NRC: CLI-05-18 - Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. - Docket Numbers 50-336-LR and 50-423-LR

				Search Options
Index \| Site Map \| FAQ \| Facility Info \| Reading Rm \| New \| Help \| Glossary \| Contact Us

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

DOCKETED 08/04/05

SERVED 08/04/05

COMMISSIONERS

Nils J. Diaz, Chairman
Jeffrey S. Merrifield
Gregory B. Jaczko
Peter B. Lyons

_________________________________________

In the Matter of

DOMINION NUCLEAR CONNECTICUT, INC.

(Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3)
_________________________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Docket Nos.

50-336-LR & 50-423-LR

CLI-05-18

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

On July 20, 2005, the Licensing Board in this case issued a Memorandum and Order. LBP-05-16, 62 NRC ___. The Board order concluded that Suffolk County's tardiness in submitting its petition to intervene was excusable under the late-filing standards of 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(c). Additionally, the Board found no basis to exclude the County from participation under the contention requirements of 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f). The Board also certified to the Commission the question whether to grant Suffolk County's request for an exemption from (or waiver of) 10 C.F.R. § 50.47(a)(1) (which provides that emergency planning issues are not germane to license renewal determinations). Today we grant review of that certified question. In doing so, we follow our “customary practice” of accepting Board-certified questions.¹

We also intend to consider, sua sponte, three other questions -- (1) whether Suffolk County's late-filed contention was admissible under the criteria for considering late-filed pleadings and contentions set out in 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(c); (2) whether Suffolk County's contention regarding “emergency planning” satisfied the contention requirements in 10 C.F.R. § 2.309(f); and (3) whether, under the circumstances of this case, the Board properly postponed its contention-admissibility decision pending settlement talks.

We solicit the views of the adjudication's participants on these three questions, plus the certified question. To this end, we establish the following filing schedule. No later than August 18, 2005, the Staff, licensee and petitioner may file initial briefs, each of which may not exceed 25 pages, exclusive of the tables of contents and authorities (both of which we require). No later than August 25, 2005, the Staff, licensee and petitioner may file response briefs, each of which may not exceed 10 pages and need not include tables of contents and authorities. Each participant should ensure that we receive each of its briefs no later than 4:15 p.m. on the due date.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

For the Commission²

/RA/

________________________

Annette L. Vietti-Cook
Secretary of the Commission

Dated at Rockville, Maryland,
this 4^th day of August, 2005.

¹ See, e.g., Exelon Generation Co. (Early Site Permit for Clinton ESP Site), CLI-05-9, 61 NRC 235, 236 (2005); Duke Energy Corp. (Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2), CLI-04-11, 59 NRC 203, 209 (2004); Private Fuel Storage, L.L.C. (ISFSI), CLI-01-12, 53 NRC 459, 461 (2001).

² Chairman Diaz was not present when this item was affirmed. Accordingly the formal vote of the Commission was 3-0 in favor of the decision. Chairman Diaz, however, had previously voted to approve this Memorandum and Order and had he been present he would have affirmed his prior vote.