ML19343A258
| ML19343A258 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07002909 |
| Issue date: | 09/15/1980 |
| From: | Sherwin Turk NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19343A256 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8009170129 | |
| Download: ML19343A258 (4) | |
Text
09/15/80 O-U"ITED STATES OF A'1EP,ICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISS10f!
BEFORE THE AT041C SAFETY AND LICENSI!1G BOAR 3 In the Matter of
)
)
APPLICATION- 0F WESTIflG40VSE ELECTRIC
)
Docket No. 70-2909 CORPORATI0fl FOR A SPECIAL NUCLEAR
)
MATERIAL LICEflSE FOR THE ALABAMA
)
HUCLEAR FUEL FABRICATION PLANT (ANFFP) )
TO BE LOCATED NEAR PRATTVILLE, ALABA!!A )
NRC STAFF AflSNER TO MOTION TO WITHDRA'..' INDIVIDUAL PETITIONS Introduction On August 25, 1980, ten of the eleven individual petitioners in this pro-ceeding filed a motion to withdraw their petitions for leave to intervene, entitled "flotion to Withdraw the Individual' Petitions of Original Petitioners Randy Aronov, Charles 0. Butler, Marilyn F. Butler, Robert H. Campbell,
-Sarah Draut, Robert E. Ely, John A. Johnson, Linda G. Moore, Ann Toledo, and
' William Carroll" (" Motion"). The NRC Staff (" Staff") files this Answer in j
response to the individual petitioners' Motion.
For the -reasons more fully set forth below, the Staff recommends that the Motion be granted and that the petitions of the ten individuals be dismissed.
Discussion:
i Petitions for leave-to intervene wera filed by these ten individuals on April 7,~ 1980, pursuant to the Federal Register notice of opportunity for hearing with respect to this proceeding (45 Fed. M.14724). ' The Staff
- s000 Sb supported the petitions filed by these individuals,1/ noting that the petitions appeared to satisfy the interest and standing requirements for petitions for leave to intervene, as set forth in 10 CFR 2.714, and that they sufficiently identified the specific aspects of the proceeding as to which the petitioners sought to intervene.S/ The Staff reco, mended that the petitions be granted,
" conditioned upon the representation of the petitioners' conaca inter 2sts by a single spokesman, and subject, of course, to the filing by each petitioner of at least one admissible contention as required by 10 CFR % 2.714(b)."1!
Af ter the Staff had responded to the individuals' petitions, an " Amended Petition for Leave to Intervene and Request for Hearing" ("Anended Petition")
was filed by the Safe Energy Alliance of Central Alabama, Inc. ("SEACA") on June 12, 1980.1/
In an exhibit to the Anended Petition, each of these ten 1/
See "liRC StTff Anseer to Petitions for Leave to Intervene Filed by Robert H. Campbell, Ann Toledo, Robert E. Ely, John A. Johnson, Marilyn F. Butler, Charles 0. Butler, Randy Aronce, Linda G. Moore, and Sarah (S.N.) Draut," dated April 28,1980 (hereinaf ter referred to as " Answer to Individual Petitions"); and "NRC Staff Answer to Petitions for Leave to Intervene Filed by William F. Carroll and Safe Energy Alliance, Central Alabama," dated May 19,1980 (hereinaf ter referred to as " Answer to SEACA and Carroll Petitions").
-2/
Answer to Indiviaual Petitions, at 2; Answer to SEACA and Carroll Peti tions, a t 2-3.
3/
Answer to Individual Petitions, at 10-11; see also, Answer to SEACA and Carroll Petitions, at 20.
1/
SPCA's Amended Petition was filed pursuant to notice published in the Faderal Register _ on April 7,1980, which extended the deadline for the filing of petitions for leave to intervene in thic proceeding until June 14,1980 (45 Fed. Reg. 23553).
. individual petitioners authorized and designated SEACA to represent them in this proceeding.EI On July 2,1980, the Staff filed an Answer to SEACA's Amended Petition,5! in which we noted that SEACA's members, listed in Exhibits I and II to the Amended Petition, appeared to have duly authorized SEACA to represent their interests in this proceeding (Answer to SEACA's Amended Petition, at 8).
Accordingly, we concluded that, based upon the apparent interest and standing of its members, SEACA's Anended Petition should be granted, " subject to the timely filing by SEACA of at least one adnissible contention as required by 10 CFR 9 2.714(b)," and urged that SEACA's participation in this proceeding should "be conditioned upon the representation by SEACA of the common interests of its 10 members who previously filed petitions for leave to intervene, pursuant to 10 CFR 5 2.714(e)" (Id., at 13).
On July 22, 1980, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (" Licensing Board")
issued its Order, requiring petitioners for leave to intervene to file supplements to their petitions including a list of contentions they seek to have litigated in this proceeding, no later than 15 day prior to the Solding of the Special Prehearing Conference on August 21, 1980.
In accordance with 5/
Exhibit I to SEACA's Amended Petition, entitled " Designation-Authorization of the-Safe Energy Alliance of Central Alabama, Inc. to Represent Interests of the Naced Individual Petitioners," dated June 12, 1980.
6/
"NRC Staff Answer to Amended Petition for Leave to Intervene and Request for A Hearing Filed by the Safe Energy Alliance of Central Alabama, Inc.,"
dated' July 2,1980 (" Answer to SEACA's Anended Petition").
~_
4-the Licensing Board's Order, on August 5,1980, petitioner SEACA filed a l
supplement to its petition for leave to intervene, which sets forth 22 contentions tnat SEACA seeks to have litigated.2/ No contentions have been i
filed by any of these ten individual petitioners who now move to withdraw their petitions for leave to intervene, nor did they participate in the i
Special Prehearing Conference held on August 21, 1980.
Conclusion The ten individual petitioners have clearly indicated that thqy wish to have
{
-their interests represented by petitioner SEACA, and that they have abandoned their interest in becoming individual intervenors in this proceeding in favor of being represented by that organization. There appears no reason why the pending Motion to withdraw the individual petitions for leave to intervene should not be granted. Accordingly, the Staff supports the Motion i
- to Withdraw and reconnends that the petitions for leave to intervene filed by these ten petitioners in their individual capacity should be dismissed.
Respectfully submitted, Yb Sherwin E. Turk Counsel for NRC Staff Dated at Bethesda, fiaryland this 15th day of September,1980 f
J/
" Proposed Valid Contentions of Intervenor Safe Energy Alliance of-
- Central Alabaaa, Inc.," dated August 5,1980.
t q
v
,er 7
p y
,,-_n
-~n,,.-m
-w,w.
y
.4.-,,-n-,
g-y
,r