ML19326B070
| ML19326B070 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 05/31/1973 |
| From: | Farmakides J, Hand C, Shon F Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8003060847 | |
| Download: ML19326B070 (12) | |
Text
_.
he L
/
/
c':ITED " TAT 7': CF A: D ]rA
? "'C"Ic ""FRGY 0"J '.Li:'I R To th" Mntter of
)
)
TiiE 'W,1,13Y) 1]>I:7dl C4;PAIIY, FN' AL.
)
In< k e'. I. 's7 ; /
(ihvin-l'ct:::e Uuc]cnr Power Stntion,
)
l'n it 1)
)
CERTIFICATE OF GERVICE T berchy certify tbnt copien of OpEf'TAL PBEi;EfkIl;G CCI!PE3F3;CE 0 !DIR anted l'.ny 3], 1973 in the captioned nntter hnvc been : crved on Ihe 2
<>r nir Policning by depocit in the thited Otnten mail, first eina:
tall, thic 31ct dny of Mny 1973:
John 31. Formnkides, Esq., Chairman Gerald Chnrnoff, Ecq.
Atomic Gefety nnd Licensing Board Chev, Pittann, Potts & Troubridec II. 3. Atomic Energy Commission 910 17th Street, l'. W.
Vochington, D. C. 205h5 Wnchington, D. C. 20906 Dr, Cadet 11. Hend, Jr., Director Leslie llenry, Esq.
i odegn Morine Taborotory Fuller, Ocney, Henry & !!odce University of California 300 Mndicon Avenue P. O. Box 2h"(
Toledo, Ohio 4360h I.odegn Eny, Cnlifornin 94923 Mr. G]enn J. Campson, Vice l'r. Frederick J. Chon President Atomic Safety and Licensing Poard The Toledo Edison Compnny it. G. Atomic Enercy Commission h20 Madison Avenue Unshington, D. C. 20545 Toledo, Ohio 43601
.loceph F. Tdhridy, Ecq.
Donald l!. Unuser, Esq.
Al f.ornnte f:hn! rman Citvc]nnd E3cetric ]lluminnting At.omic Unfety and I.icensing hoord Compruly 4107 Cathedrnl Avenue, H. W.
Piablic Oquare Unchington, D. C. 20016 Cleveland, Ohio hh101 Dr. Harry Foreman Mrs. Evelyn Stebbins, Chairman Coalition for Safe Electric Power 1:ox 395, Mayo University of Minnesota Park Pulldin6, 312 Minncopolis, Minnesotn 55h55 140 Public Squarc Cleveland, Ohio hhllh Joceph Scinto, Ecq.
Francis X. Dnvis, Esq.
Director Regulatory Staff Counsel Ido Rupp Public Library U. 3. Atomic Energy Cor:: mission Port Clinton, Ohio h3452 Wachington, D. C. 20545 (CNf / +
)^ f u M U
~
Off' ice of the Geeretary of the C[daiacion cc: Mr. Farmakides Mr. Scinto ASLBP R003 060 h iJLhAv.~
E. cour,rourne, n. nrown OM' File
(
UNITED STATES OF A:JERICA ATOMIC UN!:ltGY CO:.l;ilSSIO:;
I n t he lan t ter o l'
)
)
TOLE 110 EDI SON CO.'.1PANY AND
)
CLI:VI: BAND EL1:CTitlC ILLl!MINATING
)
Doci:ot No. 50-346 CO'ilPANY
)
)
(Davis-Desse Nuc1 car Power Station)
)
SPECI AL PRElIEAltING CONFl:RENCE ORDI:lt On Ilay 22, 1973, this Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Doard) held a Special Prehearing Conference (Conference) pursuant to a duly issued and published No t.i ce.
The Applicant and the AEC 1(ogulatory Staff werc reprencnted by their respective counsel.
1.1rs. Evelyn Stchbins, having filed a petition' for leave to intervenc in il$i's proceeding, appeared on her own behn) f and as reprenentat ive of the Coalition for Safe !!uclea r Power the
( n:nni-con n;,i d on Ilu-record at Ihe Confors.nre 1o Coal i t ion ior Safo I:lec tri c Power).
Art.or a caref ul review of the entire record, including the idtial petjtion to intervene dated February 2,
- 1973, and the amended petition for 1 cave to intervene subnitted I
aMGM
{k
-=
~
(
2 on April 16, 197:1, as supple:wnted further by discussion on the record at the Conference, the Board concludes that the Pet i t.Joner has suf ficiently identified its interest, and specified certain aspects with suf ficient pa rt icular-ity and basis t;o as to raise issues which may become mat.ters in controversy.
Therefore, the Boaril rules that Mrs. Evelyn St"hhins and Ihe Coali t Jon for !:afe Elontric j
Power will he admitted as a party to this proceeding on the isstics stated below.
In so ruling, t he Iloa rd ha s taken account of the fact that the Intervonor did not have the honefit of Counsel but has attempt.ed to comply wi t h t he procedural requi remen t s of Sec t ion 2.714.
The 130n rd al so recognizes t ha t the provisions of Section 2.749 are available to the Applicant and to the Staf f if no facts are developed by the Intervenor t.o support its case.
l The Hoard expects the Intervenor to support, through I
di rec t t es t. i uony, the contentions made at the Conference.
'As 1.o the amended petition to intervene filed April 1 G, 1973 by the Intervenor, as supplemen ted by the record developed a t.the Conforcuee on May 22, 1973', the Hoard rules as follows:
rRWL
=
m
- q e -
(
-3 1.
Paragraphs 1 and 2 of said nuended ~ pet.i t ion relaie to 'the interest of ihe Petitioner.
The Board is of the opinion that sufficient interest. has been shown by.the I n t ervenor t o
, justify its admission as a part.y to 1 bis proceedint.
^
2.
Paragraph 3 of the amended petition presents a contention which wilI be admitted as fo]Iows:
Issue 1:
"The Coali tion contends that the Final Environmental S ta t erien t con-stitutes an arbitrary and capricious refusal to comply with considera tion of alternatives as required by Section 102(2)(c)iii of the National Environmental Policy Act of 10G9, in that the ' staff' has failed and refused 1o consider the
-alternative of conserva t ion of enert;y wi t.h in the Applicants' service areas so as to obviate the need for ihe 372 ?'W additional capacity of the Davis-Ilesse Plant."
'D SD mo n @ n 1T 1buhJ U
L
(
t 1 l
t.
- 1.
Pa ra;;ra phs 4 and 5 of the stuende.1 p<. t i t ion deal uit.h radiologje:O healih and 1,aiety isnues which are not involved in this Tro-ceeding, except innofar as 1hsy may vtla1e 1o t he envi roninen t al ana l ynis re<gu i re.d.
11 0 i
Il nin nuch rela tionship hits been shown.
l direct inquiry, the Intervenor failed to provide specific information relating to any relevant fact that night indicate the possibility of the type of accident. which Intervenor alleges.
Accordingly, iho lloa rd s
I concludes
- t. hat. t he Intervenor has completely 1
failed to show that there would be a genuine 1
showing of material fact that could ho in dispute and,therefore,the contentions are
- denied, f.fo reo ve r, these con 1 on t ions apin a r 10 be a challenge to the Colomission's Interim Accept ance Cri teria for Emergoney C..re Cool ing 4
Systems.
Since they fail t o con for.n to the requircinents of 10 CFR Sect. ion 750, they are rejected.
gg&
id 4
b.
i
(
. i Paral;raph G of t he araended peti Lion,
a.s clarifie d at the Conference, prc.- a.'s a contention which will he admitted an f o l l esws :
1_s_t : u e ' !!: The Coalition coni <ndt.
I h a 1.
I h <-
Final Environmental Statement has not properly eva1unted all porns i b1 e s to rm dai.mge and the environmental consequences of such incidents as having ihe cooling tower lost. due to storms, flooding of the area, or d:nonge t r>
ini i l d i ngp,.
The hil.h lake levels and severe Jako storms make these events distinctly possible."
5.
Paragraph 7 of the amended petitlon, presents a coni <nt}on relisting io the une of plutonium.
i It is denied as vague, unclear and i rrel eva n t to this hearing.
+
G.
The allegation in Paragraph 8 of the anended pe t i t. i ots it: not. understood, and in dculed an
~
vague and unclear, wmc hub b
j l
i M
1 tm
(
-G-7.
Ihtragraph 9 of the niaended pe Li t j on, as c)ai.iiieri a t the Conforcuce, present.s a contention to
- .e effect. tha t Section 7.2.2 of the Final Environ
- r. ental S t.a teine n t (Sec tions 5.9. ] t.hrough 5.9.5 incorrectly c.i i ed ley J n t.ervenor) i a i I:
to :ulottua ieIy ova lua f o the environmental consequences arisinig from a transportation accident involving spent fuelfi-because.of the specific characteristics of the
':. Cayahoga Valley.
Since this contention rela tes 8
to a "spccial situation", the Board does not consider it as a challenge to the Commission's Regulations and w.il] admit the conlontion formulaLed as follows:
Issue 3:
"The Final Environuen t al S ta tement is inadequat.c in that. the trea tinent of trans-porta tion acciden t.c in Sect. ion 7.2.2 under-estimateu the effects of accidents involving sp nt inel being transport ed f ro:a th.is particular g g1 D bO f a ni.l.1 1.y.
The part.icu Iar s.i t.ua 1. ion around t.hu nQF]'
r
'q0 0
Davis-Desse facility is such that the poicntia1 iU u (
.1 3
t cris ts 1or gron ter em ironmen t.a1 contamina t. ion v
p than tha t contemplated by Section 7.2.2 c f i he Final 1:nvi ronmen tal S ta tenent."
e
~
l j
-. L H.
The l o] ] owi n;; issues, contained in the initial potition to in terveno which was appended to 1
-the anended petition, are admitted as supplemented I
and c]arified at the Prehearing Conference as set
~forIh below.
D.
Para;;raph 2G(3 ) of the i ni f.i a] pn ( i ti on pre':eni s a contention which will be admil. led as f ol l ow:; ;
Issue 1:
"The Final Environmen tal S t a t eunn t 's i
ovaluation of the threat of radioactivity to
.the agricultural and farmin;; lands, and farn animals and products has been underest.:iua Led in that the Final Enviroinnen t.al S t.a t e n o n t shoulel a
h:4ve assumed a fuel failuse ra t e h j ;>.her i.han
{
0.25 percent of failed. fuel t o obtain a source for environmental inpact ca 1cu] a Lions. "
- 10. Paragraphs 2G(m) and 2G(n) of the initini pet i tion presen t con t en tions which will be con:;ol ida t e<1 anti a
admiticil as follows :
b:surr 5:
"The Fi nal Environni.en t.a ] S i.a l eme n t.
n n m' is inadcctuate in thal.it faiis to evaluate the cu:aula_ tive and nynergis!ic effec ts on ).ai.e D '9
. uh ~(
Eric of the. effluents from i.he I):ivi t.--lio,se
~3
~
2 s
(
8 e lTluen t.n inny be procluced by' olltor sc r:l eto:
reactors operating adjacent to La l:en *M C'. 2 :,'b li,
Superior, and IIuron."
)).
paragraph 2G(o) of the initia] petit. ion presents
-a coniention which wi11 be adiaii f.ed as fol1ows:
Issue G:
"The Fi nal Environinen ta) Statencnt is inadequate in that no consideration has been given to the fact tha t operating experiences at nuclear plants show that radioact.ive releason go up wi th aging of.the react.or.
The evalua tion, t.he re f ore, of radioactivity on the enviroinnent is comple tel y inadequate and incorrect."
32.
paragraph 28 (second paragraph so numljered) o f the ini t.ial peti tion prcsonts a cont.ent.Jon v!hich will be adiaitt.cd an follows :
~
Insun 7:
"The l'inal Envi ronmen t al S t a f e::.en t is inadequate in that population growth in 0
0 this area has not been prop <rly ansrssed VW
~
' gr }
innsiauch an 1.h e placisig of t h i:; p l a ti t in this u kh J U
3 argely : gricultural area vill proba bl.y s ; inanla t ra tlic growth of indun t.ry anel popula tion.
The 4(
.m.
(
Q
_9_
environmenta] ef f ec ts ar;nuut:1 in the l'j ual Environmental Sta tenon t arc incorrect."
33 The contention stated in Paragraph 29 o f the initial petition will be admitted as fol]ows:
- J :!.u.o_ _0_.:
"The t o ta l eIIcet of all ell]unnis (radioactivo, heat, chenicals, dissolved solids and suspended solids, and B.O.D.) to Lake Eric' as - a result of all opera tions of the Davis-Desse Plant (oither alone or in combination with other pollutanIs) w.ill acid to the pollution of Laho Erie, ondanger fish, wil d li fe, spawning grounds, aquatic biota, their habi ta t and support ing ecosys tem, recrea tional aspects or wa t.cr supp.lics, and will be in v.iola tion of the Non-do;;rada tion 1
T 0
D c3ause of the Wa ter Quali ty S t andards of bdd Q
Ohio as approved by the Environmental Prof.ection g! D dl] U 1' k
5
_a
. Agency.
Thoso ef fonts have not'been propo.ly assonsed in t he Fina) 1'uvironnuntal S t a t e:nen t.. "
14.
All other contentions not speci fically discussed above and rhich were raised 1 the Intervenor in 4
...m
(
r the initial petition or the amended pe tition are lioreby denied for f ailure to sacet the require:acnts 01 Section 2.714.
Discovery S
As indicated at the Conference, discovery by the the eight issues admitted horcin will proceed t
p arties on immediately and may continue for approximately three wechs, until June 22, 1973.
The parties are urged to cooperate to the fullest extent in the exchange of informa tion.
i A !;ccond Proho: iring Conference v:311 he held on or about
. June 26, 1973, in preparation for the Eviden tinry Session to begin wit.hin a reasonab3c time thereafter.
The parties arc directed to confer and to present to the Board by June 15, 1973, a proposed schedulo, not inconsistent with' the above da tes, for this proceeding, i
t
,e M
se F
1,'~Q]n gA5ui g
a tu, e
3 l'
I
i
.. i nc 1 utlin:: loro]>osed d::1es for e>:cliange of britien d i reei t e.;l i taony, s i :i r l o f ov.ideis tia ry lie: ri ng,,
e t.c.
TIIE Nim 1IC sal') TY AND I,1CENSI NG IDAllD
,,'_' P...r. f. '.ff {.',Wll (b.
f
)? 6s 3.
- i. -
i Ca de t. 11. II:uul,
.lr.,
I,le m h oi-Oh,:ltEW f/ Lib =,eu.
g/?
i
./
w
~
Fre d e r i c' ]I.,.jdIn> n, !.ie::' r f
I i '.
...c.
.f.
.?
Jolin li.
a ri:ui k i<l e s, Clia i rma n Issued a t Wasiling t.on,
D.
C.,
t !)is 31s t. da y o f ?,la y, 1973.
l e u[.
Q1 g a'n @] '
T g
.i J(u 1
e e
________.____-___J