ML20054M676
| ML20054M676 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 06/22/1982 |
| From: | THREE MILE ISLAND ALERT |
| To: | U.S. DISTRICT COURT, MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSLYVANIA |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20054M674 | List: |
| References | |
| 82-0763, 82-763, NUDOCS 8207140195 | |
| Download: ML20054M676 (19) | |
Text
,
.i.".$$0b0iO
' d),
Y,,{,,,,,f 9
)'
orrect or mc ca.cnn nu..u:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
MIDDLES DIsTHICT OF PENNEYLVANIA Aare f t*** OF Cast Asse u s COunTHousE
" ^ " " " * * " " ' '
DONALD R. DERRY WASHINGTON AVE fr LINDEN STREET eLEnn SCRANTON. PA.18 501 NOTICE OF RIGilT TO CONSErlT TO CONDUCT A CIVIL CASE BY A U.S. MAGISTRATE In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.
5636(c) and Local Rule 901.0, you are hereby notified that liagistrate Raymond J. Durkin of Hilkes-Darre or Magistrate John Havas of Harrisburg, the full-time nagistrates of this district, may, upon the consent of all parties, conduct any-or all proceedings in a civil case, including the conduct of a jury or non-jury trial, and order the entry of a final judgment.
Your decision to consent or not to consent to a referral to a full-time magistrate is entirely voluntary and is to be communicated to the clerk of the District Court.
A consent form is attached to this notice.
Local Rule 903.2(b) directs that the plaintiff shall,be responsible for securing the execution of any consent form by the parties and for filinC the fora uith the clerk of court.
In cases referred to a magistrate by consent. the final judgment may be appealed directly to the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit unless, at the time of reference to a magistrate, the parties consent to appeal on the record to a judge of the District Court as provided in 28 U.S.C. $636(c)(4).
Appeal to the District Court may be reviewed by the Court of Appeals upon petition for leave to appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
1
$636(c)(5).
If a consent form executed by all parties is filed, the clerk will submit it to the judge to whom the case has been assigned for approval and referral of the case.
[
d' 4
JAL N*
t D0l!ALD R. BERRY CLERK OF COUltT
/
8207140195 82d707 PDR ADOCK 05000323 G
PDR k
f,";'.. l st.
ri,t).c.t...m No.4~.a u<e.6's'n SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
___...a__ ____. ______.. _ _._ =:= =. - -
e :- _ u -= =-- = _ -..-- - : ---. : n _ - -.
n _.
,;an -.m Ettitch 9 titles Bistrirl @mtri FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
[
CIVIL ACTION FILE No.
82-0763 N
WILLIAM P.
RODGERS, SUSAN ROMAGNA, CIIRISTOPIIER
)
SAYER, VICKI SCilOFIELD, PAT SGRIGNOLI, JOliN
)
SGRIGNOLI, SARA R.
S!!ENEFELT, SUSAN SIIETROM,
}
WILLI AM SilETROM, CilESTER G.
SIVERLING, RITA M.
}
SIVERLING, PATRICK M.
SLICK, GARY SMITit, MICilELLE
)
SMITil, TOM SMITilGALL, RUTil SOLOMON, JULIE A.
SPONG,)
RICIIARD SPONG, GEORGE TALEFF, JOllN EDWAltD T!!OMAS,
)
JOANN M.
- TOPOLSKI, E.
ANTiiONY TOPOLSKI, STEFAN A.
}
TOPOLSKI, ANTONI N.
TOPOLSKI, MAREK F.
- TOPOLSKI,
)
MITCil TURNAUER, JANINE R.
ULLOM, SilARON VERBOS,
)
ROGER VERBOS, FRANCINE WOERTilWEIN, DR. ROBERT 1
COLMAN and other persons similarly situated,
}
}
Plaintiffs,
}
}
versus
}
}
}
}
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIONERS JOSEPH M.
HENDRIE,)
- 1 RICl!ARD T.
KENNEDY, JOHN AIIEARNE,
)
I
_ j VICTOR GILINSKY, PETER A.
- BRADFORD,
)
}
j e
}
and METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, GENERAL PUBLIC
}
b UTILITIES, ROBERT ARNOLD, HERMAN DIECKAMP, JOHN
)
- IIERBEIN,
-)
}
Defendants.
}
}
Christic Institute 1324 North Capitol Street Washington, D.
C.
20002 an answer to the complaint which is herewith served upon you, within 20 days after service of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.
--DONALD R. BERRY,
)
'A
~
Cle k of Co u r*.
(O_I
.~%,.
.p.- u U
Kenneth J.
ulpollanii UcF"fu Cle'*
Date:
June 22, 1982 D;[aii,rcourt]
NOTE:-This nummon* is i=>urd pursuant in Itute -I of t hic l'eder.it Itules inf Ciiil l'r-citure, t
i E
O 8
v IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR TIIS MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA THE PEOPLE OF THREE MILE ISLAND acting
}
through THREE MILE ISLAND ALERT, INC., LOUISE
}
BRADFORD and MICHAEL KLINE, class co-representa-
)
tives; LEAH DeRDISTE, DUNAL DeRDISTE,
)
KATIIY McCAUGHIN, KATHERINE PICKERING, STEFHEN
}
PATTON, HOLLY S.
- KECK, T.A. KECK III, ANNE MILLER, }
LAWRENCE MILLER, GAIL A. MELHORN, MATHEW MAGDA,
)
SUZANNE MAGDA, CRAIG SIEWERT, JUANINE SPRAGUE,
)
KEITH BENTZ, STEPHEN E.
BAKER, KAREN E.
- )
JOilN S.
ADAMS, PATRICIA ANN TOMKINSON;
}
KAREN LEE MILLER, MICHELLE SIENE'IT,.".'IMOTHY J.)
LYNG, GEORGIANNA.NYCE, BARt3 ARA J.
ULaidu, MisRr h.
)
DOUG LAS, LAURA FREEDMAN, LYNN GOLbFARD, C_RALD.B.
)
BURKHOLDER, PATRICIA BURKHOLDER, DORIS KESSLER,
)
JACOB L.
SUSSKIND, UELEN M.
HOCKER, CHARLES L.
}
III'CK ER, KATHLEEN BEVEL, MARVIN LEWIS;
)
COMPLAINT-JOHN E.~ ACRI, GENE ALBRIGHT, TERRI L.
- BARR,
)
CLASS ACTION JOEL M.
LERNER, BARBARA DELL, ALFRED G.
- BEVEL,
)
e VERA BORNE, PAUL BOWNAN, DONNA BOWMAN, AVA BRADY,
)
No.hMOb 3 CAROL LROOK6, BDITH F.
BROWN, FRANCIS A.
- BROWN,
)
PASCAL J.
- CANTONA, JR.,
SANDRA CIIOMA, MARGE
)
CLEMENT, ELLEN COOGAN, RICHARD COOGAN, JOYCE
}
CORRADI, MARIO A.
CORRADI, PAT CUMMINS, DIANA
}
DAVIS, LOIS DeHART, W.
SCOTT DeHART, CHERIE A.
}
DILLOW, G. BENJAMIN DILLOW, FRANK E.
ENTERLINE,
)
MARY KAY ENTERLINE, GIL FREEDMAN, GRACE GRANZOW,
)
ROBERT GRANZOW, PATRICIA GUPLER, M' LISS IIALSEY, DAN)
HARTNETT, MARY HARTNETT, JANET L.
IIINTON, MARY ant' )
l I!OK E, ROBERT W.
HOKE, JACQUELINE I.
IlUM Pilit I ES-
)
BICKLEY, LAURIE K.
- KEIPER, R.
STEVEN KEIPER, MIKE
)
KLINGER, RANDY K.
KING, PAOLA KINNEY, THOMAS KINNEY)
SANDP A L. LERNER, HARRY I. MACIIITA, PAUL n. MAKt1HATil) l JR.,
J.EROY T.
M L Li'.O U R N, AMELIA Mll.LER, GARY
)
l MITCl! ELL, SUSAN LANNAN MITCi! ELL, EVELYN MUCRIDGE,
.)
JEFF MUGRIDGE, CATliIE MUSSER, JAMES A.
- MUSSER,
)
l DDRIS McCORMICK, MICHAEL J.
NEMSER, PAT NEMSER,
}-
I PAUfA NEMSER, ANNE NISSON, MAi!Y OSilCRNE, BILLIE J.
}
PRESCOTT, STEPHEN M.
PRESCOTT, MARY REYNOLDS,
}
GEORGE RINEER, SAUNDRA L.
RINFER, KAY E.
RODG ERS,
)..
bY j
%g Q
dy 81
- %c,p2 19,
9 Ng tog <e l(
c s IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA THE PEOPLE OF THREE MILE ISLAND acting
)
through THREE MILE ISLAND ALERT, INC., LOUISE
)
BRADFORD and MICHAEL KLINE, class co-representa-
)
tives; LEAH DeRBISTE, D NAL DeRDISTE,
)
KATHY McCAUGHIN, KATHERINE PICKERING, STEPHEN
}
PATTON, HOLLY S.
- KECK, T.A. K ECK III, ANNE MILLER, )
LAWRENCE MILLER, GAIL A.
MELHORN, MATHEW MAGDA,
)
SUZANNE MAGDA, CRAIG SIEWERT, JUANINE SPRAGUE,
)
KEITH BENTZ, STEPHEN E.
BAKER, KAREN E.
}
JOHN S.
ADAMS, PATRICIA ANN TOMKINSON;
}
KAREN LEE MILLER, MICliELLE SIEWE!.f, TIMOTHY J.)
LYNG, GEORGIANNA NYCE, BARB AR A J. ULRICH, MARY H.
)
DOUGLAS, LAURA FREEDMAN, LYNN GOLDFARB, GERALD B.
}
.BURKHOLDER, PATRICIA BURKHOLDER, DORIS KESSLER,
)
JACOB L.
SUSSKIND, HELEN M.
HOCKER, CHARLES L.
)
, HOCK ER, KATIILEEN BEVEL, MARVIN LEWIS;
)
COMPLAINT-JOHN E. ACRI, GENE ALBRIGHT, TERRI L.
- BARR,
}
CLASS ACTION
,, q.,
JOEL M.
LERNER, BARBARA BELL, ALFRED G.
- DEVEL,
)
2-C 2k VERA BORNE, PAUL BOWMAN, DONNA BOWMAN, AVA BRADY,
)
No.
CAROL BROOKS, EDITH F. BROWN, FRANCIS A.
- BROWN,
}
PASCAL J.
- CANTONA, JR.,
SANDRA CHOMA, MARGE
)
CLEMENT, ELLEN COOGAN, RICHARD COOGAN, JOYCE
)
CORRADI, MARIO A.
CORRADI, PAT CUMMINS, DIANA
)
DAVIS, LOIS DeIIART, W.
SCOTT DeHART, CHERIE A.
)
DILLOW, G.
BENJAMIN DILLOW, FRANK E.
ENTERLINE,
}
MARY KAY ENTERLINE, GIL FREEDMAN, GRACE GRANZOW,
)
~
l ROBERT GRANZOW, PATRICIA GUFLER, M'LISS HALSEY, DAN) l HARTNETT, MARY HARTNETT, JANET L.
HINTON, MARY ANN )
IIOK E, ROBERT W.
HOKE, JACQUELINE I.
IlUMPilR I ES-
}
l BICKLEY, LAURIE K.
- KEIPER, R.
STEVEN KEIPER, MIKE
}
KLINGER, RANDY K.
KING, PAOLA KINNEY, THOMAS KINNEY)
SANDRA L.LERNER, HARRY I.
MACiiITA, PAUL A.
MAKURATII) t JR.,
LEROY T.
MILBOURN, AMELIA MILLER, GARY
}
l MITCilELL, SUSAN LANNAN MITCiiELL, EV ELY N MUCH I DG E,
)
JEFF MUGRIDGE, CATl!IE MUSSER, JAMES A.
- MUSSER,
)
DORIS McCORMICK, MICHAEL J.
NEMSER, PAT NEMSER,
}
i l
PAULA NEMSER, ANNE NISSON, MARY OSBORNE, BILLIE J.
)
PRESCOTT, STEPHEN M.
PRESCOTT, MARY REYNOLDS,
)
GEORGE AINEER, SAUNDRA L.
RINEER, KAY E.
- RODGERS,
)
l l
1
r e
5, WILLIAM P.
RODGERS, SUSAN ROMAGNA, CHRISTOPHER
)
SAYEa, VICKI SCHOFIELD, PAT SGRIGNOLI, JOllN
)
SGRIGNOLI, SARA R.
SilENEl ELT, SUSAN S!!ETROM,
)
WILLI AM SiiETROM, CllESTER G.
SIVERLING, RITA M.
}"
SIVERLING, PATRICK M.
SLICK, GARY SMITil, MICHELI.E
)
SMITH, TOM SMITilG ALL, RUTil SOLOMON, JULIE A.
SPONG,)
RICilARD SPONG, GFUHGE TAl.EFF, JOi!N EDWARD TIIUMAS,
}
JOANN M.
- TOPOLSKI, C.
ANT!!ONY TOPOLSKI, STBFAN A.
)
TOPOLSKI, ANTONI N.
TOPOLSKI, MAREK F.
- TOPOLSKI,
)
MITCil TURNAUER, JANINE R.
ULLOM,.SfiARON VERBOS,
)
ROGER VERBOS, FRANCINE WOERTilWEIN,-DR. ROBERT
)
COLMAN and other persons similarly situated,
)
)
P lai nti f f s,
)
}
}
versus
}
}
}
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIONERS JOSEPH M.
HENDRIE,)
RICHARD T.
KENNEDY, JOHN AHEARNE,
)
VICTOR GILINSKY, PETER A.
- BRADFORD,
)
)
and METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, GENERAL PUBLIC
}
UTILITIES, ROBERT ARNOLD, HERMAN DIECKAMP, JOHN
)
- IIERBEIN,
)
}
Defendants.
}
)
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR CIVIL DAMAGES AND OTHER RELIEF I.
NATURE OF THE COMPLAINT This is an action seeking remedy for defendants' intentional violation of plaintiffs' constitutional rights and for defendants' i.ntentional infliction of potentially fatal amounts of radiation upon the persons and property of the named plaintiffs and other persons similarly situated, whose interests relevant to this action are represented by the organizational plaintiff, Three Mile-Island Alert, Inc.
The injuries complained of herein are of two kinds.
The first kind of injury suffered by plaintiffs was the violation of their constitutional rights, and the attendant emotional and mental distress they suffered, when defendants intentionally exposedthenamedplaintiffsandotherpersonssimilarlysituated]c{Il to radiation, so depriving them of life, liberty and property, c"*
without first having accorded them the process due all such
,a persons under the Constitution and laws of the United States.
The second kind of injury suffered by plaintiffs was the further emotional and mental distress, physical impact of radiation upon the cells of their bodies and of their decedent stillborn, contamination of their property, and expenses related to protective measures taken, when Strontium 90 and other radioactive waste materials were intentionally, unlawfully and unjustifiedly released into the environment from the Three Mile Island nuclear generating station, Unit 2 (TMI-2) in June and July of 1980.
That the Fifth Amendment of t'se Constitution implies a cause of action to remedy radiation injury inflicted by agents of the United States was explicitly recognized in Jaffee v.
United States, 48 U.S.L.W.
2586 (3rd Cir. 1980), vacated on other grounds en banc, 663 F.2d 1226 (1981), cert. den. 50 U.S.L.W.
3916 (May 17, 1982).
II.
JURISDICTION This action to redress the deprivation of life, liberty and property without due process of law arises under the Fif th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Jurisdictibn is conferred upon this Court by 28 U.S.C. S 1331.
I III.
, PLAIriIFFS A)
The organizational plaintift is THREE MILE ISLAND ALERT, INC.
(TMIA), a public interest orc.anization which ic open to participation by, and represents, all the people of the Three Mile Island area in seeking to protect the public from health and safety hazards caused by the TMI reactors.
TMIA was at all relevant times a member of two coalitions, the TMI Public Interest Resource Center and the TMI Legal Fund, whose staff acted on behalf of TMIA.
At the time of the events complained of.
herein and up to the date of this complaint,
.Jh {
TMIA, acting on behalf of all persons affected by the health and safety hazards..
of the TMI reactors, represented the interests of all such i.4a.
persons in seeking due process of law pricr to any release of radiation from TMI-2.
TMIA has represented the interestn of all such persons in Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) hearings concerning the Three Mile Island nuclear generating station,, Unit 1 (TMI-1). TMIA sues on behalf of itself and on behalf of the,
r.
persons it represents, tha pnople of Three Mile Island, who ware entitled to due process and were injured physically and I
psychologically by the release of radiation from TMI-2.
B) The individual plaintiffs are, designated class co-representatives LOUISE BRADFORD and i
MICHAEL KLINE, representing TMIA, and LEA!! DeROISTE, DONAL DeROISTE, KATliY McCAUGIIIN, KATIIERINE PICKERING, STEPl!EN PATTON, HOLLY S. KECK, T.A.
KECK III, ANNE MILLER, LAWRENCE MILLER, GAIL A.
HELilORN, MATi!EW MAGDA, SUZANNE MAGDA, CRAIG SIEWERT, JUANINE SPRAGUE, KEITH BENTZ, STEPilEN E.
BAKER, KAREN E. ADAMS, JOHN S. ADAMS, PATRICIA ANN TOMKINSON, KAREN LEE MILLER, MICHELLE SIEWERT, TIMOTHY J.
U LRICil, MARY 11. DOUGLAS, LAURA FREEDMAN, LYNN GOLDFARB, GERALD B.
B U R K !! O L D E R, PATRICIA BURK!f 0LDER, DORIS KESSLER, JACOB L.
SUSSKIND, IIELEN M.
- HOCKER, CHARLES L.
HOCKER, KATHLEEN BEVEL, MARVIN LEWIS; JOllN E. ACRI, GENE ALBRIGilT, TERRI L.
ALFRED G. BEVEL, VERA BORNE, PAUL BOWMAN, DONNA BOWMAN, AVA BRADY, CAROL BROOKS, EDITl! F.
BROWN, FRANCIS A.
Bl( O W N, PASCAL J.
CANTONA, JR.,
SANDRA CHOMA, MARGE CLEMENT, DR. ROBERT COLMAN, ELLEN COOGAN, RICilARD COOGAN, JOYCE CORRADI, MARIO A. CORRADI, PAT CUMMINS, DIANA DAVIS, LOIS DeHART, W.
SCOTT DeHART, Cl! ERIE A.
- DILLOW, G.
BENJAMIN DILLOW, FRANK E.
ENTERLINE, MARY KAY ENTERLINE, GIL FREEDMAN, GRACE GRANZOW, ROBERT GRANZOW,.,.
PATHICIA ANN GUFLER, M'LISS IfALSEY, D AN !! ARTN ETT, malty !!ARTNETT, JANET L. !!INTON, MARY ANN HOKE, ROBERP W.
HOKE, JACQUELINE I.
IluMPilR I ES-B ICK LEY, LAURIE K.
- KEIPER, R.
STEVEN KEIPER, MIKE
_4_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~
[
KLINGER, RANDY K.
KING, PAOLA KINNEY, THOMAS KINNEY, SANDRA L.
LERNER, JOEL M.
LERNER, ifARRY I.
MACillTA, PAUL A. MAKURATil, J1,,
LEROY T. MILBOURN, AMELIA MILLER, GARY MITCllELL, SUSAN LANNAN t
MITCHELL, EVELYN MUGRIDGE, JEFF MUGRIDGE, CAT!!IE MUSSER, JAMES A.
MUSSER, DORIS McCORMICK, MICilAEL J,.
NEMSER, PAT NEMSER, PAULA NEMSER, ANNE NISSON, MARY OSBORNE, BILLIE J.
PRESCOTT, STEPIIEN M.
PRESCOTT, MARY REYNOLDS, GEORGE RINEER, SAUNDRA L. RINEER, KAY. E.
RODGERS, WILLIAM P.
RODGERS, SUSAN ROMAGNA, CHRISTOPiiER SAYERi' VICKI SCHOFIELD, PAT SGRIGNOLI, JOIIN SGRIGNOLI, SARA R.
SllENEFELT, SUSAN SilETROM, WILLIAM SHETROM, Cl! ESTER G. SIVERLING, RITA M. SIVERLING, PATRICK M.
SLICK, GARY SMITH, MICIIELLE SMITil, TOM SMITilGALL, RUTH SOLOMON, JULIE A. SPONG, RICHARD SPONG, GEORGE TALEFF, JOHN EDWARD THOMAS, JOANN M. TOPOLSKI, E.
ANTHONY TOPOLSKI, STEFAN A.
TOPOLSKI, ANTONI N.
TOPOLSKI, MAREK F.
TOPOLSKI, MITCH TURNAUER, JANINE R. ULLOM, ShARON VERBOS, ROGER VERBOS, and FRANCINE WOERTHWEIN.
C) " Class Action Allegations" The class of the above-named plaintiffs and all other persons similarly situated to them are all persons who were exposed to damaging radiation intentionally released from TMI-2, or who incurred expenses or restrictions on their liberty in avoiding such exposure, or whose property was contaminated byf such radiation.
This class of persons, comprising many thousands, is too numerous for joinder to be practicable because the radiation from the TMI-2 partial melt-down was dispersed broadly into the atmosphere and onto the soil where it entered the food chain.
Questions of law concerning the liability and
-S-l
immunities of the defendants and questions of fact concerning exposures and health effects caused by the intentional release of radiation from TMI-2 are common to the whole class.
The claims of the designated class co-representatives, persons who represent TMIA, and the other named plaintiffs who were entitled to due process and were exposed to radiation intentionally released from TMI-2 are typical of the claims of the class insofar as the grounds for liability and the nature of the damages.
Each member of the class suffered the same denial of procedural due process;-
and considerations of exemplary damages are common tothewhole.i).f; class. These predominant, common issues of law and fact justify maintenance of this suit as a class action under Fed.
R.
Civ.
P.'"*
Rule 23 (b)(3).
IV.
t DEFENDANTS A)
The federal defendants are:
1)
JOSEPH M.
IIENDRIE Brookhaven National Laboratory Building 475 Upton, New York 11973; 2)
RICHARD T.
KENNEDY Under-Secretary of State for Management U.S.
Department of State Washington, D.C.;
3)
JO!!N AHEARNE,
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555; 4)
VICTOR GILINSKY Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555; and 5)
PETER A.
BRADFORD Public Utilities Commission State House Suite I 112 Augusta, Maine 04333, the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission who unlawfully authorized the release of radiation which resulted in i
~-
depriving plaintiffs of life, liberty and property without due process of law.
These defendants were informed of the health consequences of their act before it was committed.
These defendants also had knowledge of the illegality of their act.
These defendants intentionally, willfully and in bad faith deprived plaintiffs of their constitutional rights.
B)
The private defendants are:
l' 1)
The following corporate defendants:
a)
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, 2800 Pottsville 4 '
' Pike, Box 542, Reading, Pennsylvania 19640, part owner and licensee of the TMI reactors which executed the release of
. radiation that was unlawfully authorized by the federal defendants; and si.i
- t *.
i h;.s.
lli'{.
'..i.-
3 '!
b)
GENEllAL PUBLIC UTILITIES COltPORATION, 100 Interpace Parkway, Parsippany, New Jersey 07054, the parent company of defendant Metropolitan Edison Company; and 2)
The following individual defendants:
a)
ROBERT ARNOLD, 100 Interpace Parkway, Parsippany, New Jersey 07054, at the time of the events complained of herein, Senior Vice President of defendant Metropolitan Edison Company.
b)
HERMAN DIECKAMP, 100 Interpace Parkway, Parsippany, New Jersey 07054, the President of defendant General Public Utilities Corporation; and c)
JOHN HERBEIN, Pennsylvania Electric Company,1001 Broad St., Johnstown, Pennsylvania 15970, at the time of the events complained of herein, Vice President Nuclear Operations of defendant Metropolitan Edison Company.
V.
STATEMENT OF THE CLAIM A. Procedural Claim 1.)
On March 28, 1979 the Three Mile Island, Unit 2 (TMI-2) nuclear power plant in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania suffered a partial core melt-down.
This serious malfunction of the TMI-2
, reactor caused the escape of lethal amounts of Strontium 90 and other radioactive materials from the reactor core into the containment building.
The containment building serves to isolate..
_______________-a
f from the environment any such radioactive materials that might i
escape from the reactor.
I 2.)
To restore TMI-2 to operation, the corporate defendants sought to make repairs which could not be cheaply undertaken while radioactive particulates and gases resulting from the partial melt-down remained in the air of the containment building.
The two corporate defendants consequently determined to take the cheapest and fastest first step for returning TMI-2 to operation, which was the venting of the airborne radioactive I
materials from the TMI-2 containment building into the environment where it would expose the persons and property of the named plaintiffs and other persons similarly situated.
3.)
The radioactive materials present in the containment build-ing as a result of the partial melt-down of TMI-2 could not be de-liberately released into the environment without authorization from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, in a decision that has the effect of res judicata here, entered a declaratory judgment that the NRC could not lawfully authorize the release of these radioactive materials from the disabled TMI-2 nuclear reactor without first providing an opportunity for a requested hearing.
Sholly v.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 651 F.2d 780 (1980), cert. granted on a related issue, 451 U.S.
1016 (1981).
l l !
t
4.)
Though persons representing plaintiffs duly requested both public notice and hearing prior to release of the radioactive waste materials from the TMI-2 containment building, the NRC
, refused to provide plaintiffs the opportunity for such a
-requested hearing prior to the release of these materials into a. u.
1 ir the environment.
l [! "
Specifically, culminating a series of requests
~
from a number of persons, Steven Sholly and Donald E.
Hossler docketed with the NRC on June 27, 1980 a " Formal Demand For an Adjudicatory Hearing Prior to Venting Radioactive Gases from Three Mile Island Unit 2," stating "that they represent persons whose interests may be affected by the proceeding to permit venting radioactive materials from the TMI-2 containment without a hearing."
The release of the airborne radioactive material from TMI-2 took place from June 28 to July 11, 1980 The Court of Appeals held that this release of radioactive materials present in the TMI-2 containment building prior to holding a hearing violated the procedural rights of plaintiffs' representatives.
Sholly, supra.
5.)
The radioactive materials released from TMI-2 in violation of plaintiffs' procedural rights has inflicted physical injury from the impact of radiation upon their bodily cells, which has caused fetal deaths, and cancers and genetic deformations which will result in death in a number of them and their descendants.
Plaintiffs' reasonable fear of these injuries caused mental and emotional stress, as well as the expense and infringement upon the liberty of movement of those who took protective measures for themselves and their families to escape injury..
.6.)
The NRC Commissioners' unlawful authorization of the
'~
intentional release of fatal and injurious quantities of fradicactive materials without first providing to plaintiffs wt
,' notice and the cpportimity for a hearing deprived plaintiffs of' life, liberty and property without according to them the procedural due process required by law. I B. Substantive-Claim 7.) Defendants' release of radiation into the environment where it exposed plaintiffs to, radiation injury and death:'was substantively unjustified. Defendants.are charged by'the NRC's own regulations to keep releases of radiation as.[ow as is reasonably achievable. Defendants had several practical alternatives for removing the airborne radioactive waste materials from the TMI-2 containment building by means that would shave substantially isolated the airborne radioactive materials in 'TMI-2 from the environment and thereby have avoided causing death and injury to plaintiffs and their descendants. 8.) If the.*equested administrative hearing required by law had been held, thereby-subjecting defendants' plan to release dangerous amounts of radioactive materials into the environment ,to the safegu. teds and standards of the Administrative Procedure Act and review by the Court of Appeals, the outcome of the proceeding would not have been a decision to release the radioactive material into the environment. Instead, the mandate that releases of_ radiation be kept as low as reasonably,
~ I achievable would have required the implementation of one of the available alternative means for dpcontaminating the air in the TMI-2 containment building. 9.) The release of radioactive materials from TMI-2 without a prior hearing damaged plaintiffs by causing 1) physical i n ju.ry through exposure to penetrating radiation, 2) emotional and mental distress, 3) contamination of their property, and 4) expenses and loss of liberty related to taking necessary protective measures. C.) Conspiracy Claim 10.) Plaintiffs reallege paragraphs 1 through 9. The private defendants conspired with the defendant NRC Commissioners to deny the plaintiffs' procedural right to due process and substantive right not to be unlawfully, unjustifiedly and intentionally e:: posed to injurious levels of radiation. 11.) The private defendants and the defendant NRC Commissioners D.
- oined together in a common commitment to promote the private business profits of the corporate defendants,.at the expense.of s n-li'-
violating the plaintiffs' interests in keeping their exposure to radiation as low as is reasonably achievable. 12.) As a means for obtaining this illegal objective the private defendants and the defendant NRC Commissioners sought in common to deny plaintiffs and other persons similarly situated their right to due process prior to the release of radiation from .' 1, ~ ' TMI-2. They refused numerous requests to delay the release of radiation until due process was afforded although there was no urgent reason for expedition; they forced plaintiffs' representatives to sue in federal court to obtain an order declaring illegal defendants' release of radiation without a prior requested hearing; they intervened in those proceedings to oppose these representatives' demands for notice and hearing prior to venting and in the midst of litigation they ordered the venting schedule accelerated in an effort to moot the proceedings which ultimately resulted in a declaration that the NRC Commissioners' denial of a hearing was clearly illegal. D. Exemplary Claim 13.) Defendants knew that plaintiffs were entitled to notice and opportunity for a hearing prior to authorizing the release of injurious amounts of radiation from an NRC-regulated facility into the environment.
- 14) Defendants knew that there was no good faith reason why they could not delay decontamination of the TMI-2 containment building until after due process could be accorded those persons who would be injured by the defendants' decision to release radioactive materials into the environment.
15.) Defendants knew that application of the "as low as reasonably achievable" standard in an adjudicatory proceeding would not permit the release of radioactive materials from TMI-2 I .. ~ into the environment because practical safer alternatives for decontaminating the TMI-2 containment building were available. 16.) Defendants knew that a hearing on the decision to release radioactive materials from TMI-2 would have foreclosed venting -- the cheapest and most dangerous means of decontaminating TMI-2 of airborne radioactive materials resulting from the partial melt-down -- because such a hearing would have shown that venting would constitute a significant health hazard. 17.) Defendants knew that releasing the radioactive materials from the TMI-2 containment building into the environment would expose the persons and property of plaintiffs to penetrating radiation, causing great risk of cancer and genetic damage to them and their descendants, and would severely distress them. 18.) Defendants willfully and recklessly disregarded these risks when they authorized release of injurious quantities of radiation from TMI-2 into the environment. As a consequence defendants have caused plaintiffs severe mental and emotional distress, and injuries that will be responsible for the death of a number of ,, plaintiffs and their descendants. 4,.. i i J. . O'1. c I I VI. DEMAND FOR JUDGMENT A) Plaintiffs request judgment against defendants in the form of monetary relief for the violation of their constitutional right to due p;ocess. B) Each plaintiff requests judgment against defendants in the form of monetary relief to compensate the actual damage of mental and emotional injuries caused by violation of his or her constitutional right to due process. C) Each plaintiff requests judgment against defendants in the form of monetary relief for the consequential damages caused by defendants' intentional unjustified exposure of plaintiffs to the radioactive wastes from the TMI-2 accident. D) Plaintiffs request judgment against defendants for punitive damages to be paid into a fund to be administered by the organizational plaintiff, Three Mile Island Alert, Inc. on behalf of the named plaintiffs and all other persons similarly situated I l who were intentionally exposed to radiation in amounts that will cause deaths, cancer and crippling injuries to a number of persons among them and their descendants, such funds to be used to ameliorate those injuries and guard against any future such injuries. l .}}