ML20054G479

Emergency Petition for Directed Certification of Village of Buchanan Request for Order Directing ASLB to Schedule Upcoming Safety Hearings at Location within 10-mile Emergency Planning Zone.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20054G479
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	06/15/1982
From:	Blail W BUCHANAN, NY
To:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20054G472	List: ML20054G471 ML20054G479
References
ISSUANCES-SP, NUDOCS 8206210594
Download: ML20054G479 (6)

Text

a UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Commissioners:

Nunzio J. Palladino, Chairman John F. Ahearne James Asselstine victor Gilinsky Thomas M. Roberts

---

X In the Matter of a CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF  : Docket Nos. 50-247 SP NEW YORK, INC. (Indian Point, 50-286 SP Unit No. 2)  :

June 15,- 1982 POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OP  :

NEW YORK (Indian Point, Unit No. 3)

---

X VILLAGE OF BUCHANAN'S EMERGENCY PETITION FOR DIRECTED CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 10 CFR S 2.718 (i)

The Village of Buchanan, New York, (the " Village")

hereby applies to the Commission for immediate directed certifi-cation of Village's request for an order directing the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (the " Board") to schedule the upcoming Indian Point safety hearings at a location within the 10-mile emergency planning zone ("EPZ") of Indian Point. Such an order is necessary to obtain Board compliance with the Commission's January 8, 1981 Order, which directed that the hearings be con-ducted "in the vicinity of Indian Point." Consolidated Edison of New York, Inc. (Indian Point, Unit 2) and The Power Authority of the State of New York (Indian Point, Unit 3), CLI-81-1, 13 NRC 1, 6 (1981). A May 26, 1982 Board order established a distant and inaccessible location for the commencement of the hearings in dis-regard of the Commission's January 8, 1981 Order. The Village, which was admitted as a party to this proceeding by order dated April 2, 1982, is compelled to proceed on an " emergency" basis since the Board has directed that hearings commence on June 22, in just [ days from now. As set forth below, the Village would be irreparably prejudiced were the hearings to commence as the 8206210594 820614 PDR ADOCK 05000247 G PDR

Board has directed.

DISCUSSION A. The Standards for Certification Directod Certification is sought by Village pursuant to 10 CFR S 2.718 (i) of the Commission's regulations. That section states:

A presiding officer has the duty to conduct a fair and impartial 1: earing according to law, to take appropriate action to avoid delay, and to maintain order. He has all power necessary to those ends, including the powers to (i) certify questions to the Commission for its determination, whether in his discretion or on direction of the Commission.

Section 2.718 (i) of the Commission's regulations does not contain any standards to be used in determining whether or not directed certification requests should be granted. However, guidance is provided by Section V(f) (4) of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 2.Section V(f)(4) states:

A question may be certified to the Commission or the Appeal Board, as appropriate, for determination when a major or novel question of policy, law or procedure is involved which cannot be resolved except by the Commission or the Appeal Board and when a prompt and final decision of the question is important for the protection of the public interest, or to avoid undue delay or serious prejudice to the interests of a party.

Thus, the standard to be applied in judging the merits of Village's petition for directed certification should be (1) whether the petition presents a maior or novel question of policy law or procedure which cannot be resolved except by the Commission ,

and (2) whether the prompt and final decision of the question is important for the protection of the public interest or to avoid undue delay or serious prejudice to the interests of a party.

-- - - ll

4 B. Village's Request Meets the Standards for Certification while there is a general Commission policy disfavoring

! interlocutory review (10 CFR S 2. 730 ( f) ) , the Appeal Board has

, on many occasions stated that discretionary interlccutory review pursuant to S 2.718 (i) will be granted where the ruling below either threatens the adveracly af fected party with imeediate and serious irreparable impact which, as a practical matter, cannot be alleviated by a later appeal, or which affects the structure of the proceeding in a pervasive or unusual manner.*

l Village's unique relationship with respect to both Indian Point Units 2 and 3 satisfies the " novel question of policy, law or procedure" requirement referred to above. Eoth Indian Point Units 2 and 3 are located within the corporate borders of the Village. In addition, Consolidated Edison Company of New York, the licensee of Indian Point Unit 2, provides electric

?

service to the residents, business and other non public entities within the Village. Electricity is provided to the agencies of the Village government itself by the Power Authority of the State of New York, licensee of Indian Point Unit 3, pursuant to contract

between the Village and the Authority, dated October 4, 1986.

Thus, any action taken by the NRC which will affect the continued operations of the Indian Point units will have a direct effect on the Village, not likely to be felt elsewhere, or by any other part)

I to the proceeding. The Commission's requirement -- now about to

, be breached -- that these hearings be held in the vicinity of 1

Indian Point is itself rooted in the soundest of policies:

• Public Service Company of Indiana (Marble 11111 Units 1 and 2), ALAB-405, 5 N RC 1190, If32 (1977); Puget Sound i Power and Light Company (Skagit Nuclear Power Project, Units 1 and 2), ALAB-572, 10 NRC 693, 694 (1979); Public Service Electric and Gas Company (Salem Nuclear Getie4ating Station, Unit 1), ALAB-514, ll NRC 533, 534 (1980; Houston

~

, Li Sh ting and Power Company (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating l Station, Unit No. 1), ALAB-635, 13 NRC 309, 310 (1981).

that NRC proceedings must be most accessible to those citizens who are most af fected by the plant in question, in this case the residents of the Village and surrounding towns.

Citizens for Safe Energy (Tr. at 830). The other location, the Clarkstown Town Hall, was offered by Ms. Fleisher of intervenor West Branch Conservation Association (Tr. at 833) .*

Despite the substantial effort of parties and-persons residing within the EPZ to provide suitable " quarters" for the hearing, the Board, without so much as a word of explanation ir.

its May 26, 1982 Order, disregarded the Commission's requirement that the hearings be held in the vicinity ~of the plant and se-lected White Plains as the site.

CONCLUSION For the reasons discussed above, the Village urges the commission to grant its emergency petition and issue an order directing certification of Village's request for an order directinc the Board to schedule the hearings at a location within the 10-mile EPZ of Indian Point.

Respectfully submitted, Dated at' Buchanan, New York s ,- -

this /5 day of June 1982 Attorney for'tMe fillage opf Buchanan l

• In addition to the locations proposed at the Second Special Prehearing Conference, the Board has been advised of other appropriate locations by written correspondence. The Nort?

Rockland High School in Haverstraw was recommended as a location by the Rockland County Attorney, Marc L. Parris.

Mr. Parris informed the Board of this location in a December 9,1981 letter. The Cortlandt Civic Center was recommended as a location by the Supervisor of the Town of Cortlandt, Charles G. DiGiacomo, in an April 16, 1982 letter to the Board (see attachment) .

I

,mu:s G. u .ev t: ;/GT.I '04176 m=. -> i me mu ,a43:3

... e .; . ' '

.T.'..E April 16, 1982 ,

Louis Carter, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board DNUBER -

NEUm.nc h,y p U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission gg .

1717 H Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C. 20555

Dear Mr. Carter:

An unfair burden will be placed :pon residents of the Town of Cortlandt if your hearinis to determine the fate of the Indian Point nuclear co: plex are held outside the ten mile energency planning i.rea.

I have learned through the media that you are contemplating holding the forthcoming hearings at the Westchester County Courthouse in White Plains.

No constituency has more right te or need for access to the hearings than those in Cortland:. These citizens who live and work within the ten mile area of the plant should have a fair opportunity to speak and cany of them are unable to sale the forty-six mils round *. rip to White Plains.

We hereby offer the Cortlandt Civic Center on Westbrook Drive which will more than adequately provide the space necessary for such hearings.

I look forward to hearing from yta in the very near future.

Sincerely, Charles G. . G isi. ,e o ,

y Superviour CGD:eg .

~

Attachunt 1

_-- 4 .h - ln . , ..

'l' '

? L.

wit!,v

_. .', i \

!'.' / ]^

i - ~f

/ s '-- ,\ )//  !

J effrey M. Blum, Esq. ,

N ew York University Law School 423 Vanderbilt Hall '

40 Washington Square South j/

New York, N.Y. 10012 -

I ',

Charles J. Maikish, Esq. " n j(

/! ~^

Litigation Division s b

• i The Port Authority of I' I

New York and New Jersey h i4 One World Trade Center 10048 4

New York, N.Y. .

. (.

ff Ezra I. Bialik, Esq. '

t, . ,

Steve Leipsiz, Esq. ~,y , f,

• Environmental Protection Bureau , , e' , ;f New York State Attorney 'C 7, General's Office Two World Trade Center '

, y n'

New York, N.Y. 10041

/ . ,t f' /

Alfred B. Del Bello Westchester County Executive -

f -

i Westchester County r 148 Martine Avenue White Plains, NY 10601 ,

L Andrew S. Roffe, Esq. s New York Assembly x Albany, NY 12248 .

,.\-.

1 I '

/

Ruthanne G. Miller, Esq. /

Attomic safety and Licensing Board Panel *  ;-

l U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission '

/

Washington, D.C. 20555 * +

Honarable Ruth Messinger

(

e

' */ .

Member of the Council of the '

City of New York --

"/

Distric 04 t x'

City Hall I New York, NY 10007 Marc L. Parris, Esq.

Eric Thorsen, Esq.

j County Attorney, County of RJckland 11 New Hempstead Road New City, NY 10956 Joan Miles Indian Point Coordinator '

New York City Audubon Society ,.

71 West 2 3rd Street, Suite 1828 New York, NY 10010 Greater New York Council on Energy c/o Dean R. Corren, Director New York University j 26 Stuyvesant Street 1 New York, NY 10003 b

t' e

f I

)-

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

,- f. -

BEFORE THE COMMISSION In the Matter of )

)

CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-247-SP

/ - OF NEW YORK (Indian Point, Unit 2)

) 50-286-SP 4

[ )

POWER AUTHORITY CP THE STATE OF )

NEW YORK '(Indian Point, Unit 3) )

r

< ./ .

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " Village of Buchanan's Emergency

- Petition for Directed Certification Pursuant to 10 C.P.R.

[ S 2.718(i)", in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the follouing parties by deposit in the United States mail, first class, tf.is 15th day cf June, 1982.

l Louis J. Carter, Esq., Chairman Paul P. Colarulli, Esq.

Administrative Jud(e Joseph J. Jevin, Jr., Esq.

Atomic Safety and! Licensing Board Pamela S. Horwitz, Esq.

7300 City Line Ave 1ue 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 i

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Charles M. Pratt, Esq.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Thomas R. Prey, Esq.

Washington, D.C. 20555 Power Authority of the State of New York Mr. Prederick 3. Shon 10 Columbus Circle Administrative Judge New York, N,Y. 10019 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ellyn R. Weiss, Esq.

Washington, D.C. 20555 William S. Jordan, III, Esq Harmon & Weiss Brent L. Branden Burg, Esq. 1725 1 Street, N.W.

Assistant General Counsel Suite 506 Consolidated Edison Co. of Washington, D.C. 20006 New York, Inc.

q4 Irvi.ng Place Janice E. Moore, Esq.

LNew York, N.Y. 10003 Office of the Executive Legal Director frich Gilroy, Westchester Coordinator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory yIndian Point Project Commission

!!New York Public Interest Washington, D.C. 20555

!Research Group 240 Central Avenue Stanley D. Kimbery

%5ite Plains, N.Y. 10606 General Counsel New York State Energy office 2 Rockefelle r State Plaza 1

4 Albany, N.Y. 12223 r <

0 I

c

%& \ YY - *h *0 '

N4* M %'y W }g g

}

, o ' 4

, y

.C (

C' n ., .

Honorable Richard L. Brodsky Member of the County Legislature Westchester County County Of fice Building f

White Plains, NY 10601 Pat Posner, Spokesperson Parents Concerned About Indian Point P.O. Box 125 Croton-on-Hudson, NY 10520 Charles A. Scheiner, Co-Chairperson Westchester People's Action Coalition, Inc.

P.O. Box 4BB White Plains, NY 10602 Richard M. Hartzman, Esq.

Lorna Salzman Friends of the Earth, Inc.

208 West 13th Street New York, NY 10011 Alan Latman, Esq.

44 Sunset Drive Croton-on-Hudson, NY 10520 Zipporah S. Fleisher West Branch Conservation Association 443 Buena Vista Road New City, NY 10956 Judith Kessler, Coordinator-Rockland Citizens for Safe Energy 300 New Hempstead Road New City, NY 10956 David H. Pikus, Esq.

Richard F. Czaja, Esq.

330 Madison Avenue New York, NY 10017 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary i U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

' Renee Schwartz, Esq.

Paul Chessin, Esq.

oLaurens R. Schwarcz, Esq.

Margartt Oppel, Esq.

Botein, Hays, Sklar & Hertzberg 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166

r Amanda Potterfield, Esq.

Joan Holt, Project Director New York Public Interest Research Group, Inc.

9 Murray Street New York, NY 10007 Attorney for Village bf Buchanarr J