ML17138A875
| ML17138A875 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem, Susquehanna, Crane  |
| Issue date: | 09/19/1979 |
| From: | Cutchin J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16341B218 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7910240689 | |
| Download: ML17138A875 (5) | |
Text
9/19/79 UNITED STATES OF AMENTI CA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
~U Ol PENNSYLVANIA POWER AND LIGHT CO.
ALLEGHENY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.
(Susquehanna Steam Electric Station,
)
Units 1
and 2)
)
Docket Nos.
50-387 50-388 NRC STAFF'S ANSWER TO SUSQUEHANNA ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES'ETITION FOR MODIFICATION OF SPECIAL PREHEARING CONFERENCE ORDER On September 4, 1979, Staff Counsel received a copy of Susquehanna Environmental Advocates'SEA)
"Petition for'.Modification of Special Prehearing Conference Order."~
Therein,SEA petitions the Board to modify its Special Prehearing Conference Order to admi t a cor.tention allowing litigation in the Susquehanna proceeding of the consequences. of a Class 9 accident and its effect on the cost-benefit analysis for the facility.
SEA cites the occurrence of a Class 9 accident at Three Mile Island as the basis for its request.
Although the Staff has concluded that the occurrence at Three Mile Island was a Class 9 accident, it believes that both the Staff and this Board are bound 2/
/
JThe petition was not filed with the Secretary as required by 10 CFR 2.701 and the copy received by Staff Counsel was not accompanie'd'by a copy of a proof of service.
See the attached copy of "NRC Staff Response to Board Question No.
4 Regarding the Occurrence of a Class 9 Accident at Three Mile'Island" in the matter of Public Service Electric and Gas Company (Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit flo. 1) with its enclosures.
Also see the attached copies of the opposing views of'taff members Frederic D. Anderson
.and Jim Martin.
y slOS40 6 o
'v' by the Appeal Board's ruling in the Offshore Power Systems case.
There the 3/
Appeal Board ruled that the Commission has adopted a policy against evaluating the consequences of Class 9 accidents in environmental impact statements on individual license applications for land-based nuclear power plants absent a
showing of special circumstances that increase the probability of such an event
.In its'Memorandum and Order of.September 19, 1979, in the Floatinn 4/
Nuclear Power Plants case the, Commission refrained. from expressing any views on the question of environmental consideration of Class 9 accidents at land-based 5/
reactors. Thus, the Appeal Board's ruling on that question in ALAB-489 continues to be controlling.
However, the Corrmission, stating that it is concerned about that
- question, announced its intent to complete the rulemaking begun 'by proposed Annex D
to 10 CFR 50 and to re-examine Commission policy in the area. Clearly, the 6/
I Susquehanna proceeding could be affected by the outcome of rulemaking or a change
'I in Commission policy.
Since the Staff's latest estimate for the start of the hearing on safety issues is February or Yiarch 1981, time is available for the matter to be resolved before the licensing schedu'le might be impacted.
Offshore Power S stems (Floating Nuclear Plant)
ALAB-489, 8 NRC 194 (1978).
Id., at 212-214.
See also:
10 CFR 2.758.
Offshore Power Systems (Floating Nuclear Power Plants) CLI-79-, 10 NRC September Ia, 1~7~)TS'lip Opinion at 9).
1
~. r CONCLUSION For the reasons';above and because SEA has made no showing of special c'ircum-stances thht would warrant consideration of the consequences of a Class 9
acci dent i n the Susquehanna proceeding, its peti tion should be denied.7/
, Respectful ly'.submi tted, y
James M. Cutchin, IV Counsel for NRC Staff C
Dated at Bethesda, Haryland this 19th day of September, 1979 However see:
Public Service Co. of New Ham shire (Seabrook Station, 7/
Units 1
and 2), ALAB-271, 1
NRC 478 1975 and 10 CFR 2.802.
P I