ML20148C202

Licensee Response in Opposition to Ecology Action of Oswego Motion to Consolidate Hearings on Radon Issue.Motion Should Be Denied.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20148C202
Person / Time
Site:	Marble Hill
Issue date:	10/18/1978
From:	Voigt H LEBOEUF, LAMB, LEIBY & MACRAE
To:
References
NUDOCS 7811010136
Download: ML20148C202 (7)

Text

r -

"IC DOCU3 y N d *

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION D ;i BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD In the Matter of 1 1

PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY l Docket Nos. STN 50-546 OF INDIANA, INC. ) STN 50-547 (Marble Hill Nuclear )

Generating Station, 1 Units 1 and 2) )

LICENSEES' ANSWER IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE HEARINGS ON RADON Public Service Company of Indiana, Inc. (" PSI")

and Wabash Valley Power Association, Inc. ("WVPA")

(" Licensees") hereby answer the " Motion to Consolidate Hearings on Radon" filed by Ecology Action of Oswego on October 3, 1978. The motion was not accompanied by a certificate of service, but a copy was mailed to counsel for Licensees on October 3. Licensees oppose the motion.

I.

In its motion, Ecology Action purports to speak for Save the Valley /Save Marble Hill ("STV") ,

• the only party to the Marble Hill licensing proceeding that has requested a further hearing in response to ALAB-480.

• / Ecology Action and its spokesperson, Sue Reinert, are strangers to this proceeding. Neither is a lawyer, so neither may represent STV, 10 C.F.R. S 2. 713 (a) , and neither has filed a notice of appearance in this case, id-7F/wonc

Ecology Action asks for a consolidated proceeding to avoid separate hearings. Implicit in that request is the premise that a separate hearing would otherwise be required for Marble Hill.

That premise is simply wrong.- STV has failed to satisfy the requirements of ALAB-480. See Licensees' response filed August 7, 1978; Staff's response filed September 27, 1978. No hearing is required in these dockets and, accordingly, there is nothing to consolidate.

II.

Ecology Action's motion seeks a full consolidation of five heretofore separate licensing proceedings. Those proceedings are in disparate stages of review. Ecology Action would nevertheless require that applicants or licensees in each proceeding be jointly represented, present common witnesses, and propose common findings.

The approach suggested by Ecology Action is essentially the same as that advanced by the Staff in its April 27, 1978 motion that led to ALAB-480.

In ALAB-480, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Boards concluded that it is "self-evident" that "consoli-dation (along the lines proposed by the staff) would be unworkable and, as to many (if not all) of [the responding]

parties, unfair." Mimeo. at 13. ALAB-480 further stated

1

', . l 1

l l

l l

that: "Each appeal board will deal with the radon question independently." Mimeo, at 20. This Appeal Board should adhere to those views and deny consolidation as to any party who opposes it. l III.

In ALAB-493, this Appeal Board deferred its ruling on STV's initial request for a hearing pursuant to ALAB-480, but stated that it would rule on that request " shortly".

Mimeo at 32. More than one month has passed since then, and nearly three months have passed since STV filed its request.

Because the construction permits for Marble Hill have not been suspended and construction by PSI is pro-ceeding apace, it may be thought that there is no urgency in deciding whether or not a further hearing is required.

The matter is not that simple. So long as the radon issue remains open, there is a small, perhaps ephemeral, cloud on the construction permits. There are several reasons why that cloud should be removed as promptly as possible.

First, the whole radon question is complicated from a technical standpoint and, unfortunately, has also become complicated from a procedural standpoint. How does PSI explain the significance of this unresolved issue to the Indiana Public Service Commission or to a concerned

security holder? How does WVPA explain to its members the possible significance of this unresolved issue?

Second, the Appeal Board should be aware that written ,

requests for contributions to STV to support a public hearing on the radon question are being circulated in southern Indiana. Is it fair to those who may be con-sidering responding to such an appeal to leave unresolved the question of whether there will be any such hearing?

Third, the mere pendency of the issue requires the ex-penditure of time and money by Licensees to respond to T

pleadings such as Ecology Action's motion, pleadings that may well prove to be frivolous. Are those costs (which ultimately must be paid by the consuming public) validly a

incurred?

IV.

ALAB-480 was a responsible effort by the Appeal Boards to dispose of the radon issue without the necessity of cumbersome, time-consuming further proceedings in 16 different licensing cases. That effort evidently com-mended itself to the Staff, a variety of applicants and licensees, and a myriad of other parties, for no one sought reconsideration of, or appealed to the Commission in oppo-sition to, the procedures laid down in ALAB-480. The time to challenge the ALAB-480 procedures has, of course, long since expired.

t

- . , - . ~ ,-5,4 .--m.-,-,,-,,,-.-s.v..,-..,-,m.,--..,.,-.,,-,.-ev.-,m.,.,~..-.. 5%.,. ,,w,-,,..-- ...w...,, q, ..yc r.u .  % . ..,,#.,,e m .: ,-,-.-,:,-wwv. =

i l

I Now, however, various parties seek to circumvent ,

the procedures; established by ALAB-480. It is suggested that the disposition of uncontested proceedings under ALAB-480 should await the resolution of a contested pro-  !

ceeding, or the compilation of a record beyond the Perkins record, or both. Adoption of any such embellishments to ALAB-480 will deny that decision's promise of prompt and ,

independent consideration of the radon issue in each separate case.

We urge the Appeal Board not only to deny Ecology Action's motion insofar as it pertains to Marble Hill, but also promptly to rule on the hearing requests of STV and Sassafras Audubon Society and to terminate the con-struction permit phase of the Marble Hill licensing case.

Respectfully submitted, LeBOEUF, LAMB, LEIBY & MacRAE By 4A Arxf M Partner 1757 N Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036 l

l Attorneys for Licensees October 18, 1978 i

, . . _ ,_w,, ,.,y-.- ,,. ,_m,

g e 0 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD In the Matter of 1 1

PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY ) Docket Nos. STN 50-546 OF INDIANA, INC. 1 STN 50-547 (Marble Hill Nuclear 1 Generating Station, )

Units 1 and 2) )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have served, this 18 th day of October, 1978, copies of " Licensees' Answer to Motion to Consolidate Hearings on Radon" by first-class mail, postage prepaid and properly addressed to the following:

Richard Salzman, Chairman Lawrence Brenner, Esq.

Atomic. Safety and Licensing Office of the Executive Appeal Board Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. John Buck, Member Mrs. David G. Frey Atomic Safety and_ Licensing Sassafras Audubon Society Appeal Board of Indiana U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 2625 S. Smith Road Commission Bloomington, Indiana 47401 Washington, D.C. 20555 Robert C. Slover  !

Michael C. Farrar, Member Save the Valley, Inc. I Atomic Safety and Licensing P.O. Box 813 i Appeal Board Madison, Indiana 47250 l U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Charles W. Campbell, Esq. I Washington, D.C. 20555- Senior Vice President H and General Counsel 1 Thomas M. Dattilo, Esq. Public Service Company )

404 East Main Street of Indiana, Inc.

Madison, Indiana 47250 1000 East Main Street Plainfield, Indiana- 46168

~

. :o Mrs. Marie Horine Docketing and Service President Section Save Marble Hill Office of the Secretary Route 2 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Lexington, Indiana 47138 Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Ms. Sue Reinert Ecology Action of Oswego Alan S. Rosenthal, Esq.

Box 94 Atomic Safety and Licensing Oswego, New York 13126 Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ms. Sharon Morey Commission Ecology Action Washington, D.C. 20555 P.O. Box 94 Oswego, New York 13126 Stephen M. Schinki, Esq.

Office of the Executive Jeffrey L. Cohen, Esq. Legal Director New York State Energy Office U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Slan Street Building Commission Core 1., Second Floor Washington, D.C. 20555 Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12223

)

I l' i l l l  !

t I

i i

1

- - , ~ . , -

, , - , . - w---, .,_ , . . ., , , - , . . , , - , - , , ,,.-n,. - , . _ , - - . , , . - . , , , , . , , - .