ML20004C855
| ML20004C855 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 06/01/1981 |
| From: | Lewis M AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | Jordan W, Little L, Smith I Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8106050531 | |
| Download: ML20004C855 (5) | |
Text
b
^
.kkb. '.. ;.... _ W.".h...:,xe /E[
C~O3 Phila FA 191A9 6504 Bradford Terrace
'r
'h
- jh, '3gggt, Qd n
qu r-.
June 1, 1981.
k h
Ivan W. Smith, Esq.
,j Dr Walter H. Jordan
[{I N.
- g < [f
/Q, "
i,' '
Dr Linda W. Little g.,.
p]
3g 0 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board h u.u@$c
,/
USNRC Washington, D.C.
20555 xA
..@?
a
- e,N
Dear Chairman Smith and Administrative Law Judges Jordag andjLittle:
s,....-
This cover.. letter and "Intervenor Lewis's Initial Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law"are submit'ted in response to
" Memorandum a nd Order on Schedute and Format for Proposed Fintings."
(April.22, 1981.)
This cover letter includes certain observations which may form a basis for subsequent appeals.
INTEREST.
My interest is my own life. Apparently this wac not specific enough for the Licensee, Staff and Board. My lif e will be endangered by the operation of TMI!1. This statement derives directly from statements in te 1964 revision of Wash 740,
" Theoretical Possibilities and Consequences of Major Accidents e in Large Niaclear Power Plants." Wash 740 was a report generated by the Atomic Energy Commission. Wash 740 states that deaths will occur as far from a reactor as 150 KM in a major nuclear accident.
I live.
and work within 150 KM of TMI#1.
My life is an interest that I may defend. This right was stated in the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration of Independenge may not have the force of law. It does have historical precedent of the highest quality.
I have not met the standards of intesst used by the Board.
The standard is not broad enough to allow me the right envisioned by the Founding Fathers in the Declaration of 3
Independence:the inalienable right to life.
g
]D 18106050 93I G
2.
BIAS C? NUCLEAR REGC.ATORY CCT.!ISSION.
The actions of the NRC demonstrato tne old adage that regulatory agencies soon become handmaidens to the industry that they are supposed to regulate.
These actions in support of the industry at the expense of the safety of the public are daily occurrences.
l.May 22, 1981, 10C?R2 Immediate Effectiveness Rule Final.
This rule will eliminate-any protection of the public by allowing operation of reactors while specific safety questions are being appealed. This rule eliminates any aid that the public can hope for from the Hearing Process.
1.CLI 81 Statement of Policy on Conduct of Licensing Hearings.
Another assualt of the public's Right to its fair hearing.
3.10 CFR 50.34 (f) AdditionalTMI related requirements for applications for an operating license.
All this paragraph does is formalize the means that a Licensee
' ' *get relief from the implementation schedule for these so-called requirements.
4.However, nowhere is thehandmaiden relationship of th NRC ~ to the nuclear industry so clearly illustrated as in th'e TMIi2 accident.
As Congressman Morris E Udall put it in a letter of transmittal to the Members of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs:
"The Commission's weak enforcement act' ion and the associated report prepared by the NRC Office of Inspection and Inforcement have had the effect ofobscuring the issue."(Com.?rint 3 Mar.1981 )
The NRC has shown itself to be exceedingly biased toward the industry. Thisbias destroys the NRC's ability to regulate the nuclear industry effectively. The NRC should remove itself from the regulatory picture, and turn its functions over to the l
Bongress and the Courts as best it can under the present laws.
Conversely, fhe NRC e ould improve its regulatory function by employing anti-nuclear advocates as extensively as it presenft employs pro-nuclear types.
5 have never met one admitted anti-nuclear type on any NRC Roard
~
l or in any high NRC administrative position. No wonder there is an obvious cro-nuclear bias in$the NRC.
This clear pro-nuclear t
i
~
ee NR bias
' eliminates abilty to deal effectively with the nuclear industry to protect the health and safety of the public.
i
3.
l.
3IAS C? STA??.
Shairman Smith pointed out that the staff comes to hearings as a party defending its position. (S.13.80 around 1: 20FM Tr e not available:
This is true, bu t the staff also has other duties to which it must adher. The staff is a part of the NRC. The NdC has the 4
Atomic 'nergy Act duty and its own charter duty to protect the health add safety of the public.
Protection of the health and safety of the public must come before defending its position.
I have no argument with the staff for defending its own position as long as that position is consistent with the Atomic %nergy Act duty of protecting the health and safety of ^ the public.
Unhappily, I see that the staff's attitude seems to be one of protecting the Licensee.
This attitude of protecting the Licensee and presenting. discourtesies to the intervenors was evident even before the hearings began.
Ms Freida 3erryh111, an intervenor who could not afford to i
pursue her contention, described a most unpleasant meeting with the staff. I was subjected to what I felt were discourtesies.
I was also very taken back that the Licensee was invited to the meeting that i had with the staff while the same invitation was not proferred to the other intervenors by the staff.
This aid to scheduling that the 4taff gave to Licensee only*shows an obvious bias on the staff's part.
When I attempted to bring up the discourtesies that I felt i
demonstrated the staff's bias, I was told by Chaiman Smith, "I can tell you right now I'm not interested in that and it does not assist the Board."(Tr 14 (Smith)
When I attempted to point out how the staff bias might sully the record, Chairman Smith answered,"It is irrelevant to any subject matter."Tr 15,16 (Smith)
Howeker, there are many NRC rulings which make clear that
~9a s'taff's actions are directly related to the record and even the cutvome of the case.
In the matter of Ecrida Power and Light Comnany (at Lucie Nuclear Power riant Unit No 2) ALA3 335 s cision June 29,1976 e
th Appeals Board ov:rturned a decision to grant an LWA because the[ppealsLoardContludedthethestaffhadmisleadthe intervenors and the Licensing Board.
l l
In the Matter of Duke Power Company, (Imendment to daterials
[
Nuc gar Sta fui transoortation j
uclear }aoa ion) tion Stent
~
License SNM 1]7A..aguire Snea for Oc and Storage -a.
Docket No 70-2623 Initial Decision Oct 31, 1980 the ASL3 ruled in response ;o l
~
\\
a..,..
4 the NRC staff witnosc, 3rott S. Spitalny, the"NRC chould not frustrato a fair NZ?A revicw ro in reasonablo dopth by pornitting any licensee to truncate or frag =ent the area of inquiry by a crabbed definition of the propoded action." at r ge 24 of the econee I.D.
a IheOconee(cisionisespeciallypertinent to these proceedings.
The very. NRC lawyer that " frustrated a fair NI?A review" at Cconee is the lawyer-that the staff is using in this Hearing:
James R. Tourtelotte, Esq. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Vommission Washington, D C 2055. (See Appearances'in Oconee I. 3. and this Hearing.)
It is very clear that the staffin this hearing has a bias that sullied the record beyond redemption.
Since the testimony of the staff cannot be relied on to protect the health and safety of the public, the testimony of the staff witnesses should not be given any weight when said testimony is used to. justify the restart of TMI#1.
3IAS OF THE 30A23.
First, I want to poir.t out that the Board does bonsist of three members.
I would have a very difficuly time ever suggesting that Dr Jordan is unfairly biased. He is, admittedly, pro-nuke; but that does not mean that he is. unfairly biased.
His words, "It is very difficuly to argue that deaths to future generations are unimportant *.
, have been an inspiration to me in my fight against nuclear power.(Memo Jordan to Yore ASL3 ttled, Irrors in 10CFR 51,20.
Table S-3)
I would like to be as sure of the other two 3oard me=bers as I am of Dr Jordan. However, I cannot.
Chairman Smith's exchange with Mrs Aamodt and with me concerning i
the staff's conduct cloud Chairman Smith's chairing of this i
proceeding.
3r Little-is an unknown. Save that she is in "5ho's Tho in American Science" and admits to being president-of a firm that does work for utilities I have no feeling for Dr Little's bias, if any. However, in this day and age of interconnected companies and financing,.I cannot help but wonder how a person who is presently doing work for anutility can judge arother
[
utility without bias.
l l
s e.
,e e
2*
l....
3:AS IN BIING HUMAN.
"our ability to reject unwelcomed facts is one of the most intercating
- and, often, disheartening - facts about hunankind." Phila Inquiree Aug 6.1980 rage 9A " Holocaust was hard to believe" Gary W111sA,cdr.c.
Allen Funt of Candid Ca= era.in same article, sprang " miracles on unsuspecting people,,t?n'ey did not argue with the unexpected, or actively disbelieve in most cases.
They just ignored the inconvenient event."
we are now ignoring Ine victime of TMI. There have been and there will be deaths. Playing with numbers-does not change that fact.
There harebeen and there will be Class 9 accidents.
I pray that the next class 9 accident will be no worse, but that it will, nonetheless, allow people to learn that nuclear power is a dead end ** technology as nuclear bombs ar e. m-dead end to existence.
- know that an unpopular decision by the 3oard will expose 7
- to the criticism of your peers, jeopardy to your livelihood, and '.oss of your prof essional reputations.
I really have no significant balm to give you for your cacerns I railed earlier in my submissions that you should worry about
.a Nuerenberg-type trial if there was a Class 9 accident at TMI!1 when and if it goes on line.
I admit new that if TMIf1 has a Wash 740 type accident the last thing anybody will have tcworry about is a Nuerenberg-type trial.
The only things that anybody will have to worry about if TMI#1 has a Wash 740 type accident is
" how fast and how rar. "
Hopefully, f
o 4
l t
n,
'.'t Wb
,,! 9 io r s
~ -. - -
m-y m
gr
--p q