ML19340D073
| ML19340D073 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 12/04/1980 |
| From: | Smith I Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | Environmental Coalition on Nuclear Power |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8012290014 | |
| Download: ML19340D073 (7) | |
Text
~
Bd 12/4/80 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 9
p>
N'6 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
^/
c,"D 9
1-P Ivan W. Smith, Chairman 1 6~~'3 3
^
e Dr. Walter H. Jordan
.s Dr. Linda W. Little
/
yt s
~ / M e
In the Matter of
)
fo
)
DEC 5 pgg -
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-289
/
)
(Restart) j (Three Mile Island Nuclear
)
Station, Unit No. 1)
)
.l 7
ORDER TO ENVIRONMENTAL COALITION
-u ON NUCLEAR POWER (December 4, 1980)
.l l
Representatives of Environmental Coalition on Nuclear Power (ECNP), Dr. Judith Johnsrud and Dr. Chauncey Kepford, stated to the board that no representative of ECNP would be able to attend the evidentiary session on ECNP Contention 1(d).
They stated also that, even if an ECNP representative were able to appear, no ECNP representative would attend because to do so would be pointless because ECNP lacks funds and infor-mation.
Transcript excerpts (Tr. 7215-18, December 3, 1980) reporting ECNP's statements are attached.
ECNP was represented by Dr. Johnsrud at the opening evi-dentiary session on October 15 and the session scheduled by the board for special consideration of emergency planning matters pn October 30.
However, ECNP has not been represented at any other evidentiary session, including those sessions where testi-many on-ECNP's Contentions 1(a), 1(c), and 1(d) was received.
So7-9 5 ro 122$0D/U 6
th
_ 2_
Moreover, even though ECNP has many surviving contentions on emergency planning, no representative complied with the Novem-ber 14, 1980 board order to attend the November 24 explanatory meeting on emergency planning.
These events suggest that ECNP may not intend to prosecute any of its contentions.
The NRC staff has pointed out that another (and final) board-ordered session on emergency planning is scheduled for December 19, and that, unless the staff is relieved of the responsibility, it must then begin to prepare testimony on ECNP emergency planning contentions.
See discus-sion of preliminary matters, transcript of December 4 If ECNP does not intend to prosecute its remaining con-tentions (ECNP contentions on emergency planning, 4(a), 4(b),
and 6), we see no need to recuire the staff and licensee to prepare testimony in response unless the board, as a matter of discretion, determines that certain contentions should be addressed.
Therefore, the board directs ECNP to report on or before l
December 15, 1980 whether or not it intends to appear and to prosecute its remaining contentions.
If ECNP fails to report its intention, the board will infer that ECNP will not prose-l l
cute its contentions.
l l
THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND CENSING BOARD /
Ivan K.
Smith, Chairman j
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania December 4, 1980 i
l t
~
ATTACHMENT 7215 Do you have any objections to that approach?
3 MR. LEVIN:
A situation has not arisen yet, so I l
2 don 't know whether I can object or not.
3 CHAIRMAN SMITH:
Do you have any objections as to p
4 5 us issuing the order?
Are you requesting a different time?
6 Do you want to ce back?
Do you have any discovery you want to pursue, or do you have any position on it at all?
7 MR. LEVIN:
No, I have no position at this time.
8 CHAIRMAN SMITH.
Okay.
9 All righ t, let's go on to the matter of the to testimony on ECNP Contention 1D.
33 During the morning break, at about 10:30, I called 12 13 Dr. Jo hn s rud and Dr. Kepford of ECNP.
They were both on the telephone.
's.
Moran took sor.e notes, as I did.
I told l
34 15 Drs. Kepford and Johnsrud that ! understand they are going to be sending us a letter addressing the problem of the 16 17 scheduling, that the testimony for their Contention 1D is 18 u p o n u s, it is time to hear it.
Dr. Johnsrud stated that 39 she had not yet sent such a letter, that her health is bad, 20 and that it is not improving.
As far as she can see, it is 1
deteriorating, and that she would not be available to attend 21 1
in th e time period that we are talking about.
22 She stated that they had repeatedly requested 23 B
financial assistance and information, and that they had not 24 25 received it.
So even if she were able to attend, it would lA4 1
l l
ALDER $oN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRQ1NIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20C24 (202) 554 2345
1)PP 7216 3 be pointless because she does not have enough information to p
2 cross examine.
3 Dr. Kepford, in response to my questions, stated lp 4 that -- I asked Dr. Kepford if he could attend any time next 5 week for tha purpose of cross examining the sitnesses on his 6 Contention and his interest in that issue, and he said no, 7 that there are two reasons.
One is if Dr. Johnsrud's health 8 continues to deteriorate and she needs hospitalization, that g he would like to attend to that problem.
But he also stated 10 in any event, it would be pointless for him or any other members of ECNP to attend the hearing for cross examination 11 12 because he stated as a quote, he has not had a single sh red 13 of paper giving him information, that if he vere to appear l
34 and attempt to cross examine on the preparation he has been 15 able to do, he would look foolish.
16 Both of them ob j ec ted that they have been in the 37 dark as to ehen the matter would be coming up, that they I.
18 have a transcript of November J8 and they could not find a 19 schedule in there as to when the matter would be coming up.
However, the schedulin; -- they made no request 20 for another schedule.
Dr. Kepf ord insisted that being 21 not having information and not feeling prepared, that cross
- e 23 examination is pointless.
I told them that ". r. Sholly is going to proceed on p
24
,5 cross examination on the aspect of the Contention, the l.ha ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON, o.C. 20C24 (202) 554-2345
'f 7217 3 issues covered by his Contention.
Dr. Johnsrud stated that 2 she hoped that the Board would take this issue and examine l
3 it very thoroughly, and I assured Dr. Johnsrud that, as we stated in our memorandum of June 12, 1980, dismissing ECNP
{p 4
5 Contentions, that we are interested in certain aspects of 6 the Contention and that we vill continue that interest.
7 And the conversation terninated by Dr. Kepford 8 stating that over the years, our concerns over the operation 9 of TMI 1 and 75I 2 have been proven by the events to have 10 been factual and right on the nark, and that was it.
33 Nothing was resolved.
12 13 B
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 f
24 25
{l.t.
ALOERSoN REPORTING ooMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
Y[
7218 I
I concluded from the general tenor of the t
[
2 conversation that regardless of, schedule, that it is the 3 view of both Dr. Kapford and Dr. Johnsrud that cross P
4 axamination of the witnesses vould be pointless on their 5 part.
So that is where ve are.
Now the Board is prepared -- first I think we 6
7 should hear f rom Mr. Adler.
He was going to be prepared to 8 tell us what the Commonwealth would like to have with regard g to these issues.
3R. 3. ADLER:
Yes, sir.
After reviewing the 10 testimony, I have no need to cross-examine any of the 11 12 staf f 's vitnesses, either the three-person panel or Mr.
13 Stoddart.
I also rereviewed the licensee's testimony on ECNT 1(d) and determine? that none of that testimony was
)
34 15 rele vant to our concerns.
So, our only areas of concern are those stated by 16 17 F.r. Sholly yesterday, and the further question of the scope ja of anticipated occurrences for which the licensee's 19 witnesses are testifying that the range of radiation and those are our only lines of 20 monitoring is adequa te, questioning.
21 DE. JORDAN:
I did not hear the last statement.
22 MB.
R. ADLER:
I was just summariring the 23 additional :oncern that I stated yesterday, which has to do 24 of anticipated occurrences, the scope of with the scope 25 k
ALoERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR FIGUI ATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-289
( estart)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear
)
Station, Unit 1)
)
This is to certify that I have this day placed in the United States Mail or hand delivered copies of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board's ORDER TO ENVIRONMENTAL COALITION ON NUCLEAR POWER, dated December 4, 1980, addressed to the following parties to this proceeding:
Dr. Judith E.
Johnsrud Dr. Chauncey Kepford Environmental Coalition on Nuclear Power 433 Orlando Avenue State College, Pennsylvania 16801 George F. Troubridge, Esc.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 34 North Court Street Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Counsel for the NRC Staff Office of Executive Legal Director U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 34 North Cour: Stree:
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania j
' ^%
y l
Doris M. Moran Clerk to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Harrisburg, Pennsylvania December 4, 1980
-