ML19340F127

Response Opposing MO-KS Section of ANS 801219 Petition to Intervene.Applicant Would Not Oppose Refiling Petition to Intervene to Cure Deficiencies.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML19340F127
Person / Time
Site:	Callaway
Issue date:	01/13/1981
From:	Baxter T SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE, UNION ELECTRIC CO.
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8101190479
Download: ML19340F127 (7)

Text

.

January 13,,,;1 3

</

~4g UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ',/ ,.,.g KJCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 'l

- . , ,f - C'I

__ s

~ .: ~' ~} .

BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD '. ,

'u... $,i

\

[/ '

In the Matter of ) '

)

UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY ) Docket No. STN 50-483 OL

)

(Callaway Plant, Unit 1) )

[]

APPLICANT'S ANSWER TO THE PETITION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE OF THE MISSOURI-KANSAS SECTION OF THE AMERICAN NUCLEAR SOCIETY

^0 On November 14, 1980, the NRC issued "Clariff'catio$

of Notice of Receipt of Application for Facility Operating Licenses; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Facility Operating Licenses and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing."

see 45 Fed. Reg. 77208 (November 21, 1980). This notice l clarified and superseded an earlier notice of "Raceipt of Application for Facility Operating Licenses; Consideration of Issuance of Facility Operating Licenses and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing," published at 45 Fed. Reg. 56956 (August 26, 1980).

The November notice provided, among other things, that by December 22, 1980, any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding may file a petition for leave l

l to intervene and request for hearing, in accordance with 10 C.F.R. Part 2, with respect to the application for a license to operate Callaway Plant, Unit 1. The Missouri-Kansas SSC6 S i e 310 0'/77 & 6 #l -

Section of the American Nuclear Society (" Petitioner"), pursuant to this notice, filed a petition to intervene, dated December 19, 1980. The petition was served by the office of the Secretary of the Commission on December 29, 1980. Applicant Union Electric Company submits this answer to the petition.

The August notice provided the following specific guidance to petitioners:

As required by 10 CFR S2.714, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be per-mitted with particular reference to the following factors: (1) the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the pro-ceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order which may be entered in the proceeding on the l petitioner's interest. The petition should also identify the specific aspect (s) of the subject matter of the proceeding as to which petitioner wishes to intervene. Any person who has filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been admitted as a party may amend his petition, but l such an amended petition must satisfy the speci-l ficity requirements described above.

l i Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to the

1. irst prehearing conference scheduled in the pro-ceeding, the petitioner shall file a supplement to the petition to intervene which must include j a list of the contentions which are sought to be litigated in the matter, and the bases for each contention set forth with reasonable specificity.

A petitioner who fails to file such a supplement which satisfies these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.

45 Fed. Reg. at 56957.

, ,,----..a-

l r While the petition at this stage need not list the contentions which Petitioner seeks to litigate or the bases 1/

therefore, Applicant concludes that the instant petition does not meet the require- .3s for initial petitions for leave to intervene, set forth above and in 10 C.F.R. S 2.714.

These requirements collectively are referred to as those necessary to demonstrate the " interest" or " standing" of I persons seeking leave to intervene in Commission oroceedings.-2/

3 To acquire standing to request a hearing and to intervene in an NRC proceeding, a petitioner must allege some injury in fact, i.e., a cognizable interest, arguably within the zone of interests protected by a relevant statute, which might be adversely affected if the proceeding has one outcome rather than another. Public Service Company of Indiana (Marble Hill Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2), CLI-80-10,-11 N.R.C.

438, 439 (1980); Portland General Electric Comcany (Pebble Springs Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2), CLI-76-27, 4 N.R.C.

610, 613 (1976); Nuclear Engineering Company (Sheffield Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Site), ALAB-473, 7 N.R.C.

737, 743 (1978). In the case of petitioning organizations ,

1/ The first prehearing conference has not yet been scheduled, and supplements to petitions, in accordance with 10 C.F.R.

S 2. 714 (b) , may be filed at any time up to 15 days before such conference.

2/ " Standing" is legal shorthand for the right to take part In a given case. Houston Lighting and Power Company, et al.

(South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2), ALAB-549, 9 N.R.C. 644, 646 (1979).

it must appear that at least one of the persons it purports to represent does in fact have an interest which might be affected by the licensing action being sought. Houston Lighting and Power Company (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1), ALAB-535, 9 N.R.C. 377, 390 (1979).

While Petitioner has described well the concern of its members in nuclear energy matters and the expertise which the organization could provide to assist in the development of a sound record on issues which may be litigated if a hearing is held, Petitioner has not set forth adequately the personal interests of one or more of its members in the outcome of the proceeding.

Applicant would not oppose, however, affording an opportunity for Petitioner to re-file its petition to cure these deficiencies. We note that the requirements of 10 C.F.R.

S 2.714, quoted in the August notice, were not repeated in the November clarification. Consequently, since it is not represented by counsel, Petitioner may not have been aware of those require-ments when it responded to the November notice. Applicant also expects that, given the proximity of at least some of 3/

Petitioner's members to the Callaway Plant site, Petitioner 3/ The petition is signed by Prof. William H. Miller of Columbia, which is approximately 30 miles from the site.

5-would be able to establish its interest if given the opportunity to do so.

RespectfulP' submitted, SHAW, PITTMAN, asfTS & TROWBRIDGE Gerald Charhoff Thomas A. Baxter Counsel for Applicant 1800 M Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036 I

(202) 331-4100 Dated: January 13, 199' l

t

(

l l

l l

l l

t l

• - ,w r- - m- - , - -- % ---w y- - -,- w. ---.-wm + - . , ' * , w-- , *y * ,e-

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )

)

UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY ) Docket No. STN 50-483 OL

)

(Callaway Plant, Unit 1) )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing "Appli-cant's Answer to the Petition for Leave to Intervene of tl e Missouri-Kansas Section of the American Nuclear Society" were served this 13th day of January, 1981, by deposit in the U.S.

mail, first class, postage prepaid, upon the following:

James P. Gleason, Esquire Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 513 Gilmoure Drive Silver Spring, Maryland 20901 Mr. Glenn O. Bright Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Jerry R. Kline Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Roy P. Lessy, Jr.: Osquire Office of tne Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

_ , _ _ _ . _ . __. . , _ . . _ _ _ . - - . . _ - _ _ ~

Joseph E. Birk, Esquire Assistant to the General Counsel Union Electric Company P.O. Box 149 St. Louis, Missouri 63166 Treva J. Hearne, Esquire Assistant General Counsel Missouri Public Service Commission P.O. Box 360 Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 Prof. William H. Miller 1026 Engineering Nuclear Engineering University of Missouri-Columbia Columbia, Missouri 65211 l

L A.

Thomas A. Baxter l

l l

1 I

t I

i

.._. . - -