ML19351D600
| ML19351D600 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07002909 |
| Issue date: | 10/01/1980 |
| From: | Mcphillips J SAFE ENERGY ALLIANCE |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8010140016 | |
| Download: ML19351D600 (4) | |
Text
--
.L 03
{
p l
A UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION S
Ocy ?"% s C
6"
~
0%
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOA ee>-
s
~
In the Matter of S
APPLICATION OF WESTINGHOUSE S
ELECTRIC CORPORATION FOR A SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL S
DOCKET NO.
70-2909 LICENSE FOR THE ALABAMA yT SO NUCLEAR FUEL FABRICATION S
PLANT (ANFFP) TO BE LO-
~~
CATED NEAR PRATTVILLE, 5
S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF SECOND SET OF CONTENTIONS Comes now the Intervenor Safe Energy Alliance of Central Alabama and cites the following grounds as reasons why the second set of contentions should be considered timely filed by the Licensing Board:
1.
10 C.F.R.
S 2. 714 (a) (1) (i) states that non-timely filings of petitions will be entertained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission if the presiding officer of the atomic safety and licensing board designated to rule on the petition determines that there is " good cause...for f ailure to file on time. "
Cer-i tainly for the reasons stated below, there is ample good cause to allow the attached Second Set of Proposed Valid Contentions.
2.
On July 30, 1980, petitioner SEACA filed a Motion for An Extension of Time In Which to File Valid Contentions.
This was 6 days before the August 5, 1980 filing date of the first pSOS So/
C.
s oioigo a ;g
eet of proposed valid contentions.
Three reasons were set out in the extension motion:
(1) that Westinghouse had not supplied SEAL \\ with information SEACA had requested, (2) that SEACA was seeking essential information from certain scientists, including Dr. Louis Williams, who had not had enough time to respond, and (3 ) that SEACA had not received the Environmental Impact Statement.
The NRC subsequently granted this motion.
3.
At the August 21, 1980 pre-hearing conference, it developed that much of the information relied on by Westinghouse was in a very importan" document entitled "the License Application" which SEACA h'ad never seen nor heard of at that time.
4.
Most of the proposed Second set of valid contentions are based on material obtained from said License Application.
A.
Despite numerous telephone conferences with staff of the NRC, in which numerous questions were asked about materials not once was any specific reference made by NRC to look at, staff to SEACA or its attorney concerning the License Application prior to the August 5, 1980.
Monetheless, there was considerable discussion between SEACA and NRC staff over the content of the Environmental Report; as a result at that time SEACA believed the Environmental Report was where most, if not all, of the infor-mation on Westinghouse's proposed Prattville plant was contained.
B.
Despite several long-distance conferences with West-inghouse attorney Bart Cowan prior to August not once did he mention the existence of the License Application to SEACA and its attorney.
i i
C.
In late August, after the August 21, 1980 prehearing conference SEACA staff member Ed Bell went over to the Prattville Public Library to attempt to find the License Application.
He almost did not find it.
It tcok him 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> of looking before he found it buried under other materials in an obscure location in the library.
Obviously, someone did not want members of the public perusing the License Application.
D.
The License Application contains critically-important (pun intended) information which needs to be carefully scrutinized.
E.
A careful scrutiny of the License Application and any other questions raised in the Second Set of Proposed Valid Contentions will promote the purposes set forth in 10 C.F.R. 570. 23 (a).
5.
Dr. Louis Williams, a scientist consultant for SEACA, has only recently been available to assist SEACA in the analysis of the License Application and preparation of the Second Set of Proposed Valid Contentions and his assistance has been a " sine qua non" to SEACA, or "that without which" SEACA could not have prepared a meaningful response to Westinghouse's proposed plant.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the intervenor SEACA respectfully requests that the Licensing Board, and presiding officer thereof, allow as timely-filed the attached Second Set of Proposed "alid Contentions.
SEACA By E
WNM Julian McPhillips P.O.
Box 64 Montgomery, Ala.
(205) 262-1911 m r~ WuoC
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing upon the following named parties by mailing the same to them on this che
/5.I day of OOw 1980.
John F. Wolf, Esq., Chairman Donald R.
Marcucci, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Bd.
Law Dept.
3409 Shepherd St.
Westinghouse Electric Corp.
Chevy Chase, MD 20015 P.O.
Box 355 Pittsburgh, PA 15230 Dr. Harry Foreman, Member Atomic Safety and Licensing Bd.
Sherwin Turk Box 395, Mayo Legal Staff University of Minnesota U.S.
Nuclear Reg. Comm.
Minneapolis, MN 55455 Washington, D.C.
Dr. Martin J.
Steindler, Member David L. Allred, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Bd 231 Oak Forest Drive Argonne National Laboratory Montgomery, Ala.
36109 9700 South Cass Ave.
Argonne, IL 60439 Dr. Ira L. Myers, M.D.
State Health Officer Atomic Safety and Licensing Bd.
State of Alabama Panel (27 Dept. of Public Health U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Comm.
State Office Bldg.
' Washington, D.C.
20555 Montgomery, Ala.
36104 Atomic Safety and Licensing Docketing and Service Section Appeal Panel Office of the Secretary U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Comm.
U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Comm.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Bart Cowan Eckert, Seamans Cherin & Mellott Forty-Second Floor 7d/4h 600 Grant St.
Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Jultih McPhillips'
. c2 z.
_ pf 41 (l
l' n)%) A s-c l
N s f..