ML19254E735
| ML19254E735 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/25/1979 |
| From: | Grossman H Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7911020267 | |
| Download: ML19254E735 (6) | |
Text
'
V ej.
NRC PUBLIC DOCMENT ROOM
'b ff, N[
.4 Y
N UNITED STATES OF AMERICA d
t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION S$p>
s Before the Atomic Safety and Licensine Board
%IIg4 In the Matter of
)
)
CONSUMER POWER COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-155
)
(Big Rock Point Nuclear Plant) )
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On July 23, 1979, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission published in the Federal Register a notice of a proposed issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. 1PR-6 that had been issued to Consumers Power Company (the licensee) for operation of the Big Rock Point Plant (the facility) located in Charlevoix County, Michigan.
44 Reg. Fed. 43126.
The proposed amendment would allow the addition of 3 racks with a close center-to-center spacing of spent fuel assemblies to the facility's spent fuel pool which would allow an increase in storage capacity from 193 to 441 fuel assemblies.
The notice provided that the licensee might file a request for a hearing anc that any person whose interest may be affected by the proceeding might file a request for a hearing in the form of a petition for leave to intervene pursuant to 10 CFR 52.714 by August 22, 1979.
By that date, petitions to intervene were received from 26 residents of communities surrounding the faci-lity, John A. Leithauser on his own behalf and as attorney for 1249 046 7911020 U
~
. Northwest Coalition,and John O'Neill, II.
An Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (the Board) was designated to rule upon intervention petitions and requests for hearings.
The members of the Board are Dr. Oscar H. Paris, Mr. Frederick J. Shon and Mr. Herbert Grossman who will serve as Chairman of the Board.
The Board will now make some preliminary determinations with
' gard to the proposed interventions.
The petition to intervene signed by 24 residents gives addresses of the signers that the licensee believes are within 15 miles of the plant and which it further believes demostrates an interest of the signers that might be affected by the proceeding.
Because the petition sets forth at least one specific aspect of the proceeding that is of concern to the petitioners, the integrity of the south wall of the spent fuel storage pool, the licensee does not oppose the petition provided that the 24 petitioners are con-solidated pursuant to 10 CFR 52.714(e) and they designate a spokes-man.
The staff agrees.
We also agree that the petition shows the requisite interest and at least one specific aspect which might affect petitioners' interest.
We provisionally grant the petition for leave to intervene, subject to the petitioners' filing, not later than 15 days prior to convening of a special prehearing conference to be set shortly, a list of contentions sought to be litigated in this proceeding, at least one of which satisfies the requirements 1249 047
. of the 10 CFR 52.714.
Because the joint petition indicates common concerns by each of the petitioners and an apparent desire that the signers be considered consolidated petitioners, the Board orders that the 24 petitioners be consolidated and that they designate a spokesman to represent them.
John A. Leithauser has petitioned for leave to intervene for himself and on behalf of a group referred to as "The Northwest Coalition", for whom he claims to speak as " authorized agent".
The Board finds the petition currently deficient with regard both to his individual intervention and on behalf of the group he claims to represent.
Mr. Leithauser and/or the Northwest Coalition vill be permitted to amend the petition no later than 15 days prior to the convening of a special prehearing conference in order to cure the deficiencies.
With regard to Mr. Leithauser's individual capacity, the petition and ace,mpanying letter fail to disclose an interest that would be affected by any specific aspect of the proceeding mentioned in the petition.
We consider only the mentibn in the petition of a possible spent-fuel accident resulting in the release of radianuclides that would directly affect certain enumerated natural resource's (lak es, streams, etc.) as constituting an aspect specific enough to satisfy the rules.
The references to "deterior-ating hardware", being " deprived of mental tranquility and a certain percentage of... business", the " risk [of] losing out on future options for land developments", and " health and safety 1249 048
. ramifications", do not identify any further aspects of the proceeding of concern to the petitioners.
Since Mr. Leithauser has not identi-fied any resource owned or used by him or a member of the Northwest Coalition that would be affected by a spent-fuel accident, there has been no demonstration of the requisite interest.
The petition is otherwise deficient as filed on behalf of the Northwest Coalition:
none of the members are identified by name and address; no document has been filed on behalf of any particular member authorizing the Coalition to represent that member; no affidavit has been filed by a member stating an interest that might be affected by the proposed action; and no showing has been made that Mr. Leithauser has satis-fied the requirements for representing the Coalition by being either a member or duly authorized attorney at law.
See 10 CFR 52.713(a).
The petition of John O'Neill, II, appears to satisfy the interest requirements of the rules.
Although his return address is Maple City. Michigan, prest = ably outside of the zone of interest, he claims to have lived and worked in Burdickville during the summer, 50 miles southwest of the facility, and states an intention to settle in the area permanently.
Assuming that he has a specific residence in Burdickville that can be disclosed to us by the time of the special prehearing conference, and that he has not changed his plans to continue living there, at least temporarily, we will find that he has the requisite interest.
If he can place the loca-tion of his family restaurant within the geographic zone of interest 1249 049
- and indicate what interests he has in the business that would be affected by the proceeding, the interest requirement might also be satisfied in that manner.
His concern about the possibility of increased radiation emar.ating from fuel rods stored in close proximity has sufficiently identified a specific aspect of the proceeding to permit his intervention.
Assuming the adequacy of his standing to intervene, to be perfected by the time of the soon-to-be scheduled conference, Mr. O'Neill is encouraged to consider consolidating his intervention with that of other intervenors, as suggested by the licensee.
The Board will rule on consolidating the petition after hIearing arguments at the conference.
At the special prehearing conference to be set shortly, the Board will consider all intervention petitions, discuss specific issues to be considered at the evidentiary hearing, and ccnsider a schedule for further action in the proceeding.
Petitioners, the licensee, and the staff are directed to consult with each other in order to attempt to arrive at some agreement with regard to the deficiencies in the petitions that are identified in this order and to frame contentions upon which we can proceed at the evidentiary hearing.
Each petitioner shall file a supplement to the petition not later than 15 days prior to the special prehearing conference which shall include a list of specific contentions sought to be litigated in this proceeding.
1249 050
. BY ORDER OF THE BOARD FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD IN hv Herbert Grossman, Chairman Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 25th day of September, 1979 1249 051 4
k