ML19341A379
| ML19341A379 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 01/19/1981 |
| From: | Trowbridge G METROPOLITAN EDISON CO., SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE |
| To: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8101230225 | |
| Download: ML19341A379 (9) | |
Text
.
O' ec Lic 1/19/81 E
'b d
s-)
J%l ?
o 5 Offilrf, S$f 3 Y
~
i UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
,, F #
7 NUCLEAR REGUIATORY COMMISSION A
'"E A l rj BEFORE THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDISCN COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-289
)
(Restart)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear
)
Station, Unit No. 1)
)
LICENSEE'S RESPONSE TO " REQUEST FOR PROCEDURAL RELIEF FOR ECNP INTERVENORS" On January 3, 1981, the Environmental Coalition on Nuclear Power (ECNP) filed with the Commission a document entitled
" Notification of NRC Commissioners of the Withholding of Transcripts and Scheduling Information From Intervenors and Request For Procedural Relief For ECNP Intervenors."
Generally, ECNP complains that it has not received transcripts of the TMI-l proceeding since November 26, 1980, and has been denied timely information on the scheduling of issues in the TMI-1 proceeding.
Licensee here responds to the allegations, arguments, and requests for relief included in ECNP's January 3 filing.
W
//
{\\.? l' JI $ gL g
3ae U981m3 q....gs' " ;
Ds0B e
s oi s
b1012302 G
t ECNP's requests for relief are addressed to the i
wrong forum in the first instance.
While the Rules of Practice give the Commission discretionary authority to review a licensing board's " interlocutory" rulings (i.e.,
those disposing of less than an entire cause), see, e.g.,
Pennsylvania Power & Light Co. (Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 & 2), ALAB-613, 12 NRC 317, 321 (1980), ECNP has not yet addressed its January 3 requests to the TMI-1 Licensing Board.
Thus, in the instant case, there is no Licensing Board decision for the Commission to review, either on an interlocutory basis or otherwise.
In such circumstances, it would be manifestly inappropriate for the Commission to address the merits of ECNP's January 3 filing without benefit of the TMI-1 Licensing Board's observations and judgment on the procedural context of ECNP's allegations and the general history of its participation in the TMI-l proceeding.
- See, e.g., " Memorandum and Order On Licensee's Motion For Sanctions Against Environmental Coalition On Nuclear Power" (6/12/80)
(recounting ECNP's numerous defaults in the proceeding to that date, and dismissing many of its contentions); " Memorandum and Order On Revised Emergency Planning Contentions" (11/12/80),
at pp. 11-16 (dismissing various ECNP contentions for ECNP 's failure to comply with Board orders to respond to discovery requests and further specify contentions).
I l
~
' Moreover, even if the TMI-1 Licensing Board had already had an opportunity to rule on ECNP's requests, the Commission's authority to review a licensing board's interlocutory rulings is reserved for exceptional and important issues.
Pennsylvania Power & Light Co. (Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 & 2), ALAB-613, 12 NRC 317, 321 (1980).
Scheduling issues and other procedural matters, such as those raised here by ECNP, are not normally of that genre.
Such matters are particularly within a licensing board's competence and appellate review of such rulings is usually bast conducted at the end of the case.
12 NRC at 321.
In its January 3 filing, ECNP requests, inter alia, that the Commission " investigate the delay or intentional withholding of transcripts" and " direct the ASLB and the Staff to promptly mail transcripts of each day's proceeding. "
The cessation of the Commission's " Procedural Assistance" program was discussed at several hearing sessions early in December, though ECNP was not present.
More recently, by " Memorandum" dated January 9, 1981, the TMI-l Board served on all parties copies of the Comptroller General's December 3 letter to the Honorable Mike McCormack (which concludes that the NRC's " Procedural l
Assistance" program may not lawfully use funds appropriated for FY 1981), the Comptroller General's December 3 letter to l
. Chairman Ahearne on the subject, and Chairman Ahearne's Dechmber 4 memorandum (directing the Secretary and the Staff to immediately cease the program of " Procedural Assistance" to intervenors).
Thus, ECNP should now understand why it is no longer being mailed free transcripts of the TMI-l proceeding.
In its January 3 filing, ECNP further requests that the Commission direct the TMI-l Licensing Board "to set *. schedule for the contentions remaining in this proceeding and to submit that schedule in writing in a tbmely manner to the parties in order that they may prepare, also in a timely manner, for cross-examination on the matters in controversy. "
The TMI-l Licensing Board has relieved the intervenors of i
responsibility for attendance at all evidentiary hearings, l
with repeated admonitions that the intervenors are nonetheless J
responsible for keeping themselves abreast of the status of the proceeding.
For example, at the opening session of the TMI-l evidentiary hearing on October 15, 1980 (which ECNP attended), the Board pointed out to the parties that it would not be issuing many written memoranda on scheduling issues, that many rulings would be "from the bench," that the intervenors could contact the TMI-l Board office in Harrisburg and the Staff office in Harrisburg by telephone for scheduling information, and that the Board would make "a strong ef fort" to notify i
. parties of the particular dates for hearing their contentions.
The Board further observed that transcripts would also provide scheduling information, though delev in the transmittal of the transcripts might render such information untimely.
T.
2527-2531.
See also, Tr. 9473.
ECNP is 4
thus not justified in relying solely upon transcripts and Board orders for scheduling information, and has long been on notice that such reliance is unwarranted.
Moreover, the TMI-l Licensing Board has issued orders notifying parties of scheduling matters such as the issues to be heard in a particular segment of the hearing, and the projected sequence for hearing issues.
See e.g.,
" Memorandum and Order" (9/8/80) (identifying the ECNP contentions to be heard during the first hearing segment];
~
" Memorandum" (1/15/80).
The Board has also contacted ECNP by telephone, or has asked other parties to do so, to inform ECNP of the approximate dates when its contentions would be heard.
Ses e.g.,
Tr. 5768 (11/18/80); Tr. 6942-44 (12/2/80); Tr. 7022-25 (12/2/80);
Tr. 7341-44 (12/4/80); Tr. 9433-9435 (1/6/81); and Tr. 9532 (1/7/81),
reflecting discussions of some such phone calls to ECNP.
j 1
1 l '
Further, there is no basis in, fact for the inference that ECNP has been hampered in the preparation of cross-examination by lack of a specific written schedule.
ECNP was served with most of the pre-filed testimony on its contentions in mid-September, and thus has had ample time to prepare cross-examination on the testimony, if it cared to do so.
Finally, in its January 3 filing, ECNP notes "for the record and for the Commissioners' education that this matter constitutes yet another form of procedural harassment."
The TMI-l Licensing Board has already once addressed similar allegations earlier in this proceeding (see, "Aemorandum and Order On Licensee's Motion For Sanctions Against Environmental Coalition On Nuclear Power" (6/12/80), at pp. 9-19), and the Appeal Board recently reviewed such allegations in the Susquehanna 1 & 2 proceeding, to which ECNP is also a party.
See, Pennsylvania Power & Light Co. (Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 & 2), ALAB-613, 12 NRC 317 (1980).
Accordingly, in light of the above, Licensee urges the Commission to deny the requests for relief included in ECNP's January 3 filing or, alternatively, to refer the matter to the TMI-l Licensing Board.
Respectfully submitted, SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE Afg) e'
)
By:
fjya
{ T'6orge F.~ Trowbrigge f
Dated:
January 19, 1981
January 19, 1981 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In,the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-289
)
(Restart)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear
)
Station, Unit No. 2)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " Licensee's Response To " Request For Procedural Relief For ECNP Intervenors" were served upon those persons on the attached Service List by 4
deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, this 19th day of January, 1981.
Wh g
Dblissa A.
Ridgway Dated:
January 19, 1981
i UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR RE3ULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-289
)
(Restart)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1)
)
SERVICE LIST Ivan W.
Smith, Esquire John A. Levin, Esquire Chairman Assistant Counsel Atomic Safety and Licensing Pennsylvania Public Utility Comm' Board Panel Post Office Box 3265 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commir.sion Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 Washington, D.C.
20555 Karin W. Carter, Esquire Dr. Walter H. Jordan Assistant Attorney General Atomic Safety and Licensing 505 Executive House Board Panel Post Office Box 2357 881 West Outer Drive Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 John E. Minnich Dr. Linda W.
Little Chairman, Dauphin County Board Atomic Safety and Licensing of Commissioners Board Panel Dauphin County Courthouse 5000 Hermitage Drive Front and Market Streets Raleigh, North Carolina 27612 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17101 James R. Tourtellotte, Esquire (4)
Walter W.
Cohen, Esquire Office of the Executive Legal Director Consumer Advocate U. S, Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Consumer Advocate Washington, D.C.
20555 14th Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17127 Docketing and Service Section (3)
Office of the Secretary U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
, i Jordan *D.
Cunningham, Esquire William S. Jordan, III, Esquire Fox, Farr & Cunningham Harmon & Weiss 2320 North Second Street 1725 Eye Street, N.W.,
Suite 506 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17110 Washington, D.C.
20006 Ms. Louise Bradford Robert O. Pollard TMI ALERT 609 Montpelier Street 315 Peffer Street Baltimore, Maryland 21218 Harrisburg, Penn:ylvania 17102 Chauncey Kopford Ellyn R. Weiss, Esquire Judith H, Johnsrud Harmon & Weiss Environmental Coalition on Nuclea:
1725 Eye Street, N.W.,
Suite 506 Power Washington, D.C.
20006 433 orlando Avenue Steven C. Sholly 304 South Market Street Marvin I. Lewis Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania-17055 6504 Bradford Terrace Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19149 Gail Bradford ANGRY Marjorie M. Aamodt 32 South Beaver Street R. D.
5 York, Pennsylvania 17401 Coatesville, Pennsylvania 19320 John F. Ahearne Attorney General of New Jersey Chairman Attention: Thomas J. Germine, Esq U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Deputy Attorney General Washington, D.C.
20555 Division of Law - Room 316 1100 Raymond Boule *Tard Victor Gilinsky Newark, New Jersey 07102 Commissioner U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Peter A. Bradford Washington, D.C.
20555 Commissioner U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissior Joseph M. Hendrie Washington, D.C.
20555 Commissioner U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 1
1 l
. - - - -