ML031960359
| ML031960359 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 07/10/2003 |
| From: | Snook R State of CT, Office of the Attorney General |
| To: | NRC/FSME, US Federal Judiciary, Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit |
| References | |
| 03-4313 | |
| Download: ML031960359 (6) | |
Text
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE S.ECOND CIRCUIT Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse at Foley Square 40 Cesitte Street, New Yotk, NY 10007 Ttlephone: 212-857-8SOQ MOTION INFORMATION STATEMENT Caption ruse sitort ItitH Docket Number(s): 03-4313 Riverkeeper, Inc.
Motion for: leeue to Attat+/- azubmta]. Ibteials to Brief V.
of khnusaE Oia Set forth below precise, complete statement of relief sought: Samuel J. Collins, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, et al.
Amicus Curiae is seeking permission to include two public documents in the appendix to its brief.
Attorne General MOVING PARTY: RiChargBlfulenthal OPPOSING PARTY:
O Plaintiff 0 Defendant X Amicus Curiae a AppellantlPetitioner O Appellee/Respondent MOVING ATTORNEY: PK: rt amo*, AG OPPOSING ATTORNEY [Namel:
[name of attorney, with firm, address, phone number and e-mail] fnamc or attorney, with firm, address, phone number and e-mail ThPtt 2%xydc. kvdiAftw Atfr=rrvyc lw~
fif~fi me~ f 4tv Attmi.ny Qc.vwn __' -88 RWrtfnrd, CT' 09M106 R1d.stat~ect.us O10IGJ(Agency appealed from: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Please check appropriate boxes: FOR EMERGENCY MOTIONS, MOTIONS FOR STAYS AND INJUNCTIONS PENDING APPEAL:
Has consent of opposing counsel: Has requesi for relief been made below? 0 Yes O No A. been sought? D Yes R 'No B. been obtained? O Yes R No Has ihis rclierbecn previously sought in this Court? D Yes ° No Is oral argument requested? 0 Yes Y No (requcsts for oral argument will not necessarily be granted) Requested return date and explanation of emergency:
H5s argument datc of appeal bcen set? O Ycs 1 No If yes, enter datc _
Sig lton^ < _rty Date: _ _ ____ Has service been effected? 0 Yes D No jAttach proororservicei ORDER~
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the motion is GRANTED DENIED.
FOR THE COURT:
ROSEANN B. MacKECHNIE, Clerk of Court Date: By:
Forn) T-IO80 (Revised 10/31/02).
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT RIVERKEEPER, INC. NO. 03-4313 V.
SAMUEL J. COLLINS, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION, ET AL., July 10, 2003 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO ATTACH SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS TO BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 26(a), amicus curiae, Richard Blumenthal, Attorney General of the State of Connecticut, files this motion seeking leave to attach supplemental materials to his brief in the above-captioned matter.
Background
The amicus curiae brings this motion in his capacity as the chief legal officer representing the legal interests of the State of Connecticut and its residents. The underlying appeal involves a challenge to the emergency planning and response procedures at the Indian Point Energy Center, a nuclear power station in Buchanan, New York. Pursuant to federal law and regulation, these emergency planning procedures affect both an immediate 10-mile radius planning zone around the facility and a further separate 50-mile radius ingestion pathway zone. The 50-mile radius zone includes substantial portions of the State of Connecticut, including its largest city, Bridgeport, and its most populous county, Fairfield. Furthermore, the movement of evacuees from the more limited I 0-mile zone would also directly impact the transportation network in and around southwestern Connecticut.
Therefore, because the Indian Point emergency plans affect significant portions of the State of Connecticut, including Fairfield County, the Attorney General, individually, and in his
capacity as chief legal officer of the state, has filed a brief as amnicus curiae in order to inform the Court of the position of the State in this matter.
The Supplemental Material Will he of Assistance to the Court The amicus curiae seeks leave to include two reports, both publicly available, in the appendix to its brief. The first is a report prepared by the United States Central Intelligence Agency on terrorist issues. This report is available at the CIA's website and has been commented on in published news reports. The second is a study prepared by Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government regarding an analysis of hurricane evacuation experiences from the State ofFlorida. It also has been the subject of published news reports.
Both of the documents are independent reports that would be appropriately subject to administrative or judicial notice, particularly in an agency proceeding of this type. In addition, the documents are neither immaterial nor unreliable as described in 10 C.F.R. § 2.743 (c) of the regulations of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
With regard to relevancy, it is self-evident that a CIA report concerning potential terrorist threats to nuclear power facilities is germane to the concerns of the State of Connecticut regarding the sufficiency of an emergency planning zone that embraces an area containing approximately one-third of Connecticut's residents. Similarly, a report detailing the experiences of the State of Florida with mass evacuations could be helpful in understanding the issues raised by the State of Connecticut to mass evacuations relating to a nuclear incident at Indian Point.
Consequently, both of the reports are material to the issues raised by the amicus curiae, are publicly available and have been the subject of active consideration in the public media.
2
Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, the Attorney General seeks leave to attach the two aforementioned reports to his brief as amicus curiae in this case.
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL ApORN'Y QENERAL /
BY: _ :.
Robert D. Snook Th Assistant Attorney General Federal Bar No. ct1O897 55 Elm Street P.O. Box 120 Hartford, CT 06141-0120 Tel: (860) 808-5020 Fax: (860) 808-5347 Robert.Snooklpo.state.ct.us 3
Certificate of Service Pursuant to Rule 25(d)(2) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, I hereby certify that on this 10th day of July, 2003, the original and 9 copies of the foregoing were filed in accordance with Rule 25(a)(2)(B(ii) to Roseann B. MacKechnie, Clerk, Second Circuit Court of Appeals, 40 Foley Square, New York, New York 10007.
I further certify that seven copies of the foregoing were delivered to the following counsel of record:
Karl Coplan Pace Enviornnental Litigation Clinic, Inc.
78 N. Broadway White Plain, NY 10603 Tel: (914) 422-4143 William A. Isaacson Boics, Schiller & Flexner 5301 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20015 Tel: (202) 237-2727 John Fulton, Esq.
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains, NY 10601 Jay E. Silberg Matia F. Travieso-Diaz Paul A. Gaukler Shaw Pittman, LLP 2300 N Street, NW Washington, DC 20037 Tel: (202)663-8000 J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.
Katheryn M. Sutton, Esq.
Brooke D. Poole, Esq.
L. Michael Rafky, Esq.
Winston & Strawn 1400 L Street, NW Washington, DC 20005-3502 Tel: (202) 371-5700 4
Sara E. Brock, Esq.
Catherine L Marco, Esq.
Office of the General Counsel Mail Stop 15 D21 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 John Ashcroft United States Attorney General United States Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530-0001 Tel: (202) 353-1555 Robert D. Snook Assistant Attorney General 5