ML20070M148
| ML20070M148 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 01/07/1983 |
| From: | Hiatt S OHIO CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE ENERGY |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8301120321 | |
| Download: ML20070M148 (4) | |
Text
.
N*
a
~
. r,a l
- ht*Kh C
NC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Li$ensing BbrgAN 10 41:23 i-
)
J Ni C." H CEiW'
,u.:.ij,'In the Matter of
)
e
./, h,,.n.
00u.i. ipa;& SEiwicE bLEVELANDELECTRICILLUMINATING
)
D'ocket Nos. 50 M "
'.','N: y.,f.,}[,.'$. ;.' COMPANY, Et A1. f
)
50-441
..nd*N
)
(Operating License) i Ofi.'. I[I.'![k.e,..
...k 'Ef,(-Per'ry' Nuclear Power Plant,
)
)
- M.dde..[".) Units 1.and2)
)
,.,.9.e -
r..
n,e ;d;b i h:(.
h,~.
..f!j MOTION FOR CIARIFICATION OF THE LICENSING BOARD'S
,'/.g.n f!]</.: i.h JANUARY 4, 1983 MEMORANDIN AND ORDER
. R;*,,;4
- (-
u
. 7,:
On ' January 4,1983, the Licensing Board entered a Memorandum and order
,[
denying Intervenor Sunflower'A111ance's motion for 'a stay of this proceeding pending' judicial review of the Commission's. Statement of Policy concerning psychological stress issues. This denial was based on the Board's finding that Sunflower ss not demonstrated that, lacking a stay, it would suffer irreparable injury (the second of the four criteria cited by Sunflower, which are identical to thefactor's.listedby10CFR2.788(e)).$Ohio Citizens for Responsible Energy
("OCRE"): belie'ves that the Board has only considered the most optimistic circum-
.=.s
'stanceslin. reaching that decision. Less favorable circumstances could indeed
.;g result in irreparable harm to intervenors.
Speci{icall t$e oard states that these proceedings are months from their
- 9 conclusion.: This is true; however, there are no environmental issues to be liti-gated pursua'nt to the National Environmental Policy Act ("NPA") and 10 CFR Part 51.
_1,j OCRE would note here, for the record, its belief that Sunflower in its motion for a. stay has made a positive showing on the other three factors of 10 CFR 2.788(e).
8301120321 830107 PDR ADOCK 05000440
s, - ~~
The Licensing Board's December 30, 1982 Memorandum and Order, which granted summary disposition of Issues 11 and 12, can be construed as terminating the Board's jurisdiction over NEPA issues. This interpretation is supported by the statement, at p. 4 of that Memorandum and Order, that "the only power the Board has to alter the FES is through its adjudicative powers. Having concluded'that Issue }12 must be summarily dismissed, we therefore lack the power to order any further clarification in the document."
'The Appeal Board has stated that, when the Board's jurisdiction is terminated on all but a few issues [as might be the case in this proceeding when the Court of Appeals reaches its decision in Sunflower's action), the Board should not en-tertain new or reopened issues even when there are supervening developments, since 1
the Board has no jurisdiction to consider such matters. Instead, the only recourse intervenors have is to file a petition under 10 CFR 2.206. Public Service Company of New Hampshire, (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2), AIAB-513, 8 NRC 694 (1978).
Even this remedy may be precluded, since the Commission's Statement of Policy specifically prohibits the consideration of 10 CFR 2.206 petitions alleging psychological stress effects, while Sunflower's Petition for Review before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals pertains only to that policy statement's effect of
" prohibiting Atomic Safety and Licensing Boardtfrom hearing questions on psychological stress..."
Even when jurisdiction has been retained, the proponent of a motion to reopen the record faces a formidable burden. The motion must not only be timely, but it must also address "significant" safety or environmental issues which, had they been considered initially, might have caused a different result to have been reached.
Kansas Gas and Electric Co. (Wolf Creek Station, Unit 1), AIAB-462, 7 NRC 320, 338 (1978). The latter points are obviously open to considerable subjective interpretation, l
l
=-
., e i
~.
i d
/
~ which OCRE suspects, given the parochial attitudes of certain parties to this proceeding, may not be favorable to the intervenors' (and public) interests.
For these reasons, OCRE respectfully requests that the Licensing Board
. clarify its January 4,1983 Memorandum and order such that:
', 1.
the Board' retains jurisdiction over NEPA issues in this proceeding until the
' judicial proceedings involving the psychological stress question in the Si:xth Circuit Court of Appeals are resolved; and
_2.
intervenors may, without prejudice, resubmit Issue #10 (or.any modification l
of same) in this proceeding after a decision favorable to the litigation of l
psychological stress issues has been reached by the Court of Appeals.
3 l
Respectfully submitted, Susah' L. 'ifiatt OCRE Representative 8275 Munson Rd.
Mentor, OH 44060 (216) 255-3158 e
{
9 9
e
=
n cga,,., -
001.KETED
'"itPC CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
,j This is to certify that copies of the foregoing MOTION FOR OgRIg(Jq$0$1DsE3
... -THE LICENSING BOARD'S JANUARY 4,1983 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER vere served by deposit lc U in the U.S. Mail, first class, postage prepaid, this 7th day of January,1983 tp.
'}qrg.1.:f).thoseonthe';servicelistbelow.
'ffjh,f(( NICE T
BRANCH
.c,:a.y,.~
. 'c. ML ti. e
.r
.&.w.
"Nqr:-
. s.,
&W
. ;.ty.';i :..;.:lg.3 tW
~
~
.n W,
9.'s,@q 7Iri'!~;j;yN.,
f Susan L. Hiatt
'~'
Qiff
.w. J..;:. u. - :
u:
i?:f. !l.%*gfy. &.
l 1
2-**.'f
~K.
v~~
> b:;
E,w.
- .s.u;211..),,. P '..
.;fy Qg:7h;:
. SERVICE LIST
-.:,g p2,, y.7 m
~,
- r *;j.g u. ' Peter?B. ' Bl'och, Chairman Daniel D. Wilt, Esq.
Atomic Safety & Licensing Board P.O. Box 08159 4,
U.S.: Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n Cleveland, OH MlO8 Washington, D.C.
20555 g.
Dr. Jerry.R,.Kline Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S... Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n Washington, D.C.
20555
..rt 3
Mr. Glenn O. Bright Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S.. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n Washington, D.C.
20555
..m Docketing & Service Section Office of the Secretary i
U.S'.INuclear Regulatory Comm'n Washington, D.C.
20555'
.a.
JJames M. Cutchin, Exec, utive IV Esq.
Office of the Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n
- .w Jay Silberg, Esq.
1800.'M Street. N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 l
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
'+
~**
L
- %l 6
.