ML20125D681

Answer of AEC Regulatory Staff to Petition for Leave to Intervene by M Donahue.Petition Deficient & Should Be Denied

ML20125D681
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello
Issue date:	04/02/1970
From:	Engelhardt T US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To:	US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
References
NUDOCS 9212150358
Download: ML20125D681 (3)

Text

- - . --- -_ _ - - . _ ____ _

e' ; .o..ua n .w i

. dOD. I. VIR FAC. Je -t f) 4 St  !=

v # ' O, Ult 1TED STATES OF A1: ERICA j .. n.. y-AT0!!10 E!!ERGY C0tDlISS10l!

( b.

APR 21970 t> C y.

In the liatter of ) 2.* tite of N e og

) tv *t

$0 2fr.,

s

) Docket i , !!0:4T1101't1 STATES PO'..' Eft C0t!PAh4 .

)

% M d' (1tonticello tincicar Generating )

o, Plant, Unit 1) )

At%UEG or TrtE AEC ltEGULATO'lY STAFF TO PETITIO.1 TOR IIAVE '10114TLRVE!'S BY 1b1. !!IKE DD3\lnP, In a letter dated 11 arch 27,1970, !!r. liike Donahuc submitted a timely petition for 1 cave to intervene in the captioned proceeding.

lir. Donahue states that he livec some fifteen miles from the site of the Ibnticello liucicar Cencrating Plant, that he has been studying the cubject of "nucicar pollution", and that on the basis of his studica is " qualified to ash come constructive and helpful questions."

The " Rules of Practice" of the Atomic Energy Comminsion (Commission or AEC) in 10 CFR 52.714 provide that any person whose interest may be o

af fected by a proceeding and who desires to participate as a party to a proceeding must file a written petition for 1 cave to intervene under oath or af firmation for leave to intervene, and shall set forth the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, how that intercot may be af fected by Connission action, and the contentions of the petitioner in reasonably specific detail.

The petition of lir. Donahuc for leave to intervene is deficient with respect to its compliance with the provisions of 10 CFR $2.714 in t

. /

9212150358 700402 PDR ADOCK 05000263 A PDR 1

l

.s' .. ( ,

j . ,

2-m J-4 that it has not been filed under onth or affirtaation; it does not set forth the intenent of the petitioner in the-proceeding; it does not t

. t, tate.how the petitioncr',o intercots.may bt. af fected by Commiss' ion j j action; and docc not state the contentions of the petitioner in 2

reennnably spcHfle detail, t'

On the bable of the deficiencies in lir. Donohuc's petition for

)

1 1 cave to intervene, the AUC reguintory staff objects at this time to the granting of the petition. The AEC regulatory staff would not,

however, object to the board granting the petitioner an opportunity to amend his petition to correct the deficiencies noted above, provided the tuacnded petition was filed at or prior to the scheduled prehearing j conference in the captioned matter.

$ The AEC regulatory staff notes that lir. Donahuc's stated interest in participating in this henring is to ask "hcipful and constructivo questions" regarding the !!onticello facility.

The AEC regulatory staff would suggest to the board that such questions could appropriately be rniced by fir. Donahuc if he were permitted to make a limited appearanco i

pursuant to the provisions or 10 CFR 52.715. Participation by way of limited appearance in the proceeding would provide a means for lir. Donahuc

+

i to obtain answers to his questions without the necessity of meeting tho l 4

j t requirements of 10 CFR $2.714. Appropriate procedures-could be considered l

at the prehearing conferenco for assuring that questions raised by-i t .

i

- . s l

l i

I

-l tir. Donahuc vero ant.wcred by the parties to the procccding. ,

1 s n V 0 A fa c Y '

3 Thomas F. Engelhardt Counsci for AEC Reguintory litaf f Dat.ed thin 2iul day of April,1970.

4 I

t 4

+

e 4

< w