Agenda - 07-31-2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Page 2 of 3 I spoke on Friday with Diane Curran, our attorney in our previous intervention re Shearon Hams safety issues. We discussed the possibility of Orange County again intervening, and what that might entail. Ms. Curran suggesting filing for a 60-day extension to comment, thereby allowing more time to gather information for an intervention. She does not offer a cost for the more extensive effort, but her letter projects a cost of between $2,500 and $3,750 to file the motion for an extension, including a $1,500 retainer. She asks for an answer today. I received this yesterday. I stressed in our conversation that, while we remain interested, we are in circumscribed financial straits. I asked that Ms. Curran outline the steps necessary for Orange County to proceed, but made no commitment. I also pointed out that we are in recess, and so might not be able to give a quick answer. If possible, please let me know if you would like to authorize the initial step outlined in Ms. Curran's attached letter. If three commissioners agree, we can take the money from the BOCC contingency. Of course we will retain the option to desist depending on the cost of filing our objections in detail. Whether the motion for delay is cost- effective absent a firm resolve to proceed is an open question. I realize this is not the optimal way to proceed, but given the timeline it seems the best option. If I don't get three ayes, I will so inform Ms. Curran. I have also copied the manager and our attorney in order that they may provide comment. Bart' — Forwarded Message — From: Diane Curran Sent: Jul 7, 2008 2:02 PM To: barryj@earthlink.net Cc: pthames @co.orange.nc.us, Gordon Thompson Subject: Proposed legal work for Orange County Dear Barry: As we discussed, I am writing to propose that Orange County hire me to prepare and submit a request to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a 60 -day extension of time to request a hearing on Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.'s application for a combined operating license for a new 2 -unit nuclear power plant on the site of Shearon Harris Unit 1. An extension of time would allow the County to evaluate whether to challenge the safety and security risks posed by Progress Energy's proposed use of high- density pool storage of spent fuel at the new reactors. This is the same issue that Orange County raised several years ago in an NRC license amendment proceeding for Shearon Harris Unit 1, when Progress Energy proposed to expand the plant's high density fuel pool storage capacity. In that case, Orange County's expert witness, Dr. Gordon Thompson, demonstrated that high- density pool storage of spent fuel poses the risk of a catastrophic fire, and therefore should be abandoned in favor of combined low- density pool storage and dry storage of spent fuel. I have consulted with Dr. Thompson, who is interested in assisting Orange County on that issue by preparing an expert report and assisting me with the preparation of a contention regarding the issue. Unfortunately, he is not available during the month of July. Therefore, we would be unable to meet the NRC's August 4 deadline for the submission of a contention. A sixty -day extension would give Dr. Thompson and me time to prepare a proposal to you for litigation of the spent fuel storage issue in the hearing. If the extension is granted, we would submit the proposal to you in time for your August 19 regularly scheduled meeting. If you approve our proposal, we would prepare a contention and expert report in time for an October 3 filing deadline. I am attaching a proposed retainer agreement for your consideration. If it is acceptable, please counter -sign it and return it to me with a retainer of $1,500. As we discussed, we should file the motion as soon as possible. Therefore I would appreciate it if you could get back to me by noon tomorrow (Tuesday). 7/22/2008