ML19208A585
| ML19208A585 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | New England Power |
| Issue date: | 08/24/1979 |
| From: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19208A576 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7909170034 | |
| Download: ML19208A585 (3) | |
Text
UNITED STATES OF Af' ERICA fiUCLEAR RLGULATORY C0!!!11SS10N In the Matter of
)
)
NEW ENGL AND POWER C0f1PANY
)
Docket Nos. STfi 50-563 (NEP-1 and NEP-2)
)
STf 50-569 DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206 By petition dated July ll,1979, Mr. William Jordan on behalf of Concerned Citizens of Rhode Island, the Point Judith Fishermen's Cooperative, and the N requested an order to show cause why the application Thomas L. Arnold Trust for construction permits of New England Power Company (NEPCO) for fiEP Units 1 and 2 should not be dismissed.
This petition was filed pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission's regulations.
The asserted basis for the request is that the application is no longer complete and should not continue to be docketed for consideration by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) or the Staff.
The petition is addressed to the Director, Nuclear Reactor Regulation because the determination of the acceptability of an application is a decision to be made only by the Staff.
New England Power Company (fiEP, Units 1 and 2), LBP-78-9, 7 NRC 271, 281 (1978).
CCRI has stated that the application is inconplete because NEPCO's proposed site, the former Naval Auxiliary Landing Field (NALF) in Charlestown, Rhode Island is no longer available for nuclear reactor construction. On June 20, 1979, the Acting Administrator of the General Services Administration made the decision to transfer the NALF to the Department of Interior, the Environmental Protection N Hereinafter referred to collectively as CCRI.
850223 790D170osy Agency and the Town of Charlestown for a wildlife refuge. Therefore, CCRI asserts that the application now lacks the minimum information, i.e., site identification required for docketing pursuant to 10 CFR 2.101(a) and 10 CFR 50.34(a).
In support of the petition, CCRI has claimed that the GSA Administrator's decision on disposition of the site proposed for the captioned facility is clear. The position taken by CCRI implies that it has concluded, and wishes the Staff to conclude, that no appeal from the Administrator's decision is possible, or if possible is not likely to produce a different outcone.
Such a conclusion is premature at this time since NEPC0 has appealed the decision of the Acting Administrator of GSA concerning disposition of the proposed site for the f acility. Counsel for NEPCO in a letter dated July 30, 1979, and addressed to the members of the ASLB with copies to all persons on NEPCO's service list stated that the appeal is in the form of a civil action filed in the United States District Court for the District of Coluabia and that action is styled New England Power Company, et al. v Paul Goulding et al.,
Civil Action No. 79-1889.
Accordingly, NEPCO may still be able to utilize the NALF site. / Therefore, 2
at tnis time, I have determined that there exists no adequate basis for issuing d show cause order on the NEPCO application for construction permits. The request of CCRI is hereby denied.
El Pending outcome of the Court's decision on the siting question, further review on this matter is being held in abeyance by the Staff.
9 %m 4
A copy of this determination will be placed in the Cocmission's Public Docun ent Room at 1717 H Street, N.W., Washinigton, D. C.
20555, and the local Public Document Rooms for NEP, Units 1 and 2 located at the Cross Mill Public Library, Old Fost Road, Charlestown, 'hode Island 02813, and at the University Library of Rhode Island, Government Publications Office, Kingston, Rhode Island 02881. A copy of tilis document will also be filed with the Secretary of the Conmission for its review in accordance with 10 CFR 2.206(c) of the Conmission's regul ations,
in accordance with 10 CFR 2.206(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice, this decision will constitute the final action of the Conmission 20 days after the date of issuance, unless the Cornission on its own motion institutes the review of this decision within that time.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Harold R. Denton, Di rector Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 2ytLday of August,1979.
_