Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 03-16-1999 - 9i%/~oL I~ ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: March 16, 1999 Action Agenda , Item # ~L SUBJECT: Allocating additional funding for Shearon Harris permit intervention activities and related public information activities DEPARTMENT: County Manager PUBLIC HEARING: Yes No ATTACHMENT(S): County Engineer's 3/3/99 memorandum County Engineer's 3/16/99 memorandum BUDGET AMENDMENT: Yes No INFORMATION CONTACT: County Engineer Extension 2303 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 967-9251/968-4501 PURPOSE: To provide information to the BOCC about the need to allocate additional funding. to cover the costs of the consulting and legal fees and expenses associated with the County's formal intervention into the permitting of Shearon Harris spent nuclear fuel storage expansion and related County-sponsored public information activities and to recommend that the BOCC allocate the necessary funds. BACKGROUND: To date, the BOCC has allocated $19,500 to pay the consulting and legal fees and expenses related to the County's efforts to formally intervene in the permitting process for CP&L's proposal to increase Shearon Harris' storage capacity for spent nuclear fuel. An additional $12,000 to support the County's effort has been promised (but not yet actually provided) by Durham County ($5000) and the Towns of Carrboro ($2000) and Chapel Hill ($5000). Thus the funds allocated to the intervention effort to this point total $31,500. Approximately $25,000 in consulting and legal fees and expenses have been either incurred, expended or committed (+/- $16,000 to Gordon Thompson and +/- $9,000 to Diane Curran) for: 1) developing and filing the intervention petition and challenge to the NRC staff's proposed fmding of "no significant additional hazards"; 2) developing the legal documentation for the pre-hearing conference; 3) Dr. Thompson's affidavit challenging the proposed finding of "no significant additional hazards"; 4) Dr. Thompson's presentation to the BOCC during its deliberation on intervention; 5) Dr. Thompson's formal report on the hazards and alternatives to CP&L's spent fuel storage expansion proposal; and 6) related travel, lodging, phone, etc., expenses. It is estimated that, to get through the pre-hearing conference (which is the next or upcoming step in the intervention process), the County will incur approximately $6000 in additional consulting fees and expenses related to Dr. Thompson's assistance in preparing contentions and providing expert testimony. The estimated total cost for the intervention effort, through the pre- hearing conference, is $31,000. It has also been suggested that the County host a public information meeting on Apri17`~ at the Chapel Hill Town Council meeting room. This meeting, which would be video taped for cable broadcast, would feature Dr. Thompson making a public presentation of his report and with additional comment and information presented by David Lochbaum, a prominent nuclear safety engineer with the Union of Concern Scientists. It is estimated that the County would incur another $4000 in fees to Dr. Thompson (David Lockbaum would reportedly appeaz on a pro bono basis) and travel and lodging expenses for Thompson and Lockbaum. If the BOCC determines that County will proceed through at least the pre- conference hearing and will hold a public information meeting, the total cost will be approximately $35,000. The BOCC will have to allocate at least an additional $3500 to have a public information meeting and to complete the pre-hearing process. It is at this point where the NRC makes its determination that: a) the County does or does not have standing; b) does or does not have valid contentions; and c) a public hearing will or will not be held. The BOCC will then have to determine if it wishes to proceed with the public. hearing process, appeal the NRC decision or drop the entire issue The cost of proceeding with the intervention through the hearing process is estimated to be an additional $51,000 in consulting and legal fees and expenses. The total of all costs through the NRC's public hearing process and including the April 7`~ public meeting is estimated to be approximately $86,000. RECOMMENDATION: The administration recommends that the BOCC agree to hold a public information meeting and agree to allocate an additional $5000 ($3500 to cover actual projected costs with an additional $1500 for contingencies) to the intervention and public information process. MEMORANDUM TO: County Commissioners COPIES: John Link, County Manager Geoff Gledhill, County Attorney David Stanch, Director, OCERCD FROM: Paul Thames, PE, County Engineer DATE: March 16, 1999 SUBJECT: Public meeting to present Gordon Thompson report and other Shearon Harris issues It has been suggested that Orange County hold a public information meeting on Apri17~', specifically for the purposes of having a public presentation of the Thompson report and to make public other issues related to the permitting of expanded waste fuel storage capacity at Shearon Harris. It has been proposed that this meeting have expert presentations by Dr. Thompson and by David Lochbaum, a nucleaz safety engineer with the Union of Concerned Scientists. The Chapel Hill Town Council meeting room and facilities would be available for the meeting and for video taping the meeting for cable broadcast. It is assumed that elected officials from other local jurisdictions would be formally invited to attend and participate. As of this date, approximately $25,000 in consultant and legal fees and related expenses have been either incurred, expended or committed for the Sheazon Harris permitting intervention process. It is estimated that the County will incur another $6000 (estimated) in consulting fees and expenses for Gordon Thompson's work with Diane Curran to prepaze the contentions and related expert testimony which will be presented at the pre-hearing conference. This total expenditure of $31,000 (estimated) should be sufficient to carry the County through the pre-hearing conference phase of the intervention process. It is probable that the proposed Apri17"' meeting will involve the expenditure of an additional $4000 in consulting fees, travel expenses, etc. It is assumed that current funds allocated to the intervention process total $31,500 ($19,500 from Orange County, $5000 from Durham County, $5000 from Chapel Hill and $2000 from Carrboro), although no funds other than those allocated by Orange County aze actually in hand. The BOCC will have to allocate additional funds (approximately $3500) to pay for the expenses that would be incurred through the pre-hearing conference with the inclusion of the additional costs associated with a public information meeting. If I may provide additional information, please advise. MEMORANDUM TO: County Commissioners John Link, County Manager FROM: Paul Thames, PE, County Engineer DATE: Mazch 3, 1999 SUBJECT: Update on Sheazon Harris issues Attached, please fmd the following materials: • The Gordon Thompson report entitled "Risks and Alternative Options Associated with Spent Fuel Storage at the Shearon Harris Nucleaz Power Plant • The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) 2/24/99 order establishing a licensing board and scheduling apre-hearing conference • CP&L's 3/1/99 formal reply to Orange County's petition to intervene • A detailed breakdown of legal and consulting costs for the NRC intervention, hearing and appeals process As of Wednesday, February 24th, the NRC has issued an order establishing a Licensing Board and setting apre-hearing conference, tentatively scheduled for May 10`~ at the NRC's Rockville, Maryland office. The Licensing Boazd will hear presentations/arguments from the attorneys of both the County and CP&L on the County's contentions and standing. The purpose of this conference is to determine if the public hearing process will proceed. The County's legal consultant, Diane Curran, suggests -that we petition the NRC to relocate the hearing to a facility in this area. County staff are in the process of finding several alternative meeting locations (as per Ms. Curran's suggestion) that can handle such a hearing during normal business hours. Ms. Curran will submit the petition to have the pre-hearing conference located in or near Orange County, if that is the Board's pleasure, this week. Having the hearing in or neaz Orange County does incur additional transportation and lodging expense for Ms. Curran. As of Monday, March 1, CP&L has filed its formal response to Orange County's petition to intervene. It appeazs that CP&L has again chosen not to participate willingly in an open public heazing process as it has requested that the NRC deny Orange County's request for public hearings. Specifically, CP&L and its attorneys have requested that the NRC find that Orange County lacks the standing to intervene in the permitting process because: a) the contentions developed by the County's consultant aze not sufficiently specific or have already been deemed insignificant by the NRC in similar cases and thus not admissible; and b) neither Orange County nor those citizens it represents have been shown to have suffered any injury as a result of the proposed fuel storage activities, nor will they suffer any such injury. A copy of CP&L's response is attached. The Gordon Thompson report arrived in County offices late this afternoon. It has not been reviewed or analyzed by staff at this time. The County now has estimates furnished by Diane Curran and Gordon Thompson as to the probable or potential costs for their services and expenses relative to various stages of pursuing the Shearon Harris permit through the NRC and judicial process. A general synopsis of the cost breakdown is as follows: • to date, approximately $25,500 has been expended or committed to the portion of the process involving the initial challenge to the proposed "finding of no significant hazard" and intervention pre-hearing conference process • the additional cost, in terms of consultant fees, travel and lodging, for having Gordon Thompson come to Orange County to present his report will be approximately $3000, for a total cost of $28,500; • the cost of proceeding through the entire NRC hearing process will approximately $55,500 for a total of cost of $84,000 • the cost of appealing license and "no significant hazards" rulings all the way through the US Court of Appeals will be approximately $26,500 for a grand total cost of $110,500. Please be advised that these cost estimates are somewhat "soft", in that they are based on an average cost for an average permitting process. If CP&L so desires, it can extend the length of the process, and thus the cost, by means of initiating extensive discovery, motion, deposition and testimony phases of the hearing process. If I may provide any additional information or clarification, please advise. .' Stea or Process Diane Curran Gordon Thomason 1. Petition to intervene a. Request for hearing, petition $ 2500* N/A b. Contentions, pre-hearing conference $ 3500* $ 4500 c. Travel, lodging, miscellaneous $ 2000* $ 1500* d. Intervention presentation to BOCC N/A $ 1000* e. Consultant's report N/A $ 12,000* f. Presentation of report to BOCC N/A $ 2000 ~. Travel, lodeine etc for report presentation N/A $ 1000 Subtotal-committed $ 8000* $14,500* Subtotal-all $ 8000 $ 22,000 2. "No significant hazard" challange a. preparation of filing documentation $ 1500* N/A b. consultant's affidavit N/A $ 1500* Subtotal-committed $ 1500* $ 1500* Subtotal-all $ 1500 $ 1500 3. NRC Hearing Process a. Discovery $ 4500 $ 4000 b. Motions $ 1500 N/A c. Prepare testimony & briefs $ 6000 $ 13,000 d. Prepare proposed findings $ 3000 N/A e. Travel, lodging, miscellaneous $ 7000 $ 2000 f. Deposition fees $ 5000 N/A ~. Miscellaneous consultine fees N/A $ 5000 Subtotal-committed N/A N/A Subtotal-all $ 27,000 $ 24,000 4. Appeal of license decision a. AppeaUstay motion to NRC Commissioners $ 6000 N/A b. AppeaUstay motion to US Court of Appeals $ 6000 N/A c. Travel, lodein~, miscellaneous $ 2000 N/A Subtotal-committed N/A N/A Subtotal-all $14,000 N/A 5. "No significant hazards" appeal a. Appeal to NRC Commissioners $ 3000 N/A b. AppeaUstay motion to US Court of Appeals $ 7500 N/A c. Travel, lod~in~, miscellaneous $ 2000 N/A Subtotal-committed N/A N/A Subtotal-all $12,500 N/A Total-Committed $ 9500* $16,000 Total-All $ 68,000 $ 47,500