ML19206A177

Brief in Support of Exceptions to Initial Decision.Concludes Exclusion of Evidence & Views Constitutes Violation of Section 102 of 1969 NEPA

ML19206A177
Person / Time
Site:	Crane
Issue date:	01/18/1978
From:	Jarboe C JARBOE, C.J.
To:
References
NUDOCS 7904180359
Download: ML19206A177 (4)

Text

'

g CARL J. JAR 30E p ir O E. Marble St.

//

Mechanicsburg, px p

h9 170.%

Of

%+' :%y d'

~

.W V

4 Is tae Matter of 6i

['/,. -;'5

)

y e

^g/

r s

)

e

1,. ' r **

~%

s

/j w

v Nfll J

d

.3 g

.....f,.,

..-r,

...r g,

,. c.

7. _ n.,

z-y s

(fhree.*ile Island '~uclear Jtation, j

U=it 'f o. 2)

January 13,17/8

.n.e.%v...e is support of

. o

,. 7

'.T y

-.s v.

I-The tcsic Jafety 5, ic essas.; 3c.2rds' :

a) exclusion of evidence msd views gr-sented by 14 dted up..oarors frc= t ***g p.:rt in the licensing deci_ ion b)excluai s of ;;rticipation is tb e filing o f exc e p ti.:ss ', b rie f s on the Initial *:ecisias as sandated by 10 0.~'2 secties 2 762, by any interested person or ;. arty c)settisc of a service date far the Initial lesisica at a ti=e

.hes the uafority of the parsess or arties isvleved or interected cc 11 n:t participate (.iue to major holidays of the year) is a violatias of the " fullest extent possible" cl.uce cf section 102 O f the NUf. of 1969.

'The :.U.,'s 11rectics tsat procedural duties suat be fulfilled to the "fullect eAtent ;ossible ' sakes tasse ;aties not inherently flexible but sue:

.4 zust se caai, lied with to tse fullest extent unless taere ic clemr cesflict of stat =atory autscrity; ccseiderat as of.daisistr tive difficulty, delay Or economic c use do not atrip ;roviaics of its f undamental 1. sport.:sce

(Calvert Oliffa Ocord. Ocs:x.

Y

'J.J..dC, M9 f2d,1109 (1771)

"The E.2.. is addressed to ager.cies as a whole, not asly to their ;rofesci sal staffs. Compl.i.sce ts the "fu.l.lest" posaiole extenc w:uld se e:r te demand that environmental issues be considered at every important atoge is the decisica saking process c:scernisg a particular actic;

". " Clearly, the review process is ss appropri.te eta.;e 40 which to balasce conflictisg factora 36ainst ene isother.

.aui just a4. clearly, it provides.ts important opportunity to riject or significantly aodify the staf f' 4 recessesded actics" (Calvert Cliffs 7 C, (1971)

~.isited appent -rs have been denied access (Ia),b),:)above) to the review process (the licens:.sg proceedisg) and thus the.31.~1 h.s ac t fulfilled tre statuatory scr.date cf TF.. to the " fullest extent possible".

pN.

5-

'.g

_s

• t "'.s

..,}'*. p,,

e f

l

/

jt,,

~ a.a',

1994180.35 9 r

l-U

ggg page 2 EXC7ITION NO.

))f This exception is co.rected as being a violation of 10072 sectics 2.715(a),

not sectics 2.7154.

There is absolutely so sandate given in 2.715(a) that previous notice la requirec ta ; resent a 'ted ai,earance.

The puoli: =ctice ( 27 " - - iews, March 30, 1977, p.1) and chair as luten'a st_te2 sta (..pril 5, 1977, tr 13); Jane 1C,1977, tr 2665) had ;n rovicus te:risestal effect :: :e,uoll:'a ability ta jresent evilence a views 4 t the licensics proceedisg= es they thought they were excluded oy reason of so ad vance notice.

IM ' is also a vielstian by the.Cl3 of the 'fallest utest possible" clause of sectica 102 of NE?...

37 excluding isterestad persons, they were not getting the " fullest" input to weigh agaisat staff recommendations (;alvert Clif fa' Cecrd.

Oc==. V. 3.3.

zC, A49, f2d, 1109(1971))

III-The extest and cost is husss lives and property of a sajor nuclear power plant accisent has been described as 45 cco deatha, loc,cco isjuries, long-ters contasisatics of as arsa the size of Fen =a., and peoperty dassge of 517 to 280 billies (Updated 4 ash-7kO(2rookhaven) Eeport).

"The court found as a fact that the probacility of a major suelest a ccident producisg dansges exceedisg the $$60,CCO,CCC limit of the Frice=.inderson act is not facciful but real (Caro'i'a Envircarental 3tudy Jroup v. U.J.

.!C, 431 ? Su;;.

2c3(1977))

Is the absence of a:7 inaurance coverage realistically rel-ted to ;otential coct far a suelear accide t,

the gr2 ::sg of tsta license la 2 vialutics of the equal protection provisics that is iscluded withis the due ; recess clauee of the Fifts send =ent.

It places the cost af the benefit to all of G;U'd custesers on as arbitrarily chosen seg=ent of society, we here is the Harrisburg area.

I:

trolisa Environmental study Jrcup v ~.C. 11C(431, ? Supp, 225(1977)) the ecurt held that tha hrice*.tsderson. set vi&lstes the equal protecti:n provision t:st is iscluded withis the due procesa clause of the 5e amendment because it providea for what Congresa deemed b be a benefit to the wuale society (the etcour-agement of the generation of nuclear power), but places the coat of that benefit on an arbitssrily choses ser=ent of acciety, tacJe injured b3 snelear catastrc;he.

E-The hergy Reorgs=isatics set of 1974(P.L. 93M38) has as ese of its stated ;urpcaess '* e recr;1cizatics establisted by tais legislation has the additional purpose of separating the regulato: y function of the AIC from its develp;sental & promotianal functions a

The 370 staff, a br nch of the NIC, presentisg witnesses and evidence is favor a

of tranting an operating license cosatitutes a precotional function of nuclear

cwer, and is 1.. ccaflict with the regulathay functics of fM M/ MM fM a br

sch o f the same orgs=1:stien, the Atcale safsty & Liceand 's Scurd, and this violates the sytrit and letter of I.L.93-438.

V-ihe Inergy Reorganizatica Act of 197k(P.l.93-438), which created the XRC, nandated it to "previde strong, effective rerulation to keep pace with the industry,_

and to insure ita(tne nucless isdustries) safe develo;=ent" (1974, U.S. Code Cc g.

& ada News, Si&A).

The 3pc staff, a branch o f th e.i T.C. La presenting witnesses and evidence is favor of grssting the license, is viclating the wnole intended purpose of the 32C as mandated by p.L. 93 438.

~1-Its Eeact:r Safety Otudy:

A) Is heavily biased 1

"The 71aistiff's experts testified ::at the 3eactor o.foty etudy.na made is part to frcacte and sell the development of nuclear power asd does not provide a realistic estimate of its dangers".

Ni.s e criticisas 30 044L

pa68 3 EXCP/ TION NC.

are detailed to support this.

(Carolina invirec= ental Otudy Croup v.

U.5. aaC, 431 ? Cupp 212) 2-group of documents ootained under a Freedes of !=fermatics auit, 4

included : letter fr:5 e ssrua en, w rit t e n s e v

.--l

n tis ber:re ce

.c select-c by tte

: :est t:s.a::::: ' fat; t ua;,

in;i:-tic.; :e os ver r==uele?r and rendy t:.rita : ::ai. l. t -i.- : r t t a. : e.;1d plaise the nuclear ictustry is: deceive the.aelic. ('Teact:r.1rety tudy oy 0; la qu e e tie ne d ',',

c.Y.

7 :'* 3,

gril 27, 1977, p.th'

3) Has seasin;less results 1-Clifford 3eck, of the._;, on figuring odds f:r a sajor -ccident

stated,

"....there is act evec in prisciple an Objective and san tita tive 9ethad of calculating probaciliAy or improo:cility of accidenta, or the likelihood that ;ctential hazards will or will not be realized". (+e

.ilmo s t Lost Jetroit, John fuller, acaders,igest irees, 14/6) 2-a : fas..yan, an 2ersa; ice en;iacer teutifying aefer-coagressicaal a

acaring, called tse Reactar..tety :tudy, 'an exerciae 12 futailtj, beceum se it sad u:ed analytscal seta:ds toit a..d oeen ecsplatei/ 11ac.rded by the aerospace industry as unreliaale'*. (..e

,120 s t _a_a s t setroit, 1976)

}- Che dd Enviroacental.rotection.gency tn its review o_

e

.U., stated 4 sajor criticians, cascia.iiag t: 2t t a e study has anaerstated tne rial baaed on uncercatiaated acalts effecto, ev-cuativa doses, cad arac oli.tias o f releassa.

ine range la oeliev-d to ce aetween a value of aue sad a value of several hundred'. (Car & lina _nvironcestal stuaj iroup v.

".,,. ;, 431 / upp 212 (1977))

C) Jan def;.cient =et adology 1-2r.

Maiel Kleits..n, pro f. of sth. at

.T, reviewed th e re:or t and said the method of calculating the probatd'*ty of a rea:tcr ucciaent "l=ada you to eilliness, added cos,elica tianc, and errer". (as in 7I, i, 2 above) 2-4 n Lade.endent group of scientista reviewed the 52, got differest resulta uain; the came methcdolJ?y, 3 d uesti;ned tCe validity Jf tte 2e-tho-dology.

( /e 1 oct ta n t :etroit, 1976)

J) Oci-ician sy the infar sd scie:tific ec.s.2 unity 1-Dr. denry.. e.e:dall, *:C, ex;reasa d s e v-ral o,iniana samr;17 chal' eng-Las the bland ccncluelons af the 7;~.

(Carniins Isvirca= ental Jtudy iroup v. G3

.0, 4jl 7 lupp 212 (1977))

2-Fobert O. ;ollard, former.'TFC projects manajer, :ind headall made 6 strc=g cinta critical of the study.

.s a last,. c in t, tacre ia no legal res casibility taken fcr tha data or concluaians of the i;.I. i Marolina I:vironne2tal tudy 3rcup v UC ZC 431 ? 2up.: 212 (177"))

VII '!he ' fullest ertest ;oasible" cla us e of section 102 of the IUli of l?69 would re,uire that these sericus empicyee rel.ted impacts ( e nvirc am e n tal) cf nuclear pcwer,lanta be made kncwn to the ; ublic in Order to comply.ith subaecti:nc (1) and (ii) o f 102-92)-c.

yQ ' hN

. I.d z M I N NO.

h-Pa6' I 7!!!- Faragraph 108 of Initial Deciaica dealing with nuclear waates ana its tellance on Table 5.3 of rsyr.s assumes reprocessing, which has been eenentially ruled cut.

'fh e resulting accumulation o f wastes at TMI 2 has not been 2ealt with is M7'.S and Initial Osciaion and is therefore a violatian of section 102-(2)-c-(i) o f.C_F of 1969 C _ _I? L -.

.d I C.

^

I hereoy certify tnat copies of tne foregoing "arief" in support of "Izeeptions to Initial Decision ', in tue na t ter c f ed. bur I.; f...

IL.i X.. ~i'i,

et. al. (Three.dle Island.iuclear Gener ating s tatica, Uni 2), ;ocket.Sc. 3C-32G, dated January 18, 1978, have been served upon each of the persons 11-ted en the follcwing service list, by mail, postage prepaid, this 18u day of January, 1978.

a J

p.s.'v Carl J4 ;1roce

e.... _.

1-Dr. Chauncy R. Keptord 6 Guct. ave /,. Linenber pr 2-Isrin W. Carter. T.ac..

7-Or. 2 nest C. Calo 3-Ernest 1. Slake, 2aq.

8.lan.3.

Rosenthal, a q.

L Eenry J..".cGarren ~aq.

9-Docke ting Gr.er rice :ecti:n Gregory !i. Fess, :aq.

10-Director of Nucle-se 7esecor 5-Ed vsrd Luton, Isq.

Ilegulation OJJ :se,i g.

IMrj

' N

,9 W1N A]*

M "C

r q

s rg i

4O 4

1n3 4 : 1:1 -

P 8

v.,r q

y*<e e

s

.~-

i.

n..

.a.s y;

,)

.&-s-Q~,1F.