ML19318D151
| ML19318D151 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1980 |
| From: | Jordan W PEOPLE AGAINST NUCLEAR ENERGY, SHELDON, HARMON & WEISS |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19318D150 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8007080005 | |
| Download: ML19318D151 (5) | |
Text
__
~
PANE 6/30/80 M
./
- =2nD UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ilb NUCLEAR' REGULATORY COMMISSION
-O El 2 1960
- r a,, p
/
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD we ;.,
7 3
,s3' s
)
In the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDISON
)
Docket No. 50-289 l
COMPANY, et al.,
)
(Restart)
-~
)
(Three Mile Island
)
Nuclear Station, Unit
)
1 No. 1)
)
)
i REQJEST FOR BOARD GUIDANCE ON SCHEDULING
" " " " ^ ~
OF PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTRESS ISSUES-
~~
People Against Nuclear Energy (PANE) requests guidance from the Board concerning preparation for and scheduling of consideration of psychological distress issues in this pro-ceeding.
As indicated to the Board during the prehearing conference on May 13, 1980, PANE has begun to prepare its case.
However, it has been and remains reluctant to commit the full resources that will be necessary until the Commission has ruled on whether and how psychological distress will be..
considered.
With the issuance of a firm schedille throug g
the final'prehearing conference, PANE now seeks guidance concerning what the Board expects from PANE and the other
~
parties in terms of preparation in the absence of a Commis
~
sion decision.
At the time of the May 13 prehearing conference, PANE had undertaken substantial research into the relevant litera-ture, contacted and obtained offers or assistance.from.._ _
.m 8007osoo g
=
prominent experts, gathered together virtually all directly relevant studies, and begun meeting with experts to lay the groundwork for intense preparation.
The week after the pre-hearing conference, most of the experts actually spent two days in Middletown.
Walking the tightrope of trying to pre-pare while not wasting its absolutely. minimal resources, PANE now stands on the threshold of very expensive and time-consuming in-depth psychiatrie-and psychological studies, which it is loath to pursue in the absence of guidance from the Board or the Commission.
In its Second Special Prehearing Conference Order of January 11, 1980, the Board recognized the difficulties faced by PANE and the other intervenors in the absence of any decision by the Commission, and it urged "that some reasonable efforts, if possible, should be made by these parties to prepare themselves for the litigation they are seeking."
This was a sound approach at that time since a decision by the Commission was expected well before now.
PANE has undertaken discovery of both the Licensee and the Staff and has taken the steps briefly described above to prepare its direct case.
PANE has certainly met the standard of reasonable efforts to this point.
With the final prehearing conference just over one month away, and with the hearing itself approximately three months away, PANE now needs guidance from the Board concerning its expectations of reasonable preparation efforts in light of present circumstances.
Rapidly approaching deadlines cry for
+
-f,.,
preparation, while the' lack of any Commission decision holds us back.
The Board needs to consider three possible scenarios:
a.
The Commission issues a decision between now and August 12, the date of the final prehearing conference.
~b.
The Commission issues a decision between August 12 and the beginning of the hearing.
c.
The Commission fails to. reach a decision before the hearing begins.
Under the first scenario, it will at least be possible to incorporate the psychological distress issues into the case during the prehearing conference.
The second and third scenarios render everyone's job more difficult.
In considering how to address this problem, the Board can take some comfort from the fact that the psychological distress issues are separate and distinct from all of the othe,r issues in the case.
There is no need either to hear the psychological distress evidence or to reach a decision on the issues at the same time that other contentions are addressed.
The psychological distress issues can be added to the end of the hearing or, if necessary, they can be the subiect of essentially a separate hearing scheduled after the projected close of the hearing on the other contentions.
Accordingly, the Board has the flexibility to move ahead to completion of all other aspects of the hearing and then to hear the psychological: distress contentions on a separate schedule.
Given the complexity of the other issues, it is quite likely that the net result would be that a delayed or
-o-
---9 v
v y-aw-Ve y
v
+
1 tentative schedule for psychological distress issues would not cause any delay in the hearing as a whole.
Finally, during the May 13 prehearing conference, Counsel
-for PANE indicated that PANE could not expect to have its direct testimony prepared until the e'nd of September, which
~
is:approximately three weeks after it
.uld be due under the tentative schedule.
At this point, it appears that the end of October is a far more reasonable expectation.
Until it receives guidance from the Board, PANE will move ahead as quickly as possible, with an October date in mind.
For the reasons stated above, PANE does not believe that this will cause any overall delay in the hearing.
However, in the absence of a Commission decision within the next few months, PANE may be forced to mocerate its preparation.
The Board's guidance would be most helpful on these points.
Respectfully submitted, fi& C Shu.'<s.bc William ordan, III Harmon & Weiss 1725 I Street, N.W.
Suite 506 Washington, D,C.
20006 (202) 833-9070 Counsel for PANE bPP Date
- n UNITED STATES OF AMERICA' NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO?CIISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
)
In the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDISON
)
COMPANY, et al.,
)
Docket No. 50-289
)
(Restart)
(Three Mile Island
)
Nuclear Station, Unit
)
No. 1)
)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the Request for Board Guidance on Scheduling of Psychological Distress Issues have been mailed postage pre-paid this 30th day of June,1980, to the follcwing parties:
Secretary of the Commission ATTN:
Chief, Docketing and Service Section U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Ivan W.
Smith, Esquire Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 v,
@ l l~
N, Dr. Walter H. Jordan
'N 881 W.
Outer Drive k
\\
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 D'
The;@
9 9 ' [.
rnC 3-!
Dr. Linda W. Little d 4g '3%,,,)j iw
[J.:-
g 5000 Hermitage Drive Raleiegh, North Carolina 27612 p
George F. Trowbridge, Esquire gj@'/
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 1800 "M" Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20006
, James Tourtellotte, Esquire Office of the Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 ADS.,Q ?. - a William S (Jordanf III