ML19262C577

Supports Shoreham Opponents Coalition 800124 Request for Intervenor Status.Members Live within 60 Miles of Facility. Petitioners Have Property & Financial Interest in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML19262C577
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	02/06/1980
From:	Gilmartin D SUFFOLK COUNTY, NY
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML19262C574	List: ML19262C573 ML19262C576 ML19262C577 ML19262C579
References
NUDOCS 8002140559
Download: ML19262C577 (8)

Text

s UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AND THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD IN Tile MATTER OF LONG ISLAND LICllTING COMPANY DOCKET No. 50-322 (Slioreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1)

ANSWER OF THE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK TO IllE PETITION OF Tile S110REllAM OPPONENTS COALITION (" SOC") TO SUSPEND CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR THE LONG ISLAND LIGilTING COMPANY'S S110REllAM NUCLEAR POWER STA-TION (UNIT 1) AND TO REN0TICE IIEARINGS IN DOCKET NO. 50-322, OR IN Ti1E ALTERNATIVE, TO PERMIT LATE INTERVENTION OF SOC PURSUANT TO 10 CFR PART 2, SECTION 2.714.

• DAVID J. GILMARTIN, s Sdffolk County Attorney Veterans Memorial Highway llanppauge, New York 11787 Tel: (516) 979-2485 P. A. DEMPSEY, of Counsel 800214053 7

3 ANSWER OF THE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK TO THE PETITION OF THE S110REHAM OPPONENTS COALITION (" SOC") TO SUSPEND CONSTRUC-TION PERMIT FOR THE LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY'S S110RE-HAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION (UNIT 1) AND TO REN0TICE HEAR-INGS IN DOCKET No. 50-322, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO PER-MIT LATE INTERVENTION OF SOC PURSUANT TO 10 CFR PART 2,

$2.714.

. 1. On January 24, 1980, the Shoreham Opponents Coalition (" SOC") filed a Petition with the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for leave to intervene in the Shoreham Operating Licensing Proceedings (Docket No. 50-322). The SOC's petition more specifically requested:

A) That the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") or the Atomic Safety Licensing Board (" Board") issue a new order and notice of hearing for the Shoreham proceedings to permit intervention by interested parties; B) That the Board permit the alternative, the SOC to inter-vene in these proceedings; C) That the NRC suspend the construction permit of the Long Island Lighting Company ("Lilco") to build the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 ("Shoreham");

D) That the NRC direct the institution of proceedings to investigate the need to suspend or revoke Lilco's cons-truction permit for SHOREHAM.

2. Pursuant to 10 CFR Part 2, $2.714(cl the County of Suffolk, as a party of record to these proceedings, submits an answer to the SOC petition for Leave to Intervene.

3. Service of this answer has been made on both the NRC, the Board, and all parties of record in Docket No. 50-322.

THE !;RC OR THE BOARD SHOULD GRANT THE PETITION OF Tile Sil0REHAM OPPONENTS COALITION FOR LATE INTERVENTION PURSUANT TO 10 CFR, PART 2, $2.714.

4. Lilco's application for an operating licenec for the Shoreham plant was submitted in September, 1975. April 19, 1976 was then set by the NRC's Notice of Hearing as the date for interested parties to file th2ir petitions to intervene. Subsequent to this notice, schedules for the issuance of the NRC Staff's Final Safety Evaluation Report ("SER") were proposed. l.s 01 this date, however, the SER for SHOREHAM has yet to be submitted by the NRC Staff.

It is now forecast that the report will be issued in the spring of this year.

5. Presently the parties are participating in informal discovery pro-ceedings, which will continue until the issuance of the SER, at which time more formal discovery will be commenced.

6. The County of Suffolk is a " neutral intervenor" in the proceedings involving Lilco's applications to build and operate Shoreham. The County's participation in the past has been vigorous in order to insure that any nuclear plant operating within its area will comply with all applicable safety and environmental standards. The recent change of administration in Suffolk County government and the gradual substitution of the County Attorney's office as counsel in these proceedings will not alter the cou.;y's position or role. In light of the accident at Three Mile Island -2 ("TMI-2") and the pro-posed regulatory changes prompted by TMI-2 and related matters, these standards are in the process of changing. The County asserts that the Shoreham plant J

should be scrutinized in light of all the facts, rules and standards applicable to the safety of a nuclear power facility.

7. The Shoreham Opponents Coalit' ion (" SOC") is an unincorporated associa-tion consisting of twenty civic and environmental organizations. The individual 3

~

members are residents of Suffolk County and for the most part, of an area within sixty miles of the Shoreham site. SOC was born in response to the d3 THI-2 accident and the members' desire to actively protect themselves and the county from any similar nuclear accident happening in Suffolk.

8. The interests of Suifolk County and SOC are mutual, as are their fears and concerns. The County welcomes citizen participation in protecting the interests of the citizenry and their property and supports their efforts to participate. Accordingly, the County consents to the petition by the SOC for late intervention and requests that the NRC and the Board grant the SOC's application for party status in the Shoreham Operating Licensing proceedings.

9. In applying the factors to be considered by the NRC and the Board in ruling on a petition for leave to intervene outlined in 10 CFR, Part 2,

$2.714(d), the County of Suffolk would point to the SOC's purpose and inter-ests to justify their request for intervention.

THE NATURE OF THE PETITIONERS' RIGHT TO BE MADE A PARTY TO THE PROCEEDINGS.

10. SOC arose in response to the TM1-2 accident which occurred subse-quent to th date set by the NRC for parties to file petitions to intervene in these proceedings. The questions raised by TMI-2 cannot be overlooked in this proceeding and in fact, are still to be formulated for address to this proceeding. Just as uncertainties at out nuclear power in general, and SHORERAM in particular, have arisen subsequent to the date for filing, so did I

SOC, a group which is interested in bxploring these uncertainties.

11. TMI-2 has greatly raised public awareness in and concern for the safety of nuclear >ower plants. In response to the public's interest, the NRC, as a public servant, should be acutely sensitive to public expression.

By granting the SOC's petition, the NRC will be acting accordingly by giving a public interest group the opportunity of participating in these NRC proceedings.

12. Where the Kemeny Commission criticized the NRC for its limited and insulated licensing procedures, the Commission and Board can avoid such criticism in this case by granting the SOC petition.

, 13. The County's participation in these proceedings as a " neutral intervenor" is aimed at representing its citizens and their property. To this end, it is acting to insure that all issues are resolved concerning the safety of the Shoreham plant. The SOC is a large group of Suffolk County residents who have expressed special concerns with regard to these issues.

In view of the time sequence of events affecting these procedures; - TMI-2, the unpublished SER report and possible regulatory changes, - SOC's status is valid and the expression of their concerns is timely and relevant to these proceedings. The nature of the petitioner, SOC, gives it a right to be made a party to these proceedings.

Tile NATURE AND EXTENT OF Tile PETITIONER'S PROPERTY, FINANCIAL, OR OTHER INTEREST IN THE PROCEEDING.

14. The members of the SOC are residents in and property owners of the area to be affected by the operation of Shoreham by Lilco. They are Lilco ratepayers, who have been paying for the construction work of Shoreham, since the cost of it is included in Lilco's rate base. They are also concerned environmentalists with specialized kpowledge of the area. The extent of the petitioners' property and financial, professional and ideological interests in these proceedings,'therefore, justify their intervention at this time.

THE POSSIBLE EFFECT OF ANY ORDER WHICH MAY BE ENTERED IN TIIE PRO-CEEDING ON THE PETITIONERS' INTEREST.

15. SOC should be permitted to intervene since its participation in these proceedings will contribute to a full hearing record and a thorough evidentiary record. One lesson of TMI-2 is that such a complete record is needed in NRC nuclear licensing proceedings.

16. The SOC's expertise regarding the question of energy alternatives and alternate technologies will be useful to these proceedings, particularly in light of the recent N.Y.S. Public Service Commission's decision to certify a coal plant at Jamesport (80003).

17. Through their intervention, the petitioners seek a thorough review of all unresolved safety questions affecting the Shoreham plant. To this end they intend to pursue certain contentions submitted in their petition, which contentions involve such safety issues. SOC plans to participate with the aid of counsel, experts and technical consultants, whose presence in these proceed-ings will assist in developing a sound record.

18. The SER is not yet issued in this case, and the licenring hearings are not scheduled until the spring of this year. The intervention of the SOC at this stage of these proceedings should, therefore, not cause a delay. In any event, their contribution to the record of these proceedings will outweigh any time lost in permitting their intervention.

19. On the basis of the foregoing, the County of Suffolk consents to the SOC's petition for Leave to Intervenejand requests that the Commission and the Board grant their application.

Respectfully submitted, DATED: Hauppauge, New York February 6, 1980 5 -

DAVID J. GILMARTIN, Suffolk County Attorney Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11787 Tel: (516) 979-2485 P. A. DEMPSEY, of Counsel 9

s CERTIFICATE OF Si.RVICl; 1 hereby certify that copies of SHOREHAM OPPONENTS COALITION'S PETITION FOR INTERVENTION were served upon the following by first class mail, postage prepaid, on February 8, 1980.

Iloward L. Blau, Esq. Jeffrey Cohen, Esq.

Blau and Cohn, P.C. Deputy Commissioner and Counsel 217 Newbridge Road New York State Energy Office Hicksville, N.Y. 11801 Agency Building 2 Empire State Plaza Energy Research Group, Inc. Albany, N.Y. 12223 400-1 Totten Pond Road Waltham, Mass. 02154 Irving Like, Esq.

Reilly & Like J.P. Novarro 200 W. Main Street Project Manager Babylon, N.Y. 11702 Shoreham Nuclear Power Station P.O. Box 618 W. Taylor Reveley, Ill, Esq.

Wading River, N.Y. 11792 Hunton & Williams P.O. Box 1535 Ralph Shapiro, Esq. Richmond, Virginia 23212 Carmer & Shapiro No. 9 East 49th Street Edward J. Walsh, Esq.

New York, N.Y. 10016 General Attorney Long Island Lighting Company Elizabeth S. Bowers, Esq. 250 Old Country Road Chairman Mineola, New York 11501 Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel Dr. Oscar 11. Paris, Member U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm. Atomic Safety & Licensing Washington, D.C. 20555 Board Panci U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

Frederick J. Shon, Member Washington, D.C. 20555 Atomic Safety & Licensing Loard Panel Samuel J. Chilk, Secretary U.S. huclear Regulatory Comm. Nuclear Regulatory Commission W.u;hington, D.C. 20555 W.u;h i nnt on , !>. C . 20555 Atomic Safaty & Licensing At omi < Safety & Licensing Appeal lioa rd llom d Panel U.S. Nuclear Rtsulatory Comm. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Richard K. Iloefling, Esq. i Stephen B. Latham, Esq.

Staff Counsel Twomey, Latham & Schmitt U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm. 33 West Second Street Washington, D.C. 20555 Riverhead, N.Y. 11901

.) ,

DATED: Hauppauge, New York '.' / .wkM February 8, 1980 DAVID J. GILMARTIN, Suffolk Coudty At .rne:

Attorney for Suffolk County Veterans Memorial liighway llauppauge , New York 11787 P.A. DEMPSEY, of Counsel