ML19329E990

Memorandum Re 690630 Decision Authorizing Issuance of Provisional CP

ML19329E990
Person / Time
Site:	Calvert Cliffs
Issue date:	03/04/1971
From:	Price H US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To:	Johnson W, Ramey J, Seaborg G US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
Shared Package
ML19329E987	List: ML19329E986 ML19329E990
References
NUDOCS 8006190767
Download: ML19329E990 (7)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:- .n ] I e. t t (, D..:/g ;"

• UNITED STATES Ol' A10:111CA ATOlli.C l'..";tC.T C0:01ISS10N

/'s/, \\ f.Y~ l~ 'e 5 f sg ~' !),.. ~,v v(\\ CO'CiU.S!O!:iMS : ~. .,j f Clenn T. Scoborg, Chniracn N-f 3' f%Y' Jctos T. n:acy - }4 [..,a '[,, .ies -f i Wilfrid E. Jchnson 6 ' ~~ j p Theos J. Tho apson .g /7,[}9m\\a s u. r IN TF. l'ATTE'1 0F ) ) ItA1.T11:0nE Gl.S AUD E.I.ECTRIC C0!!PAUY ) Docket Hoc. 50-31.7 (Calvert Cliffs 1:uc1cnr Pcuer Plent ) 50-310 l'aite 1 cud 2) ) s ) ) F.!.~0RANU'1 On Jtme 30, 1959, the. cerctic ccfety and lice.nsing bonrd convened to prenidu in this pro:acding, reader...d en initici decision nuthoric:ing the it.ru. nee of provisionel const ructJ on p?inits to the cpplicant, the Bnitimore Cer, t nd Eiertric Cc..;nr.y, to build ti o precsurirc.d stater reactors at the cpplic.mt 'r. cite ca the t.c.0 tern chore of the Che cpar.he }3ay in Calvert County, !!a t y lcud. In recch!.n3 ftr. decicin,, the board concluded, on hcd the reguia. tory etc.Cf t nd th: Advi:..:y Cc.: nittca on Renctor Snfcgucrds folic.tring their earlier revf..., th thet:c-is rec.rc.a ibic rs. urruce the r.ubject nucicer fr.cilitic: c m be cca.itcuet ed cad o ec:.cd at the proposed site without unduc. risk to the hec't h c*:d cr fety of the public. The bn.sec for the board's safety conel tm.t o:.re oct-forth in the initir.1 decision. 1

800 61go

'$l' L._

._.m.._ W t I' The appliention for permita was contested at the board henring by the Chennpcake Environmental Protection Ahsociation, Inc., an intervenor in the proceeding; however, no appeal to the Com::ission han been taken from the board's decision, the time for filing execptions having nou expired. In accordance with-our precent regulations and practice, uc have in-for:nally revicued the initial decision.. Our review icada us to conclude that the board's decision is supported by the record of the proceeding and that it should be permitted to become finn 1, as scheduled, on August 14, 1969. While, ordinarily, no Commission memorandum of revicu would be issued in such circumntances, becauce the initici decision trents with a matter of general significence for our licensing proceedinga - uhether a board enn inquire into the validity of the atandarda establinhed by Part 20 of our regul ttions (10 CG Part 20) - ve believo come opecific comnnnt on that matter is in order. Ac reficcted in the initini docinion, the me'jor. contented iosue nt the hearing involved the discharge of radioactive enterials from the plant, in particulce, the lic,uid uarte dischcrge containing tritium. The intervenor did not question that the proposed facilitico vill comply saticfcetorily uith the limite of Part-20 (actuoi relcacen of tritium are expected to be only a cmall frcction of Part 20 limits); rather, in th: uords of the bor.rd, "The focus of [intervenor's] attcck seem[c] to be on the validity of Part 20 . i t se l f". The board concluded, correctly we believe, that n1though the inter-venor raised question as to the underlying' assumptions of Part 20, therc yj,

( 2'," [ - N- -~~ "m 2 m 4: w

sm u

g,k.,1 jf - 1 i

t. '

+ 4 ~ % war: 'nri evidence w1.Is h wo.21d warrnut. di p. r:'ere f rom the s tniulards o f-that l'a' t. r

• !hile reach'n;; the above? coa:luaio:i on the. record of this pr,oceeding, 1-

..t.he= board uns of the further' vicx 'thatl in cases where the evidence is 'such 1- - as t'o drau Linto :cuest ion the validity of Part 20, 'the board "might not be - . able to rely upon '[that 'Part] as establishing the outer limits of accept- -able rich" It is'to that hoard vicu, and the scope of its' application, ~ that we address our co nents below. ~ ' It bot.rr, statr.itent at the outset, and the board itself recognized, that the: Cornission's 'licentf ug regulations establish the standards for reactor coruitruction 'per.al t de.crtrinetions; and that the findings in procriedings such as thd instant one must be taade in cecordance with those regulations. Fu rt he r, it ihould. i e clear thr.t our licensint; regulations - which are general in their..cpplication rnd which are considered and adopted in public rule , making proceedingr. wherein the Corraission can drev on the vicus of all inte:ested perso n - are not subject to caendment by boardr, in individual u ndj ud i cat ory; procco-!! n ;n. e (1he'foregoiny, doe not, 1.owever, foreclose a 1icenr.1ng proceeding challenge th'etxali 'i ty of 'n Co: cal s> ion reaulat ion, on limited ground t, i f the contested to s egElat ion t elat e r.- to an issiie in the proceeding. By limited grounds we naan, who 1.ei; Jt he; regul t.ti >atir. wi thin the Cocal rsion' r out hority; uhether it was piomdtgatediin ae.terdance uith applicable procidural requirements; and, as n . rerpec t <: thc Coted?rien'. radiological sa f ety standards;, win ther the. standerde m e- ..g . ' ' I sj -.8, E y b

4 5 4-7 ~ ~ establithed are a reascaable exercise of the broad discretion given to the Commission by the / tomic Energy Act for implementation of the statute's l' radiological safety' objectives. Sce, Power Reactor Development Co., v. E1cetrical Workern, 367 U. S. 396 (1961); Sicqci,v. Atomic En m y_Conrnissio,n, et al., 400 F. 2d 778. (CADC,1968). We'vould couple the above comr. ento with the enjoinder that, if a board i believes there is a substantini question presented on the record cc to the validity of a challenged regulation, the boacd should certify that question to the Commission for r,uidance prior to rendering an initial decision. In the subject proceedint., an the initial decision enhen cicar, the record did not present such a suictantial, question. One final matter varrants coxment. The Commission's Part 20'atandardo are based on recor.xondctions developed by the statutory Federn1 Radiation Council cnd_ approved by the President for the guidance of Federn1 agencien. The l'cderal Radiation Council, for its part, tekco into account the cdvice of the best. technical expertise avoilabic, including the recommendations of the Nationni Council on Rndiation Protection and Ihnsurcr..cnts and the Inter.. national Cc. cat. scion on Rcdiological Protection. The Comnionion, prior to cdepting its regulatory neandards, cdditionally consults uith other grceps, ruch as its Advicory Cocce.ittee on Biology cnd thdicino, end socks public coa.nat. 'ihe ccatral cira of thin careful and comprehousive process is to arrivo at standards uhich provide cn edequate carcin of safety for expoced percon3 Uc vould only add that since Port 2010 a "living dccument" its t e m + 9C'.

1. sug

_/ g

.~. ~. .a-.~,- .. - + - -.~:~ -u .D p :. '. y atr.ndards crc cc stinuingly revic red trith the objective of-ccouring that ~ expo vres to the ptiblic rec:ticing frca atcatic energy c.ctivities remin 1:c11 i ~ within the dasired cafety :::rgir... Ey the Co:tmicsion. .n .Oj .'..a h _ Y. d.. '..;, l(.,,'. }...... +. .'.) ,3 i

f. s...

11. B. !!cCool Secretary Dated.Auguct. 8; 1969.

4 ? e 4 e s d ,. ' (q a -- e /, : -/ ~ J .p g .n- --.-i ? ~~

~ 4 1 f t 4III i. I s if .\\ A I a el a l. I I ll I... i e c it. II' .li et i .( u +.o.o.....o i.. .. e . c~ DN February 25, 1971 An th uny Z. I:o i se ;n a, E s q. Ler li n,.tair..a ni.sia.; css ler D10.. Street, k.'a ! U it a, t o n, ii. C. 2'l.63 Lear l'r. Aoicr.ca:

• ihis is in respons.? tu your "potition" deted February 5,1971, on behrli of Dr. and Mrs. Irving Lyon of Bennington, Verri.out.

t.le have cor.cidered your request that any notice of hearing on the uctter .,f the inseaneo ef ca operatiac, license to the Vere.ont Yankee i;uclear l'awc.c Corpart. tion for the Vari..ont Yanhoe I:uclear Station at j Venna, Ver:,nat, be delt.yed until the later of the follouing dates: { "l) thirtf deys follouin;; the n7tice in the Federal hegister of the availability of the Detr.iled E nvi ron.. ca ta l S tc t en;ent, said state.tont to ref}cet rotolut!mi of the deficicacies in Applicant's rnvi-ronic.ent al :t e;>a::t referred to in tain petition and I t.o be other.it.e in fu ll. co.a.>11ance with the Appandi:e 12, Part 50, as issued on Decci.:bcr 3, l' Hie, or 2) ..;n. ch 4, i. 71." I belim ti.- t tbe soce.'eres dereribed i:clou wilJ be responsive to whr,t ce tche to be y-ur i..adiate concerns. I n::: cuelosing a notice o f be cln;t t:.tich h,a beca forurded tu the Federal, gef,is,ter, for p.N ir.ri..c. You vill m,rc that the t:otice p,:ovicer. Li'nt any party nay, i:i cccordcare Lith par.syaph 11 of Appeadi:: L o f 10 CFP. 30, ra ir. i: r:. irrre i i tite,sr.;t eudin.: ubet.her the issusnee of the license we lv. b. l l i.1;. t o r e r.n l ': i1 n ny s i.3n i fi c.,n t adverse ef fect on the env.4n .i.

• ih i r.

.; " 1. ; '.e the ccr.o ov.u. thoegh re expect that t.h 2 notic.. >il l ;v: u.d.lirhed ir. th e.Fe. J..c..r a_l..;'.e.1>.i.s t.e r. ur ior to the :-arch 4 d:ite :l.celiie/ i n Nre,:rn;6 11 (a) o f /;.pe.vii.- L to 1^ CFK 50. The noticc of heerh.,e..r para:;.rn,0 11. o f Appendix D c: pinin hou sucii 1:; mor. vi il 1.e coou.e:cJ. 34'

• O.

i./p.' ,') 4 8 c C.. J i l. i

W'. ^- , 4.J y?"~ s

,? wx

.-{.'. Antino.ip:Z. - noir:aan, Esc. 2~- February 25, 1971 ~Also cuelosed is a copy of the notice of evallability of the AEC regulatory staff's Draf t Detailed Statet.: cat on the Environtacntal Concit'erctions Ly' the bivisfon of Ecactor Liecacins,11. S. Atorai.c ~ . Energy Connier! ion, Ib. $ated to. the Proposed Issuance of an Oper'ating ILiccuse to the Veredat' Yantec Power Corporai. ion. for the Vennont ' Yanhec ::;ucicer.'owcr S tetton,' Docket i;o. 50-271," uhich has also boca foru0rded to the: Federal Rgister for publication. I an enclosing a. copy of the draft cetailed statement for your information.

As to -the final detailed statesent, the-AEC regulatory staff's position on c.ntters of schedule for the hearing before the presiding atos.iic safety. and -licchsinc. luan. d.;ill be that the finct detailed sta teraent-should be served on the partier: to the proceedin; a renconabic tir.:c in advance of,the cvidentiary sest:fon to allow for preparation by

' o th 01~ pdftieS. Isr..i. yon's co:w ut.ary on the appliccat 's environ;rantal report, which - wan cppended.co.tne " petition," appears to us to be a catter which can b.e apprepriatel - dealt with to the extent raaterial and pertinent / . in t.hc public proceedin;;. S incercly, Q~.,.. ,f..j l I'\\ aro,ld L. Price Director of 11cculation

Enclosure:

1.: ...:t i er of I!ca c in ; 2 I;r, tire n' Ava: 1.6111ty '3. Dra it. li..: te i le.' s ta teren t . <c c : Qont r..:21e GW;;e D. Lii en, Unites' S ta te: Senate Dr. and I:rs. Irvin; Lyon John A. ;11tra.=, Esq.

e. Lmircuce 3. iii.n tiek

'imio cc h ic '.ia.p t:...fallerds, Attornr:y Geacral 4 otitptli.cr, Vers. at . hine.:,1c imi '. l. *. ~ (uinn, Attoracy Ger.f ral Docton, ha:.wchusertt: inauer. 'o t r. ar.' ca i.. I:u&i m .'.t to: cey General Coa ( orti,..e. (nhire A!gic.. ;r ! I s, N.W.. br. St.mic: T. .nhinson, Jr. 9 .g- ) ,.}}