ML20108F177
| ML20108F177 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 03/08/1985 |
| From: | Wetterhahn M CONNER & WETTERHAHN, PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC |
| To: | NRC |
| References | |
| CON-#185-971 OL, NUDOCS 8503120352 | |
| Download: ML20108F177 (8) | |
Text
.
i i
0%ETED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'85 Paq 11 A70:55 Before the Commission ~
In the Matter of
);
CFFICf)0F SECRE7Aay 00CKEI NG & SERV!re
}
Philadelphia Electric Company
)
Docket 50-3b2 dC
)*
50-353 oL (Limerick Generating Station,
)
'O,, M D Units 1 and 2)
)
's U
~ ~ -- --..._. %
APPLICANT'S ANSWER TO GRATERFORD PRISONERS' PETICION FOR REVIEW Seventeen identified prisoners have been admitted as a consolidated party to the captioned proceeding under the collective group designated as the Graterford Prisoners.1!
The Graterford Prisoners seek review. of a Memorandum and Order entered by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board
(" Appeal Board") on February 12, 1985.
That order dismissed without prejudice a
petition filed by the Graterford Prisoners that sought directed certification of a Memorandum and order entered by the Atomic Safety and I
Licensing Board
(" Licensing Board") on February 5, 1985.
The Licensing Board had ruled that the Graterford Prisoners were not entitled to full disclosure of the plan 1/
Philadelphia Electric Company (Limerick Generating
~
- Station, I' nits 1 and 2), LBP-82-43A, 15 NRC 1423, 1447 (1982).
-2/
- Limerick, supra,
" Memorandum and Order Regarding Graterford Prison" (February 5, 1985).
9 8503120352 B50300 PDR ADOCK 05000352 l
.O PDR t
. b for evacuating the Graterford Prison and for taking other protective action in the event of a radiological emergency at the Limerick Generating Station
(" Limerick"), which had previously been released in a sanitized form.
The Board ruled that, despite repeated directives to specify informa-tion allegedly needed by the Graterford Prisoners to formu-late and litigate their contentions, beyond that which was disclosed in the sanitized version of the plan, they had not done so.
.The Board further ruled that security concerns outweighed the interest of the Graterford Prisoners in obtaining further disclosure of the plan.
The Appeal Board denied certification of that discovery order, holding that the Licensing Board's order did not meet the standard for obtaining interlocutory review and that the intervenor had not yet exhausted its remedies before the Licensing Board.
Nonetheless, the Board encouraged the parties, with the assistance of the Licensing Board, to attempt to find some middle ground that would accommodate the competing interests at stake.
It noted that a protec-tive order could be drafted to limit time and place of access to sensitive information.M The Graterford Prisoners then filed the instant petition for review.
f 3/
Limerick, supra, " Memorandum and Order" (February 12, 1985) (slip op. at 2).
4/
Id. at 3.
v.
The petition should be dismissed for three reasons.
First, the Commission's rules expressly exclude Commission review of "a decision or action on a referral or certifica-
- 2. 7 3 0 ( f). " 5_/
Accordingly, no tion under SS2. 718 (i) or Commission review may be obtained on this matter until the Appeal Board is vested with jurisdiction over a
- final, appealable order issued by the Licensing Board with respect to the Graterford plan.
- Second, the Licensing Board's discovery order which precipitated the appeal is now moot.
On February 27, 1985, the Licensing Board convened a
conference attended by counsel for the Graterford Prisoners, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (including Acting Commissioner Glen R.
Je f fes), the NRC and Applicant to discuss fuller disclosure of the Graterford plan under a protective order.
Significant progress was
- made, including a commit.nent by the Department of Cor-rections to release certain portions of the plan under protective order identified by counsel for the Graterford i
Prisoners as critical to their contentions. !
Another t
5/
6/
A more complete description of the precise undertakings cannot be made in the public record because the transcript has been placed under seal.
See Limerick, i
- supra,
" Memorandum and Order (Conference on Full Disclosure of Evacuation Plan for the Graterford Maximum Security Facility) " (February 19, 1985)
(slip (Footnote Continued) l l
1,
conference has been scheduled for March 22, 1985, following review of the newly disclosed portions of the plan by counsel and appropriate representatives of the parties.1/
j-Third, even assuming the Commission were to review the t
j Licensing. Board's discovery order which prompted this appeal, there'has been no showing that the Board abused its i
discretion.
The.only issue at this point-is whether public-
- ly available documents exist which reasonably enable the i
]
Graterford Prisoners to formulate proposed contentions.-
Cf.
~
Duke Power Company (Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2),
CLI-83-19, 17 NRC 1041, 1045, 1048- (1983).
Clearly, they 1
j have received sufficient-information from the previously i
j released, sanitized plan to do so, because the - Prisoners have proposed several contentions relating to transportation i
i l-(Footnote Continued) op. at 2).
Counsel for Applicant has read the contents i
of this pleading describing the' conference 'to counsel for the Department of Corrections, who stated that he l
has no objection to the public disclosure of this information.
1-l
' 7/
At the time of the conference, the NRC staff offered a proposed form of protective order and affidavit of nondisclosure for consideration. by the Board' and
-parties.
Objections ' to the form of those documents were due March 4,
~ 1985.
Applicant-nuggested minor changes.
On March 6, 1984, Staff counsel submitted : a redraft of the _ proposed form of protective order and
-y affidavit' 'which' reflects the Staff's and Applicant's changes.-
No objections from other parties has - been reported to or received by Applicant's. counsel.
l l
a ^ m*-m m-.
m
--e--,-
9-4--v*T+ 1rw
+-+y
+ga q
e-y+ - -
,,y.g-w y--,a7m
-py-,
g pw4%
-+
g y
-ymt---*gy-r"*
r*'9w-
4 for an evacuation, sheltering, communications, radiological monitoring and supplies, and other matters.8/
The Licensing Board has not yet determined, however, that the Graterford Prisoners have filed at least one admissible contention.
It is therefore premature to decide what further disclosures, if any, to which the Graterford Prisoners would be entitled in order to litigate any admit-ted contention (s).
For the reasons discussed
- above, the petition for review should be denied.
Respectfully submitted, CONNER & WETTERHAHN, P.C.
Mark J. Wetterhahn Robert M. Rader Counsel for the Applicant March 8, 1985 i
8/
See Proposed Contentions of the' Graterford Inmates with
~
Regard to the Evacuation Plan (February 15, 1985).
_v 4
Ii UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
^
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In'the Matter of
)
)
Philadelphia Electric Company
)
Docket Nos. 50-352
)
50-353 (Limerick Generating Station,
)-
Units 1 and 2)
)
i CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1
I hereby certify that copies of " Applicant's Answer to Graterford Prisoners' Petition. for Review," dated March 8,,.
1985 in the captioned matter have been served upon the following by deposit in the United-States mail this 8th day j
of March, 1985:
1 Helen F. Hoyt, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing j
Chairperson Appeal Panel Atomic Safety and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Licensing Board Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Washington, D.C.
20555 Commission Washington,ED.C.
20555 Docketing and Service Section Dr. Richard F. Cole U.S. Nuclear Regulatory l
Atomic Safety and' Commission-Licensing Board Washington, D.C.
20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ann P. Hodgdon, Esq.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Counsel for NRC Staff Office of the Executive j
Dr. Jerry Harbour
, Legal Di_ector Atomic' Safety and.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Licensing Board Commission i
U.S.. Nuclear Regulatory Washington, D.C.
20555 Commission l
Washington, D.C.
20555 4
4 I
i 4
m...
> 4 Atomic Safety and Licensing Angus Love, Esq.
Board Panel 107 East Main Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Norristown, PA 19401 Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Robert J. Sugarman, Esq.
Sugarman, Denworth &
Philadelphia Electric Company Hellegers ATTN:
Edward G. Bauer, Jr.
16th Floor, Center Plaza Vice President &
101 North Broad Street General Counsel Philadelphia, PA 19107 2301 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19101 John L. Patten, Director Pennsylvania Emergency Mr. Frank R. Romano Management Agency 61 Forest Avenue Room B-151 Ambler, Pennsylvania 19002 Transportation and Safety Building Mr. Robert L. Anthony Harrisburg, PA 17120 Friends of the Earth in the Delaware Valley Martha W.
Bush, Esq.
106 Vernon Lane, Box 186 Kathryn S. Lewis, Esq.
Moylan, PA 19065 City of Philadelphia Municipal Services Bldg.
Charles W. Elliott, Esq.
15th and JFK Blvd.
325 N.
10th Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 Easton, PA 18064 Spence W.
Perry, Esq.
Miss Phyllis Zitzer Associate General Counsel Limerick Ecciogy Action Federal Emergency P.O. Box 761 Management Agency 762 Queen Street 500 C Street, S.W.
Pottstown, PA 19464 Room 840 Washington, DC 20472 Zori G. Ferkin, Esq.
Assistant Counsel Thomas Gerusky, Director Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Bureau of Radiation Governor's Energy Council Protection 1625 N. Front Street Department of Environmental Harrisburg, PA 17102 Resources 5th Floor Jay M. Gutierrez, Esq.
Fulton Bank Bldg.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Third and Locust Streets Commission Harrisburg, PA 17120 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 l
l l
L
James Wiggins Senior -Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 47 Sanatoga, PA 19464 Timothy R.S. Campbell Director Department of Emergency Services 14 East Biddle Street West Chester, PA 19380 Mr. Ralph Hippert Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency B151 - Transportation and Safety Building Harrisburg, PA 17120 Theodore G. Otto, Esq.
Department of Corrections Office of Chief Counsel P.O. Box 598 Camp Hill, PA 17011
}t
?
Robert M. Rader
)
i s
l l
t