ML20115B279
| ML20115B279 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 01/03/1967 |
| From: | Mccool W US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML093631134 | List:
|
| References | |
| AEC-R-135-6, NUDOCS 9210150378 | |
| Download: ML20115B279 (2) | |
Text
r-
_____-__.n.--_+-__-.
x.
.I,,
.i +-[* ;; a;.
- O
.(. h.r t.
4 9 c._- 7( n' Id,,s w.a. 9 h [. g g' h i h*
7
-C y
- w.q
,..,, s.,
_ A4fdgpdh_w$Nh.38_
.O 9 N.",7RM$O MMGbd%@kOI!M*AU5MiMhh!g
_h 8
J
'{ dD
Wf *. ~
4 Nk[****
Q
- d,efy
[Qg Nu[gIQ, ca s %'g.,
" $U dg g Abj,4;. g *
..Y&g%%fW57"f n'1NM5>483h"Q:Qg[$?id l
w $9
&.T.gshd X
M..'
- n:p'p N,4,5 rup@t #
% 5 a % ;? $g % g %f. Q h
FiC'i 4 g @gdnuar(^37..I
_. ; p.;
M y
r -Qfh.
4 3 s
a
~
M
%F, h*.
4 N
&g %:... g,. y we Mi y
. g
, a ~ff{h.pf,. l h;
/
.;AT
~
S'I
.g
- r., c.
vW;g M*
47, k-,p w>
t r 1 iti
- 4 b.f.v.Mhh 3 [g'hW'WINDJ_AN tPOINT12)p-4DOctGT+NOp30-M].
P CONScr.tnAT t
ON. 00btP e
b i
'is
%d c
M~Ox,M IW
~
UMEMORANDUMD DQhun ya. W. v.nM !,
M A
rw
+_
v i
w.
..e w.
'M Nye~ %;9 a
M,.L
%g g? %
%* QyrS W< *L' - -
w ydd+i la.
c.w p*%..f3 4.W ^'
k
'Qe r
s ~
.. l L :;.. p-
'1e sit
~ Nem;or,ar'd
. het.@'
.At ep.
Ort,er, '
-mxw,
n v
p s e; ff -
,jd.
!DE Si tM o
f g
m 4
i o
4:
Esti' S
r p.- V g
m -n cx
.. (F y.
ar m agd a
m m
p:qp g ;ie Q,
' g.@6
~
/
! w nth h;^ j
.x#y0,cssya_y e
nsw P1
- 4
.),m.,
ga mr a
1 s
m v
l r
pplicarr':1 a ed+'a.6 s )
h; d. m
-. enh m&+9 =
- T tM.
gr
- v - %
pec6"y~
$ f ('Q%.
ge..
Q7
..j-
- +*H INI %, k k N k M h$ $$$f$h w [ M $ $ !I N 4
j M
R[y M
LlThk%$h$W$$t WINN NfY c + % g, w& % $ ' k $kl &m q$ h{%secte
&shpu$f$Yf ~uy&s&s
=mp aa f
&SWk
&p;h?f$Wh fa2
, k.B&gg$Ay%m}Q g&pf.&,0 f
%Q98Ms%
2
]W W2 ViQt$... g.
liQq ;0fY- ~,y WW$
v
.,w
,.s.~
.- w
_..~TDISTRIBUTION
. @$, Tb COPY. Nor'[o -o....[%%.,,
...e-
}'
a TEM, oT t WY4piK%sW2%g (ffwgg' skis 5U62ugm?ip(e#w@; dQ;p,$:w
.p5Ehjjf4dshphWy%'2dS.
f%$
p
[
r
-:llSecretaryty-pgsj@he e
T.
2 ID#DA M ss_lonegsfj d'd @ug-gM3f63%Q pphjg 1.Q@%y4hC.yg g.fBf4 J -fp.erdl?'anagerf$g$:%j?ig;ty WRlSh%q y E;
- b..^;
AidIfof:-RegGlat'lon GED:{;W^19 ttV)lt. X2Hgis$
AS'g Q3?hgy?siv%Q yJ,yi.d.
)
4:
10 -"19 4 gyR,%QrQJQ'i?jy 213i%d%3,;/ra EN VR.
JIDeputp'Did.sof.* Regulation M
.d
% 3 50. M TO '@ !', GiQ3( E P 14kMf%-
"'d M'i b
E.MAsst. Geh? Mgth
- m b. N :
^ Exec 7 'As s t.? to :OM '"-
l' u %%. T -
i
~ "~.As s t. GM f or'. Admin ~. ' f
'G 16'b W3
. $Asdt},,GM.*for :Operatibiih ~ (fh.117/$Qk' 7 $;y g%$M Ldjb'$.x
~1
-F i
4
,~Asat'. 0M 'f or".Reac tora % '
.18 WM:MY
- is t &P a.J ~
r f
-) Asst.~.to;GM @d@@i
.g.. m.19 4 % 'i
,,,,4
..M4 -d"
~
'L JGeneral!. Counsel l'; #;.;_
- 20
';2W
~
~ ' ',.
^ 7 Co=plianeeEX"#
' ' 2f> '" ~3D 9210150 m 920500 4.3Congr.]Relatilbui-iM%r.'y J.32.'-$331 PDR ORG NRCH T
t i
~ J 7InspeetionTh$6. Ms.'.Cr i:.m 23h9G';%
~ ' q,. wr&. b..
.%iterials~Licensi.. &
%= wumm ngJ A ~. '.7 3,,5 +--J.S.,654%_.* WWW l 6 ~
A.
,, g o u: d
- c. A r%.
l m
r g.g, g, >,s;
. z-z
~ ~ n
- o.,;,.
,g..
~e a; ~
n g
a.
Fyr s.
g 4e w.at
.e
~ '~~
y;Y
?
4 }L.
3 p
?
s
- K 9-p l'; s 1
5 1
I t
.50 hr:. -
j[U}
L
$T?il...
- y.. :
6
%.i'kl G
fA...,
k12 $.;6:
.JCOFL k
7 N
a
~-
5.filf :.@ F M asion d5{
- 1)..
}
PL:
l
.m n
b" gggt tifneMa g-g -Q PJ,;g %CtW$[3 2 - J5'%[*<
iff 79 TOf d
- ?;
On 4[1 k-N,A $
s'w 4.,
K 7 4 [fdExsd.iAss bjtol;DM'F F
- 9 T 3 5
~ ApWA3-%f E.Q;MS
- ~
[ij yJ$y3ASN(I Tor;Admi@ ivy,Tl{f{~$6
- 51. dMi^l "
M
-i t-T.+-usstr;.ox'r&%peral.1~Oh8d: ej Jgf '
E.f M
MZO 5~
~
L
,f $
k.($b.O.N. ~ l f'hN!hf:u ri, ~ "f" h' 9 eact urh v> w -
,. 8 % o
~
'~
1
[~
?
h
..v g Generd1 %cun.
E!,;gi;,,4.N---
o 13 4 %
9
"..s.
'j": F 7C5inpliai2ce.
3.5.T[ff6?,6rs.;261.MT 9210150378 920520
- ~ *I,,A #'0[h C M l7.5 M (J
M PDR ORG
.NRCHIST
-bNNbI
@ hbEu u t N d M $b$if
,--g
=;
-~=--n-w q,,
a I
f.4*h't
.5 Y9
J '.s].\\
W92 J(R x
'TsA%;@,f4y_4
'-. d W." 3 k h,,. s m'#att',
.y 8
8 h'4 ' 4
. e.; %,i I*
r t
tMemoraneum ana o.rder kEl&5l%
cror' h. ziatormattorr Z
.$ 4 ;2 R -
^l '
. NSMQ
. ?&h E ?NS commissa.o$Q'R~
4Y
=
n..-
e a
e
, /
.,M gy.
- %- }
& 4-.m. p % a.f. $. p $, \\.. ~
q.
4 7 h L'
b
% ;i
,@j
.gM
$ge.h4$
@wp
.p r _
,2
.' c' ' Q,
'~
'\\
O 8.m ':
>. - a v l w. -
.r a p.e
..}:/,:]g g T( p%4.-} p;g.
I e
.y o.
e s.
y j.pp,;g ;
M.
p e
g Q ?g.r.
L';p g1g g
,~
y w$ H - W e # N h $ e+f,y K.jp -
p.y' g.
- Q 5 4.M '
M ww
.f.. p.
a s.g--e., w w w ~.g. g g..
Y.
~
4 f
+p.4. $44'\\
. (,
. f...
s,
','}
"a
- 1,
.x.i i
?.'
k,k A, -
3 t
4.-t ;$ '.Ai
$. %... y, gg.f.
% o. b. h.-,
/j:
i J.p:W n..
.. gt, p',.
. w i,s ipresese*
, f 2 5.
is
.a v,.. c..'... '..
s
+
} r -T',*.,....% m r
.. ['f 4 - h8'
- p. p p
.g i
..s.
p.. ' ",;..m. 3 t
.J{.,
7..
- ..q
..+
e.
y
(
,N? h.. p
..- 7. c. -
,s
' c..
s x. -. p.,t. g :.
7 '.
' l g'.
.e.
r,.
g
- )
EF l: ' '
1'
.,J %..~;. ;,
L' i _.
q q.
k,g lI' p$lj.& T '.'',N:
' ~
4
' 's - - Q.
- r. e-
^ f.h;M '. - - '
~l+
-?. w
$h.
/
X (,.
' ^
..
- M ' ".J. ' ' S [t.
3 cf. > at ':
.~t--
'~.,'t-
%.,d{.;...
+m:. l ?([ E l ij ' 0. m <k;. 'k
(
".;, l.
- *f.w.
- f
.Q ih a"/..,.
(
{3 f.,
ay,
.-.... v,-
. w,
.m
.e.
~...
..e hv.~..,. l
',j'l.R l ?.'
i
~
'~
I.
~
s...,
n s ?,yg,. g
,4W,. :
. f::
4..
~
w
.7 s
,r.,,5. n..-.....$.
c
,t.
. m,,, vo.
,,,4
- 3.,
~,, z %,.
~.
s 4
.......-r.,
e g g g m -7 y ?
. e g e%' ;,v s.g,. ;.;.
vg s..
h:~:
- ~.
m,e
.n
.,..?.
..p(..-
.&f W M.,.
4 p'.-
. ya.;...
<3..
.~
- ' m.
- ((.
...y R e,.
k,*
.. : . V *
~' :;. ', ' '..
y "
a; ~. k k y &y. 5Q k n.'.C #-( } ' '
~ Q.f.. y,ij.,
' ;h '
f g
.yv+ ny
_ 3. p. y ;,: y
. ;y(r..
- .jp y.<;,
x-
- m:
ws
.y,
.L jd.
.,['*%4 c
- h.. i
[
.;tv j. '
r- [,'
.,..#* j.
- t 9...
.a
.. J..p e ',4
.f'.
l '_ ?,'
-l '..k l. l
- l }
I(-
3;[
-f &
QQ;..
. +
- jsg);gg.,..; [;
- p y
,,, y &. g. c -
a.
4A,w o
n..
w, ap..
.a a.
u..
w v.~
, y. m ayn n
Q q.
.. m..
.~ y : g
+ L..g N... '..
~
a.; m.
b
,g A
g
1
- CC';li."U.; g PROD T.Uilt..;.C. g g. (q UNITED STATES OF AMERICA A'IOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION COM!!ISSION!GS:
Glenn T. Seaborg, Chair =an
[p] s Wilfrid E. Johnson Samuel M. Natrit Of D0CKEiED t'
James T. Ramey ggg
{
kmMF.hp 6
DEC201966 > -3 i
ofw at na :=xn g
husg:::c::
9 In the Matter of
)
y
)
m\\j CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YOF.K,110.
)
I DOCKET 50 50-247 (Tnatan Point Station Unit No. 2)
)
MEMORAIOUM AND ORDER On October 3,1966, an atomic safety and licensing board, by initial decision, Utcected the issuance of a provisional construction prmit, to g
Consolidated Biison Company of New York for Indian Point Station Unit i
No. 2, a pressurized vater reactor facility to be located in the Town of' a
B.tchanan, Westche. ster County, New York.
On October 21, 1966, the Cos-
=$ssion received an "APIeal From Initial Decision, Exceptions and Brier in Support mereof" from the Conse; vation Center, Inc.
The Conservation Center ob,)ects to the board's denial of its petition for intervention and states certain exceptions to the substance of the board's initial 4
deci e s.c: 2 he Conservation Center'e petition to intervene was denied by the board for failure to comply with the Rules of Practice of the Comnission.
See 10 CFR $ 2 714.
De Center, in its appa$, "ausune[s] that untime-m o
- ~j)i
- \\ \\s W) f
~
i 2
l I
liness in tl a presentat1on of the pet,1 tion was not a basis for denial 4-cince the decision makes no reference thereto." We note that the Center's petition vas not properly filed and served upon the' parties until the l
second day of the hearings and that it was opposed, inter alia, on grounds
?
j cf non-timeliness without adequate justificatic,n for late filing.
Based on the record presented, denial for this reason was within the ambit i
of a board's authority under our Rules.
Even if we vere to hold that the petition was thnely filed, its very general statement of organizational purpose does not set forth an interest of the petitioner in the proceeding which may be affected by Co=nicsion action, as i
required by our Rules. Petitiorar asks that we nov consider in support of l
its interest additional matten presented for tne first time in an affidavit.
j appended to its appeal. We do not beliere this vould be appropriate. One seeking intervention should in the first instance set forth before the i
j atomic safety and licensing Soard tne matters on which he relies for a l
shoving of intere;,t. Malatenance of an orderly hearing process and. a due regard for the rights of the parties to a proceeding point to this as the i
proper course. We see rio compelling reason for departing from this course in the present case.
petitioner, in '.t; appeal, emphasizes the 2.=nortance of public 4
i participation in this proceeding and see=ingly concludes that this is foreclosed by denial of its petition to intervene. The high' degree of-1 importence we attach to appropriate public participation is reflected in our Rules and in our " Statement of General Policy" explaining the procedures 1
the Co=nission expects te h followed by atomic safety and licensing boards j
in the conduct of these proceedings.
(2ee,31 F.R. 832, January 21,19%; -
31 F. R.12774, September 30,1966).
In the present proceeding ve note that l
~.
in
' i
[
there was participation by representatives of cognizant State and local i
official bodies. _ The State of liev York pcrticipated as a party throusn its 1
Office of Atomic and 5; ace Development cnd supported the application. Limited
-appearances in support of the application vere cade by the Mayor of J'
l Buchanan, the Westchester County Executive and the Council' on Science and e
Technology of the City of Eev York.
Several private persons and organizations also made limited appeen.nces, either for or against the application.. We think it further vorth observing that vb:n, at the. bearing,' the deficiencies j
in the-Center's petition vere objected to by the parties - the Cc=nission's
}
regulatory staff, the applicant and the State of New York - counsel for the i.
l petitioner stated that intervention was only for the purpose of asking an occasional question in the event the proceedings did not cover some of the i
]
-quentions that occurred to the Center's spokesman from the standpoint of reprcsenting the public. While each of the parties responded that it would l
[
have _no objection.to the Center's making a limited appearance (see'10 CFR I
li 2 715) to acco=modate this stated purpose, the Center took no action in this regani.
t Since the Center is not a_ party to this proceeding, it has no -standing j
to file er :ptions to the board's initial decision. Matter-of Pacific Gas End Electric Co=pany, 2 AEC 172, and 2 AEC 173; Matter of Elk River power Demonstration Reactor Procrem Project, 2 AEC 21+5 We 'oelieve, in any event, that the record (which includes not only the applicant's presentation but also the review by the reguletory staff and the Adv1 Lory Cetttee on Reactor Safeguards) suppods the board's findings and c;nclusions under 10 CFR Section 5035(a). petitioner's exceptions appear premised in large measure upon a m
h-lack of understanding of our two etage licensing procedure, the scape of-information required for a construction per=it as ccatrasted to an operating license, and the function of an atomic safety and licensing board at the construction pemit 1.t, age. As we stated in our deelsion of May 6,1965 in liatter of Jersey Central power & Light Company, 3 AEC
"* *
- Section -50 35 does not require that all design dete11s of the facility must be supplied, nor that at t 2e construction permit stage every safety question shall actually have been satisfactorily resolved.
"The board considers the expert analyses, notes any safety questions that rem.in unresolved, evaluates the research and development pro 6r c proposed to resolve them, and thereupon comes to an over'-s11 judgment as to whether there is reasonable assurance that the safety issues vill be resolved and the proposed facility _can be constructed and operated safely."
The foregoing ref1cets che lonpstanding appreach of the Co=icsion's regu: story process. This approach has received favorable judicial review by the United States Supreme Court (Power Reactor Develonnent Co. v.
International Union, et al., 367 U.S. 396) and has also been carefully reviewed by the cod 6ress through the Joint Co=ittee c. Atomic Energy.
(See,I= proving the AEC Regulatory Process, Joint C-ittee Print, 87th Congress,1st Session, March,1961; see also, power Reactor.Develoment Co. v. International Union, e_t,al., supra, at pp. 408 409). We are sae_sfied from our review here that the proceedings below meet the cited standard.
It is ORDERED that the appeal be Genied in all respects.
Dated: Decc=ber 20, 1966 By the Cocmission.
CAg
__f
. f W W W. B. McCcol Secretary
.-