Text

Transcript of 730522 Prehearing Conference in Cleveland,Oh. Pp 1-85
	ML19329D259
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	05/22/1973
From:	Farmakides J; Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:	;
References
	NUDOCS 8002260862
	Download: ML19329D259 (85)
	v • d • e

{{#Wiki_filter::1 rygti[' www gy ..s 19 s UNITED STATESjATOMIC'ENERGYiCOMMISSION M ki 4 ' * *W![p4 T@($.g%E}~... Jg* l: f, y A g.p'ri 4 . tse essMbb w~ $$ ~* ? rz 4 ep. , iffbSQ5ji _ 9[h.fb{f?lkfb," ~~ s. . i fa

ar-

= p'... y g - sj t g ,g,g. ge, y. 5 2 l y

j

~ 4 2

8,\\

IN'THE MATTER OF - 2 .ww-gg A a O MR* p'A'isQ 4 B oc Jj

(

ages" e 4 ~I >;a, w THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS POOR QU ALI TY PAGES s-l Y me D RER0 RTE ~ IN r f () k)

MQ}_Qiw,,y d. ] ;'29, WC:qu ?- ..-c 0' {.y.]: Y 1 m 1 m e, + :- 2 - ._ q{;, ;! :i" ? ;' t Q 1550- ,1 ' + UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Rei-cdit ' , Retype " 2 ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -ip all

v'%

3 h:- Up 4 In the matter of: f" ' 5 THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY and Docket No. THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY: 50-346 6 (Davis-Eesse Nuclear Power Station) 4^' 7 8 City Council Chambers Cleveland City Hall 9 second Floor 601 Lakeside Avenue 10 Cleveland, Ohio 44114 11 Tuesday, May 22, 1973

a..

~ 12 Prehearing Conference in the above-entitled matter 13 came on for hearing, pursuant to notice, at 9:40 a. m. -. ~ L.! ' ? 14 BEFORE: 15 JOHN FARMAKIDES, Esq., Chairman ' Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 16 DR. CADET HAND, Member. 17 MR. FREDERICK SHON, Member. 18 ~ 19 APPEARANCES: I For the AppIicants: 20 I 21 GERALD CHARNOFF, Esq. and JAY E. SILDERG, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge, Q 22 910 17th Street N.W., Washington, D. C. 20006 23 WILSON W. SNYDER, Esq. and LOWELL ROE, Esq., Fuller, Henry, Hodge & Snyder, h 24 300 Madison Avenue, Toledo, Ohio 43G52 e-Federal Reporters, Inc, 25 g "Y

!E[Vf5N$$W

i: '

E ' ' ' ~ ~ 2

xuu ?

90,"j:Cb. ~ - -g ~ > ;

s,,,

..r-(Cont' d) : a - n j d/, E 1 - For the Applicants . :~~. s ! * - ', y glai 2 _ DONALD H. HAUSER, Esq.,-Corporate Solicitor' The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company 3 Illuminating Building - Public Square .h Cleveland, Ohio 44113 ,Y 4 t t-WILFRED H. MABLE, Esq., "e :. 5 13116 Chestnut Oak Drive Gaithersburg, Maryland 6 The Toledo - Edison Company 7 .x 8 For the Staff: 9 FRANCIS X.. DAVIS, Esq., Attorney AEC, Regulatory Staff ~ 10 MYRON KARMAN, Esq., 11 Attorney AEC, Regulatory Staff +

9d -%

'4.- k K; g . 13 For the Petitioner: i& ; 'c. .e"~ 14 MRS. EVELYN STEBBINS, e j 15 140 Public Square 312 Park Building Cleveland, Ohio 44114 ) .;a. 16 l l 17 1 E,; 18 19 I 20 21 O 22 23 i 24 Q -Federal Reporters, Inc. 25 h - + _y .- ~. - -A

hGfff9fri ~' 3 g.gy ~y c r. tqqq: 3 m,.v, ', y l

" Mv.

P R O.C_ _E E _D.I N _G.S ype' q ;1p. ;All ~ 2 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: The hearing will now be in order. j y.?l-11 3 The record will show that this Prehearing Conference .h., began at approximately 9:40 la.m. on May 22,1973, ,a-y 4 in the City g n 5 council Chambers, Cleveland,tOhio. 6 Let the record also show that a moment ago I was t 7 approached by three people carrying TV cameras 'and who asked to m. i'. 2 8 televise the hearings. I advised that they could televise q p 9 before, during recesses, and afterwards; that they could not [~ 10 televise during the hearing. 11 This is a Prehearing Conference primarily to consider yg .12 the Petition to Intervene filed by Mrs. Evelyn Stebbins, forL~ h -m.m. i e-13 the Coalition for Safe Nuclear Power. ~ ~ ~ !h L s h.* ~14 This process arises from a Notice of Hearing; which

it: ;.

15 Notice was published in the Federal Register on January 5, 1973, 1 16 at 38 Fed Reg 907. The Hearing arises from' requirements of 17 Section B to Appendix D, 10 CFT Part 50. The Toledo Edison 18 Company and The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company are the 19 holders of Permit CPPR-80 issued by the Atomic Energy Commissiort 7 I on March 24, 1971. This permit authorizes the licensees to I 20 21 construct a pressurized water nuclear reactor designated as the 22 Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station at the Licensees' site on 23 the southwestern short of Lake Erie in Ottawa County, Ohio. 24 The facilities are designed for initial operation of - Federal Reporters, Inc. -f 25 approximately 2,633 megawatts thermal. / 'A ,lh. \\ .i N

dd ~ ' E:n " ' l -. 3 $ik $;.. T ~ 4 m

c ye y.

-y! ;W U "Qh2/2 1 ^ Incidentally, during the course of the hearing I hfh]? gfgy .2 would appreciate very much that there_be: no smoking. Thank you, yp; y 7.c y 3 As I have noted earlier, the facility is subject

y ngg 4

to the provisions of Section B, Appendix D,10 CFR Part 50, t LGtS M $_$ 5 which sets forth procedures applicable to the review of .m

m. J -. :

6 environmental considerations for facilities, such as Davis-Y:

n: r ?

7 Besse, for which the construction permits.were issued during thn -q 8 period January 1, 1970, through September 9, 1971. 57_ m m3 j> e 9 The Notice of Hearing further specified that a r &; j. _. 10 Hearing would be held at such time and place to be set by this

'. M i1 Board and specified conditions and procedures in which this k,4 GMfb.'

12 Hearing would be carried out. s M[ih. ggf$ ' 13 ~ 'The~ Board designated for this Hearing, by a Notice-

s. -.gy ;

MS "iD. s,- 14 published in the Federal Register (38 Fed Reg 6424), consists, ... 1 4 O~ 15 on my left, of Dr. Cadet Hand, Director of Bodega Laboratory .? a of the University of California, an environmentalist. ,,f 16 . L... t 17 On my right is Mr. Federick Shon, a nuclear physicist . l. ., 4 e m MNM 18 and an expert on reactor safety.. a 19 My name is John Farmakides. I am an attorney with a "2' 20 background in biology and chemistry, n 21 Also in the room is the Alternate Chairman, h 22 Mr. Joseph Tubridy, an attorney and a member of the Bar of the 23 Supreme Court. h 24 The Alternate Technical Member is Dr. Harry Foreman, e-Fedetil Reporters, Inc. W-25 who is not able.to be with us today. s. QW _. ] h'[,, ', . ~ -

3 % ;v n.,s n.; w:y.::n y - , m g.c. y n:q ~ 3.~ ~ dy.f4 g ?fy, ,c +, ~ WR.WK ;J :.;I iThe Notice of Hearing also provided that any person g@jw / ".-gf;; ~ ^ QyM.4 2 whose interest may be affected by the proceeding may file a ,. + y ;,. po 3 Petition to Intervene on whether the construction permit should 'h ) jg.' ' 4 be continued, modified, terminated, or appropriately conditioned w,., sye.;'- 2 _ j,', - 5 to protect environmental values. yy y 6 Any such Petition to Intervene nust be filed under 7 oath or affirmation and otherwise conform to the rules of r s w 8 practice-of the Atomic Energy Commission, specifically 9 Section 2.714 ,nw p 10 Two petitions for leave to intervene were filed: !{.;. 11 one by a brief, single-page letter filed by Mr. Steve Ganis;~- f.:.. dm.. m-12 and a second one was filed by Mrs. Evelyn Stebbins on behalf? -c f.>* 4::, "i 13 ' of the Coalition for Safe Nuclear Power. ~

Q: x y

/M ~ ~ 14 By Memorandum and Order dated March 30, 1973, this n;j a 15 Board ruled that the letter of Mr..Ganis failed to meet the - 16 requirements of Section 2.714. Accordingly, his petition was 'y 17 duly denied, but he was invited to present his comments and n ~,_ 1l9 W. 18 views at the Evidentiary Hearing through a limited appearance. ~ 19 The petition by Mrs. Evelyn Stebbins failed to meet i 4 -j 20, the requirements of Section 2.714, in substantial part; however, .v. 21 the Board felt that Mrs. Stebbins would be given a second Q 22 opportunity to revise and resubnit a petition within 20 days, 23 conforming to the Section I indicated earlier, Section 2.714. Q~ 24 Mrs. Stebbins, by an Amended Petition to Intervene, e-Federal Reporters, Inc. '~4 : 25 dated April 16, 1973, recubnitted her petition. ..Q, ~ .l %o ,[ jjI j

If:.:, +5hllll O

R.

u. ? ~ ^ c g y g : w y ;; : : [t& i %..e T '.$/ft 1- . The Applicant opposed the petition in its entirety; - 0 4, ~Sigd 2 and the Atomic Energy Commission Staff opposed in part, and Q .m 3 agreed in part if certain conditions were met. .h{tl The Board by Noticle of Order for Special Prehearing i 1;. 4 ( ,y ^ -4,;. - 5 Conference, dated May 4, 1973, noted that while the petition of r 6 Mrs. Stebbins, as amended, attempted to comply with Section .,1 7 2.714, it still remained vague, unclear, and a. iguous. , e.p a.. 8 Nevertheless, the Board, mindful of the fact that i' 9 Mrs. Stebbins was without benefit.of counsel and that the 10 failure to comply may stem from a misunderstanding as to the t. ,C. .z'L. 11 facts needed to meet the requirements for intervention, decided J. x w % ucws 12 to hold a Special Prehearing Conference in order to clarify and

G.y N. $$?.-

13 resolve the matter. x[ 3bE!?.,e T9 ' 14 These are the pre'.iminary remarks of the Board. ] 15 Perhaps at this time we would appreciate the people appearing before the Board today to identify themselves. 16 17 For the Applicant? ].....Du 18 MR. CIIAlmOFF: Sir, my name is Gerald Charnoff, of the e:. - r 19 law firm of Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge at 910 17th Street s. I Northwest, Washington, D. C., and I am appearing today on 20 21 behalf of the Applicant in this proceeding. 22 On my left is Mr. Jay Silberg of the same law firm 23 who is appearing with me, and the first seat to my right behind 24 me in the second row is {1r. Uilson Snyder of the firm of 'g -Federal Reporters, Inc. l 2 25 Fuller, Henry, IIodge & Snyder in Toledo, and he is also 3.3&tw ~- J 'w-m ew-. - -, - ., _ _. ~ _____.~w...e.,m. - -. ,3-

~~*& L._e w N m'm, -. _e. n#te

d m

py:%;i!:'!O'w'O v&~ *.4- %. o r

s c' ~n '. 4 -

-' ". nh ' : :- " -~ T* L e st/.,x w.n w,c.:c.p. .s ,w ~ v~ ~xo y

m.,.m..,O, <g;.., 4 :.a %pgs.

r.e %gi- ' w,

~.. ". ', ~.

. :~~ -J .s y: < Ge -.,. >. +. -. .+ ... w..- n A:pw:.:;g/ e 1.:.

m -. >....

3 5, y y l appearing for the Applicants today, sir. ~ "" " ' ~ '.. s.y..,,. Mpffi%%J[).C ' )

q~,yl/Lygh '

!Q 2 l' CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Thank you. i,A; g-. O m ~

= g w. a. _, v

-, Gr 3 For the Statf?- =' " = ^ ~ - ~' ~ 1 y~ j [' f [. " k - * !M!Dsc" - ' _4 'L MR. DAVIS: My name is Francis X. Davis, and I am . v.:-.. .s..+ ,_gf f. li 5 with the office of General Counsel of the Atomic Energy yz: s n . -x. : ',- 6 Commission, Washington, D. C. 20545. m.- + +,m-., .i'lyl.-(~4 7 on my left is Myron Karman of the same office and $y- '4..;sp ' g,. 8 same address. r, ~.7, v s J-9 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Thank you. . w n: . J:: w:.. WE. 10 For the Intervenor?

q w ~..

~/,.~'a c a djdit 11 Can you hear us? 1 %;p? @ : s. e. mg% yg c.3 ;37 .y_.-+. ? pgy v.(u. .,.w. .nL..,.,k*~l.13 ~,

L..,. N'J-

.sw. m :-.: w -( ^ GQQTg YAPr. qQyge::y e ~ 'try-l4 >vw ~,;#'.hD ', 4 5.; ': - 15 4%.s, 16 d.a 3 . ~ T ; {, '.r', s, x, - )7 4,., e e... s 4,%MjG~;'<'.a';.;. ~

zfw, 3.~ 18

,' g.., ; om A. 19 s... -, '1 ,e ' : cj M. s 20 I 1 q,- l -% i *. 1 1 21 l l . --c 22 4 23 .t h 24 -Fedect Reporters,Inc. Sjr'., 25 . M{ t,, + -N- .. k =- ) ' Q Q*Ni.' : 'l,. v 2;.

M h,dkigQ4 "'M 1":. ', ~ 1 > ,g :nw.,

..-y g

.. w y z. ~ C*D/.YE'fg 1 f qi%

^

t r' 1550 f1 MRS. STEBBINS:'.I am Evelyn Stebbins, Chairman of the L O type Jp 1 2 Coalition for Safe Nuclear Power. f .ba & W ^% 3 VOICE: We can't hear you. 'h (Te J. 4 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Can you speak up a little bit, k, n, ',h 5 ma'am.

l 6

MRS. STEBBINS: The Coalition for Safe Nuclear Power. And I wish at this point -- I hope this will be an appropriate 7 .e 8 time to announce that the coalition for Safe Nuclear Power had voted at a Board meeting to change their name to the Coalition m 9 [ 10 f r Safe Electric Power; and they will be known as this organi-ss., jj zation henceforth. J' ,s.w ypp,

12 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES:

Mrs. Stebbins, we are having.a i little difficulty hearing you. Could you turn the microphone 13 me YMf.C down a little and speak right into it? j4 y<

4l.

a. - -

MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. Is this better? 15 h 16 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Yes, I think it is. l e->", 3 17 Can you all hear in the back? l pp~ [ 18 (Chorus of "No.") 1 g, { )9 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Can you speak up a little bit? MRS. STEBBINS: I guess it is on. t 20 ,L, 21 I said that I was Evelyn Stebbins, Chairman of the 22 Coalition for Safe Nuclear Power, and that I hope that this would be an appropriate time to advise this Board that the g p Coalition had. voted at a Board meeting to change their name to

- j "*'*'* [5 the Coalition for Safe Electric Poker.

4. 0 5

.K -n >e ~ .~r:.n F ~ "q :y'g * *J t 9'Dk. i'4, O u :.,Q'. ~ g V

2 Mp gg;.9 *;

2 Qpfy,? ' i ~ y;h. y:_ q '. M '?!2 h .1 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Is there any significance to 2 : ... 6 v,n hhhfh 2 that' change,'ma'am? ~

?Ey *,

. ;.si P 4,m; -. 3 MRS. STEBBINS: This allows us to have a little l yq3 : 4 wider area of representation or interest rather than just e.ijo j y.n:, 5 nuclear power plants; but other than that, the organization m[ 6 remains the same. 7 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Well, during e course of the 8 hearing later we are go'ing to be asking you as to the details , s.;S, 9 of the Coalition, and perhaps this' will be clarified further ..e, ~ m 10 then. m,, cN. ru - 11 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. Okay. - Q: ~i. 2[i$2PZ 12 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: We have no problem with you * . 1 Q.d ~ AMC. 13 ~ announcing that at this. time','~no, ma'am. y % - r. 3.yyyiw 8:Jin '~4 14 MRS. STEBBINS: And the address is 312 Park Building iis':M m- - y 15 140 Public Square, Cleveland, Ohio 44114. ' "j 16 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: All right. Thank,you very much. a 'j (. 17 The Board will propose that we move ahead by consider- }g <'3 II[ k-18 ing the Amended Petition to Intervene filed by Mrs. Stebbins. ~ Ms... Y 19 The Board has some direct questions first that we would like to ^ T. ' 20 explore to be sure that we understand the position of v y L.

[

21 Mrs. Stebbins. And then after that, what we will do is -- in t 22 accordance with our order -- is ask nrs. Stebbins to address 23 the objections filed by the Staff and the Applicant. This will 24 be her opportunity to re,spond to the objections of the other - Feder:t Reporters, Inc. 0lR 25 two parties. '7l ,.;g~:* l - Q,.J- ',..

ew: n 2,---

,~, _. _..

h~,, my en. N = PWM e ,? Y ? ~k ~ a , rm py;;&n ':n;h; / r = : ; ^T T ~ y - zn. e;s et:p ~ c

W. ;w

'~

3

.~, 3 QP[11 First', Mrs. Stebbins,'I take it that the Amended ~ &#e .-n ftk. v h %d1N .2 Petition to Intervene filed April-16,'1973, is the petition that. &y'ipf';9.:.. MEh?i ^ 3 is before'us today? ~ n g-s.y,- e 4 MRS. STEBBINS: It was my~ understanding that this was ) x :. i $3Y,,,dk _ 5 a supplementary petition in addition to the original petition.'

e'.*p.*

? .h - 6 Iidid.not reiterate the items-in the first petition, which a. .i gg 7 seemed, to some extent, %g acceptable to the AEC regulatory staff. 4 8 I do believe it was called " Supplementary" Petition rather than n.g; ~ i # " Amended." 9 en, ~.~;l.- 10 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: No, ma'am. I will have to .X : jj disagree. The title is " Amended Petition to Intervene" and-x./. 2 +. . i e ij\\l ', id@y,". ~ .12 a tually.-- m. a m: - t QEN 13 MRS. STEBBINS: I guess it is Supplementary. n .c 5 "N I.7k ;fk- ] MN 14 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: n: Actually, the Order that we 15 issued required or directed you to resubmit a Petition to g Intervene based on the fact that in our opinion the original e., ^ _ _ i-:

6..

Petition to Intervene failed to meet the requirements of a 17 gy ; w?9 % Section 2.714 unless -- excuse me. Off the record,

o. g, ;t. e 18

9 19 (Discussion off the record.)

e-CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: I have another request. I would g

7 _o like to have this on the record.

I have another request from - 21 22 an ther TV station to televise the hearing. I have denied the 23 request, as I have earlier with the other two. The position of 2j the Atomic Energy commission is very clear in this regard: the r-Federal Reporters, Inc. hearings may be televised before they begin, during recesses, , [; - ~ ^

:w..

/ x; $u l

w e.r T. s _, Q [: c, % ;{ ".); '[ii'; '., { v,.. 4 h ( 'f 2" - 'T ~ l p 4 11 1, - n.: y y 9,,. ^ . a. : f; ng r.;q&,y 9.{ s,. s y

f 914 y

\\ 4,%_,-$m l and after they conclude; but not'~during the hearing.

pg.

i .ff. [1 2 I think, Mrs. Stebbins, we are going to go r.ick now .mns l N y l, 3 and we will advise you, in view of your statement just a moment (. 1 (gsb 1 4 ago, we are going to --

pw,

,[M.,C ' S VOICE: I can't hear anything at all, so I am leaving. ) %.".. c 15 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: I am terribly sorry, sir. We j,9h 7 are having difficulty with the loudspeaker system. I cannot .A ..D! 8 improve on it. It's a mechanical-system. -y i-M: 3 9 MRS. STEBBINS: Mr. Farmakides, sir, I might point out .m 0 g p,, 10 that when I submitted my Amended Petition, I also resubmitted 2,.yp. 11 a copy of the original petition. And on page l' of the Atomic Ti. - 1 .q;;ggi,c; 12 Energy commission regulatory staff's answer to our Amended' 13 petition, last paragraph, they state, ..m g: < c., "With respect to the s %.s, g;f 14 letter and list of contentions - " at%',f ' 't 15 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mrs. Stebbins, you will have t- ) n. 16 to speak up, ma'am. f. The court reporter cannot hear you. N 17 MRS. STEBBINS: "With respect to the letter and list upp h:3i m. of contentions from the Coalition dated February 2nd and 3rd, 18 19 1973, respectively, the Staff has no objections to the parti-n l 49-20 cipation of the coalition as Intervenors to the extent discussed

x. a

N 21 in the February 15th response from the Staff."

.c 22 Now, that was a comment in addition to their comments 23 on our Amended Petition. ! g' ~ 24 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mrs. Stebbins, the fact that Federal Reporters, Inc. 4s.j. - 25 the Regulatory Staff said that, speaks for itself. They are e A ' We b /Ch;t f; w : /t'., ' h r pp,

,9;u.,.:g - ~ c 12 T pY@.V _w, > > f..; '., [ is ~.' 'I one party, and they in no way bind or control this Board's ~ .l,~ :, ' , L.y 2 actions.. I will give them the same weight I will give you -- - J 3 if you become a party -- or to the Applicant, and nothing more. r O i ..), 4 I think we will proceed and consider the Amended 4 6 5 Petition to Intervene. I will say this: that I will allow the 6 other two parties to also respond to this item of procedure. 7 For the Staff, Mr. Davis? 8 MR. DAVIS: One minute, please, Mr. Chairman. 9 Mr. Chairman, I'am'not quite sure of the point. 10 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: The point that we are discuss-k 11 ing right now is what is before the Board today: Is it only-VM.C 12 the Amended Petition to Intervene filed April 16th? Or is it- ~' T h-l ;* 13 the Amended Petition to Intervene, plus the original Petition.

3.. m. ~.

.i,.m w 14 to Intervene filed February 2, 19737 ~ 15 MR. DAVIS: Mr. Chairman, as you said, the Staff's 16 response speaks for itself. Mrs. Stebbins' group did in fact 17 submit -- resubmit the original list of contentions and the [- 18 letter attached to the supplemental -- excuse me -- the 19 Amended Petition to Intervene. And we took the Amended Petition 4 ^ 20 to Intervene, the letter, and list of contentions, as a body. I

l 21 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES:

Mr. Davis, we are having 22 difficulty hearing you, too. Is it possible to talk directly l*' 23 into the microphone, sir? 24 MR. DAVIS: Ye,s, Mr. Chairman. - Federal Reporters, Inc. 25 The Regulatory Staff. considered the Amended Petition f

. b v

' ^ ,n'

bM[.Jat;.[i l;y Q,.,. + j[ 13 h,.' k.. [,, ~ ~ q.ip@ 1 to Intervene,- the -list of contentions originally filed, and the y..... ..g 3: 2 letter with that original list of, contentions as a body, as one TEsi 4' _A. 4 ' 3 document, and we responded to all three. !) j e#&a. 4 As our response to the Amended Petition said, we 5 considered most of the contentions in the original list of N ';' .f t' ' 6 content; ions abandoned when Mrs. Stebbins -did not - attempt to J:M 7 correct deficiencies that we noted in our original response; (.- 8 but, however, those contentions where she did attempt to correct. 9 some of those deficiencies, we took the original contentions t.. 10 and the attempted correction in the supplemental -- excuse me, ' 5,;,, jj the Amended Petition as one. Therefore, -- ,7 n '; jigy,g o '12 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mr. Davis, hold on, please...y. l U 13 If some of you, or all of you are having difficulty Wes&.q k ' hearing in the back, there is room here in the front, a little .Y: j4 L 15 bit closer to the front, and you are welcome to sit there. 16 I see no reason why you can't take those seats. They are prob- { 37 ably more comfortable. (Discussion off the record.) 18 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mr. Davisk going back to the ,p ' j9 y, 20 Point that we were discussing with you: We're still not clear 21 as to what your position is. I don't think you he ve elucidated h 22 "",y m re and indicated your response to Lae Petition. 23 SPecifically, if you are saying that there are 24 contentions in the original Petition that you think should be hi

-Fedelsi Reporters Inc made a part of the Amended Petition, then clarify that and 25

+~~ 3 h:, m; .-,--,m. ~

l '{. } T ' n= 34 f&&+:a ~ . ~.wg. ""Of. I clarify your authority for that, sir. And also what did you h: r .i r 493ir,h ' 2 mean by saying that.Mrs. Stebbins had, in fact, abandoned ',o,..i. -. fv,5 3 certain of her contentions and not others? . (n;c 4 MR. DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ~ ,) =

k 5

In our February 15, 1973 response on page 8 thereof, 6 the Regulatory Staff summed up what it had dealt with earlier 7 in our response by saying that paragraph 26 and paragraphs 28 8 and 29 of Mrs. Stebbins' original List of Contentions was to the 9 extent,that we dealt with them and discussed them in our 2, .e. '~ 10 response, and we thought they were adequate. They were s 11 adequately phrased for consideration by the Board. ' #57. : 12 Then switching to our April 30 response when on k, [.';; 13 pagos 10 and 11 we said that we had no objections to the-I' 14 participation of the Coalition as Intervenors to the extent , c 15 in the, discussion of the February 15 response, we were referr-i 16 ing to paragraphs 26, 28, and 29. 17 We, therefore, thought to the extent in the discus-7l. s., {'[c' 18 sion in our original response that they should be dealt with i by saying that they were not the other contentions in 19 20 l Mrs. Stebbins' and the Coalition's original pleading. We ~ i 21 meant -- and I mean now -- that we thought they were adequately P rased. They were incorporated by being attached to h 22 23 Mrs. Stebbins' Amended' Petition and Affidavit. 1 24 We took it as part of that Amended Petition. And - ederal Reporters, Inc. 25 since none of the other contentions were rephrased, or none of 4 f - ~ M

K: /hy:.,x,. W. ! r^'j. * %.,. -.:

y-yc: ~ y 15 * ,gw: a u. y~ QWC , - C' ' c.C.. k>*x*. u 1 our objections were dealt with, we thought that they had been y s ,,A. 2 abandoned and syould not be considered now. Whereas, the three s. z.,7 a.. c-o;.y -b.N;af 3 Paragraphs we refer to were. dealt with adequately q 'j., g l ~,g 4 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: So then, sir, in summary, s.. t id: 5 could you identify specifically and give us a list of those i ' [i. 6 contentions that you think are properly before us now? 7 Identify them by document and also b number. Give +.- +. ; 8 us the paragraph number. g.', 9 MR. DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [ 10 In Mrs. Stebbins' original List of Contentions

jlf, 1j entitled " Petition to Intervene," I don't think we considered

1. T :.

g ;t y,- x,. paragraphs 26, 28, and 29 to the extent that we discussed ine 12 !'".W,. !)JFPi' ~ 13 our pleading to be proper for consideration by this Board. , em r ~. $%E" j4 If the contentions are specified today to the extent IN 15 that we thought that Mrs. Stebbins meant it to be as we worded i 16 them in our original response, the other contentions in that j7 original List of Contentions we thought were abandoned, since . N. : 18 they were not rephrased to meet our objections. 9 v j9 In her Amended Petition to Intervene, we thought = >, l . j', - 20 ther contentions were suitable for consideration by this Board. I

?

21 If the interpretation were given to then that we thought they ~ 22 had, or if Mrs. Stebbins respecified her contentions to be 23 adequately expressed for consideration for this Board -- in p,- 24 ther words, we did not think that the contentions as expressed o - ederal Reporters' Inc e, 2j in bicck-and-white, or the Amended Petition in some instances

D

s. ',.

p f ~ =l

ih;

l ;.: , j :, /.

6;j 6.,.(y)~. 16 qq p .m w. I was proper.

- ( pjy..

,g g;v;f 2 But if interpreted in one way,.they would be proper; ,e 9," 1 s 3 and if interpreted in another way, they would be improper.

g/

4 We tried to specify to what means we were referring in our 5 February 15th response -- excuse me -- I meant in our April 30 6 response. 7 We tried to express what-we meant, which we thought 8 would be improper. Those paragraphs, the way we thought they 9 should be interpreted, the thoughts expressed in paragraph 3 of 10 the Coalition's Amended Petition, was to the extent that we 11 discussed, all other contentions that were in that Amended +if..: ~ 12 Petition and should be denied. &:[: ].g. 13 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Thank you, Mr. Davis. C7 jf j+ .r 5 14 For the Applicant, could you give us your thoughts? 15 MR. CHARNOFF: It is our view, sir, that both 16 Petitions are before the Board in the sense that a ruling, I 17 think, is due from the Board. ,o-18 The Intervenors did, in fact, resubmit the first 19 Petition and changed only insofar as an Affidavit was added to l [. ' 20 l the first Petition. For the reasons set out in our filings, 21 we think the Petitions are still deficient and did not, and do 22 not, believe that the additio!. of the Affidavit to the first 23 Petition cured it in any respect. I am referring to the Q 24 defects that were found. -Feder:I Reporters, Inc. } 25 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mr. Charnoff, would you please __,4

T % $tk C $ d W h i N 6 N M [ [*A b.' E Z U w.a 'i s [. 4

t1%,g e p%8 %, a i a ?e W,.

7,;" ' 17., e .r m m-Q K. Y. T. a' Y m '.. ?%. i~:!x ' F.

-n :h - \\ h f.: N yl W Q p.l f

% ' T. c . : f p.% ~ z g h i1 turn the microphone more towards you.'~,i^~ N A k.r s., 4; 4 %,4N.hl.i. 2 .4 C d-MR. CHARNOFF: The defects were noted by the 3 ..c g.. <dve C4%

-.,1 m.p y<f f w

^A.1.yl 3 Licensing Board and by the other parties to this proceeding.. e N.g 4..' " 4

w.., n.

. _.We did not address that in our answer, but we do r e. ..@/)/ 5 believe.that having submitted that paper to the Board that the - v# :y S;g., e - - 6 Intervenors haven't, in effect, asked for another ruling on m 7 that original Petition. ~ ' 2 j %,.y ' ' { <., 8 Clearly, in addition to.that before the Licensing- [.$_ 9 Board this morning, is the so-called Amended Petition which,

,g,,.

[ [t 10 as I recall, it contained the seven contentions which we ad- .~aj.y 11 dress in our reply in that document as well. .4- , w.y

,7.;?,7"'iQ,12 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES

That's enough on this point.is v ,c. &p,3 *t.. Q *,' .p.'e ; 4 3 The-Board will take the entire matter, including this 1 i ;, .WX ':!... aG R, g. # ' ~.14. point plus the other points that will'come up later this ,c ,Y['Y 15 morning, under advisement, and I hope that we should have a a s -.. l C'E. 16 ruling in the latter part of this week or the early part of .n:. %. ..If,..f; c 17 next week on all points including the Petition to Intervene ~. m . w... k.R;b. 18 filed by the Coalition for Safe Nuclear Power. x-n a pk j, I d.@ 19 All right, let's proceed then. 1 ~^ i. Mrs. Stebbins, the Board was concerned with your 20 t .:,.y ..Q' 21 showing of interest. Could you point out for the record those ~ 22 members of your organization, the Coalition, even though you 23 changed your name. I am referring to the name of the Petition. i 1 24 Could you point out for the record those individual 8 tal Reporters, Inc.

-g,g 23 members of your organization who have such an interest, and j

ww l f: % ' t..

1. J4

~n-es CQgtg %a f-'".n . = - - - m SWW < 'd '4

g@]d, 1 jg;n.:2 /1 \\- w.< 18' y!' ~ ". .y Q f g ' D( - 1 their reasons, ma'am? %:j *: ;.. 2 MRS. STEBBINS: Well, I hope that this will clarify-g q. fy 3 matters. The Coalition represents over 350 people who have ,\\ j l s s 'f v - 4 supported the Coalition. And they come from the following ~a-t, 5 counties in Ohio. The ~ count!ies are: Ashtabula, Lorain, Lake, 6 Sandusky, ottawa, Lucas, Tulton, Mahoning, Stark, Ashland, l 7 Medina, Erie, Richland, Franklin, Seneca, Geauga, and Cuyahoga. .w 8 Now, the specific organizations who have signed 9 certificates of representation to bur organization are Citizens 10 for Clean Air and Water, Inc., an environmental group of m 7_ ~ 11 approximately 500 citizens with the ma-)ority of the membership q' _ igy r 12 in the Greater Cleveland area,- but with members throughout tlie e. 44 $1y-13 state. They were organized in '68 for the purpose of fighting .. ' d ';. - - TM # 14 pollution and preservation of natural environment. 15 Area Councils Association, a group of neighborhood ~ 16 associations in the Greater Cleveland area, reprc_aenting ~- J,- 17 approximately 20,000 members, whose purpose is to promote a q_. d 18 strong and representative citizen action movement for mainton-19 ance and improvement of neighborhood life, which has included lconcernandactiononairandwaterpollutionproblems. 20 21 CIIAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Is that all written down, 22 Mrs. Stebbins? 23 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. I am reading it from something 24 that is written out. eral Reporters, Inc. \\ $_, 25 CIIAIRMAN FAR'IAKIDES: Well, please go a little slower l l ,5 * : e' l y _'

h{W:f. hi ' i ~ y9 .7: CiW*/j . tuo. ~ ~T $ i s.. I because it is very difficult to follow you and the acoustics f .2 are not the best. r---- ~; &~. - - ~ ~ " ' ' ' - - ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ C '. 3 MRS. STEBBINS: hnere would you like me to start 1 ':Q..y,f-4 again? ,s, ' 4,': 5 THE REPORTER: "Which has included..." 6 MRS. STEBBINS: ...which has included concern d QR 7 and action on air and water pollution problems. Many of the 8 Area Councils members own property in and use the western P + 9 basin of Lake Erie as a recreational area for swimming, boating, l 10 and fishing. .1.. m.- ? 11 Ohio Consumers Association, an organization concerned e,. J.7.%N! H 12 about protection of consumers, which has a membership'of E 13 approximately 50, consisting of about 50 percent individual w%&t.'- ~

y. pig <

14 memberships, and 50 percent organizational members throughout M3 3 15 the state. -i T..~ - / 16 Community Rights Council, organized for the purpose . a: w., 17 of promoting their personal rights as pertains to their general . ?' d 18 welfare and the exposition of any attempt at encroachment of 19 such rights, with a membership of approximately 100 persons in ,i 20, the vicinity of Oak Harbor, and including persons residing at i 21 Sand Beach. g 22 National Health Federation, Cleveland Chapter, an 23 organization with approximately 250 nenbers concerned wit-h ~ 24 maintaining the health freedoms of our nation's people. -Federal Reporters, Inc. g,, 25 . Southwest Action Group'on Environment (SAGE), a m% I sn '6 y9, ~ s --o.

1x4,.4,~9.,l;;>. 3 ^ ~ .s 20 ,; e.y.~,r w .r.., g??s*N ' # '$. 7 [,_ citizens organization of approximately 70 members in Berea~, 1 y - ~ Q+ *+* u ~ - 2 Middleburg Heights, North.Olmstead,-Rocky River, and Olmsted'~~' ,t '4[' ,a 3 Falls. .x .Gn Avon Lake Task Force on Pollution, an environmental 4 (( 5 group from that area. 6 Citizens for a Safe Environment, a citizens group from Lake County, 100 members. 7 8 Dr. David Gitlin, M. D.., Berea, Ohio. 9 Mrs. Helen D. McCue, mother, housewife, and Chair-10 woman of Mothers March on Pollution, North Olmsted, Ohio. 11 Rev. Earl H. Cunningham, Ph.D., Cleveland, Ohio. Mh;~,.y 12 George Kundtz, Chesterland, Ohio.. $[~j 13 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Did you -- I am sorry. lQ.J' .w,y '; ' 14 MRS. STEBBINS: I do have additional things written ,1 ~,' 15 here which I could read, which further point out our interest, ' '. ~ 16 if you think it has not been proven at this moment. 17 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: I might ask you: Do you have .. ((' ' I8 any members that reside in the County of Ottawa? 19 MRS. STEDBINS: Yes, we do. l 20l CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: And their names, ma'am? At ~ 21 least one name; it doesn't matter. 22 MRS. STEBBINS: All right. Sandra Zenser, Z-e-n-s-23 e-r. 9 24 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: What is her address, ma'am? y - detal Reporters, Inc. 25 MRS. STEDDINS: Gee, I don't have it right here with fl 2 } ',s

Wkibl:h1;;$7:H '{ W $ Q % ' ' S b, % " ? 21.'~ 'i^^~ L igeg:1..w-n ~ :: ~. ,l~- m.f;ia %. L '. ; a; : e. p,n; gtM T . w e ~, o.y . r..;v. s. , r y, g~,9

1 me, but it'is Oak Harbor.

m -.e. h;3, dy : o, ^

.cis'.p v 2

c c. ahyg:i s . _. ----CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES:- Do you know of ~anyone else who y +%o 3 lives in that vicinity? 1 m.e. i r n .c e osn a.'.g ggG.. 4 MRS. STEBBINS: Well, yes. Mr. Newman owns property

3. v. -

'5 s. ? _., . 3lps 5 at Sand Beach and he is a mber. ...ey, 6 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Now, I understand also that i m 7 you are representing yourself as well nere, so;you are involved 8 also representing yourself? 9 MRS. STEBBINS: Well, I truess so. I didn't -- t 10 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: That's a vary key point, ma'am. . - p 11 MRS. STEBBINS: Well, yes. 7,t. = :,M :" ' 1 2 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: I am sure that if you are not, , - (;. ? 4 k ,i t ~ ar.k' /.;, 13 then we would have~other difficulties. But I assume you are P t. W.: , $l~-- +f g u,' 14 representing yourself -- it s w..,. ~,- - 15' MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. M% 16: CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: -- as well as the Coalition? .,,).,'j. 1. 5 17 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. t -4 2 4 a M.f$, ' 18 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Otherwise, we get involved in

, 3,g 19 a problem of you practicing law, and I don't think that is 20 l involved here.

+ . z, 21 MRS. STEBBINS: Okay. Well, I have always felt I was 22 representing myself as well as representing the Coalition as 23 Chairman of the Coalition. p 24 CHAIRMAN FARMARIDES: That is what we understood. I .r - ederal Reportars. Inc. (.. 25 just wanted the record to reflect that. J

,._ c

{ g e _- ~

c,,, ;.3 ?$k;'yf_,3 ;u n 22 ..A Q '.

e..

s '. 7 i . a. s [ M.IH1 1 MRS. STEBDINS: Fine. 2 M. cu.. 2 e,.

.CHAIRMAIL.FARMAKIDES: . Offithe. record.- :.r e 3

'(Discussion off the' record.) g!'C r ')- h ""'. 4 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mrs. Stebbins, I think you did eJ 5 have some Certificates of Representation there that you were 1. 6 going to file? 7 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes, I do. 8 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Well, you may file them, ma'am, 9 either with us today, and by serving the other two parties, 10 or you can mail them in to us with proper service. 11 MRS. STEBBINS: Well, I have them, sir, so if you. ' f ' % ~" 12 will give me a moment, I will. ' (~-,; ~ 13 MR. DAVIS: Mr. Chairman?_ E's,1,:. QQt.

if 14 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES:

Mr. Davis. r 15 MR. DAVIS: Thank you. 16 I have one question regarding these Certificates of 17 Representation, as to their currency, as to how recent they are, 18 CHAIR!1AN FAR!iAKIDES: I haven't seen them, Mr. Davis, 19 have you? 20 MR. DAVIS: I have this question of Mrs. Stebbins, i 21 Mr. Chairman. 22 CHAIR!1AN FARMAKIDES: Oh. Wait until you get it 23 and then you can raise the question then, if there is a Q 24 question. -Feder:I Reporters, Inc. 25 MR. DAVIS: Thank you. k '>*') A."-

Q Q 4. w:a.:.a.r. x t:,Q.:eo p k, t.9.e,. c;,. e v m v; + m er- .a... 23 ' w ,_: q, 9mpr. f4, .:V, .. c,.1".1 x.v.1 ? !J,. - + 5#;5 L g.. ,n 4.H.. A '.-CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES:.e Ordinarily,th'e rules require .a g3, gpe.-1 u -- $e n.m., CTW.. 2 a certain number of copies to be made of every submittal, but m;c.9:.: < - ;r ' ~ .n m.l3,ixM +,j].4 3 we will make copies of these with the Xerox machine. --.s Jy 7 '. > m lJ ' e 4 Off the record. i.', (Discussion off the record.) 3, 5 y d,M ~. -6 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Back on the record. /

n' 7

MRS. STEBBINS: Mr. Chairman, sir? -4 8 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mrs. Stebbins. .. T 9 MRS. STEBBINS: Would you like me to give copies of 10 these certificates to the court reporter? w + ?.;' I1 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: We will tako care of.it. Wew . - (t.s n w.;/. ' erd v:- y 12 will filt it in the Public Proceedings Branch when we go bac)c. t. +c ~ N.* h. ,.,; J.pf,. 13 MRS. STEBBINS: Well, I do have a set here if you-

%u;g<.,e wW N.

14 want them. g 3[ 15 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: If you have extra copies. 16 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes, I have an extra copy for the

7.,. -

17 court reporter. x u.%' ml'$ 18 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Fine. Then please give that ..g [-;- 19 extra copy to the court reporter. ,-fl 20 Incidentally, the proceedings in this hearing are o 21 available -- all of the documents filed are available both 0 in Washington, D. C., the Atomic Energy Commission Proceedings 22 23 Room, as well as here in Cleveland at the Ida Rupp Public 24 Library -- I'm sorry, it is not in Cleveland. It is the .g -

-Federal Reporters, Inc.

f!,.,... 25 Ida Rupp Public Library, Port Clinton, Ohio. That's in the

p. ::,. ~

( 2,y.. n r 1k,0? ? ~

7 . s e : s. :. ! j .. N.< m %%f g.:: Q, .9-24 ~ 3yj J. ....c ' " " en 1 . vicinity - of-the site... iar, =- s t- - =--.- = -- -H p' h # 2 Ida Rupp Public Library, Port Clinton, Ohio, 43452. <.c r. .m &. v. 3 Anything else that the parties might wish.to state = (h:,, 4 with respect to the interest shown by the Petition to Intervene" ~ ~ 3 .5 Let's proceed then to the matters raised by the Staff -l 6 and the Applicant. And I want to.be sure, Mrs. Stebbins, that < :.W. 7 you understand. ~ ..--:=

== ~~-- = 8 You.have got to show us, this Board, that there is a 9 genuine fact that you are going to dispute. In other words, we 10 can't have a hearing merely on the law of a problem; it's got V 11 to be some fact that you know of that you dispute and that you t. 4 yr-. 12 dispute, and that you intend to show either by filing direct ~ -h.;h.~ 13 evidence, or through your cross-examination, and this Board - q,,o,.... Y T 14 . will permit you s cross-examine on that fact so long as we 15 are assured that you do have a material fact in dispute. 4 :3 16 So when we say, "What are the bases of your conten-17 tion?" it's really up to you to establish to the satisfaction , -] 18 of this Board that there is a genuine issue of fact to each 19 of your contentions. l Now, we do not request that you offer proof at this 20 21 time. Of course, when the hearing takes place you will be in Q 22 the position of offering proof. We simply ask that you make a b 23 showing of what you have based your contention on. (q~ 24 Now, both the Applicant and the Staff in their - Pederal Reporters, Inc. 25 response to either your Amended Petition -- I think the g e i e, e - n ,3 r ~.._ -,.. - _ _. ~ _.

_ _.l f-l - .[- ~. s' 25 . w,: ?,~ e.g7;jjA y ,n,, - 2p.1 Applicant's was filed 26 April 1973,' and-the Staff's was dated - f;M.. Nf, ' 2 30 April 1973 -- they raise some very vital points in opposition .r. u -

d. -
G,

P: t t.. to your intervention. And in our order of 4 May 1973, we 3 Afe, 4 asked that you direct your attention to those points that they ~y v [; ', ' 5 raised in reply, and this, then, permits you to respond.- And 6 we'would like to hear from you now. u;. 7 MRS. STEBBINS: Just a moment, please. 8 CHAIPJfAN FARMAKIDES: What we can do, if you would 9 like, is to take a recess for 10 minutes to give you time to 10 get these in order, or we can proceed, whichever is your desire, ._,y _ r.<_.:. 11 MRS. STEBBINS: Let's just take a short recess, please. .c v. J:f.'Nm.--~12 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: All right. Let's take a 10-9

nn W

13 minute recess until 10:40. xsm Ms x M _. , J. i,> ' -14 (Short recess.) - n. 7 15 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: We'll continue, please. 16 Mrs. Stebbins? 17 MRS. STEBBINS: Mr. Chairman, I would want to address $7, 18 myself to the contentions in my original Petition, as well as 19 the Supplementary Petition, the Amended Petition, inasmuch as 20 ll you have not ruled on whether this is to be included at this

y

,i 21 Point or not. 6 22 With respect to our first contention and the February b 23 submittal, we have stated that we felt that the environmental Q, : 24 report -- - detal Reporters, Inc. 25 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mrs. Stebbins, let's be clear (.. e l t a-l {I; ', # y', r. \\

_&_q-}X4l.?..: r '; ' i ~l a x u :as + 26 wifl( f f&.' 35$5l(. '[ ~ Y,%. -. I about that. We have ruled earlier that your February petition _. wy M;.Ql6 2 was denied because it failed to meet a substantial part concern-(5 w g, ~ ",,, \\ Q 1' 3 ing the requirements of Section 2.714. ' ( ): l 1.- 4 Then we gave you 20 days to resubmit, and you re-submitted an Amended Petitio}'n to,which ??as attached the origina: - c,.4 - 5 6 Petition that you submitted. I 7 Now, as to the Amended Petition whickj included the I-8 incorporation of the original Petition, we have not ruled as .c 9 to that.

.~;,

10 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. I know you ruled, so I thougl t 3 11 it might be appropriate to address myself to the whole thing.. Ek{hi" T' 12 CIIAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Well, how long would you tak"e,

jcf & F;

, (2,7 4.:M - 13 ma'am? 4,,,, ,? #% ~dd.9,' I 14 MRS. STEBBINS: I really don't know, but I don't 9;< [r a ~ 15 think it would be too terribly long. 16 CIIAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: I would appreciate if you would 17 first start with the Amended Petition, the April 16 petition. ~ $N 18 Then you can go into other attachments that you had to that 19 Petition with I;,spect to the Staff's comments on the Petition 20 land also to the Applicant's comments. I would like to hear 21 your response to the Applicant and your response to the G 22 Staff on your Amended Petition. v 23 MRS. STEBBINS: All right. One moment, sir, p, 24 Starting with my response to paragraph 4, we feel e-eder:l Reporters Inc. i 25 that the consequences -- .w. a

Q g..,,. o 3.s 3 , }$ f u.; a,,.< s w ll.J', t, a ~< ~' 4][(.f Q', .qn(j g .1 ~ ', 4 ;/ 7.. s o j ' h e;,,',1 MR. CHARNOFF: Excuse me. I'm sorry. Could we do 1 (-. ( ;, $,, b.., '. b J-this in some sequence? As I. view it, the first contention;_in 2 ygg, .fi,. 3 the Amended Petition appears in paragraph 3. . (W;i *. 4 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mr. Charnoff, I know that's )- l i

.y

. d ! __ 5 the way it is in the responsh,.but I would like to allow 3,1 6 Mrs. Stebbins to proceed the way she is going. Let's take it 7 as to individual paragraphs. Now, we will worr'hr later as to

,4

[ ^ ^ 8 which contentions that paragraph might be. Let's address 9 ourselves to the paragraphs, and I.think you are speaking about e i '- 10 Paragraph 4? . g;, 11 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. Paragraph 4 is the one I am- .a y J., 3,.m:; - 12 referring to right now.. .Jb,. ; n:, A " X P-%.. -13' In our original Potition, it was more or less -.e.m c2:Q' g *" 14 Contentions 8, 10, and 12. It concerns Class 9 (Catastrophic) 15 Accidents. We would like to point out that this has been 16 brought up by our federal agencies, one being the U. S. 7 17 Department of Interior. They responded to an AEC Environmental '[f 18 Statement objecting to the failure to consider Class 9 Catastro-f 19 phic Accidents. 20 We also think that Class 9 accidents resulting in ? 'Ir 21 both air and water releases should be described -- and the m 22 impact on human life and the remaining environment discussed -- -Q) 23 as long as there is any possibility of oc'currence. That's the 24 U. S. Department of Interior. (3 - Fe er:I Reportets, Inc. Y c' 25 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Do you have a nane? u 0;l yg,[*.- . ~.;. u -

'flk1$f]!,'_ a; i:' l' Q : ::l:,' ~ P 3g ..l.,; n. ' i ;.,,;, ; 1 MRS. STEBBINS: No, I do not have a name on that. s- .( ~ 2 CHAIPJ1AN FARMAKIDES: These were the comments in the 4.;p.. J' ; 3 final environmental statement? 4 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. The consequences of an accident 5 of this severity could have far-reaching effects on land and 6 in Long Island Sound which could persist for centuries affect-7 ing millions of people in this densely populated area. 8 Now, also, the Federal Environmental Protection 9 Agency has criticized the AEC for failing to explore the risk c 10 of catastrophic accidents from the operation of atomic plants. 11 These federal agency comments indicate very cleariv. 12 that the coalition's contentions regarding Class 9 accidents. f 13 should be fully consids. red in environmental statements, and"we w:9 {f['/ f 14 submit these comments as further evidence of this fact. Any // 15 failure to allow consideration of Class 9 accidents will be a 16 further violation of the National Environmental Policy Act. 17 With respect to paragraph 5 -- 18 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Could we hold off on that? e. 19 I would like to hear -- what we'll do is: I'll Itave I 20 it up to the parties. Do you want to proceed on each individual 21 paragraph? 22 Mrs. Stebbins, how do you feel? Do you want to go O 23 through the entire Amended Petition and then have responses to . i. 24 that, or-do you want to go through individual paragraphs? tal Reporters, Inc. 25 MRS. STI:3 BINS : It really doesn't make that much + =

-- y&74. a O .3 m n., 29 .S.njn 'CQ ', a a ,,E l's i l t: %y 'o -ft f.'.'l difference to'me. I have something written down. Whether you a. o

M

~ j-;f.h [ 2 want to break 1t down with comments on each paragraph from the ,.c., cp;., o;., 3 people, that's okay. 7 h_/ 4 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: We'll address ourselves to + 5 a. 5 paragraph 4, and I will hear responses from the Applicant and 1 6 Staff and any further response that Mrs. Stebbins may have. 7 For the Applicant? Do you wish -- I know you 8 responded to the original petition. Do you have further ' s 9 comments in view of what Mrs. Stebbins just said? 10 MR. CHARNOFF: No, sir. I would simply indicate, as y *a. - ~; I1 g. you reflected the fact, that we have already responded to this l.2h;;,. 12 contention. We think that this particular contention is a ng4:' M.x.W '-1 3 matter of co='arcial policy, and the law has been excluded from .., ~. < -. s h - ' 14 this hearing for reasons set forth in our filing. e

n.,

15 I would also point out that the Department of \\ d'. ' - 16 Interior's comment read by Mrs. Stebbins referred to Long 17 Island Sound as a possible repository for the aftereffects of s = sir IQ[ 18 an accident of this sort, and I would point out it would be n, 19 nowhere near the area. This was obviously written from the -A i 20 context of another statement. ^ 21 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Is that correct? j 22 MRS. STEBBINS: That was. I was merely pointing out 23 that this catastrophic accident should be considered.. 24 CHAIRMAN FtWiAIGDES : But these were not comments, eral Reporters, Inc. i 'k 25 then, on the drafting of Davis-Besse? l .q .,.'s... ';) G f.;

h% Q y fi A ', ' ' i' sh 30. $.,;);[j.:. n Pa,g, l MRS. STEBDINS: No, I don't believe I saw.any com- ,. ~ e gag ('r.y, 2 ments from the Department of Interior. <h ty. s 3 CHAIRMAN FAMfAKIDES: When you said they were, I was [ $ 4 a little surprised, but I mal y have overlooked it. 'yjf ' 4 ~M, I 'f,~ 5 Anything else, Mr4 Charnoff? i ..., 9 6 MR. CHARNOFF: No, sir. 7 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: For the Staff? Do you have j s 8 anything further to add, Mr. Davis? 9 MR. DAVIS: Mr. Chairman., we believe our responses 10 are clear on pages 6 and 7 in our response to the Coalition's s 11 amendment as far as paragraph 4 is concerned. I have nothing M,. 12 further to add. $' _ gs 14 r-2 _13 CHAIE1AN FARMiKIDES: There is one thought that ~ y ;.,% ' MN 14 comes to mind, Mrs. Stebbins. Is there any reason you chose ..3 n 15 to start with paragraph 4 instead of paragraph 37 ( l6 MRS. STEBDINS: When I was typing' things up I .i.. 17 happened to put paragraph first, by accident. And there is c :R 18 another reason: 9 as I go through some of these things, I refer 19 to paragraph 3, and I really felt that paragraph 3 belonged at s_' 20 the end. 21 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: In other words, paragraphs 1 22 and 2 go to your interests, and all the rest is to the Petition? .fh._ 23 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. l 24 CHAIRMAN FAR!1AKIDES: But you will include paragraph l D' tal Reporters, Inc. 25 3? ,q g. &y

' "ic.y}fce p-A, ~ 31, ~ < uw ;>,.,,

~

gk "j:,.,fW ~

~_,%' g,,. 7/h (,' v+M.tt e v ~<E!8(f P 1 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes, later on. [h[hh-I'. : 3 [ 2 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES:,All right, go ahead. What's .e.. c. s > Ug, 3 the next paragraph? Pa,ragraph 5 is the next paragraph. ~' -j (7 4 MRS. STEBBINS: ts., - M. - 5 This more or less could.refe'y to contention 13 in our original 6 Petition. y 7 We rather feel that the seeds of destiruction for Lake i 8 Erie as a water supply will be contained within the core of the 9 Davis-Besse plant. There is the possibility of no more water 8 10 supply for over 11 million people even if they escape with their 11 life in case of a major accident. The life-giving water can.: '~ 4 o &s .,wi s 12 be turned to death-dealing by radiation poisoning. . ; c' 7;. [hNb:_ .13 In our Amended' Petition we did point out testimony' sc. j$ $ v F ij{fr j4j by Dr. Ford. The Strontium 90 inventory in Davis-Besse is y3 ~. - { 7y< 15 adequate to more than contaminate the entire body of Lake Erie .l 16 above water quality standards. It becomes such a serious 17 subject that it needs to be considered. ^: p jg Now, in addition, the Davis-Besse has an untested j j9 safety system. There will be extensive hearings in Washington _J on this. 20 l There has been extensive testimony of other types of ,J ~ y. 21l accidents that would not be controlled by an Emergency Core 22 Cooling System. The total thing, in our estimation, needs to 0 23 be considered because of the problem. We're talking about 24 water supply for over 11 million people. -Merci Reporters, Inc. i 25 .Y :e: '. ~ ,}. l~- w+ 'a 6 Y g ( _ S P Vl',ik !k ~ ; ?. F,&

d' 0:;i. :lo ~ c => q ;.E i 32 an z>, .w ; * - 1 If this water supply is contaminated, there isn't . { ,A - 1.'. 4' 2 going-to be any water for this country. It is going to be y ~ 3 evaluated, and we are trying 'to point this out in our report. O. ~ 4 And I don't know how we could further justify it other than 5 what we have said now on the failure of the Emergency Core 6 Cooling System on these various accidents which would not be 7 controlled. And we think that a true environmental assessment 8 needs to consider this fact. 9 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Well, Mrs. Stebbins, what would 10 you show, ma'am -- that is what I said earlier -- a dispute 11 as to the fact? What is it that you would show us with respect 4 0 ('. ' 12 to your paragraph 5 during the evidenciary hearing? i 13 MRS. 'STEBBINS: All right. 'Then I guess the thing . W[.. 14 that we would have to show to prove this would be the possi-15 bilities of an accident, since it is the consequence of the -- 16 the environmental consequences, and the thing you have to show } 17 is the possibility. .c -['- 18 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: And you would do that how? How 19 would you do that? 20 MRS. STEBBINS: Through witnesses. 21 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: So you would then put on witnes-22 ses to show what you have just said it would show? ^ ~ 23 MRS. STEBBINS: I'm sorry. I didn't hear. 24 CHAIRMAK FARMAKIDES: In other words, then, you would -Federal Reporters, Inc. 25 intend to put on a direct case using witnesses to prove your E

[_

p. m -

, : i..

x ~

=y y,. cc,,.:x - &,=- ~ 33 x q,y; ;; ' % ~ e f';jaj J - Ag2 .I ,,5 paragraph 5. contention? ~.---..----F

4 7 N i 2

MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. O. y h ; >.... a.c.; % 7..y 3 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Now, what about.your paragraph 7'. & 4 4? Would you have the same thing? .4 5....e ','l $ 5 MRS. STEBBINS: Hell, paragraph 4 would -- pretty s.; 6 much the two would go together to a certain extent because you 7 are talking catastrophic accident; but we had put this in 8 specifically with Lake Erie because we simply considered this 9 such a great problem if there ever was an accident, that we s., .~ 10 feel that it is something that needs to be truly evaluated. f.. I1 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Could you give us a little bit

~..

-I-12 more detail on how you are going to ehow this? What is it * 'O -$hy,... -13 that you have in mind? 2-- ~ W.x. er g :n - 14 MRS. STEBBINS: Well, I don't know what more I can say .*t*,1. .C' .s.- ( 15 'other than to have witnesses who have studied these accident. 7> 16 Possibilities and who would testify at the hearing. .? - 17 CHAIRMAN FARMARIDES: Dr. Shon has a question. ..c, lf? ', 18 DR. SHON: Mrs. Stebbins, would you intend to show wr 19 by your witnesses that, for example, the ECCS, the Emergency h 20 Core Cooling System, doesn't meet the AEC criteria, or something 21 on that order? Would you intend to prove that the containment 22 will break or will release material, for some specific reason? y ih - 23 Do you have witnesses that intend to address themselves to that: 24 MRS. STEBBINS: We would h' ave witnesses that would tal Reporters, Inc. W. 25 speak to the failure of the Emergency Core Cooling System. g. ,1 '9?b ?/, o s me, 9 Q.. s'- ' '."

Cs r.",.,,' s d < p.M ;. 34 %y :p^f f " 1. 3 A-3 I CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: You mean this one? We are . ~< . ; I,",,,',<g '.,_ .'.alking about Davis-Besse now. 2 3 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. All right. i j' 4 CHAIR W FARMAKIDES: All our comments are related 5 to Davis-Besse. 6 MRS. STEBBINS: We are talking about failure of the 7 Davis-Besse plant. 8 CHAIRMAN.FARMAKIDES: D.o you know of some fact or 9 other that would indicate to you that the reactor would fail, 10 or that there is some fault with the ECCS system? . :a ~ 1I MRS.' STEBBINS : It would appear that there is a h,, 12 distinct possibility that there are faults with the ECCS system. .h@L. 13 CHAIPXh.N FARMAKIDES: In other words, you are not ^ -c

f. '.hf I' 14 alleging any particular fact with respect to the building or 15 design of the plant that would cause it to fail?

16 MRS. STEBBINS: Well, sir -- may I have a recess for M 17 a moment? 18 CIIAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Yes. And before we recess, 19 look, we are going to be asking you these questions, as we told 20 you earlier. 21 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes, I understand that. 'e 22 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: And we are going to be asking b 23 you, too, to tell us what it is -- what the facts are you are 24 putting into dispute. We cannot have a hearing merely on the eral Reporters, Inc. 25 legal issues involved; that is up to Congress. We are going to s n.1 * \\. >3 .s. --um i-..-

zd;Qa7li% , s..a 1 ', 0- ~ 35 90

.f.m%~j ; z,' x

~ ( ?,jy 'R: ~ (.ip A-4 I have a' hearing here strictly on the facts in dispute. And we [41[;:a 2 have to have some indication from you that there is a fact in Qjp 3 disputie. 3.,.,.' Now,wewillalsolaskyoulaterwhatyoumeanwhen ,-, g. 3.j'! : 4 zw' \\ 5 you say the Coalition assert $s its interest as a private attorney ~ 6 general. So, ma'am, we would appreciate an answer on that, too. Itis 5minutesto11k00. 7 Let's recess. Let's ^ I 8 recess until 10 minutes after 11:00. 9 (short recess.) c 10 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: May we proceed? ,; q. I1 Proceed, ma'am. ,e y gq 12 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. Mr. Chairman, I would say that hj h5;;;... 13 we know of no fault-in t'he construction, perhaps, of the plant n ^ y dj 14 specifically. But we have had three occurrences within the N 15 Past six months when environmental stresses could have made the l ~ .J 16 Operation ineffective had the plant been in operation. There was a blocked intake at the water pipe at 17 j j* 18 Sandusky; there has been flood waters surrounding the plant; Ir.- 19 and the dikes were broken around the plant. And we do have ,~ 20 some photographs of some of the extensive storm damages surround-21 ing the plant, which we would go into further, 22 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Okay. That is what you would .&c 23 show, then. All right. Could you then go to the other question we raised; .24 tal Reporters, Inc. 25 that is, what is your definition, ma'an, of appearing here as 9 I ~' ~ {tia. L_;' -

..f. y.., ; -:+. %; [ - ^ 36 p ;p y. m : -4i, ;- y c ..g.. fs ~ a -.. y.:.3. ] JSip A-5 1 a private attorney general? l M,.; '.. v - 2 MRS. STEBBINS: Okay. Well, we feel that the, you (* ; ;,'. 3 know, people of the State of Ohio -- all of the people of the O g 4 State of Ohio -- really are being affected by anything that a. ] 5 happens at the Davis-Besse plant. And it was in this context 6 that we felt that the people of the State of Ohio needed 7 representation that we were attempting -- 8 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Are you representing the people 9 of Ohio? 10 MRS. STEBBINS: Well, we felt that this was appropriate, I1 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Well, this will be most diffi-j.. 12 cult. You cited to me a coalition of peoples and organizations, h. f' -13 and I totaled the number and I have roughly, oh,1500, I thfnk. e_ WO2 14 Now - 15 MRS. STEBBINS: No. 16 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: -- I think you are going to be ..f. m 17 hard pressed to make the point that you represent the people

- ?

18 of Ohio on this. 19 MRS. STEBBINS: Sir, there are 20,000 people in the 20 Area Councils Association. 21 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: In which one? 22 MRS. STEBBINS: Area Councils; 20,000. 23 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Well, just to be clear about 24 this -- because we may have a problem on this and I would like 6 eral Reporters

Inc.

25 to avoid it, if possible; if we cannot avoid it wo will have to .yi'C 2

e i w. ,m y s t 4;4fc:@, >.f?,, ..;p J. ' f.. - 37 t ur gy;b;;p:*:n 4 1-

ff: y.eg.,p h.

'iplA-6Ld. '- g,^"y.g ,1 answer it -- but are you also representing yourself with respect W,.ll c a '2 to these three contentions? Or the Coalition that you are s <q, ~';s c W-n.r. 3. P 3 representing? g/: 4 MRS. STEBDINS: I am also representing myself and the m, :, Nl' ;^I 5 Coalition. r .f-6 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: All right. Let's go on, then, .h.[ 7 to the next paragraph, which is 6, I believe. And I wish you 4.r[' 8 would please direct your response -- I'm sorry, I haven't given I' 9 .n the Applicant or Staff an opportunity to comment with respect 10 to paragraph 5. N,,.. - 11 We will have from the Applicant at this time.

Again,

n:

~ ? 4Xp,. . ~12 let's have an understanding, Mr. Charnoff, that you don't have i

e7,'.

o .J g,. -- ~1 r~ ~ ~' 13 to repeat the~ material'that you had presented in your response. SO,&glA; :, i?^r 6 i

14 I am just saying if you have anything in addition you would anC

-f 15 like to present at this time. ' 'l 16 MR. CHARNOFF: I want to make one point: 17 I believe the issue extends beyond that of the design ,iN[' 18 basis aspect as one -- an issue that was attempted to be '[J 19 litigated -- and at a great extent was litigated -- at the a '. l" 20 radiological hearing which was conducted in 1970 and 1971. I y -{ 21 think the identification of matters by Mrs. Stebbins as to s 22 recent events do not indicate that she is talking about .Qc 23 environmental matters; but, rather, she is talking about radio-24 logical safety matters. ral Reporters, Inc. Y,' 25 The event referred to with regard to the flood P: -Q: . ys t sw. y

,g.. l **< ';l:7: { . 'e 3 g' ^' v n,n. w g g.;:;- n:. > l3 I effects of last year's storm creating a high water mark of ,[- { (; j 2 576 feet above sea level. The design of the plant is for .Gy':t;

R.-

3 583.7 feet above sea level -- gy' 4 CHAIRMAN PARMAKIDES: Hold on for a moment. The a.. [ 5 court reporter is obviously having difficulty getting.this. 6 Speak. slower. l 7 MR. CHARNOFF: I think to a great extent some of the x ,1 8 remarks made by Mrs. Stebbins reflect the fact that there is 9 nothing specific about the Davis-Besse plant that are of con-10 cern to her; but, rather, that her concern relates to whether j .e./ 11 or not Emergency Core Cooling Systems and the criteria for them . :,~ - 12 are adequate. That matter began under litigation in the rule- . y, y,,.... n v4 Mb.-13 making hearing. T h;6Erl ~ w @ '-- 14 Other than that, we would stand on what we said in 15 our written answer.- 16 CHAIR W FARMAKIDES: The Staff, Mr. Davis? K 1 ;, ' 17 MR. DAVIS: The Staff will stand on its written g J; @ 18 Answer on the April 30th filing. / 19 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Anything further on that,. E 20 Mrs. Stebbins, that you would care to address yourself to? y 21 MRS. STEBBINS: The court reporter took my paper. I 22 am waiting for it to be returned. i; 23 CHAIRMAN FAR!MKIDES: Off the record. A<. 24 (Discussion off the record.) r:t Reporters, Inc. 6,lo,p,n 25 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mrs. Stebbins, you may proceed ,isg-W. b.fY-f;'j,

c. vm m

nifCd,:f>6, a ' ;,; T 2M *.

W : ~

~ R e ph%@c V:

7) <- j7 1 39 d

L: ip A-8)^ f ' $ i.'l anytime you are ready.. - -- V 9 ,% i ,~ ,n JE y ;.. 2 MRS. STEBBINS: Mr. Chairman, on 6, which is Conten-

'W: 3 be

.c = -@{- 3 tion 22 in our original Petition, the issues of environmental qgj [, 3 4 harm because of storm damage we feel is a very real hazard. { 's 5 It is perfectly evident that storm damage and 6 consequential environmental damage has not been properly 7, 7 considered. The main reason we feel for this is that the lake ~ l 8 is now at its highest level. We find that Davis-Besse plant was ...v. t 9 designed for a 4-foot 8-inch level above low water datum. s -.tn .I 10 However, the April storm on Lake Erie which flooded the western i .A 11 basin of Lake Erie, the water was 8-feet 1-inch above low water ~., :n s ,is2gfm.-.- 12 datum at Toledo with a wave action above that level.- + (mg. ( 13 9 713 3.u :y 3:. x. The pictures'which we have from newspapers and aerial r-Q g:>f ' ~14 photos were taken two days after -- the aerial photographs were h 15 taken two days after the November 14th storm. g j ' 16 With predictions that lake levels could go higher, 17 we certainly feel that this must bring reconsideration on g{$:' 18 whether the Davis-Besse plant is being constructed in an area 19 which will be subjected to floods, and which would, consequently, ..h-20 seriously endanger every citizen in this area of Ohio either 21 directly or through env't6nm ntal damage which has contaminated l& 22 the land and water, # ?t it unlivable. l,' 23 We have several aer.ial pictures here showing extensive l 4 24 flood damage. It appears possible that there was danage to the l eral Reporters, Inc. 4' 25 auxiliary building last November. W ,. N ' j-

u ~~~v' 'h" 1 q)%g fy:qw:;x% r n: ATC77 ' 4 9 9 ry ' L s - 40 ,;;4Vli% a s q, ;:.O ,c W,K.r.; ?; * ' ~ 's i A-91 1 When we look at this one picture, it appears to us

5.. ;

e .::0 ../ wp%,i s,, t 1here is no roof on the building. While comparing it to a 2 i 3 %c an 3J 3 previous p'icture in the environmental report, it appears that <t%. f - 4 the building had a roof on it. The auxiliary building will - t.i ' 5 house the control room and related facilities, the new and spent { ,4 6 fuel handling, storage and shipment facilities, the radwaste 7 decontamination facilities, radwaste (blank) control faciliti.es, ~ 8 access control areas, and engineered safety systems, electrical 9 and mechanical penetrations. y ~ If, as appears possible, that the roof was damaged 7 10 ....t_ in the storm, you know, we would wonder what might have 11 q-e 12 happened.if the plant had been operating at that time. 1 . %, c t. k 13 Now, the extensiveness of the water surrounding the. '~~ ~ -.J: x, w,0 s r. 1 376 7 ~ 14 plant, including flood beyond Route 2 on the other side of the T 15 plant, the reports in the paper by the Toledo Edison officials ~ 16 who said that they,were unable to get to the plant to find out Q; 17 if there was any damage -- -h.h 18 CHAIPRAN FARMAKIDES: Mrs. Stebbins, you don't have tc 19 rea( the entire statement that you have there. We wanted to 20 know, really, what are the facts that you are going to show. 21 MRS. STEBBINS: Okay. The facts are that we are 22 going to show would be this storm damage -- 23 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Could you finish that statement? The storm damage, you feel -- go ahead. 24 erat Reporters, Inc. f-25 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. The consequences of storm damagc 4 t l e r n

___Q f?yl@ K f Qr-y,_. *; O 3 'p ~; ? ; - 41 se.w?b y y .~. .r'

g.,

(y. <, y. ~,. ~ + .f ~. 4 'qffip A-10.1 and the consequential -- the possibilities _ of what could.m r e :ww,. x e. ,1 sM 9,d ? i ^ g7, 2-gge y.2 . happen as to accidents and so forth because of storm damage. u p.u.:r.; p ~ nw dZf'iT 3 Now we, you know, really feel that while they said this was a. jf!(< ' <$j.p. ; 4 matter that should have been considered at the original ,,. v.9 JJC ' 5 hearing, I think this is new evidence that was not available ~.71, 6 at the original hearing. I think that this is a matter that

{'

7 is,to be considered at the operating license hearing. It -M^ 8 hardly makes sense to us to continue construction of the plant 3 9 if there is such a threat. w.m 10 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: As I understand you, ma'am, y: [w your whole point is that the staff as not " adequately considered j) M.r :

. 4, "

12 this in the environmental statement"? a.n,.,- ' h. ((' [ <Q " ^ j3 MRS. STEBBINS: That'.s right. a, L f r~g. ::w.'

,-, J3 7 M E} - 14 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES

So what you are saying is that -e. PE c 15 you are disputing the final environmental statement as to its c. 16 ' efficiency on this point? p 7,, j7 MRS. STEBBINS: That's right. 4 t,y {h 18 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mr. Shon has a question. Just l 1 5 wc - i gy g9 a moment. t ~ 20 (Discussion off the record.) .V 'l 21 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Let's go then to paragraph 6. t 22 MRS. STEBBIUS: That was paragraph 6 ) l l 23 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: I see. You had already gone to 1 24 67 6 is the same response as 5? at fteporters, Inc.

- 's,

25 MRS. STEBBIUS: Right. ..n l $') ; \\ ,.9 y:

~

6 :,... - M '1 7. ;,6 i : ^ l .m \\ _,#^^"'** * ^ ,.._..m-

,n,ya.,.,h,q.p$.&.s$hlk%' ~ ~ ^ .~ 42 k. ~ Ip,.s, y -'A-11 4 J'~'42-1 G,'[ l CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: All right. Is there anything n my;;fE h ' b; Q,, -{ ~' 2 on 67' N 3 MR. CHARNOFF: I would point out that there were no f3 l J.- 4 damages to the auxiliary building from the storm. I don't t i }, ' ';,' 5 know what picture Mrs. Stebbins was talking about, but the 6 roof was under construction at the time, and it may be a '7 picture of being incomplete. 8 With regard to other storm damage and the design of 9 the plant, the storm and the tornadoes, this was precisely a 10 matter that was litigated in 1970 and 1971. 2? 11 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Those go to the facts that ' r 6: d'f," 12 Mrs. Stebbins is alleging. ~And Mr. Charnoff, if he prefers to A fg s -- ~ d d... _ 13 dispute the facts, we'll certainly hear it. ,.s eng;p& ^ wO~ 14 But I was going to the other question, and that is

o. :

~ ~ I 15 the thrust of the contention is that the final environmental [~' 16 statement is inadequate. Do you have anything on that? 'L. 17 MR. CHARNOFF: We would understand that the conten-

rh. "

^ tion -- we think it goes to the question of Regulatory Safety 18 19 rather than Environmental Management. We don't understand { 20 the need to make a reiterization. 21 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Therefore, that's really your 22 answer? 23 MR. CHARNOFF: That's correct. f3g,,' 7 24 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: The Staff? What is your res- , e-Federal Reporters, Inc. l 25 Ponse? t. i

n. -

<x: r $ s: 1 --a.. l e

3' g nq% 3 + ;.. --*E.5 me. + ,r- '.,. fQ.y/.K.. ' : -e - a L .j. 43 .; Y, ~~$ M.:,;- ~ ' - 7 u . -(2 i S; . P A-12 1 MR. DAVIS: The Staff, too, believes that the issue 3 yp

r ma c: : w,

p -2 of storm damage is not.in, issue now. Consequently, the final ~

x@.<: y[*F: *,

p.,

3 environmental statements are adequate in this regard and is .f r \\ / pQ,.. ; 4 an issue ready to stand, on which we can present evidence. ';n. ,,JA,74 5 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: In other words, you don't agree ~ 6 with the. witness, but you think if the Board permits this y contention you are prepared to proceed to show your side of i;. 8 the case? 9 MR. DAVIS:

Exactly, 10 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES:

Off tie record. i...

).

}} (Discussion off the record.) - y,

[i;Mp" 12 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES

All right. Mrs. Stebbins, kEh.$Nlf 13 do you have anything further in response to the two allegations - l: %jf " ~ 14 made by Mr. Charnoff? w,. C-f., -e. t:>' 'fy :, 15 MRS. STEBBINS: Let's go to the next one. a ' i.~ 16 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: So we are now on paragraph 7? y. -[ ' 17 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. I have really nothing further .; h il;zA i jg to justify paragraph 7 other than what I have already put into 'J 39 this. We think that the shortage of uranium fuol and with the i 20 way that -- V, 21 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Excuse me, ma'am, but what is 22 y ur response to the objections raised by Applicant and Staff 23 n this point? MRS. STEBBINS: I will have to look at that for just h 24 e-Federal Reporters, Inc. ne second. I don't know how I can respond to 2.t other. than j ;. 25 r.6;;.- '$ hk. f * . _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.

v - - ~ _,...,...,. N.,.,A,9 M U(3 Yi - , 44 '1 m ~ ~ / M. ~ g";e~f p._g ' - ip A 13: - 7 ('{s,. ,'l the way I have. ~ l -s ,; 51:y-:. a 7.4 2 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: All right. p.y J. t

61 3

MRS. STEBBINS: They said that the consequences -- Y-Qi,-. 4 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Well, that's all right. I just @7.r - ? 5 wanted to know if you had an' additional response. 6 All right. Anything further on paragraph No. 7 from 7 eithr the Applicant or the Staff? 8 For the Applicant? 9 MR. CHARNOFF: We will rest on what we have submitted, 10 sir. i CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mr. Davis? I1 . ft - 12 MR. DAIVS: No comment.- wp,, - -> g.J..;.ME 13 7 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: How about paragraph 8? "~ m W. UYE'fV *;, W ~ 'R 14 Mr. Stebbins? p. T:-. 15 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. Paragraph 8, as we look 3 n. 16 through the environmental statements here, we felt that it .a. 17 was a violation of the requirements because they did not have % @t a - l8 the adequate prior monitoring. ~ ]' 19 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Yes. But how would you respond, 20 ma'am, to their reply to you on that? 21 MRS. STEBBINS: It is a conclusion without any basis. 22 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: You mean their reply is a ,g l 23 conclusion without basis? l g 24 MRS. STEBBINS: That's what they say ours is -- that's ederal Reporters, In:. 1-l 25 the response to our paragraph: that it is conclusional without .;~. t t.

y;. $.'

= y.7, - - ?

[w"M,I.hSA$$[C. 2 "'Zl & ~' ~ q: t :~. - ; + a:, ' 45 W.x;T :' ^ gg$.L?v.?, ' ~ n %a u.L o i__

_ e. __, :

~ li A-14 1 basis. -' m.p T% _e c : ~ < ::L '~ ' CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDESi Do pu understand' what that s%p{,[~7 ' 2 j n r, = s.W w 3 means? srhms we can have the Staff clarify that. ,1 '.13 _ .r 1-4;,- p i 7% 4

IRS.STEBBINS

Yes, perhaps if they could do that. C1.54_ } 7? 5 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mr. Davis, would you care to p' p 6 clarify that? \\ a,. ;, 2,-..f, 7 MR. DAVIS: This paragraph 8 it. the Coalition's , : e; s - 8 Amended Petition appears to be a (blank) approach pursuant to 9 the National Environmental Policy 'Act. This is what we meant 10 it to say.

g..

$,Td 11 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: In other words, you are saying .L: u. ~.< a w w. - %' G. $N]e& 12 there is no fact in dispute as far as you can see, in this ,, m p. -2.- A f', 13 paragraph? @.;pu u,.. ~ .my:: V s. 14 MR. DAVIS: That's right. We have nothing to disputer 4/ ^ 15 and it is in evidence now. i 16 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mrs. Stebbins, I think that is ,N.~' 17 the real thrust of it: there is no genuine issue of the fact na< N 18 here that is presented by paragraph 8. In other words, if we 19 are going to go to a hearing, what would they show and what 5 20 would you show? T: 21 MRS. STEEBINS: I cannot respond further on that 22 Particular paragraph at this time. ~ CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: All right. Let's go then to i 23 l 24 Paragraph -- I'm sorry.. Did the Applicant have anything else? i e-Federal Reporters, Inc. 25 MR. CHARNOFF: No, sir. j .i hhi 5/ ) y n.~ q. ~ N.mt v-

f. ~

f% y L lz l. m $ $ V $ ' ~, 5 - ~~ 46 .,.g % 7, ~ -- -a.

%. '"[{ ?_

_ h

t ' k:^,~'

, s. %. -o .A I CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Now to paragraph 9. Mrs. Stebb:.n: ,;,;w m _. j $jf [g : u, MRS. STEBBINS: On paragraph 9, in our estimation as h 2 g [fa[, 3 to what is in the reports, it does not give you a true evalua-f<>3 tion of the transportation alspect. M', 4 At the moment, we still don t M. t e 3 -u ' E.. know what direction the spen,t fuels, and so forth, are going to 5 c w.s- [v:__ {. 6 be transported. In reading about how containers are made for 7 the AEC and the shipment of waste, I don't bel eve these i 8 containers would be strong enough to withstand the dumping into 7 9 the Cuyahoga Valley if there was a train accident, and dropped h f, 10 from the train into the cuyahoga Valley.; it would be a consider x i 1l able depth there. This is the part of the region that we s db.,,.. 12 are talking about in the evaluation of the possibilities of 7 m g. h~.;, ',bigs.- 13 trancportation accidents. m w_,,, Wi I4 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mrs. Stebbins, we are going to 15 have the same problem. Look, this Board has certain authority, 16 certain jurisdiction. Now, primarily, that stems from the J ' 17 fact in dispute, and we will resolve that fact, but you have 4.,: o. 1 f' 18 got to put something in dispute. N 19 Now, you made a contention. The staff came back with 20 their answer and said they had, in fact, addressed the problem ~ 21 you stated in their Section 7.2.2. How do you respond to that? A 22 Do you disagree? And if you disagree -- d 23 MRS. STEBBINS: We disagree that it's properly g; 24 evaluated in Section 7.2.2. -Mr t Reporters, Inc. (, 25 CHAIRMAli FARMAKIDES: Okay. So then your response to , \\4 ", I [ s mu i

rk. &?!!W W %# a * -2 ~. . L:. ,3'l'MW.x.

=

~ '4 7 ' x 4 ~. 8 ($$ $ d f

1. ' % ['

" 1 :- g *:,, r Y l M g b I,*7 [.1] c ~~ g m.j v- / 1;) i4p A-16,,,il to their reply is that in fact the final environmental statement Q Qijte 74y;g'k';f '2 in Section.7.2.2 does not meet the legal requirement? uc,y n p.c .c 4' 3 MRS. STEBBINS: That's right.- J a.

pQ, 4

CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: All right. Mr. Applicant or J., nu; 1 J.. 5 Mr. Charnoff? o - m b 6 ~ MR. CHARNOFF: I am still at a loss as to the 7.2.2. I. 7 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: As they addres this point, '"^ 8 Mrs. Stebbins -- as I understand it -- says it is inadequate. 9 MR. CHARNOFF: What we don't understand is in what 10 way it is inadequate. L' gy, 11 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Yes. I think also that would 5 -ss;% 12 be my next question. What are you going to show, ma'am? What e3-gy,. h,h,9; 13 do you intend to show to support your diegation or your w. ..g C+96%~ 14 contention? i 7., 15 MRS. STEBBINS: With respect to this contention, we 16 would hope to show that these transportation accidents have not .t 17 been properly evaluated; by witnesses who can prove this point. v

).

' VI ' l8 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Would the reporter read that , rj ~ ~ 19 last part back? 20 (Record read.) c. 21 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: In other words, as I understand g 22 that, you are going to put on direct cases of witnesses to show d 23 that (blank) (blank) (blank) did not adequately consider this 24 point? /Id; -bral Reporters, Inc. 25 MRS. STEBBINS: That is the point, yes. C t. !? 2 J1d,' s, ]$'?

, w,v.. 9! U? J, I. ' A } 48 a,s.p. q _c

*f: -

..i A-17 1 MR. CHARNOFF: Mr. Chairman, that still leaves me in p.7 gl %%( 2 some doubt as to what it is they are going to prove other than- , J64S ..~ c ', f3 3 the general allegation that something is inadequate. 'g:- ) 4 There are establiched regulations governing the t a 5 (blank) for spent fuel levels. What Mrs. Stebbins has to 9 6 establish is which of those regulations have not been met, or i 7 which of those regulations are not accurate. 1 8 She must identify which of those she has in mind, 9 and maybe the allegation of the inadequacy of the compilation. m 10 If we don't have that, we don't have an idda of the allegation. 11 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: I think that she has said that a~ >,-E 12 they are going to be discussing the transportation of the fuel wq.y hm[J.f ge 13 aspect.- It is in contention and I think she clarified it C " pl'.;+' 14 further. ym \\ 't 15 I.et me hear from the staff. 16 MR. DAVIS: Mr. Chairman, the Staff stands by its 1 17 statements in Section 7.2.2 If this contention is allowed, we n.

j; 7; 18 will present evidence stating its reasoning and any statements v

19 to the effect that the consideration of transportation accidents I has been properly addressed and reviewed and the results have 20 t 21 been put in that review of the SDS. 22 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: There is one thing that should h~ 23 be clear to all parties. I am not sure that the Board has not 24 yet decided on these contentions, but once the decision is made eral Reporters, Inc. ~~ 25 assuming that a contention, two contentions, or all contentions C. ; .m m, . [i ' * ? \\ g/ j

W 6 % Q?W'TiQ / W 'Qm W.e<S.l ,~ l a, ~ J ~~ 3 p.: ,s .w. 49 4.u%x%.w g:t.,. -,,. e. c, ~ m

w

+ ~ i g;c 1 -e. t';w.- .' g.s y ? A-18 ? Y l1jif ;'j.;C ~ are admitted, we will have at some further time another Pre-

z. ~

rW _~ ~ g@:awwy x - y. ,r u., .m e" ' 2 hearing Conference at which time Iz want to know specifically-anc swM s- -pgpa w e. c $ h;p 3 precisely the witnesses and the documents that are going to x y w. cu

.w,X. o.m.

be used in the evidenciary hearing. ~I want each of the parties 4 e ,p W ;3. 1-

-s...

J,n.CM;;. ) > - a ,.5 to know the, case of each other.. All right? c..g y c. 3 ~ .g [~ 6 Do you understand in Contention No.-9, Mr. Davis, in t, n9& 7 respect - 5- [9 - w, l2 8 MR. DAVIS: As I understand it, Mr. Chairman, .y wW; 9 Mrs. Stebbins' contentions are quite broad, but they are to the - 9 a :. o 10 effect that the environmental statements to review the trans-y.,,, 11 portation accidents have been inadequate under the performance.. 4p - 9%%i.., 12 of NEPA. rw. . y%s%yt{['3..$' :n13 w .= ~. a. CHAIRMAN :FAMIAKIDES : -You address it in your paragraph W ~ e.o.7 /Wj4 7 on page 8 of the final environmental statement. i 936 f - M,i t - ~ MR. DAVIS: Excuse me. The Section 7.2, particularly

4 15

,, +.y g r.r. 16 subsection 7.2.2. -- oh, it is a cross-section. i 17 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: It is 7.2.2 i e;Y MM Q, 18 MR. CHARNOFF: I don't know whether it is appropriate l l %. t + .m P '* 19 to ask the Board a qnstion, but let me suggest that I am at ' E' ' N 20 a loss in terms of understanding the contention and partly 4* [l 21 because, as I recall it, 'you asked Mrs.. Stebbins what it is that j. 22 is inadequate. And she responded by saying that, "We will have l Y 23 witnesses who will testify as to the inadequacy of the trans-I l portation evaluation." 24 ral Reporters, Inc. A #. , 25 I must say I am at a loss to understnd how that h*'**_,l, w

f.. ' +

J.,, m $': s ? f '. > z.g ' r+ .. + j yn + 9 ..a iJ.4'M11 E . f O k-p---

_-n,

W 4 d S @ d @Wtra n n ; sis w:: m n,L r$QQ@fD m g w W M W,: RQw s: so =:x-7f- .T- @[r u ljW-5 0 ).~ C*"37%r Mn 2 m 2 .5 :p &, v c- . v::Y m g c.n - n :: a,.y s p.r. g e; . s; v v,.,,.,. 9 a.; jcv s. s a [yi:e 1 e.<. m. y g. :. n r. . s w w m i& m 2W' % D - "

4' ';.

'u. 'Y ~ .iy ty H '.l: Y, I . 9M -responds to your question,xord:3 clarifyrthe ~ contention-in' anyx g & W @$ ls%l y is ~ L eq %! N ~: ? n&* i I did raise - the question of: the' standardsi that' apply to 4 F l$." 2 way'.: I w kwh ':' ~ ~ ~, .,s ~ , Y'j C : C M NTp { 3 shipment of fuel in containers, and we don't know now ---but E MI.n. / ~ .f,D,Ws%~T ' 4 may later -- we don't know whether the Coalition is challenging 2.. f. .I,. i s' C' @RQy$p .:g t ,5 the AEC regulation with respect to containers, or the compliance-7M, 6 with those regulations, or some other hidden allegation. +: v;.x. 7 I am perfectly prepared to have a hearing from our SqLe9., ' e. xn:V ' :: .Q - 8 standpoint, of course,.on any matters. But we do need someone n g:% gwp ' ~ -9 to stand in and guide us to some of the responsiveness like

3) -

.~ ??A. - 10 "What is it that is inadequate?" Other than that, we just have %wW Ad@y witnesses that will testify that something is inadequate. 11 j q't,Jkfy ji.g m :' . "', w> n: CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES:- We don't suggest that the N,9 M f7 S12

.;ss y y

/. Jf.E;1.. Intervenors need to show proof with' respect to their allegationt

a

,2.,5 W 3 7 m A' M fi'.( ; i .x v. 4 T. 14 at'this time, b'ut'I think that Contention No. 9 goes to the c 4 4.+ QMl,i'b.- 'G 15 adequacy of the final environmcatal statement, as I understand Q .n My> e Mrs. Stebbins, and specifically to.the issue of transportation MA: 16 . > dp,, hh 17 of fuel. M,ce%l;. n up ,Wps '18 Now, by the time we get to the hearing, this will be 'La np 74 19 crystallized so that the parties will know exactly, if this p eu. YM 20 contention is admitted, it will be crystallized so the parties hac.. L 3;% ,Qik %~~ 21 will know what the issue is. I am not going to require the w Intervenor to go beyond the point that you did today. A)C 22 Qs l 23 Again, that would be satisfying the Board as to the l

,.m s

iNJ 24 fact that there is a genuine issue. The genuine issue here, I e-Federal Reporters, Inc. iljyf!;:l: _ 25 as Mrs. Stebbins suggests,-is the adequacy of the final hY,. w w .e m%;.,..,m. c . - *. h l, ' Nt y' W l &c

. g I

i a r m ! M e m !ni d ? W M,.x;4W:M;rR:y.'+:my QW%f6f-

..n.-o.x.o.: w n c.

"c ~ 2a .wh* ,v. c.... m;. c - &. + , :o.:._: 51 s 3 ~. +g;6> g w <w.wpa- -nu u. e yu: ? x.; -.. qs e >l., ,c ., e. s.. =, v ,~ ' w x-; ..~,,:

,1 u.

e c.7 W. a - .,y., n- ...=.4 4 M.. .a ;. ,.3 m z,,, >.,x, u~

s, wa

., " ~ :- ..s. ^ ~ & *Mf". ~Y'**:c

/ '&

b d y l2 ~ ^'lt-C - {' .s r.f 20Qs1 environmental statement on the transportation of. fuel. * {., > : ^ Q Q, g& f h f

7 -

,~.g y 3):6 : ~ ' lw$

r..,

%@,% y :$= tw62 _.s. e '. Let's go on,'then, to the attachment.; Let's go back y;;s s(p 7. -- +.o ~. -:h @&l d '4 ~ 4O 3 to paragraph 3. 'i[ b ,@g. t,Av.- MRS. STEBBINS: This will take me a second to get a %> r.. ,s 7.5.,fh@s 5 together. J~- . m r.; ..'c.5 ', %. ;4, '. t s y.3 ' 4._ -6 MR. DAVIS: Mr. Chairman, I have a question, please. x :: .s. 'fa j Iiig$,, 7 Could the reporter please read back what you just said regard-mw;. ; .y n f 3, 8 ing what her contention is? s,@. s :,,; o..~ 9 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mr. Reporter, would you read

&J ; '.

10 back my response? ' - ^ ve h~,, W & Pn 11 (Record read.) w : >.,, a laJ$ @f y-~~12 7 '. p MR. DAVIS: As the reporter read back your statement,. -, "Q' 2 :.C7 R li'f' 4 -- 2M;.

' *'c ws.b.pl'. u,,.13 it appeared that the issue -- there might be some question 1-j f dCf

.. 3'- Qd_,M@,.' M -,' a }3: s%t

f 14 whether the issue deals with transportation in general, or: w. :-

,:m,.... " M E < 15 transportation accidents. p-I tY N., 'i. $.~b 16 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: I beg your pardon. I see the af R i ;', .. y :,.- M.[J- ' 17 problem. The contention deals with transportation. accidents.

m L..

-p':,y y cq. - g 18 If'I did not use that one word " accident," I should have. y, y% t " 19 She is going to transportation accidents. m a M'.. 20 MR. DAVIS: Then during the course of prehearing .% 1 w sn. [J 21 Procedures that contention will be further specified? h![ 22 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Yes, if the Board admits it, 23 that contention will definitely be further specified. O 24 Mrs. Stebbins, are you prepared now on paragraph 3? g)k, t-Fedent Reporters, Inc. 25 MRS. STEBBINS: I hope so. With respect to 3, I may M-L.,J,.. .S~ '. ) ,g: f '.l .e 3 s [. ? .? $ (, ._f* fk _' Q Y.5 l-ll ~ t

%:w +.u yy .3, - - x 4s, y z.hyg:a.my .g.

y

.w. ~. en . w a y ~. p p.- .w -y c

wsp &g gits J.u

. ~~ 52- ? sq. g r f@T[N:g,9;f: ' ,.^ . V,, L' c, r' fwn = . s_' + s.- ~,- . 'm ~ A-21ff'f WMf'f.g s s l take this'a little bit out of order concerning the cost benefit .aQ:}.AW s + - + - ~ y%qrq2. r' A2-.. analysis F but-in',our estimationfit was.not: properly-evaluated c. y,. m,.,,s e.c e 9 7 K f. - '3 in terms of the report. ~ j ~ ~ -- l v ;;. x L?@+):r - 4 Now, the reasons for this was to point this out -- - - 'y(g j-3 . ; c M., e .N ~ 5 5 and this refers to our paragraph 5 that we were-talking aboutr c 6 .the possibility of the Lake Erie water supply being-contaminated. If this was thrown into cost benefit analysis,]this would be ^ 7 ~i s, 8 one point. c., v 9 A further point would be with reference to our para- -e. . t :[; '~. 10 graph 6, referring to potential storm damage and possible I,. El[ 11 environmental harm. This wasn't evaluated in the cost benefit em% r.:; -L. TEM "12 ' analysis. rmw

'Q jg ;.;gcfl%j'

'E13 ~~ Paragraph 3~-- excuse me. Now this goes to some of " ' ^ ^ " ^ g W

=

f e; A 14 our original contentions in 16 and 18 in the original Petition,

< y 2,.; ;

15 and the fact that this storm in November proved that it was b Y t ~ 16 impossible to evacuate people quickly from tihis Sand Beach area ) ~, D 17 The Coast Guard boat was not able to get into the area, and s.: q.,: f57' 18 helicopters had to be called in, which tock considerable time. .w,w; .tc. 19 So it becomes apparent that when we talk about the ability to 20 be able to evacuate people quickly, this ability is not always i, 21 there. And this is a rather proven fact now and something for 22 the cost benefit analysis. 23 Now, one of the -- now, a couple of the other T, $ 24 contentions in our original petition were 33 and 34, and this l I - ederal Reporters, Inc. i1> - 25 referred to the total fuel cycle as an environmental effect of t I m

.e

^* ,v. ,Y g

p.n-g s;(L8?

.d'hh.o.m x. e p.d,' hf... [T~

9,;*hi F

,,c. , m.w , c,. .v.:n. w;,.e s a -[,w.. w,7 ;,"w,3 E.-b c E g w'l edy

f. %. e' M.,@ ' :*. f" 7;A J,- p

.. d 53 7.t w gwn:wy:: m .n ~ 7 x m 4 3.~ F.

P ; g * + ;i < % ;7m: :;.,n ~.m :;M M.w fr s: z

-.+ 2. we. %^%995@M ^;b. A-22

^6, um

T-M

~ V, ~ * "%$5$1 dhe davis-B' esse' plant. 4 A 5 )l e I C9 5.v M- ~^ = s. c, ...a v*.. ng, n n ~ ... o v. .+ -^. ,s ? e:: fg*p:g@;c.g 3 ,_ a ^ 2' WD .. < 2 . A. - W 7Now when you consider that. these wastes must-be +- cy y e ~ ~x w, - p, = ~3 W:@r, w>.J.. stored.for thousands and thousands of years--this, in'our estima-l . g j.y ~ - T%igi 4 tion, needs. to be thrown into this cost benefit -analysis, -and-- BM;p -f \\

mgu, Q.$yy

.5 is one of the missing links, in our-opinion, in this cost bene-w. ,-u a. Mf.. .&.J u . 6 fit analysis. = .r . g;., q $, r 7 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: How do you read,that into your mm.. i -Q. + A' j - 8 paragraph 3, ma'am?' -f m- =- e7.. 9 MRS. STEBBINS: The fact.that there is the problem of

3. w,,.

Of ' ' j'? 10 long-term storage of waste, that this will be possibly a very M;; c W.. - $s2.L & ~ costly procedure; nobody can really tell at this moment. And. 11 -@Ter : 12 we felt that.this was part of the cost benefit analysis.that-A%fA.%,n st Mt C.%.h.ast5W:13 should be considered.- c- :i ' ~ k,, p $fElQ' ly?'c S p :: 14 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Well,' as I read your paragraph ,e ct ~* % ) - 15 3, it summarizes -- the last sentence in which you say, "In

A u..

v. .1. m.W a 16 other words, all alternatives to con.struction of this plant

p. >.:

'.cEW W' 17 have not been considered, including but not limited to, w %. 18 conservation of energy and underground siting." 3.;- 9- $2 r 19 So, insofar as I am concerned, I.see two alternatives c 20 that you feel have not been considered: one is this conserva- .;. :g '- m. ' T. 21 tion of energy, to which you attach in your Petition -- Amended ..e C 22 Petition you attached an affidavit; and the other one is the .ty 23 underground siting. 24 I don't see any,other information which you have -Federal Reporters, Inc. W submitted in the Amended Petition that goes to, for example, . v g,f 25 i a- = j* I.

s e,

- -W)(1.rp.n.?..,v,;,. 4' .y 4Kt -< y g 4 i

e %q C :.I' R:). W S C @q: g g w e g : n m? M. f M, O

7 + M<,;4 %g m @ C.,

m ~ m.. w. 14 J~ N ' Q k.f M

w

.u -

54..

.p 4 z ~. p,1

. e,

,Q, pu n.ypy. A. m g y n #q.. y ,w .a w: -q a ? ? m y.L:q.--

.; v 4.

n.

~'

e.

~, e.o a

g...

ar. ', (Uf,:n, fh.~,,g f'h%Q.. % T'o -231 storage of vaste' that~ you just alluded to[ and relates to in. ~ p +},wl+n 1 ' j **.. _ y _' } ', * ?[n' fl ^.e .c- <n = r s. .i.. A' g_sQ w.: Y' Y 0 - fY ?~k $1 ' ~ ? f, $f E***$ ~ xi o.3, $g 3 ~ MRS. STEBBINS: Oh.' I was'of the opinion I was ~ ,%y '5;3.- 3 i s 1 o, ~ g y,<..y ; 4 talking of the cost' benefit analysis as we had it in paragraph- ' M &.;. i ' a.1_. e} 5 g.f

g^,,.

"" N "- -^ 5 28 originally, and ~ Q$.L. ". < .+y:g. P e, 6 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Well we will get into that . vs , *V T %p;l.'..y 7 later, 28, as a paragraph -- 7, ,,.,a .,,.,v 8 MRS. STEBBINS: I thought that was incorporated in ~.1,',s; ~ ' d w, E - 9 paragraph 3 at this point. s,.. ' %,._; j 4 7 ]. - 10 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Oh, so you are incorporating - yf( .I1 paragraph 287 ~,9..m. ~. t +.... ^ -' E.76..%. [: .12 "'" MRS." STEBBINS : I thought-I had incorporated it in".

d..c,.s... :..

.t 4 y.q" % * -.d[Dh.f vgdb j$[ 13 paragraph 3.: So' -.; M.. '. en_.; 4/: 14 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Well, let's limit ourselves to Mm MNV bi j '* '. M 15 paragraph 3 at the moment. g, :, De w 16 MRS. STEBBINS: Okay. ,6 a g%f. 3. M<. 17 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: And when we finish with this

?f k Q': L f Edi

18 Amended Petition, the Board has question's with respect to three d e, w.

i' 19 other contentions you raised earlier. 37 g,P a 1 , sg. 20 Anything else in paragraph 3, ma'am? -h-21 MRS. STEBBINS: All right. . } 22 Then you are talking about the possibility of under- ~ 23 ground siting as breing considered. We would like to point out ~.. ? :. that with respect to objections of Toledo Edison, that Toledo Y ;l 24 a.,

e-Federal Reporters, Inc.

Edison has proceeded in this entire project at its own risk. 25 \\ :3?. gW,. l., 1.x *.y r ^ u, \\ k.'& &W :) ~, t. 0 :xw< x .u

,4.K t hhi.w w/&_mr_a'= ?. ....__.1 ~ - - - - - - - - .?g.gp;Dfm&sy#]f ^;.t ', f+;' W 's,_W _... ' ' Q . ~ ~s Tf g " c 55-4 . a.

w$ h f b 'f h. y;f. '

l}

w m. ? .iA-24; j l. They' started.in. September.of 1970 with'a variance of construc - .i h % F ~.,r y dg&jhb$.j 2 _ tion.at -their own risk before ' the-original mafety',-hearings were q fb;j Q ^.

a xp

~ jvXJpy 3 held to determine whether the plant could,be placed safely in th9'_ L~ ' %ge 4. - 4 that area. s- + m :-' - # + "- - 6%,

.n.,,

{ grijh[ m .5 When the Calvert Oliffs decision came along, and the-3. 'J; + --$.42cu. 6 rules were adopted by the Atomic Energy-Co mission,1the ,][$,'? y 7 Applicants again were proceeding at their own risk, at their y,,F.. g 1 .yy '. 8 choice, to continue constructing and not halt construction c- ,[ 9 pending the' full review. UT 4.l:.. - 10 Now, if they are to use at this time an excuse that .a... r - T\\ 11 it's too late to give consideration to this fact, we would g gu v.c.9~~;$ 12 simply have to point out that back in 1970,.at the original v;f.m,. ..m . ~ y z' 7 _ Je (, 13 hearings, we tried to discuss environmental aspects,'we tried + . :.aw tQ., e 'p'f..14 to talk about underground siting, and were not permitted to. ,9 T,_%:' ' _A A" 15 This was in our original petition. So this is nothing new, t.e, )

f t

\\;;Mc 16 but something that we have not been able to bring before this Ei/p [ .cf[A[4; >: - 17 Hearing Board due to rules which were adopted by the AEC.

kkD, 18 So this is what we would have to respond, you know, A y, B

19 reiterate again that all along the Applicant has insisted upon $ ~ c' ; 20 going ahead with this at their own risk and -- ,.a_ -, r 3]-- 21 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: What specifically would you 22 show, ma'am? What would be -- . O. _ - 23 MRS. STEBBINS: All right. There are plans over in 24 Europe, they are arguing more about underground siting, to try 1 - g tal Reporters, Inc. f;'? J;a 25 to specifically show that this is an alternative. It is an ..+ g&,. ' '4 . 3 ?.

. + % y; f.f ' f M- %. ',:n . r. .3 s l ', 55 ~ 3_ ;v,p,- 1... n_g.,. ~; ipiA-25j ~, - ~'?+.9,mn 1 ~ lternative which should'have 'been considered?-""'^=~-- ~"" a w - a.cy d((:25 '- 2 There is a possibility that this is an alternative 3 :. ' ;y .eh% 3 -which might.have offered more safety.~

~ - -- m - 2.- ~

d@s,ut.;c-.c I .4 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Okay. Mr. Charnoff, do you ,5 ( 1 -~i; " 5 have anything to respond? i E 6 MR. CHARNOFF: No, sir.. daQ 7 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mr.- Davis, do - u have any 3 Je 8 further response? ~~ =~ = =- = 9 ~ MR. DAVIS: I feel that our original response was 10 adequate to that point of underground siting. .j l-d *.g, 11 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Thank you.

et.

j~.mQ:G7,l 12 The Board also would like to go to the original ~- 44bd: 3 .. t* R 13 petition submitted by Mrs. Stebbins as an attachment to the %syi, T7'

14 Amended Petition.

We would like to discuss paragraphs 26, 28, 15 and 29, which occur on page 4, page 5, and page 6 of the ~ 16 original Petition which, as I said earlier, was attached to the j 17 Amended Petition. 4. .2, - f c '. 18 We have not determined yet how we are going to 19 handle this. We have listened to the comments of the Staff and .T 20 the Applicant, and'Mrs. Stebbins' further comments with m-21 respect to those initial contentions, and we will rule on these 22 in our order. g 23 On 26, Mrs. Stebbins, do you have anything further i 3,g. 24 to add on 267 -Federal Reporters, Inc. V, 25 MRS. STEBBINS: One moment, please.' L'& j @V,*; Lfg) .s a V

QLQQWln... ;. ya:, ?l.c '%y. . = e, - n,, ../ ~ 5y me9:;, w.: ;. Wyi@., 5 ' p.98[ j i.~. ~ ...e'A-26 1 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: In your answer, please consider 'T L.. < s 7 "NOk 2 the response of the Staff to that contention. . y v. ? .p. %. ~ 3 'MRS. STEBBINS: Let me review the' response of the fn Q( 4 Staff again. ^k 5 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Well, I will tell you what: I c' 6 am goir}g to be sking you the same questions on 26, 28, and 29. -( 7 Let's break for lunch. You will have time then to review, and 8 let's reconvene at a quarter of 1:00, is that all right? [ 9 (Discussion off the record.) 10 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Back on the record. [7 11 We will change that to 1:00 o' clock to allow a little ..'M5 c ' 12 more time for preparation. ph 13 (Whereupon, at 11:45 the noon recess was taken, to y.,. sw 4. 0 % s fj(( ~ 14 reconvene at 1:00 o' clock p. m. this day.) , i. 6 : s .o 15 w 16 s ' ~ 17 .y s ~... n.._ 18 19 ' i: 20 21 g 22 23 ~ i i 24 f e-ederal Reporters,inc. .,; w 25 w 4'S I,

.$9 'i.e$%e. m:%. :,A. m,c. c. ECT ~ ' .duh ,r w.m s 58 g, w m n u m R.Qff es.Nm x .p fg e t. t 1 AFTERNOON SESSION ex@:4 c s 4 9 y m.m < 3;k;9i 2 (1:00 p. m.) _. _ : r_. E . r.. .O r, - c a. = ,yu%/, 3,:N I 3 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Are we ready to proceed? ,;-+. h 4 Mrs. Stebbins, we were talking as to paragraph No. 26

J*N -

5 on page 4 of the original Petition, which you attached to the v, 6 Amended Petition. And as to that one, I would like to direct @@~ 7 your comments to subparagraphs (1), (m), (n), and (o). There u. . +' 8 are four subparagraphs: 26 (1), 26(m), 26 (n), and 26 (o). a: i 9 What exactly, ma'am, do you intend to show, for ny i 10 example, starting with No. "1" or (1)? m.m, .,of_, 11 What do you intend to show on paragraph 26 (1)? 4,7. ~ ibm ~ - 12 MRS. STEBBINS: All right. On 26 (1), due to recent. ~~ .g.g,. - QgrWe t 13 studies that have been done concerning radioactivity around mDrs:c. f!Qi - jJim }%' 14 the shipping plant, for instance, it becomes apparent that thern ! -a 15 is much greater radioactivity released, or in some way has .s E . 1 16 gotten into the environment that would have been anticipated. .;.y_,. 17 Now, this is the type of information that we would want to M iyi 18 develop in this case, and bring witnesses in to support this 19 sort of thing. 20 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: In other words, you are saying +, 2 l' 21 the assumption of the Staff in the final environmental state-22 ment is incorrect because of the experience -- 23 MRS. STEDDINS: Yes. I think there are several reasons i 24 why this is incorrect. - ederal Repotters, Inc. b-25 Some of the problems that are coming out as to what f l Nl y.,

L, abd../%bQAr.@nh,?yh;.a@..;p..V 37: % :ri &n

,' W 2-

- " ' - a J~-'--- m :- ..-. p : : - 9 ~ c p ~' k;b T .<m

y: er=

n jan c:: o .lL . p, MsN:.,. ~. * ; '. ; -, *' ' " s?n '. ' -[: ;9 ' if ~ V' ~

d' b

59- ,j Y 7 .d:' . ~1 Sp4 %$2D a rB 'J M ' c-

- x

+ ff 1p has.h}appened'withthereleasesofexcessiveradiation,this 7;(fl$1[k-l-l 3 ~ ^ ~ A-28 s. W y. c zy y%;7g. .would tend to support our contentions of the greater environ ~~ gy,4 ~ 2 3sp.pyr Qr ;4 3 mental damage, so to speak., ' hh j-l' ~ Sff76 4 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: I am still trying to -- the

p. ?; :

t . :p g m s 0320.- 5 second paragraph. The assumptions by whom? I would assume &:-e lt ' y _f.f. 6 you mean the Staff?

w.-

..,. d.;C. 7 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. In the enviro ental report.

y;;,

v y.l 8 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: The possible environmental ab.a s: k~ 9 effects are, therefore, incorrect and inadequate? What do .y k. 10 you mean, ma'am, by " incorrect and inadequate" with respect to pq ?.y - 9.- 11 this? w??W Q + gg;p 12 MRS. STEBBINS: With respect to being incorrect, Ir

vpp,

' f~ g [g ;13 -think'there has been no evaluation of the possible effects of Amt ^ .zgp+M w:?. ' A:J ZG " 14 fuel rod damage; whereas, on November 20, 1972, the Atomic

bes, 1

~*,v. c: 3[ 15 Energy Commission wrote a letter to Tol,edo Edison saying they si.p-. NW 16 could anticipate this fuel rod problem in the Davis-Besse w.w, 3

ky,

%w@x' 17 report. This has not been evaluated in the environmental s $@D,WM,;..p'. ' /f .+ l8 statements.

1. - -

19 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: All right. Any additional sw ~ ?

M 20 comment that might be offered by the Applicant and the Staff

..+ n.. 4 a; . c?.. 21 on 26 (1)? 22 Mr. Charnoff? 23 MR. CHARNOFF: We don't believe that Mrs. Stebbins' ,s 1e 24 statement identifies whi,ch assunptions are incorrect, or in - Odefal Repor ters, Inc. d@ ., 25 what way they are incorrect or. inadequate. set A .. i:1. W s "g,e f f f: n'L. i / hg.? h _' *.'

R; Jer&.. ~p p Q % m -[;.w e ^m h e g ; g,y- - 3 M.. W -

W, i ) 4

Q wlh. m 2,

. e 4.. ;.. a n v.,.. - < 3; i,., nm .,,=..n-60 su r,.c %: c r. . - (--.., ~ .1

g. u g

3c - ~;. ,e. .w .. ~ c. N N.%. wif. f,#: - i ~1/ ^.

6

-4 fip~~F29J C y M M . <i

y ~" # J !

j ~ 5f*3% r2g.2 $$:il N.pg.+ - :I would point out to the Licensing Board that if thero-H .,t m. q,w <L.!2 was'one matt,er that was extensively litigated at the construc. .. sur ky.y4D h. &nis.).2 - '\\

Mfine,

.3 tion permit hearing, it was the question of effects of low leve: y y,q Q Mz,.y 4 radiation. That matter was therefore litigat.ed in that pro-

r. p: M.

c,5 yMMb 5 ceeding. ?$x +, ~ P eC.. 6 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Thank you. The Staff have any x.

7 P ? e

/ d >; L - 7 further comment on 26 (1)? .a,9;p 8 MR. DAVIS: In regard to Mrs. Stebbins' last couple .Nffg.y 9 of statements regarding fuel rods, I believe fuel - yes, fuel .:; ? _ f3.3 10 rods, that would seem to be clearly a problem of a radiological m 7, EPt 11 health and safety condition, not pertinent for consideration 3 - q3 ' MyGYr..n12 here.. I ' 3 'Thank you.. .y &iM5fdM

3tq f 14 MRS. STEBBINS

Mr. Chairman? w-c. ap". - n 15 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Well, I am not quite clear, Mr. Davis. I see, for example in your response dated 15 of 16 y ?[, 17 February you indicated that, "Taken together, that is subpara- .b. .18 graphs of 26, we believe that the thrust - " I am quoting, "we

g ;

believe that the thrust of the contention raised by paragraph c 19 .v. / 20 26 is that the environmental impact due to releases of radio-n h 21 active materials from the plant would be substantially greater 22 than that postulated and that the basis for such contention i are the reasons set forth in subparagraphs and paragraph 26 23 I 24 to the extent that the condition may raise issues appropriate -Federal Reporters, Inc. ,A ' N 25 to the present proceeding." m,~, f,

v. ;

l 1.~ . es.. y$.1.*g h s -c rw < + ,g ~ [ ,,.. !.e v+y e.; s p syc

,,;& &w y>,il n;T' + ".;~, - g3 M ~ s. e,n. a mf pic y e Q Jg;@ ' t v

Q g y n.st t g,

y -Q I 7 Well, now,'in view of that comment made, Mr.' Davis, CQnsjsM Y. W;$%p: I am not quitie~ sure I' understand your last answer.. Mf 2 ~ ry 3 ~ ..3g 3 MR. DAVIS: Mr. Chairman, this statement in our 07-i

U. 2 x.

8$k* ~, 4 pleading, in other words, of the 15th, does state what we

- ('N.A%

w:m. '. . A.[}' ' 5 thought Mrs. Stebbins might have meant by her pleading of para- .- o ,Ag.' ff-: 6 graph 26, and we still think that that might be one contention. u -. f yQ; _- 7 We don't know; she hasn't stated that. $h 8 However, she did draw in a couple of references to 'w.. 9 fuel rods, and that to me would play no.part in this contention ^f f , 9. 10 as to what she means. ,c. Ef?!J: 11 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mrs. Stebbins? x ~ 4;4. [EI Q ~~12 MRS. OTEBBINS: Yes. If ^ I might respond to that, I' an ^' ~

c

,qx :. - gC. 13 saying that'the fuel rod problem was not known in 1970 and 1971 ya ,cA wy 5O 14 when this hearing was held. It'is obvious from the operation ,c;y g 17<. - 15i of the present nuclear plants that this fuel rod problem is ((;.> .22 % 16 causing extensive radiological releases. JaQ gp-17 Also, it was apparent to us that this has not been l*Cfl5 n 18 considered by the Staff in their evaluation. .,w, ~!q!f' 19 Now, I can't see how they can stand there and say you . Wl~ I M. 20 should have talked about this'back at the radiological hearings. l _ sYif " .m They didn't know about the problem at that time; the utilities 22 didn't know about the problem at that time; but the all-seeing 23 coalition is supposed to have such foresight we would have known ] i 24 enough to have discussed this. .h.-. -Feder*l Reporters, Inc. i gjW 25 We.are discussing the environmental effects from this s 3p,,

p,

h ' f,'_ a gw w p,, , R W :z*,;,., \\ u m a

3* m$y?5,", v),*c.G: .m, i ?n. a# ,v 4 y _..; . x, x.

2., ; w..

.s-s gg m;.y;m., 3 ; m,w, sna., I 4g-31 i problem, and it's very clear that any radiation emitted into p.,.W, s .st.9fe '2 the environment, either in the air or in the~ water, is going m3 -:- 3 to have this effect on the enirironment. Man is a part of this -h - 4 environment and he is dependent upon it. {f [ -= 5 And, so, I was using this as a specific example. And 6 it is only one of the examples of why radioactive releases I <. ( 7 could be more than has been postulated, and why the consequen-8 tial environmental harm could be much greater. [ 9 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mr. Shon has a question. .f 10 MR. SHON: Mr, Davis, do I draw from what you said O., 11 a moment ago about the fuel rods being a purely safety matter, W Y (: M7" ~ 12 that you assert that the leakage rate of. fuel rods in no way: .y y, e 'l d s 13 ' influences the amount of release into the environment as - MaGP ' " j,:=. J ' 14 calculated in the environmental report? Is that not a factor ~ 15 ' in the calculation that was done for the final environmental e statement? 16 l s ~ 17 MR. DAVIS: Yes, Mr. Shon, it was. Indeed, as I w c 18 understood Mrs. Stebbins' statement some minutes ago, she, as +' 4 l l I understood it, again was referring to fuel rods. 19 I did not I 20 take her statement as being a basis'for an assertion that the i l ..~ 21 l radiological effluent releases was greater than we have / 22 postulated or did determine. And that the effects from those '] 23 releases will, in turn, be greater than what we have postulated. h: 24 If, then, that is a factor of contention, those two contentions -Fedes:1 Reporters, Inc. 25 and fuel rod assertion is her basis, one basis only, then we l y ) s , M "'-

mz";W u.hyw6 g. ' w. ; r.~ - i; x ~ w a. a

c., _

m._. g/gWW 1 '... g ~. x 63 - ggbyc "..g,- 'i ;i _g ,p ,J 'cipjA'3231f" . V .4 ~ ,. - g. g, 1 would stand ready to accept that as the contention with one y 2n , p M ;,, n 2 q p %g3~:L 2 specific issue, one factual question only. She has not ~ ) n

m..c

$$1 3 specified any other'than I am aware of. j .] ?. .Ms;?<. ~' 4 . CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: In other words, you are saying \\ ,.,T y. that the Staff would accept that as 'a contention if it were I ,f ff ; 5 ~.% \\ ,,_C,e 6 limited to only the fuel rod issue? ,hw, 7 MR. DAVIS: Yes, Mr. Chairman, unless she, Mrs. Stebbin( ~ r }. 8 and the Coalition would present other bases for that assertion. 9 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Anything further, Mrs. Stebbins? 10 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes, I believe we would have other 4 x, 7.$i 11 bases. I didn't think that this was the time that we needed.. l .:. g.: A > J~C., F 12 to go into all.of these bases since there was to be another,. p-N;h1 13 Prehearing for a full settlement of all these issues.- n G:y : sw[ ~r ] '{"q q/ I P. 14 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: This is the prehearing that . < A" ' ~ ' will decide which contentions, if any, will be granted to you, 15 N-16 l whether or not your Petition will be granted. ~ 7:c, ,Y"' 17 MRS. STEBBINS: All right. With specific respect to .g yy ypf -. this contention, then I mentioned the fuel rod problem as one 18 ,j c - { 19 of the problems. Another problem is the Atomic Energy J ~; 20j Commission's standards which will allow releases above those ,a 21 which are, you know -- they are supposed to release this amount 22 but, yet, they can release this amount (indicating). Now -- .g ~ 23 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: What are you talking about Q'[ 24 specifically? I don't follow you. r - Federal Reporters, Inc. 25 MRS. STEDDINS: I don't have those figures specifically w I b y.%, ;

Ow

p-v
&y;*Qwf 'Q'"

e g'4,% & sg w

i.;

4 'q,- ~ gyf 7, 64 wca;ges: & .s ~mdh, v; N; D 3e * ~ JA-33., m 1 . in front.of_ me, but the standards-which the Atomic Energy--- - .. tg, e y, + ' QQ((,,'* - th M.; Commission is setting for nuclear power plants are, so to. speak, 2 y.f i!. 3 guidelines only; and in the case of -- if a nuclear plant were -h.4 emitting more radiation, the Atomic Energy Commission would - 3 4 . c.m < u .1 i 5 then, in turn, evaluate this and determine whether the electri-6 city to be received by the public, you know, sort of cost bene- .,, 1 : 7 fit.this thing, is the radiation going to harm the public, or 8 do we need the electricity more. ,~ 9 So the standards that are actually set and the manner o,. - / 7 '.. 10 in which they have evaluated this upon set standards, there .;f -,, jj really is no assurance that these standards will be met at all .,;n LL-times. gpg 12 .;I I13 CHAIPJiAN FAREKIDES: Mr. Davis? n;t;y ~: a, %.y-14 MR. DAVIS: Mr. Chairman, thank you. Might I respond ",-. n y

n ltoacoupleofpoints?

~d 15 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Please spe'ak into the microphone. 16 l ~ j7 MR. DAVIS: There are a couple of points I have. I fjGF } - 18 am unclear as to the standards, the AEC standards which she is j9 referring to. Is she referring to the commission's levels }! enumerated in Part 20? This would appear to be,in our response, n 3 21 to be an improer form as not complying with 2.578 of the g" Commission's rules. I don't know what she was referring to. 22 23 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Very frankly, we don't, either. 24 firs. Stebbins, we don' t know what you are referring tc -Fecetal Reporters' Inc' 25 and absent that, I don't see how we can evaluate the second ~ w 'i (*,. n ' l [ 1 7;-...-

apw.,, ~a f-h k ;.,.J ', \\^v' ~ ~' ?. 65

s r. r;..n.

Og sy_v :, w.~, m;IM ip A-33 .,m,- ~ '- 1 point you raised. - T,1 y {ffr, I - '2 (e. W rT.g?; 2 MRS. STEBBINS:- -I was ^specifically referring to the ' x; va 4Q4 3 new "as low as possible standards" that they are adopting which fy l d'.J ':* ' TM.3f4 M,. 4 permits the Atomic Energy Commission to allow higher radiation.

Q

) ir - 5 CIIAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Well, Mrs. Stebbins, we are- -~ ji+:, 6 still not certain. The Atomic' Energy Commission has come out withacomprehensivelistofrulesandregulatibnsgoingto ..d C 7 i s,f' 8 these nuclear plants, and we're certainly not sure which stand- .,s 9 'ard you are talking about. 10 Now, in any event, it appears that Mr. Davis' comment ?~; 11 has merit; that is, of which you seem to be saying that you f7l'"f*T ? '12 are challenging the standards, and that would come in under,7 [gg$Tf' 13 x_ '~ S e c t i o n 2.'5 7 8. ~ "~' ,p e.yu ib f gv r, ' '- 14 Anything further on this 26 (1)? Let's go to -- I'm e ff:" 15 sorry. . ;p. ~ 16 MR. DAVIS: Mr. Chairman, Mrs. Stebbins again vaguely ~ +, ,' f. w., 17 referred to a cost benefit. It might allow the radiation to -f I8 reach such a point where they would become outweighed, the 'E 19 benefits from the electricity and other benefits to be derived lfromthisplant. 20 21 Again I am referring to Part 20 If the levels of 22 radiation vould exceed the levels of Part 20, there would be no g 23 plant allowed. That's perfectly clear. h 24 The cost benefit weighing takes place, also, but -- 1 -Federal Reporters, Inc. 25 CIIAIR!iAN FARMAKIDES: We are not arguing with your k. 4.s

aff;EW %% W K.. + ' R ~ [' w a m px-n,.y;y;? : a 66 + '~ ~ V.y; *,:,- e ,T k e d

frp'gb.

~1

4 y

M pia-34 1 contention. We want to be clear what the contentions are and >w~

bM] S: - i-V-

2 the bas &s for them. All right. Let's go to 26 (m). Could you F4 s g ;%: ; .i.- p- % ST ~, 3 clarify th'is, Mrs. Stebbins?* ~~ .) 1 %'qN 4 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. What has been done,is that in adif 5 each case there is an independent analysis of a particular 6 nuclear p6wer plant, and nowhere has there been any overall 7 analysis of the total of the plants and the possibility of .,. m x,.. 8 accumulation of long-lived radioactive isotopes. 9 Now, we're talking about tritium, which has a 12-year u' 10 half cycle. The western basin of Lake Erie is going to n d$ 11 begin to be quite an area of nuclear plants, according to what y M. fM -~ 12 is presently planned and under construction. e. i 5.~ n $. N.4fd 13 The studies that they are doing have announced so p'QQ ty., DN/,[' 14 little in this contention, and also there is the fact that '6 ',7 .~ 15 Lake Erie receives the water from the three upper lakes, also. .g 16 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Thank you. The Applicant, . h,~ 2 17 Mr. Charnoff, is there anything further on this? .s m. 18 MR. CHARNOFF: The only thing we would add is that y 39 this specific matter was taken up in last summer's hearing on 20'l this particular plant, and the same allegation was made. No I

,w e

(' 21 testimony was presented, notwithstanding, to be a statement on 22 the record in the way of testimony on this matter. 23 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Last summer's hearing you are 24 referring to as the one on continued construction; is that -Federal Reporters, Inc. 25 correct? L'

iy l.. L

?:: : ?: e

tht:k&h:l (, l, l 67 st@pi j 3 es 4 + a # Q; wMwm 3 nj.w;,9 : \\ ip A-33 MR, CHARNOFF: Yes. Y,s. 2 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Staff? Is there any comment on rA. P.'s 4~ [ k 3 26 (m) ? - r y 4 MR. DAVIS: I would say that one February 15th y *f. '

m.,

5 response to paragraph 26 does refer to subparagraph (m) as 6 appearing without basis. k,m, 7 I still don't see what Mrs. Stebbins has furnished 8 on this basis. 9 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Here, Mrs. Stebbins, Mr. Davis, 10 is saying that there is your failure to consider the total ~ l1 impact value of nuclear plants on Lake Eric which renders your

w..

" ? '.". 12 final environmental statement inadequate. Is that correct,.- z E JS b 13' Mrs. Stebbins? ~ "~ Mbhi.hM >

h. ?

~l4 MRS. STEDBINS: Yes. s 15 MR. DAVIS: Might I have a minute? 16 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: All right. Go ahead. ,., ~ 17 (Pause.) h;k ' 18 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mr. Davis, are you ready? .a: '; i-19 MR. DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I 20 The Staff feels that under the requirements of NEPA, I ,,a 21 we have a duty to look at the environmental action of this 22 plant in Lake Erie arongst other portions of the environment,

1 23 and precluded in that review is not a review of the accumulativc

{) 24 environmental effects from all nuclear power plants in the lakes 3-Federal Reporters, Inc. 25 that drain into Lake Erie, and also Lake Erie. -;I ... m. % I l

rmm, um -v 0

+'~.
~

~ ,s ~* .-s:S O 3 W. - , v 68 - - y,. q,7 l v m ' cip A-36 J 1

37)., '

In addition, Mrs. Stebbins did not -- at leas.t in my I, ]l -- [.,..(, Q'. 2 view - furnish a basis for this contention. j 3 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: That would be the next question .a ,}j ' 4 raised. What is.it you are, going to show to substantiate the . p, ) ' ' e: ; 5 contention? Is there a' continuing fact? And how would you shov 6 that? U Thereisanaccumulabveeffect. 7 MRS. STEBBINS: t 8 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: How are you planning to show 9 this? o 10 MRS. STEBBINS: It is a well-known fact of the brh ~ I1 accumulation of DDT in the environment. Now, there is much

' /.

.c ShC 0 ( " 12 ~ comparison between DDT and radioactive substances.- - e ik,dh b.13 ~ You have an environmenta poison, let's call it, fQf W

;A "?

14. which has a comparatively long half life, and you let it ~ I l I 15 l enter the environment and it simply isn't going away, s, [ 16 You have some very strange currents and swirling h ', - 17 around of currents in the western basin of the lake. You have, Y 18 for instance, coming into Lake Erie not one river from the 19 Detroit River, but you have three rivers from'the Detroit River. I 20 You have the relatively clean and practically the 7-t 3 21 same water quality of Lake Huron and the stream coming down the center which can be detected and picked up by sampling. 22 3 ~ 23 You have the dirty polluted side on the American (] 24 side, and you have the d,irty polluted side on the Canadian side. -Federal Reporters, Inc. ?;. 9 25 If you look at studies of currents in the western ., p.e %Q'},. ?? cf n

~ f, Wy. . x .re .>~ gQQ 3.; ^ - 59 9,g a ~, ..g; [i A-37 basins, you will find you have currents -that are swirling P j $ t. 4:, ~ 2 arc e d in here. ..n. a l' *'. 3 'We hope, and we think that this is something that the t i '[. 4 Atomic Energy Commission should have looked into with four ,y 5 nuclear reactors planned for. As we know, Davis-Desse is under 6 constru ction at the present time. 7 Going into Sandusky, what are we going to do? Put four reactors there? They have 2400 acres, and they are doing 8 9 studies now. 10 So when you begin to look at this total picture, and i 11 when you look at the types of currents that you have in the 7 ~ -~-12 western basin, we. felt that this was something that needed to 13 be evaluated. ' A. :. A NN-14 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Thank you. Any further 15 comment on this? 16 (No response.) 17 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: All right, let's go to 26(n). s jg MRS. STEBBINS: I guess I really covered (m) and (n) 19 together because that was talking about the -- l 4 20 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: In other words, we can consider 21 l (m) and (n) as being one contention? 9 22 MRS. STEBBINS: Really, I put them together because .V 23 it is what's coming into the lake from up above. And I have 24 no further explanation other than what I have offered you now. e-Federal Reporters, Inc. 25 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Anything further on 26 (n)? ..c -.~.-.- --

M jk[. p - 3e?.e ~ + g fvw w m-1;;.* s 4 1'n s .-.cu r i' 70 1pi.A-38, 7 J.f %. 1 . _ _._..-,MR..CHARNOFF :. We think. that insofar as the conten -- x .?Md.1 2 tions here,'the Licensing Board and the AEC should consider 4,?.& . 5,,c,9 ; 3 future plans, or prospective plans, that there is sufficient .l

V '

'a ~ ; ' 4 case law to make it clear that one does not have to consider v a.- 5 things that do not exist. it 6 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Anything further from the Staff" 7 MR. DAVIS: No,.thank you. 8 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: All right, how about 26 (o)? 9 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. We would plan to show how radio ~ 10 active releases from plants as they get older do go out. This 11 has been proben in various reports. We would bring witnesses; g g. l.a,. - 12 in to show this, and the fact that in an evaluation that has 93e. v (g...jff 13 been made upon a postulated release, doesn't mean that 5 or 10 C" ""f,"W., w ' years from now we would be able to meet that release. W? r ~ "~ 14 j...; "*[ 15 Let's take 5 or 10 years from now. We need the [ 16 electricity, and somebody will have to put more radioactivity 6(..- 17 in because we need the electricity. n. 1 S}}('9 18 This is the basis for that contention: as the presen': 19 experience of reactors that are now operating and what they 20 I have shown. 21 MR. SHON: Mrs. Stebbins, I take it that what you 22 l are saying is that the radiological impact figures in this .d<r 23 report in the final environmental statement are based upon 24 Projections that you think have proven where similar projection l3 -Fe~ der,t Reporters, Inc. 25 in it have proven inaccurate; is that right?

l ': N; -

p.,ps >,..y n;f~., y- ,'q..- ,a s3., 3 f M y,.;; y a, u;,2 n 71 n,., 1p A-39;e!. +, - 1 imS. STEBBINS: ' Yes, this is primarily what we are 3.:f b.k.). 4 2 saying, and in the safety -- preliminary safety analysis, in w s .t in-s.,,, 3 comments on this -- oh, I am trying to think of the federal te s. agency which.made this comme lnt -- but the fact that there was r. 4 ;s ./N:,;.;~v, 4 ,2-t 5 no operating experience which would show that the postulated 6 release would be as low as they were talking about; that -l 7 operating experience at present plants would i dicate it was 8 higher than what they were talking about. 9 f1R. SHON: Therefore, the environmental effect would 10 be underestimated, is that what you are referring to? 11 MRS. STEBBINS: That is right. .*h. J T, i m* ~ 12 MR. SHON: I would liko to hear what the Staff has>

_nN '

13 to say about that. ' "sp A 14 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Yes, sir. Mr. Davis? s - 15 MR. DAVIS: One comment that I do have is the fact I 16 that -- or just an observation -- S. 17 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: If you want to consult with -11;;+ ,in l' 8 your technical people, you may, sir. 4 ~. I 19 MR. DAVIS: Thank you. 20 l CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: All right. 21 MR. DAVIS: -- is that postulating -- and granted we l ~ 22 are not conceding -- l 23 CHAIR'4AN FARMAKIDES: I am sorry. He are having Q-24 difficulty reading you, sir. Can you talk into it? e-Federal Reporters, Inc. f. 25 MR. DAVIS: Postulating the statement of the ,a gr (* qfy :

i':&y,?blf... '.+')E*; & ? f' a j' 72 +w rm,, q q;; w y p c -(

y;;Me a.i; y g. '>

--c /. ,t j -1 --4 0j:. 1 Coalition,<.without conceding the. truth of it, that in fact-g v. ; $h.,,.; - -.g 2 releases will go up as the plant ages; nevertheless, the plant's .g;, v ~ 7 f' 3 effluents, radioactive emissions, will still have to be within

hs. -

W 4

the limits specified in Part 20 and whatever other standards M rT u

/;'. -

5 are adopted by the Commission, that one interpretation.of her 6 content,Lon would be that it could be an attack upon the rules r; ,. H ', 7 of the Commission and improper in form in 2.758. 8 MR. SHON: Mr. Davis, you say emissions might rise .p 9 but would still stay within Part 20. Was the final environ-10 mental statement based only on Part 20, or on something else to 2 ,~ l1 make its estimate of impact. e' k h '~ 12 MR. DAVIS: One minute.. wa 3. 'f 13' - ~ - Mr. Chairman, our environmental review was based upon Q #c;o u7 14 I a projection of the effluents from this plant as planned, D 15 considering -- and the fact remains -- that the sources 16 determine -- th:2 the assumption that the effluents would in .;+> (./, ', 17 fact rise as.the plant aged, they then are not based upon the 18 limitso5Part20,themaximumallowanceoverthelifeofthe l 19l plant. I ~ 20! CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Any further comments on that e t 21 point? O 22 Let's go to paragraph 28. There are two paragraphs X) 23 28 on page 6. Mrs. Stebbins, which of those paragraphs did 1 e 24 you stato earlier was incorporated in paragraph 3 of the j' -Federal Reporters, Inc.

$ v 25 Amended Petition, the first 28 or the second 28?

'a G,.*,W s " s h(

p., _: m q..

ra,4.y(6; ~i;, .m 73. + .o 3 s. a. ~~y

y. c ' ' *.

q sp.fs;.o;s y ~ ~ ggr.a 3 ~ 4 --41,l . '.I -J MRS. STEBBINS: The first-- 28. - -" 3.'nis,U 2 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: The first 28. All right.

.4

.4. E * '?, 3 Now, how about the second 28, as to the Staff?-In %,.,h J., 4 your response of February 15, page 8, you say, " Paragraphs 28 4 w, 4. 5 and 29 appear to set forth specific contentions related to the c a 6 issues.pf this proceeding and their basis." ._.c 4 7 Now which paragraph 28 did you have in mind there, sir? 8 MR. DAVIS: On page 4 of the same pleading, in a u 9 series of enumerated paragraphs we referred to the first _'A. 10 numbered paragraph 28 as being inclusional without basis. That' , yp. 11 was our total comment upon -- our only comment upon the first 4. ,, m 1.fby e - 12 No. 28. ? m. Ihdi. ' 13 When on page 8 we refer to paragraph 28, we a w. q.e r; gg:,W.' 14 mistakenly did not spell it out. We were implying the second 3 15 No. 28. 16 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: The second paragraph 28. I see. s

hl. -

-l{f 17 All right. Mrs. Stebbins, can you please address .G[mP. h '18 'yourself to the second 28 and give us your basis for that, y 19 please, that you are going to show, ma'am, that would put a lgenuineissueoffactintodispute? r:Y 20 by.' f 21 MRS. STEDBINS: Okay. With respect to population

O f 22 growth in the area, one of the major factors of population

>Q 23 growth is', of course, industry. One of the things that attracts 24 industry is: is there adequate power to supply the industry? pg -Federal Reporters, Inc. Now, while this is only one of the reasons why

wf. '

25 N y %, M +

.E w.~ yi. S.3,'pg g.; t-f d, ? ; o, s ..), 4 ' _

e _

e y

4 j

,,-g. t.e,,, m:, 4 _ tn v i; 4 ,y -+ 3 74 - aa .c.a a, w s - x-p;y, g e : y. 3 y w (h[, sfl. i 42 ; > 1,' industry' develops,'a second reason that industry develops is c< m> : A h h,' 2 because of the availability of water-supply. n.-~- i $$ifu W.. g; ^ ^ 3 With the water supply of Lake Erie thereis, of iN..', Sfg[. ' < 4 course", adequate water supply. With the construction of the

nGn 5

Davis-BessepN. ant,thereisadequatepower,accordingtothe ,M,, I[f = N.k. 6 advertisements that are being placed in national magazines by Aj' 7 Cleveland Electric Illuminating saying, " Locate your industry.

i: ' '

3 8 here. We have adequate power," and so forth. 4 m rM. . r-9 So that the total impact of this is the promotion

f 10 of industry and the factors that will stimulate the growth o.

$bRU. I1 most are power and water. Of course, transportation, too. , jyg P . 6,.. "?qy?"*- 12 I-90 is going throughthat area. It's partially complete. v u gg[.,U i' 13 This will help also to bring industry into the area: the k- ~ @fM-g^ 14 transportation system which is being developed. ee., ,,J.$, 15 So when you put these factors together, we see this m. p:f+ 16 as a. possibility of bringing in a much larger population into .n m

h( *

..g... 17 the* area. ~'... 3 ig'g7[t.41gy 18 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Thank you. Mr. Applicant? y, 7-T. 19 MR. CHARNOFF: We have no comment other than to say v i M' 20 that we think the contention lacks any basis. It completely 1.#,. $G l ~" ' 21' lacks any detail and it is simply a speculative assertion. ) 22 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Staff? 23 MR. DAVIS: As we said in our February 15th response, we stick with what we said in that pleading, but we think 28 is g 24 ( - Feder:I Reporters, Inc. %n 25 not the contention and, as has been elaborated today, has more I [ Y ', l .. :g.. ,a[k ki

9 % ) ;.fh M j; n _ 7 % ;; c; - 75, _ rwsc a-

c;

~. L' ~ a,R;y 9:F ~ y ?.s %y y [" .~ p m.p.. y _. "it 1 bases than it had at that f-ima. c.(.$.,5 h f j %>;'.9 f ' 2 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Let's go to,29. mpg ;.[ e o + u.(, ' ' 3 I'm sorry, Mrs. Stebbins; anything further on 28? .hI No.j ~ i,j i s 4 MRS. STEBBINS: e.. ke, 5 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Let's go to 29. j 6 I wish you would, in addressing your bases for 29, P ease also give us what it is, in your opinio, that you think l 7 8 causes this violation of the nondegradation clause of the [ 9 Water Quality Standards of Ohio, and what it is specifically that you are referring to? We would like to know. jo 2-jk.' jj MRS. STEBBINS: Okay. 1y>. a. ggyf r.. 12 With respect to the nondegradation clause of the (q,- f 6. 13 Water Quality Standards of Ohio, this is a clause which was x p; kyg* s cpW ' ~ 14 developed in order to protect the high quality of our water 65

p' 15 with the fact that we have had increasing pollution.

Many areas 16 have become extremely polluted but other areas were still, so 3 j7 to speak, relati n:1y good water. And the purpose and intent rh 18 behind this was not to allow further degradation of those- ?, - j9 waters in which the quality was already good. 20 i Now, specifically we do not have large amounts of qw i 21 radioactivity in our waters now. If we add this as a new e. 22 pollutant, it is in our extimation a vital issue of this non-Q) 23 degradation clause of the Water Quality Standards. CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: And you say these have been 24 - detal Reporters, Inc. a" 25 approved by the Environmental Protection Agency, and I assume h,.' 6 ?v 3 1 t ,::w

gfg, ag'rydy~,j p,.r g %n c' (Q r g .., u:s %, w. Rgv. T

?.$wc ';: jggf.

76'. y g

fi(r*.,
--.u u e

e m,y;j -~ a y,, , ;w _ ~ < y,Qg, ; ,, ' 2 m y. ~ MRS. STEBBINS: Well, it is my -- G m y ;. CL / 3 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Excuse me. ,h:~ ^ 'tecJf,. 4 I assume you are talking to the Federal Water Pollu- ..: c D. 7;h i 5 tion Control Act amendments; is that what your point is? w., 'i 6 MRS. STEBBINS: The standards were set by the State 4 .c.; W~ 7 of Ohio, the Water Pollution Control Board at that time. Ohio

...,-?_

4 4 8 now has an Environmental Protection Agency. The standards 9 were approved by the Federal Government -- now the Environmenta:. 7 f... 10 Protection Agency -- but I think at the time of the approval "N ", 11 had a different name, like Federal Water Quality Administration, Wnk Mi$b 12 something like that, at the time of approval. . -w. CIIAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: How does this clause relate to a ..e,, w. & y,:'d 'h.yq:p 13 ' 7" i j 14 the Federal Water Pollution Control Act amendments of 1972, 15 do you know, ma'am?' .r. f,y 16 MRS. STEBBINS: 1972? I'm sorry. I have not fully ,0].b' 17 evaluated all of the 1972 amendmencs to the Act. -:c y 37 Ge% I8 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: So then what you are talking ~ ^ ' - 19 about here is'the Water Quality Standards in existence prior?

~

20 MRS. STEBBINS: Which were already approved. r 'x \\ ' 7; 21 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: I see. All right. F 22 MRS. STEBBINS: And the adoption of a nondegradation Q-23 clause was something which the Federal Government asked the ( ? 24 States to do. Most of the States in the United States did - FedeC l Reporters, Inc. af, 25 adopt such a nondegradation clause; a few of them did not. ..s, e F . 9 Yi . 4) >7 3 e., n 3.+ g 4

hhbrY)h,Ny i.k ;,Q.Y. i / II h&N&.,m ~ RY ' ' s

Y a.

y sc,eJ,3 o.z - g 4 y.j y h A-45 ( l e- ,C,,jl7 f c ~:.L' CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: I am just curious as to.what v.[u.y y,[ f[;[.'.2 you meant, ma'am, by this phrase. c, G7PC., All right. The Applicant? 3 W; g 6';g 4 MR. CHARNOFF: The only matter mentioned by N., gl' 5 Mrs. Stebbins relates to so-called radiological or radioactivity 6 in the water. I would point out that under the Federal Water I 7 Pollution Control Act amendments of 1972, and to the best of 8 my knowledge under the Federal Water Control Act legislation 4 9 which preceded that, the provisions of those statutes do not ~ 10 apply to radioactivity; those were specifica13y excepted. 11 The other point I would mention is that we do have a a

W 12 Section 21(b) Water Quality certification from the State of

~ _N h.' J. 13 ' Ohio, certifying that we met-the Ohio Water Quality Standards ., gy s. R3%$;; $> i 14 as approved by the Environmental Protection Agency. 15 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mr. Charnoff, first, as to your J 16 first point in that paragraph 29, Mrs. Stebbins talks as to A., 17 effluents which includes heat, chemicals as well as dissolved h$C 18 i solids, suspended solids, and B.O.D. in addition to the s 19 radioactivity. I MR. CHARNOFF: That is correct. And I understand that 20 i g 21 in clarifying that, that in terms of nondegradation provision, P 22 the Chairman asked Mrs. Stebbins, "What do you have in mind?" Q 23 And Mrs. Stebbins replied by referring to radio-24 activity, sir. I was addressing my remarks to Mrs. Stebbins' g3 e-Feder-1 Reporters, Inc. 25 clarification of her contention. ' ^ -ea > (. k,

p a[.m:- y.r <;J z +~{ 's. t .y.9 % ~e+ w s,%;_;7. f ~~- ; - M y ;y. :..

'~

mm. (; T. pay. A 46 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: I see., e ' * .,- 1 f.Ys%e r. . Staff, anything further on paragraph 29? ~ 6.c4(f. 2 'j$!.?, ' K-? c' Y 3 MR. DAVIS: No, Mr. Chairman. 3 l. . Ji,. <g : ',,i n a 4 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mrs. Stebbins, anything further '. I l ,. t; O: .' S 5 on paragraph 297 l . 2:.[- 6 MRS. STEBBINS: The approval of the State of Ohio 'j 7 giving them their water certification was somet ing that was 8 done by the State of Ohio under the gun. They have not fully y qe 9 gotten an evaluation from Batelle Memorial, who was doing a ^ 10 study for them. r,.

Mc.~ g,

s 11 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: We don't have to go into the

r..

3 :;.t $$ThNfr-12 merits. 9.n : i. w... ~..p.jJF.m ? 13 m O - a. MnS. STEBBINS: Okay. .:gQQ M - w p yN '14 CHAIRMM.i FARMAKIDES: We don't have to go into the M'7,N I c.s, ~ - :: 15 merits, whatever they might be. c'[ 16 MRS. STEBBINS: Fine. .c .Y,X.. .% 7. 17 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: At this time we just want to +

g.,.7... _

18 clarify what you meant in paragraph 29. I think we have enough .]j'- 19 clarification now. I l MRS. STEDBINS: I specifically. used the radioactivity

.Q

20 w;,

1 . e..m

1li 21 because this was a new pollutant which was being added.

i 22 CHAIRM.Mi FARMAKIDES: Well, we are not going to limit 23 you to that, Mrs. Stebbins. We will also include the heat, ,- b 24 chemicals, and other materials that you have included here in f-esal Reporters, Inc. 0* l jy.; 25 wa -*'^. . Ut?wy h g- ,, =y

'x n. .. ~. ~ -- V ,fk&.' % % ?..:3,F; ' ( 'f n i :? ' . N,x.' Y ' ': ~ ' h y9 -

r,

p,.,.n 9n A a.

v. ~ -

w..

t. zn ; x, - <+ 1 , i. _ ~

.62r: m..

~A-47:j zl This. concludes the questions.the Board.has. And I 6%y.i. 9 W; 7 @ '2 would like'to project schedules, assuming that there is-at leas 1. ~ 98%, W. - upm - - "g@ 3 one contention -- and I am making no ruling, of course; but I W( d l~ ,4 am just getting to look at the schedule here. If there is at ~~ 4_ q. [3 5 least one more, firs. Stebbins, how many days of discovery will mg.n % 24 ty,{j 6 you nee,d before we can get into another Prehearing Conference y t.t . /,. y! - - 7 and go into the evidentiary session? e. 8 The reason I ask, as I understood you, most of the s'..,- 3 9 contentions that you have clarified further for us you indicate y*- .w -h$ 10 you will put on in your direct case with regard to witnesses. 7 ; ;.. 11 So I don't know how much more time you will need for discovery. %g..f;gy... Q*pgg 12 Could you give us an estimate? 9 $g]gi"- 5 t..x,3M ?. 13 tiRS. STEBBINS: Well, I would think we would need .m e, P., - [y p. '~ 14 about four weeks for discovery.

p+ y e cM 7;?.ip ~. *O 15 CHAIRMAN FAIUiAKIDES

Well, we -- the Board has a 4,y..; - -(I$.I g 16 little bit of a problem with time here because, frankly, we gave o. ac rie K 17 you an additional approximately three weeks to revise your .g;y: fM,,:1j., 18 Petition and following that we used up additional time. And ..s. y,.J 19 we do not -- we, the Board, do not wish to delay this hearing. s ,3 i ( 20 ! So we feel that in view of what you said earlier, perhaps a s

5 21 shorter-time period will be necessary for discovery, and we

.a 22 wondered what type of discovery you would be interested in. 23 fins. STEBEINS: Well, the types of discovery that will 24 enable us to help support our contentions here. r:t Reporters, Inc. @k 25 CHAIRb1AN FARMAKIDES: Yes. But what kind, ma'am? w:. w.* 3 7,u y s ,og<. . 5fi j 7_ r ~ v;p.m:[ ' ' [ 1

- -- ~ - - - v c 4 $[. , Y@. 4 ;' T Y .,' ', ' ~ 80 X 3 '

t;;.w $;[&t'

? % i~ ~ '

a N, < gj = e we

,e, .i..,.j4 8,

1 OE some things I won't ask you as-to' detail; other things I- -

~ ? d[s e.i. 4 1 J Q 2 want detail. Here.I want detail. --Uhat type of discovery are ?k+ : t;y: : # 5 3 you.looking at?. ' O. y[v, 4 MRS. STEBBINS: Well, now, when you ask me that ~ -. p.g 4 M-5 question, it is going to take me a few minutes to answer that -i:, c.' -. 6 as I go back through this. 7 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Well, look, let me say this, 8 then: We probably will have a conference call following the .s

A 9

Order, if there is a decision to grant the contention. And we jo are telling you at this time that we a2ce predisposed to having jj a very short time for discovery. We already think there has

O. <

' t.2,;p.._:. 12 been enough time, and we are thinking in terms of'20 days. w v. u-L'n.:, s fk 13 Following that.we probably will hcVe a Prehearing Conference g+, O 4 > .c uwsnnx. 1{FdMW4# j4 again to proceed further, if we go that route. ., e +, 7rn7' 15 H w does that sound to the other two parties? " ^ ~.. :. 16 Mr. APP icant? l

c

.ii.. A C 1, j7 MR. CHARNOFF: It would be acceptable to the Applicant [ _, k: @w p!i. 18 here. w 4];., p;;]. ~ 39 CHAIRMAN FARLKIDES: Mr. Staff? l MR. DAVIS: Yes, that is fine with us, too, i. 20 v,. I M.ru Mr. Chairman. 21 ,y S' 22 CHAIRMA'i FARMAKIDES: Mrs. Stebbins, would that cause .G-y u a hardship? 23 MRS. STEBBINS: Well, I had indicated the possibility 24 (-.a - e . ' " " ' ' " ' ' ' 'j of about four wecks' discovery. - x. y ' m t-,., {jf f;- %a u, %.... ' t,: - ?%; a 2 -.1

% g:$$ $2~~"ifQl,dj'*. --S 5 E 'n s, ; L h J g3 e h,r.m m/ ;.+ - An ' g lu.g' ' hy 4. . % J ^, . Now, 'I also have another problem here which I would -49.,6 1 2%# >N, ~ i $ [. 2 like to make a motion to this Board at this time, and I-think

w;9,,. c -

15%% L- ..u. Afd.l 4 3 it might be appropriate for me to do so with respect to it. \\. p_. 1 .gg:S < 4 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Let us first decide whether or ,m :.. t r ~ M y ;;4b - 5 not these contentions will be, admitted, and then after that

.);: s. : y 6

we'll entertain further activities of the parties. 7 n \\ C*; :P-7 At this point in time I don't see why),you need more y .c b .&-.,n' et 8 titae than that, in view of what you said earlier with respect g...; 3 9 to the bases of some of your contentions. So let's plan on M 10 that kind of a schedule. So we are talking about, then -- we ,p .9 ;. 11 should rule by sometime next week, and we should then be in a -p. - k a m v!. N... .u 5 e-r 12 position of a second Prehearing Conference sometime in the s = :. .a - E %,..'i i 13 middle of June, and then we will probably go to evidentiary ( u, v yE e m y, ~ .-$f 14 hearing sometime in the first part of July. That would he the ,3., 15 kind of schedule we are talking about. e ? .6 16 MR. DAVIS: Mr. Chairman? 1 n:

4 P

g 9J', 17 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mr. Davis, wi., 'L,'_e*- /.,d..,%.O." 18 MR. DAVIS: Excuse me. Pardon me. When did you give .w + 19 for a second Prehearing Conference? About what date? 20 l! CHAIRMAN FAREKIDES: After' discovery is completed. -e 'g :, -f 21 I think we said sometime in the middle to the end of June. c, g. 22 MR. DAVIS: Thank you. 23 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: We have nothing further at this 24 time. Off the record. ^, er:1 Reporters, Inc. 25 (Discussion off the record.) E]a::q. a

5. i my,,&.

t_ a --,---_,,..c.

u :iner .;~ ~

m;'p n @'p, $ b ; W % -

s al$d g _, . 4 1 % ~,. g2 s 4 x. ;+ + w.. T- ~- c m - -r f);l[h s,' ~ ' i i i;:~:A -50 L l CHAIREN FARMAKIDES: Okay. Back on the record. i n: 7 ,' t u r # Qq '3 :.- A 'Dif j 2 This completes this Prehearing Conference. The Board .A.*. h,'; %? m' ~ S + T.f F ' _ 3 will take the material submitted today. ~ Yi 7, y gy 4 I'm sorry. Mrs. Stebbins? .,dM O

'l, b 3 5

MRS. STEBBINS: Mr. Chairman, I did have a question . _; o..,- 3.: 6 h'ere,.if you wouldn't mind. I wanted to bring this up at the i

f. n..,

7 beginning of the hearing, and I mentioned how I have resubmitted. w $~ !!yf[ 8 our original petition, m. . y, 9 We felt that we were resubmitting this. I didn't ry,_ 10 have additional information with respect to the specific number i Y. + b 11 of -- the first Section 28 which talked about thic benefit om f'..s; e . M ;; & - 12 analysis which I am still heaving in the contentions, by the~- < m g: S Nh-13 way that I have resubmitted my Petition. a1 em rif h_.

r. \\

~

77,

? 14 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: You discussed that, drs. Stebbins, .1 -ep C 15 that as to our paragraph 3, as I understood you; that's the way ,1 16 I took it. ),[ 17 MRS. STEBBINS: I did want to clarify that that was, 2 5 18 for instance, being considered as a recubmission here when I 4, ' -

).

19 was talking on this cost analysis. I 20 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: The Board will consider that, I es. '~ 21 y c 22 MRS. STEBBINS: There is one other thing: this has b 23, been a well-known fact through all of these hearings, and this 24 is the reason why we were not able to present a case at the - ederIl Reporters, Inc. 25 second hearing last July to bring out our points, and this wac x,,) s

g r.

~,3 . N. qa,

2. #

? n ,w ?- '.t g

. ($[h;34.';a:x &c o,, ..,:;~.~ . +..,. .s 7 +:' ' ' ~ S; " Wg y

g; ;g P

~: J 83, ~ V;yy.p.x v.r-a g.. ', 4 p 4995s."? -51'4 '1 because of a lack of finance.

t..

g/f3[yb3' i.' w AV 4 5f.r:. a '2 Now, the Atomic Energy Commission has been charged p , u.1 ry: .ty' c : -;- 3 to protect the public by setting standards and also to regulate M: ', 33 fM., e ni..[ 4 the industry. If there is no public participation in a hearing s 6 M.

1 (d.. ~. g

, m. e by Intervenors, then there really is no way for the public to 5 1.l y r 'l ...J.f; : 6 participate. ...u W.?s 7 Unless the coalition receives better financing, we t; M v, f.vY 8 are going to be very pressed to have the money to try and bring m ! ' '~ 9 these witnesses in; therefore, we would like to make a motion I 10 th'at the Atomic Energy Commission support us by bringing the w; ~~ ' 3'? WW 11 witnesses in to bring this about, this side of the case. We Q r,,;r O@;iW:O pr 12 think.that this really.is a part of the Atomic Energy .,0 e j, ym.,.Mp.13 Commission's charge to protect the public. y mi C:. 3-e@qm sggV 14 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: Mrs. Stebbins, let me make lN W; ~ $[ 15 myself very clear. Number one, this Board has no authority a.- ~ to authorize the kind of request you just made. 16 $:y. .g. : a 4 19 ' 17 Number two, I don't think, ma' am, that you represent gy:- [$$h; 18 the public interest. I think the public interest is repre-u.v% c 19 sented by the Atomic Energy Commission. You do represent a x. si'; 20 segment of the public for whom you speak: that's the Coalition. 1 %. p.: 9 )m 21 In that sense we have allowed you to represent them. C:c e.-- 22 Let's be very clear that the public interest is not ~ necessarily in your corner. 23 ~1-i 24 I think, as the Supreme Court has announced, that er:I Reporters, Inc. $?. 25 the public interest is with the agency. . ;y,f y, J, $fsi',- .1 'h ( t J

4 fLl '

nw.u p }"-

r3'

g

'l 44-in A-52 1 Now, let's get back to the financial problem that d 2 you voiced. Here the Doard is very symoathetic, but whatever 3 you can work out with the Staff with respect to their ability 4@ to help you, for example, wilth the transcript, 4 is something ii 5 you have to work out with them. 6 This Board has no authority to make funds or i 7 financial assistance available. L i 8 Now, again, this completes the Prehearing Conference, 9 and I think the record is clarified enough to sufficiently 10 allow the Board to reach a decision on the contentions. 11 We will close the hearing. Before we close, I see a hand and I will. entertain a question. 12 i O I ~Od 13 l MR. GERDY: While the Board doesn't have any funds to 14 ! make available to this group, is it possible that the Board 15 could re' commend to the Atomic Energy Commission to make funds 16 available? And, if so, would the Board so recommend? 17 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: I don't know if we have this is authority to "recor. mend." We're not a part of the Agency l except in the sense that we are under the statutory panel. 19 I 20 I can't recommend to the AEC to do this, or that, or I 21 what have you. The only thing I can do is make a decision, o I t 22 ! which would then bind this Board, and then, in essence, it ^ 'i j 23 binds the parties. Once those, parties are bound, they have an + e', 24 appeal threagh the AEC. (-) ?-Federal Reporters, Inc. 25 Let me think about this further. I think my initial

T 85 r.ip A-53 1 answer is the final one. I don't think we have that authority. (- 2 We'll think about it, and if we come up with a different 3 decision, we'll include it in'our report. 4 Thank you very much. 5 MR. CHARNOFF: Simply for the benefit of the.public 6 present,, I would call to the attention of the Board that in 7 at least one or possibly two cases involving the cases of the 8 Three Mile Island and the Peach Bottom, Intervenors made a 9 request similar to that of Mrs. Stebbins. The Commission 10 denied that request. I1 CHAIRIMI FARMAKIDES: How did they get up to the 12 Commission level? ~ (/ 13 MR. CIIARNOFF: It was part of a Petition to be filed 14 ; at that time with the Atomic Energy Commission. 15 CHAIRMAU FARMAKIDES: In other words, what you are-16 saying is it did not come through the Board? l 17l MR. CHARNOFF: No, sir. 18 CHAIRMAN FARMAKIDES: We're going'to think about this 19 ! and if we reach a different decision than the one I just told l I l 20 you, then I'll put it in the Order. Thank you very much. I 21 This concludes the Prehearing Conference. 22 (Whereupon, at 1:50 p.m. the Prehearing Conference 23 was concluded.) 24 Ederal Reportets, Inc. 25 I ,}}

ML19329D259

Text

Navigation menu

Search