ML19329F482
| ML19329F482 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 01/03/1972 |
| From: | Newton R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8006300684 | |
| Download: ML19329F482 (3) | |
Text
m. ).
. [j ru i
Jfdi 'I'7I2
- ciuEr tw'.mta
['\\
s#I Ph00. & U11L. FAc. 50 -M?8W
'ljs
fQ i.\\
UtlITED STATES OF AMERICA
^
'? WrI r T\\"g ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSI0tl 7
EFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
~
in the Itatte r ol CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY Docket No (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2)
)
AEC REGULATORY STAFF ANSWER TO PETITION TO INTERVENE 0F STEVE J. GADLER On December 20, 1971, Steve J. Gadler (petitioner), who appears to be a resident of St. Paul, Minnesota, filed a timely petition to intervene in the captioned proceeding pursuant to the Supplementary Notice of-Hearing published in the Fcderal Register on November 29, 1971 (36 F.R.
23169).
The Supplementary Notice identified aaditional issues for consideration and detemination by the presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in this proceeding. These additional issues relate to the implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 as provided in Appendix D,.10 CFR Part 50 of the Conmissinn's regula-tions. The Supplementary Notice granted a thirty ' day period from date of publication in the Federal Register for the ' filing of petitions to intervene on the additional issues specified.
The bases for the intervention of Mr. Gadler are stat:d in seven generally worded contentions regarding the effe:ts of the operation of the pro-poscri Midland Plant.
THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS POOR QUAUTY PAGES The Supplementary Notice provides that petitions to intervene are to be filed pursuant to 10 CFR Sect. ion 2.714 of the, Commission's " Rules of 80063004 F @
. Practice." Under 10 CFR Section 2./14 a petition to intervene must (1).et f urth the intere',L of the petitinner in the proc eviliny; (?)
how that interest may be affected by Commission action.: and (3) the contentions of the petitioner in reasonably specific detail.
In our view the petition to intervene of Mr. Gadler fails to meet the requirements of 10 CFR Section 2.714 in all three respects.
As to the first two requirenents of Section 2.714, petitioner's naked assertion of an affected interest does not give him standing even under the broadest interpretation of recent judicial pronouncements.
We note that petitioner does not claim to be a resident of Michigan, nor does c
he claim to own or live on property in the vicinity of the plant.
The interest alleget by petitioner is no different frcm the interest of any other member of the general public. The Supreme Court in Jenkins v.
McKeithen, 395 U. S. 411, 423 (1969) has stated that persons challenging agency action cust show both an " adversary interest" and "some connection between the official action challenged and some legally protected interest of the party challenging that action." Petitioner has alleged no such
" legally protected interest."
In addition, the petition of Mr. Gadler is inadequate under the third requirement of 10 CFR Section 2.714, in failing to set forth contentions in reasonably specific detail.
The petitioner's statements as to the e
e e
3-
[
ba".is for his being granted intervenor statu:; in this proceeding are unduly broad anel vague and provide no reasonable basis under 10 CFR t
i Section 2.714 for granting the petition.
i e
Finally, most if not all of petitioner's assertions could have been i
raised under the earlier Notice of Hearing (35;F.R.16749) in this procending. The Supplemsntary. Notice of ilearing expressly states that it does not provide a'n additional opportunity to any person to intervene on the basis of, or to raise matters encompassed within, the issues pertaining to radiological health and safety and the common defense and security specified for hearing in the prior notice.
Accordingly, for the above stated reasons, we believe the present petition to intervene should be dinied.
Respectfully submitted, llrh.'*t /z;\\*. ?Y,L Robert Newton Counsel for AEC Regulatory Staff l
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 3rd day of January,1972.
9 h
e 9
e.
8
.c e
.c