ML19344A772

Motion for Reconsideration of ASLB 800808 Special Prehearing Conference Order Rejecting State of Il Contention 6.Siting Issue Addressing Emergency & Evacuation Planning Raises Compelling Public Interest Question.W/Certificate of Svc

ML19344A772
Person / Time
Site:	Bailly
Issue date:	08/18/1980
From:	Fahner T, Sekuler S ILLINOIS, STATE OF
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
ISSUANCES-CPA, NUDOCS 8008220178
Download: ML19344A772 (5)

Text

- . - .

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD IN THE MATTER OF: )

)

NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC )

SERVICE COMPANY, ) Docket No. 50-367 (Bailly Generating Station, )

Nuclear I) )

)

(Construction Permit Extension )

Dated June 23, 1980) )

INTERVENOR, STATE OF ILLINOIS OBJECTIONS TO BOARD ORDER FOLLOWING SPECIAL PREHEARING CONFERENCE OF AUGUST 8,1980 Illinois objects to the Board's rejection of Contention 6.

The Board seems not to have read all of Contention 6. The Board has treated Illinois Contention 6 generally as though it were identical to all other " siting" contentions raised in this proceeding.

This in incorrect.

Part of Contention 6 refers generally to evacuation and emergency plan needs, but most of Contention 6 refers to existing physical characteristics of the site which have been altered and may therefore be presently unsafe for construction. Contention 6 in pertinent part states:

...the Board should require a showing that the now acknowledged " unfavorable physical character-istics of the site" will be compensated for by the

" appropriate and adequate compensating engineering safeguards" 10 CFR S100.10(d). This is especially important as part of the showing of " good cause" 8008220 @ g .

given NIPSCO's prior inability to adequately design engineering techniques that (1) compen-sate for inadequacies of the site such as the difficult geologic configurations and (2) do not create additional hazards or problems on the site e.g. dewatering complications, and soil changes attributable to pile driving.

From the Board's order it appears that the Board has not given consideration to what the contention says, or to Illinois' response to the Provisional Order in relation to Contention 6.

Illinois would urge the Board to reread all of contention 6 in the light of the standard set out in the order following prehearing conference. There the Board states that the scope of the hearing shall encompass reasons for delay and consequences of continued construction. Contention 6 fits these standards. The alteration of the soil came about because of the experimentation in pile driving techniques which was one cause for delay. The altered soil may not now be able to safely support a nuclear plant. Further construction activity may amplify existing safety problems.

Although building a pimit on a physically unsafe site will undoubtedly call into play emergency and evacuation plans, the thrust of that part of Contention 6 which describes physical characteristics of the site was not to give another reason for evacuation plan consider-ation, but to address the site characteristics themselves, in light of 10 CFR part 100. This aspect of the contention is clearly within the scope of this proceeding as defined by the Board.

Additionally, Illinois contends that all of our contention 6, and every other siting contention raised in this proceeding- which addresses emergency and evaluation planning, raise " compelling" questions of public interest which cannot abide the operating license hearing.

Illinois also objects to the Board's rulings on Illinois contentions 4 and 7c. Accordingly we urge reconsideration of the Board's ruling not to admit these contentions.

Respectfully submitted, TYRONE C. FAHNER Attorney General State of Illinois BY: ' - ' -

SUSAN N. SEKULER Assistant Attorney General Environmental Control Division 188 West Randolph, Suite 2315 Chicago, Illinois 60601 (312) 793-2491 u .

r CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 18th day of August, 1980 I served copies of the foregoing Intervenor, State of Illinois Objections to Board Order Following Special Prehearing Conference of August 8, 1980 upon each of the persons named on the attached Service List, by causing copies to be deposited in the U.S. Mail, in envelopes properly addressed and sealed, first class, postage prepaid.

^~

l

< - s. ~ o - - ~ ~ _

SUSAN N. SEKULER i

l l

i 1

_- .I

'

• SERVICE LIST CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Herbert Grossman, Esq. Michael I. Swygert, Esq.

Chairman 25 East Jackson Blvd.

Atomic Safety & Licensing Chicago, Illinois 60604 Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm. Wiliam H. Eichhorn, Esq.

Washington, D.C. 20555 Eichhorn, Morrow & Eichhorn 5243 Hohmvn Avenue Dr. Richard F. Cole Hammond, Indiana 46329 Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel Stephen Laudig, Esq.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Com. 445 N. Pennsylvania, Indiana Washington, D.C. 20555 46204 Mr. Glenn O. Bright Diana B. Cohn Atomic Safety & Licensing Suite 700 Board Panel 2000 P Street, N.W.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Com. Washington, D.C. 20036 Washington, D.C. 20555 Richard L. Robbins, Esq.

Edward Ossan, Jr., Esq. Lake Michigan Federation Suite 4600 53 West Jackson Blvd.

One IBM Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60604 Chicago, Illinois 60611 Steven Goldberg habert Graham, Esq. Counsel for the NRC Staff One IBM Plaza U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Com.

44th Floor Washington, D.C. 20555 Chicago, Illinois 60611 Atomic Safety & Licensing Board George and Anna Grobowski Panel 7413 W. 136th Lane U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

Cedar Lake, Indiana 46303 Washington, D.C. 20555 ,

Dr. George Schultz Atomic Safety & Licensing 110 California Street Appeal Board Panel Michigan City, Indiana 46360. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

Washington, D.C. 20555 Kathleen H. Shea, Esq.

Lowenstein, Newman, Reis Docketing & Service Section Axelrad & Toll Office of the Secretary 1025 Connecticut Ave., N.W. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

Washington, D.C. 20036 Washington, D.C. 20555 Robert J. Vollen, Esq.

c/o BPI 109 North Dearborn Chicago, Illinois 60602 l