ML20053A717
| ML20053A717 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 05/25/1982 |
| From: | Johari Moore NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-SP, NUDOCS 8205270180 | |
| Download: ML20053A717 (10) | |
Text
._
i UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE COMMISSION In the Matter of CONSOLIDATED EDIS0N COMPANY
)
[
[
OF NEW YORK (Indian Point, Unit 2) )
)
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF
)
NEW YORK (Indian Point, Unit 3)
)
NRC STAFF RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO POWER AUTHORITY'S ADDENDUM TO NOTICE OF APPEAL I
J Janice E. Moore Counsel for NRC Staff May 25, 1982~
7 DESIcnTC ORIGINAIl 'N
$6TtI$$ $
3S09 8205270 (10 g
/
/
1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
)
Docket Nos. 50-247-SP CONS 0'.IDATED EDIS0N COMPANY
)
50-286-SP 0F NEW YORK (Indian Point, Unit 2) )
)
May 25, 1982
~c POWER AUTHORITY CF THE STATE OF
)
NEW YORK (Indian Point, Unit 3)
)
NRC STAFF RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO POWER AUTHORITY'S ADDENDUM TO NOTICE OF APPEAL 1.
INTRODUCTION On May 10, 1982, the Power Authority of the State of New York (the Authority), Licensee of Indian Point, Unit 3, filed a document entitled
" Power Authority's Addendum to Notice and Supporting Brief of Appeal of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board's Order Granting Intervention" (hereinaf ter Addendum).
In that document the Authority adds to its appeal that portion of the order of April 23, 1982, issued by the Lice'nsing Board designated to preside over this proceeding, granting intervenor status to the Greater New York Council on Energy (GNYCE).
For the reasons stated below and in "NRC Staff's Brief in Response to Power Authority's Appeal of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board's Order Ruling on Petitions to Intervene" (hereinafter Staff Response) filed on May 4,1982, the Staff opposes the Authority's appeal of the Licensing Board's ruling concerning the standing of GNYCE to intervene in this proceeding and submits that
. the Licensing Board's' ruling should be affirmed.
--w a
II.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE On November 6,1981, GNYCE filed a timely petition for leave to I
intervene in this proceeding.
The Staff argued that an amendment to GNYCE's petition was necessary to establish its standing to intervene on the grounds that:
1) the petition contained no indication that the named GNYCE members had authorized '.he organi- -'
zation to represent their interests, and 2) the petition did not indicate whether the organization had authorized the signer of the petition to act as the organization's representative in this proceeding.1/
On December 10, 1981 GNYCE filed an amendment to its original peti-tion which included affidavits of Andres Rosenbloom and Dean R. C In his affidavit Mr. Rosenbloom stated that he is a member of GNYC a direct interest in the outcome of this. proceeding, and that he authorized GNYCE to. represent that interest.2_/ The affidavit of Dean R. Corren stated that he.is a duly authorized representative of GNYCE.E In response to 1/
" Response of the NRC Staff to Petitions for"(eave to Intervene and Requests.for-Participation as Interested States Filed in Response to the NRC Federal Register Notice of October 7,1981" at 21 (Novem-
, ber 24,1981) (hereinafter Staff Response to Petition,5).
-2/
" Affidavit of Andrew Rosenbloom Authorizing Representation by the~
~
Greater New York Council on Energy" (hereinafteF Rosenbloom affidavit)
~
attached to " Amendment to Petition for Leave to. Intervene.of the Greater New York Council Council [ sic] on Energy" dateTDecember 10, 1981.(hereinafter GNYCE Amended Pe.tition).
-3/
" Affidavit of Dean R. Corren Certifying Authority to Represent.GNYCE" (hereinafter Corren Affidavit) attached to GNYCE Amended Petition t
4-
\\
N j
=
.. GNYCE's amended petition, the Staff asserted that GNYCE met the standing requirement for intervention in this proceeding.b/
On April 2, 1982, the Licensing Board issued an Order ruling on the standing of various petitioners to intervene in this proceeding. All the petitioning organizations except for GNYCE were granted intervenor
, status.EI With regard to GNYCE the Licensing Board found that it.had standing to intervene, but that without further specification, GNYCE had failed to set forth a litigable contention.
Memorandum and Order (Ruling on Petitions to Intervene and Agenda for Second Prehearing Conference) at 24 (April 2, 1982).
The Board ordered GNYCE to submit further speci-fication of one of its contentions by April 12, 1982, and conditionally admitted GNYCE as an intervenor pending a ruling on this contention.
GNYCE complied with the Board's Order, and its contention was dis-cussed at the Second Prehearing Conference held on April 13 and 14, 1982.
On April 23, 1982, the Licensing Board issued an Order setting forth the contentions to be litigated in this proceeding.
In that Order GNYCE's contention was found to be adequate, and GNYCE was admitted as a party to the proceeding.
Memorandun and Order (Fonnulating Contentions, Assigning Intervenors, and Setting Schedule) at 20 n.4 (April 23,1982).
The Authority now appeals the admission of GNYCE as a party on the
-4/
" Response of the NRC Staff to the Amendments to Petitions of UCS-NYPIRG, GNYCE, Parents, and WESPAC for Leave to Intervene and Amendments to Requests of the County and NYC Council for Partici-pation as Interested States" (hereinafter Staff Response to Amended Petitions) at 15 (December 21,1981).
5/
For a list of those parties granted intervenor status see Staff Response at 3 n.2.
Those interested states granted leave to parti-cipate are enumereted in Staff Response at 4 n.3.
_4 grounds that:
- 1) GNYCE failed to demonstrate that the signer of the affidavit of membership in the organization had the " requisite indicia of membership" required by Hunt v. Washington Acole State Advertisina Commission, 432 U.S. 333, 344 (1977); and 2) GNYCE is opposed to nuclear power.
Addendum at 2.
,~
III.
ISSUE ON APPEAL Whether the Licensing Board erred in admitting GNYCE as an Intervenor based on an affidavit of a person alleging to be a member and notwith-standing GNYCE's organizational purpose to oppose nuclear power.
IV. ARGUMENT A.
The Licensing Board's Determination that GNYCE Possessed Standing to Intervene in a Representative Capacity Base'd on the Affiday'it of its Member was Correct The Authority has not submitted any arguments specific to GNYCE but merely incorporates by reference the arguments it advanced in its April 19, 1982 brief in support of its notice of appeal.
Addendum at 1, 2.
In the Staff Response addressing the question of the underlying basis for representational standing, the Staff distinguished between UCS, an organization seeking to intervene in a representative capacity on behalf of its sponsors, and RCSE, an organization seeking to intervene in a representative capacity on behalf of its members.
Staff Response at 12 n.19.
The Staff pointed out that the Hunt decision relied upon by the Authority in its brief in support of the notice of appeal did not apply to RCSE, since RCSE based its standing on its members rather than on sponsors or financial contributors.
I d_.
,' GNYCE is in the same position as RCSE.
GNYCE submitted an affidavit as an amendment to its original petition for leave to intervene on Decem-ber 10, 1982.
In this affidavit, Mr. Rosenbloom stated that he was a member of GNYCE, with a direct interest in the outcome of the proceeding, and that he authorized GYNCE to represent his interest in this proceeding.
',Rosenbloom affidavit. Since the organization has identified a member whose interest may be affected by the outcome of the proceeding, and who has authorized GNYCE to represent that interest in this proceeding.
GNYCE has established the requisite standing to intervene in the proceed-ing.
GNYCE is basing its standing on the interests of its members rather than sponsors or financial contributors. Therefore, as with RCSE, the Hunt decision does not serve to preclude GNYCE's intervention in this
~
proceeding. The Licensing Board's ruling concerning the standing of GNYCE to intervene in the proceeding should be affirmed.
B.
An Organization's Opposition to Nuclear Power does not Preclude its Intervention in NRC Proceedings In its Addendum the Authority incorporates by reference its argument that opponents of nuclear power should not be permitted to use this pro-ceeding as a forum to debate nuclear power.
Addendum at 2.
The Authority asserts by the use of extra-record quotations that GNYCE is an organiza-tion which opposes nuclear power.- As the Staff argued in its response to the Authority's brief in support of the notice of appeal, expressed opposition to nuclear power by conduct outside of this proceeding does not preclude intervention in NRC proceedings. The Authority does not identify any Commission regulations or case law in its Addendum to suppdrt its position.
The Staff submits that there are none. The Staff incorpor-
/
- ates by reference its arguments made in response to the Authority's position in this matter set forth in the Staff's Response at 16-18.
V.
CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above and in the Staff Response to the Authority's appeal filed on May 4,1982, the Licensing Board's ruling concerning the standing of GNYCE to intervene in this proceeding should.-
be upheld.
Respectfully submitted,
= T KJi hR2K MrwiFt%n Janice E. Moore Counsel for NRC Staff Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 25th day of May, 1982 Og 9
e l
/
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REFORC Tur COMMTCCIDFI In the Matter of
)
~
)
CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY
)
Docket Nos. 50-247-SP 0F NEW YORK (Indian Point, Unit 2 )
50-286-SP
)
' POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF
)
~
NEW YORK (Indian Point, Unit 3)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO POWER AUTHORITY'S ADDENDUM TO NOTICE OF APPEAL" in the above-captioned proceed have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class or, as indicated by an asterisk, through deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system, this 25th day of May,1982.
l Louis J. Carter, Esq., Chairman Paul F. Colarulli, Esq.
Administrative Judge Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Pamela S. Horowitz, Esq.
7300 City Line Avenue Charles Morgan, Jr., Esq.
Philadelphia, PA 19151-2291 Morgan Associates, Chartered 1899 L Street, N.W.
Dr. Oscar H. Paris Washington, D.C.
20036 Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Charles M. Pratt, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Reoulatory Commission Thomas R. Frey, Esq.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Power Authority of the State of New York Mr. Frederick J. Shon 10 Columbus Circle Administrative Judge New York, N.Y.
10019 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission El. lyn R. Weiss, Esq.
Washington, D.C.
20555 William S. Jordan, III, Esq.
Harmon & Weiss Brent L. Brandenburg, Esq.
1725 I Street, N.W., Suite 506 Assistant General Counsel Washington, D.C.
20006 Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.
Joan Holt, Project Director 4 Irving Place Indian Point Project New York, N.Y.
10003 New York Public Interest Research Group Mayor George V. Begany 5 Beekman Street Village of Buchanan New York, N.Y.
10038 236 Tate Avenue Buchanan, N.Y.
10511 John Gilroy, Westchester Coordinator Indian Point Project Stanley.3. Klimberg New York Public Interest General Lounsel Research Group New York State Energy Office 240 Central Avenue 2 Rockefeller State Plaza Albany, N.Y.
12223 White Plains, N.Y.
10606 Jeffrey M. Blum, Esq.
Marc L. Parris, Esq.
New York University Law School Eric Thorsen, Esq.
423 Vanderbilt Hall County Attorney, County of Rockland 40 Washington Square South 11 New Hempstead Road 4
New York, N.Y.
10012 New City, N.Y.
10956 Charles J. Maikish, Esq.
Geoffrey Cobb Ryan Litigation Division Conservation Committee The Port Authority of Chairman, Director New York and New Jersey New York City Audubon Society One World Trade Center 71 West 23rd Street, Suite 1828 New York, N.Y.
10048 New York, N.Y.
10010 Ezra I. Bialik, Esq.
Greater New York Council on Steve Leipsiz, Esq.
Energy Environmental Protection Bureau c/o Dean R. Corren, Director New York State Attorney New York University General's Office 26 Stuyvesant Street Two World Trade Center New York, N.Y.
10003 New York, N.Y.
10047 Honorable Richard' L. Brodsky Alfred B. Del Bello Member of the County Legislature Westchester County Executive Westchester County Westchester County County Office Building 148 Martine Avenue White Plains, N..Y.
10601 White Plains, NY 10601 Pat Posner, Spokesperson Andrew S. Roffe, Esq.
Parents Concerned About New York State Assembly Indian Point Albany, N.Y.
12248 P.O. Box 125 Croton-on-Hudson, N.Y.
10520 Charles A. Scheiner, Co-Chairperson Westchester People's Action Coalition, Inc.
P.O. Box 488 White Plains, N.Y.
10602 Honorable Ruth Messinger Member of the Council of the torna Salzman City of New York Mid-Atlantic Representative District #4 Friends of the Earth, Inc.
City Hall 208 West 13th Street
}
New York, N.Y.
10007 New York, N.Y.
10011
. Alan Latman, Esq.
44 Sunset Drive Ms. Amanda Potterfield, Esq.
P.O. Box 384 Croton-on-Hudson, N.Y.
10520 Village Station Zipporah S. Fleisher New York, NY 10014 West Branch Conservation Association Renee Schwartz, Esq.
443 Buena Vista Road Paul Chessin, Esq.
New Ci ty, N. Y.
10956 Laurens R. Schwartz, Esq.
Margaret Oppel, Esq.
Judith Kessler, Coordinator Botein, Hays, Sklar & Hertzberg Rockland (;tizens for Safe Energy 200 Park Avenue 300 New Hempstead Road New York, NY 10166/~
New City, N.Y.
10956 Mr. Samuel J. Chilk
- David H. Pikus, Esq.
Secretary of the Commission Richard F. Czaja, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 330 Madison Avenue Washington, DC 20555 New York, N.Y.
10017 Leonard Bickwit, Esq.*
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board General. Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 1*
Washington,, DC 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Boa rd U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 T 0]' L { N L. & i~ & 'O,
Janice E. Moore Counsel for NRC Staff J
,,