPSS Inquiry (at 19-23) addressed the ability of WPPSS to meet schedule deadlines:
4 The rate of delay in plant completion is accel'eratir.g...
AstudypreparedbyWPP$5'indicatesthereislittlemore than remote likelihood that the officially adopted schedulei can, in fact, be met.
Schedule delays have a direct impact on the overall cost of the projects....These extentions expose construction costs to the impact of increasing inflation.
The low probabilities of achieving the schedules, as established by the risk analysis, were not discussed by the Board (of
. Directors) when the schedules were adopted.
The Comittee was unable to find evidence that the officially adopted completion dates for the plants are used by WPSS management to monitor or control the progress of work at the plant sites. ,
Moreover, Permittee has committed to the NRC Staff that:
the final design of WNP-1 will satisfy the requirements of any future regulations promulgated between the date I
. of docketing and the resumption of construction of WNP-I from which WNP-1 wot.la otherwise be grandf athered by virtue of its date of docketing. A Supply System letter dated June 11, 1982 makes that comittment...
1 Letter to R. Ferguson, WPPSS from D.G. Eisenhut -NRR, NRC, July 16, 1982. Clearly with the committment refered to above, four years (over ,
and above the time for construction halt) is not sufficient time in which to build the plant. The time requested for the extention is not reasonable, nor is it adequate, and further requests for extensions would be even more reasonable. -
Thus, there exists no record to show that Permittee's actions to suspend the construction are "beyond the control of the permit holder"
1 i
as required for a finding of " good cause" under 50.55(b) or that the time requested is reasonable. Such actions as were taken by the Permittee were intentional and therefore " dilatory".
Respectfully submitteu, Dated this day the lith of February, 1983 C - 3,</ _
Mina Bell. CF5P 9 I e
e e
a q b e
1 x . _ - - _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ _ - - - _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - __ .. _ .
l 'e a e c .
- UNITED STATES OF. AMERCIA NUCLEAR REGULAT01Y CO PISSION I
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )
) Docket No. 50-397CP WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM ) 50-460CP (WNP-l&2) ) -
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVIC E
.e.
I hereby certify that copies of " COALITION FOR SAFE POWER AMENDED CONTENTION NO. 2 - FEB. 11, 1983" in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class, postage prepaid, on this lith day of Februarf, 1983:
P Herbert GRossman, Chairman # Nicholas S. Reynolds ASLB Debevoise & Lieberman USNBC 1200 Seventeenth St, N.W.
Washin6 ton, D.C. 20555 ,
Suite 700 Washington, D.C. 20036 '
Glen 0, Bright Administrative Judge ASLAB Panel ASLB USNRC USNRC Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, d,c. 20555 State of Washington Dr. Jerry Harbour Energy Facility Site $ valuation Administrative Judge Couno 11 ASLB Mail Stop PY-11 -
USNRC Olympis, Wa, 98504 Washington, D.C. 20555 Decketing and Service Section -
William D. Paton, Esq.
OS N'iC Washington, D.C. 20555 Offi
Legal Director .
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Gerald C. Sorensen Commission
' Manager, Licens ing Frogram Washington, D.C. 20555 WPPSS 300 George Washington Way Richland, Wa, 99352
, p?
- M ina Bell -
Intervenor for CFSP l
.____._.__.__..._...__.___._._.u
S .2./. - P 3
~
l w & P-1 JW 4 4 L 9yJ 43 Aa& /r- /
P M P I ar.ay n,e.
Wi~-ni,G A7/4 ,>>o fg X A'It*/
~ *%-
- f~ . 77' cw-~ u awsxeis acf.'ta c ep}sf y& .2&Xf+ < A. J>L F A (
l c-l UNITED STATES
/* *g' S ,
[ <.
f NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20665 i , ,, j OFFECE OF STATE PROGRAMS R3
\ &f D<atc2LJ - m J1-
'2- All. LLnk w%'P-J.
Mi 7
, _ . . . _ . . _ . _ _ . , _ - . . .