ML17138B236
| ML17138B236 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 04/24/1980 |
| From: | Cutchin J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Johnsrud J Environmental Coalition on Nuclear Power |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8004280246 | |
| Download: ML17138B236 (12) | |
Text
April 24, 1980 Dr. Judith H. Johnsrud, Co-Director Environmental Coalition on Nuclear Power 433 Orlando Avenue State College, PA 16801 I
ISTRIBUTION
-Cutchin-Moodhead Reis S.Miner O.Parr P.Leech H.Regan Shapar/Engelhardt/
Christenbury FF (2)
Reg Cen:
LPDR In the Matter of Pennsylvania Power and Light Company
'llegheny Electric Cooperative, Inc.
(Susquehanna Steam Electric Stat~i n~qfts 1 and 2)
Docket Nos. 50-387 C50-388M
Dear Dr. Johnsrud:
On October 5,
1979 I mailed you a copy of (I'1)C Translation 520, "Radiological Assessment of the Wyhl Nuclear Power Plant" by the Department of Environmental Protection of the University of Heidelberg.
I agreed to send you a copy of revised pages that wePe then being translated.
A copy of the revised document is enclosed.
The Staff expects to make its "Review of the tlyhl Report" available to the general public in the form of a NUREG document in the near future.
Sincerely.
James M. Cutchin, IV Counsel for NRC Staff
Enclosure:
As Stated, cc:
(w/o enclosure)
Charles Bechhoefer, Esq.
Mr. Glenn 0. Bright Dr. Oscar H. Paris Jay Silberg, Esq.
Mr. Thomas M. Gerusky Ms. Colleen Marsh Mrs. Irene Lemanowicz Susquehanna Environmental Advocates Bryan A. Snapp, Esq.
Mr. Robert M. Gallo Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Docketing and Service Section o
OFFICE SURNAME OATEP NRC FORM 318 t9.76) NRCM 0240 OU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICEc ]97MSF 369
II tt.
It t':
J
'I
'tg "9 t
o I
UNITED* STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMXSSXON ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
/X Q~
gS<
C Charles Bechhoefer, Chairman Dr. Oscar H. Paris Glenn O. Bright In the Matter of-PENNSYLVANIA POMER 6 LIGHT COMPANY and ALLEGHENY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.
(Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2)
Docket Nos.
50-387 50-388 ORDER SETTING PREHEARING CONFERENCE e ruary On February 4,
- 1980, the Applicants in this-" operating license proceeding filed three motions which, if granted, would result in the dismissal of Citizens Against Nuclear Dangers (CAND) from this proceeding and would limit the participation of the Environmental Coalition on Nuclear Power (ECNP) and Susquehanna Environmental Advocates (SEA) with respect to certain contentions.
Given the severity of the sanctions requested and the effect on the proceed-ing which would ensue should we grant the motions in their entir-
- ety, we desire to hear oral argument on these motions.
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that a prehearing conference will be held for this purpose, as well as to consider other matters (such as future scheduling) which may be pertinent 'to the course of this proceeding.
(Parties that wish to raise other specific matters
are requested to advise us and other parties; such advice must be received by Monday, March 17, 1980.)
All parties except Ms. Marsh are directed to appear; Ms. Marsh, as well as the Commonw'ealth of Pennsylvania, are welcome to do so if they wish.
The conference I ~
will commence at 9:30 a.m.
on March 20; 1980, in Courtroom No.
2, U.
S. Federal Building and Courthouse,.197 South Main
- Street, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18701.
Following the conclusion of the formal business of the con-
- ference, the Board will hear oral limited appearance statements r
pursuant to 10 CFR
$ 2.715(a).
The Board will give preference to those who have heretofore requested the opportunity to make such a statement but, to the extent that time is available, will hear others who are present and wish to make statements.
It is 'expected that statements will be received the afternoon of March 20.
(Fur-ther opportunity to make statements will be offered at later sessions of this proceeding.)
Those who wish to make oral statements are requested (if they have not already done so) to inform the Secretary of the Commission, ATTN:
Docketing and Service Branch, U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Dated at Bethesda,
- Maryland, Charles Bechhoef er, Phairman this 22nd day of February, 1980.
I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION L
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Charles Bechhoefer, Chairman Dr. Oscar H. Paris, Member Glenn O. Bright, Member I.
g ",0 ~
P
,I ~ ~
In the Matter of PENNSYLVANIA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY and
~ ALLEGHENY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.
(Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
Docket Nos. 50-387
)
50-388
)
)).
)'
ORDER (January',
1980)
By motion dated January 18, 1980 (received by us on January 24, 1980),
CAND asks us to admit one of its contentions
- which, I
it asserts, we have not previously dealt with. It claims that our'cryptic" Order of March',.1979 (LBP-79-6, 9 NRC 291)
(an order which occupied some 85 typewritten and 39 printed pages)
I neglected to deal with the contention CAND submitted on January 10, 1979, dealing with the health effects of low-level radiation.
I CAND must have failed either to read or to comprehend our March 6 'Order.
In that Order, we assigned the January 10 conten-tion in question the number 15 (see 9
NRC at 296; slip op. p. 5).
We had earlier discussed that contention at the prehearing con-ference (Tr. 355-56) and we. discussed it again in our Order (9
NRC at 299-301; slip op. pp. 11-16),
along-with several related
contentions submitted by various parties, including CAND.
The I
r contention was admitted as part of the following contention which encompassed the related contentions submitted by various parties and which, insofar as relevant to CAND Contention 15, x'eads as I
'I follows:
- 2. 'he residual risks of low-level radiation which will result from the release from the facility of radionuclides
+ *
- have not been,
'dequately assessed and factored into the NEPA cost-benefit balance before the plant is allowed to go 'into operation.
CAND also requests that we rule on its motion dated January 11, 1980.
Our Order of January 16, 1980 did so.
(The result of that Order was conveyed to CAND by telegram on January 16, 1980.)
CAND's"motion is dismissed as moot.
FOR THE ATOMIC, SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD I
Char es Bechhoe ex, C airman Dated at Bethesda, Maryland,'his 24th day of January, 1980.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Charles Bechhoefer, Chaixman Dr. Oscar H. Paris, Member Glenn 0. Bright, Member In.the Matter of PENNSYLVANIA POWER 6 LIGHT COMPANY and ALLEGHENY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.
(Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
)
Docket Nos.
50-387 50-388
)
)
)
)
ORDER (January
.K, 1980)
By motion dated Januaxy 11, 1980, received by us on January 15,
- 1980, CAND filed a motion for us to xeconsider our Orders of October 30, 1979 and January 4, 1980.
Those Orders had the effect of>alleviating, although still imposing, certain discovery obliga-tions upon CAND.
Upon receipt of CAND's motion, we requested the Staff counsel (Mr. Cutchin) to attempt to arrange a conference call to discuss various points raised in the motion.
This morning (Wednesday, January 16), Ml ~
Quechfn informed us that he had contacted Mr.
Thomas J. Halligan, CAND's representative, to advise CAND of the conference call and that Mr. Halligan had declined to participate in any such call but insisted upon being contacted only in writing.
In line with Mr. Halligan's request, CAND is hereby notified--
that its motion, which includes no information that we have not
already considered, is denied.
Given Mr. Halligan's refusal to participate in a discussion concerning the outstanding discovery obligations, CAND is hereby reminded that it must respond to the Applicants'nd Staff's discovery requests by Friday, January 18, 1980 (the date established in our Order of December 6, 1979).
As provided by our Order of October 30, 1979, failure to respond will result in CAND's being barred from presenting direct testimony on the contentions for which responses are required by January 18, and such failure may also be grounds for dismissing CAND from the proceeding.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
/
j'harles Bechhoefer, Chairman Dated at Bethesda,
- Maryland, this 16th day of January, 1980.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Charles Bechhoefer, Chairman Dr. Oscar H. Paris, Member Glenn 0. Bright, Member
@gp o<<~
eo 8
ps~
,geo~
'ect q
o~<",ye@
g5 o
In the Matter of PENNSYLVANIA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY and ALLEGHENY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.
(Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
Docket Nos.
50-387
)
50-388
)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DENYING CAND PETITION AND MOTIONS January Under date of December 11, 1979, Citizens Against Nuclear Dangers filed a document titled "Petition for a Government. In-1 quiry; Replies to Discovery Order; Motions on Interrogatories before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board."
In that document, CAND appears to be seeking various forms of relief concerning discovery requests outstanding against it.
Both the Applicants and NRC Staff oppose such relief.
We find the relief requested to be unwarranted and deny it in its entirety.
CAND's filing appears to reflect either lack of knowledge of our earlier orders or, a misunderstanding of the purpose of discovery, or alternatively must be considered as another
d'eliberate attempt to avoid the obligations of discovery.
Its 1/
claim of our failure to respond: to. its October 9, 1979 motion for a protective order agai'nst the Staff fails 'to take account of os Memorandum. and Order on Discovery, Motions (II), LBP-79-31, dated October 30, 1979, which took an overview of outstanding discovery. motions and explicitly d'ealt with CAND's October 9
motion (see pp., 4-5).
Me granted CAND certain relief, but re-quired that certain. discovery requests be answered.
Our order was written in broad enough terms to encompass discovery submitted by both the Applicants and Staff.
By virtue of our Order of December-6,, 19'79, the date: for. responses, to such discovery requests has been'xtended'o January.
18,
- 1980, more than 6 months after the date the responses originally,. were. d'ue.
CAND has supplied no good'reason:
i.'or a change in. this, outstanding order, or for its request.
chat its protective ord'er request be reconsidered and expand'ed to include the Applicants.,
CAND also asks us to subpoena various governmental officials who assertedly, have expert knowledge of certain of the matters at issue fn this proceed>;ng and. whom CAND wishes to respond to the outstanding d'i'scovery requests.
Such. request reflects a basic 1/
Because CAND's request for Pennsylvania's Senators to oversee this: proceeding (through the vehi'cle of the General Account-ing Office); is beyond our jurisdicti.:on.,
we treat it no further.
misunderstanding of discovery.
The Applicants and Staff wish to find out what CAND knows about each of its contentions, and they have a right to do so.
See our Memorandum and Order on Discovery Motions, dated August 24,
- 1979, pp. 5-6.
As the Supreme Court has poiqted out, in a nuclear licensing case,
- >> it is still incumbent upon intervenors who wish to participate to structure their participation so that it is meaningful, so that it alerts the agency to the intexvenors'osition and contentions.
9 3
N *3 ~C..
9 C,
435 9.9.
- 539, 553 (1978).
Discovery is one of the primary vehicles for achieving that result.
When (and if) a contention is later litigated, we will have to decide whether the evidence presented by the. various parties is adequate to enable u's to resolve the outstanding issue.
If
- not, we may in some circumstances call our'wn witnesses.
See the Staff's response to CAND's motions, at p. 3.
For that to hap-
- pen, however, we would'ave to be supplied with much more infor-9 mation than CAND has presented in order to justify that course of action with respect to any of the named officials.
In any event, that eventuality would still not relieve CAND of its obligation 2/
to inform the parties of the bases for its own cqntentions.
2/
Our disposition of the request to subpoena various govern-mental officials renders moot CAND's request for a prehearing conference at which to take those officials'epositions.
4 CAND's petition and motions are denied.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
~ I I
C ar es Bec oe er, C az.rman Dated at Bethesda,
- Maryland, this 4th day of January, 1980.