ML20148N251

Second Suppl to Petition to Intervene.Requests Withdrawal of Listed Proposed Contentions Which Overlap W/Safe Energy Alliance of Central AL Contentions.W/Certificate of Svc

ML20148N251
Person / Time
Site:	07002909
Issue date:	12/20/1980
From:	Donelson C AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
NUDOCS 8012310448
Download: ML20148N251 (12)

Text

~

'f h D._ M -

"~

UNITED STATES,OF AMERICA

' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION a

,BEFORE THE~ ATOMIC'S!$ETY-AND' LICENSING' BOARD I

'In.the Matter'of.

' APPLICATION OF WESTINGHOUSE i

ELECTRIC CORPORATION FOR A

-f S

~

].

SPECIAL' NUCLEAR MATERIAL

' DOCKET NO. 70-2909 LICENSE-FOR.THE' ALABAMA NUCLEAR FUEL FABRICATION-PLANT (ANFFP) 'TO BE LOCATED.

1NEAR PRATTVILLE, ALABAMA SECOND SUPPLEMENT TO PETITION OF CATHALYNN D'ONELSON FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE

{

Comes now Cathalynn Donelson and states, in response to

. request.by the Atomic' Safety and Licensing Board, that the following proposed contentions appear to overlap those conten-tions heretofore filed by the Safe Energy Alliance of Central Alabama and for that reason she will withdraw said contentions upon being granted intervenor status.

CONTENTIONS TO BE WITHDRAWN 1.

All of the contentions contained in the first set of proposed contentions submitted by Intervenor David L. Allred.

2.

The following contentions contained in the Additiona'l Proposed Contentions of Intervenor David L. Allred:

Sections 1. and 2. of I.A.

sl A Sections 2. and 3. of I.B.

p D

Section III in its entirety..

>y 7,,

9

+n OY I

Section IV in its entirely.

.~

ofg Section V in'its entirety.

'}

}

Section VI in its entirety.

43 o

g k-k \\

.Section VII in its entirety.

0 O

)

()

O

,- m

g

. n.

1 j

4 s

7 LPage'.'2; h

(

CONTENTIONS TO'BE WITHDRAWN.

f Section VIII.inNitsrentirety.

."SectioniIX inLits. entirety..

' }

T

..... f.

, S ections-' 1., -/ 2. and L3. a.c b. and :d. ! of.XII. A.

~

Sections R3.. a. ib and c.,. 5. b., c. and.. e. (1) cf Section'

XIII ; ~ B.

Sections 9...~a.,.' 14., [18. -Lb.,.19 and L 22 ' '.of ! XIII. L B ' :

q

'i The.. Appendix enumerates those' contentions to be~ withdrawn contained in.the(Additional Proposed Contentions..

l Re,spactfully submitted,!

3 fW

,[

V a

Cathalynn onelson j

855 Park Avenue

. Montgomery,.- Alabama-3 6106 on this, the 20th day of December, 1980

]

1 I

't s

h r

V 5

I 2

l J

i

. ~

-.m Mu

.y LAPPENDIXL I.A.l.. TheLEnvironmental ReportLstates that.~y-"1985,-

~

180iadditional. nuclear plants areLexpected to increase...the

?nat' ion's electrical. supply." 'However,-!the Westinghouse has relied upon1projecti'ons. based on informatio'n obta'ined from-an

' April, 1979, report.of.the Department;of-Energy.

Such projec-tions.occurredjprior to'theLincident at.Three Mile-Island and 4

(the, subsequent.re-evaluation of;the propriety of continued.

t 4

nuclear energy; production in this country.

Indeed, the year-long moratoriumfon licensing of nuclear. plants has not been

considered by Westinghouse.-

The projected "80 additional: nuclear plants" by 1985 is inaccurate and not a valid basis for considering additional fuel fabrication.

j 2.

With the' advent of the public's and government's.

t renewed concern for nuclear safety, additional tests and re-tests of existing nuclear' facilities have been mandated. 'New standards-i and stricter safety compliance requirements in the construction t

and operation of nuclear reactors makes the projection that by i

"the year 1990,. a total of 189 nuclear plants" being in service unrealistic.

There will not be 189 nuclear plants in service by 1990 and the requirement of fuel based on such projection is 5

l inaccurately overstated.-

I.B.2.

Westinghouse has not identified any proposed site alternative for a new facility in spite of the-NRC's request to do so.

See letter of Dr. E.Y.

dated June 3, 1980, transmitting questions to Westinghouse, including question

1. 24, and Westinghouse's response dated July 3, 1980.

Neither

)

i l

1 l

1

g-Page 2 has Westinghouse given " comparable data for the-. alleged'"20 sites.tn 16 states. : Environmental' Report, p. 3.

Other

~

sites _are ecologically, economically and technologically more

-desirable and less costly than the proposed site.

3.

An examination of'the map." location of Nuclear Power Plants in'the United States," Environmental Report, p.

7-4,

.shows that a facility in Kentucky, Ohio or West Virginia would-

-l be more centrally. located-to-serve existing and proposed nuclear

~

power plants.- Such a location-would also meet each of the criteria-E established by-Westinghouse in its Environmental Report.

\\-

III..

Westinghouse, in Section 13 :f its lice nse applica-tion \\

s eks exempti n rom certain regu13: ions pr:mulgated by-the-NRC.

Westinghouse' tates the sectt:n of the. Code of Federal Regulations from which it.eeks exempti:n, however, Westinghouse fails, in eac instance, to s ate the reasons for. seeking such exemption a d the requisite "gocd cause" upon which the exemption would ce ased.

Westingh use has failed to show that the exemptions s mulc be' granted.

The exemptions sougnt by Westinghouse.s,hould n t be crantec #:. environmental, safety and nesith reas-9s as set f rth below:

A.

I n S e ::ian 13-1 9.e s

house seeks xemption f rom the reautre

ent t: " notify, in writi the : ire:tc. cf the appro-otiate ARC Irs: action and Enforceme.: Ic;i:nal o ics...at least 30 days :afore the date that rea-: rat.r y pret:(etive eculo-ment is first used" because use of rss:. cat:ry orotet*ive equipment is soecificall'y addressed ir :ne icense a po l i ca ti o n.

However, Section 5-3.4.3 of the lice se a:alic%ti n deals a:i t n

.s P5ge Three resciradory'orote~ct'ibn only in t-s.-

ary manner.

3 1.

Westinghouse has fa;.s: :: identify the times, 4

orocedures,. locations, persons, :: : 9er identifiable criteria that constit te the situations '. s-it is.imorattical te acply

~

f process'or oth r engineerino c:

r:.s t assure that concentra-tions of radioac ive materials i air'are below limits specified in the license, i

2.

part 5-3.4.3'also' states : at ":sfore initiating use of respiratory cr_ tective ec.1: ent...a written :espira-tory protecticn program shall be Ors:ared...."

Nowhere, however, has Westinghouse set fort-such a :rogram.

To grant an exemotion i

before the respiratory prog am is : soared and evaluatec l

by.the NRC is improper.

3.

Westinghouse has also fei'e: t: crevide a " description of sculpment and f acilities whic\\

111 :e used" in.its respira-i tory protection arcgram as require: :y l' C.F.R. 70.22(a)(7) and 10 C.F.R. 70.22(a).

s

\\

Westinghouse has failed t: s :. gicd cause for this

\\

requested exem: tion.

Westingh:.ss as ahso failed to provid

\\

an adscuate basis'for evaluatir; its re:ues't; for ths exemption.

-j

\\

Westing.cuse, :y its failure t: :::. ice t~e a'bove inf ormatien

\\

and data, nas set submitted "a c: :'ete and ace'brate disclosure N

as to all matters and things re:..:s:

t-be disclosed." 10 C,r,R.

5 70.22(e).

\\

I N

'G.

In Section 13-2 resti ; :.se seeks exemotien\\frem y

x 10 C.F.R. 20.203, "Cautien Si; s..s:els, 5ignals, anc Cdn rels" by postino a general warnine se se; ' rte in secti:n 12 -2 c'fs tre l

N t

t s

i I

i I

h l

o a

LPage'Four, y-A[t

-lTcense application.

Such a general warning is no.watning.at

<a 1

J alli.

The.very; reason for requirin; s:ecific aarnina and caution-j tlabelb is t'o alert pecole to. dan;9:'as conditi:ns.. Follcwing the i

\\

ration le'of Westinghouse's procose:.a lte rna tive wa rnini,.1.e.,

1 9'E v e r y. : ntainer or vessel in' thin area may contain racioactive a-material ( mphasis added)'," a similar sign. a t the' entrance.to.

tne facility would te. adequate.

1

~Westi ghouse has' failed t: state'gced cause for the s

requested exemp\\

t'on.

Westinghouse nas.also failed to show that its" proposed procedure-to protect realth and t: minimi:a conger to' life" 10 C.f.R. 7.23(a)(4) is edecuate.

The alternative proposed by Westinghcust is inadec ate and creates an unreason-N' lit able health hazasd to f ae\\

y.emol:yees.

C.

In Section 13-3 We tinghcuse seeks exemption from the

" General Requirement" f or dis osal o' licensed material in

+

favor of being permitted to "ab nd:n er dis cse of small quanti-ties of source, special nuclear,

byoroduct materials whi,ch are present" on ite s retained for.ecord ourocses.

1.

A1:P.: ugh Westinghouse se.e ferth recommanded "c:ntamination *.irits" for two nu:1!:es, no such limits are prc:: set for rt Er centaminants ;ri:b All'. exist in the facility.

Such failure fails to meet the rec,n e ents r 1C C.F.R. 70.23(a)(5) reoviring a su-mary deucriptinn c'

';9:amental Taterial centrcis t

with respect- : such ctbor nucli ss an: ::,ta: nants.

2.

The above-stated f ail.r e to cen3 ice o tne r contam-I inants which may possib}y be conta! Er cn ra:Crds

'so violates 16 C.F.R. 70,22(e) reauirine that e licerse a::lica.'on contain

.{-

-i

.=

-h f*

~*

9 D

"D SI M i

~

oJu.db..k

' Page;Five' o es as:

"homplete and 'accuratesdi'sclosuresasltr e.1 things required tc; l

)

^be disclosed."

i 1

N 3.

Westinohouse has also fai.5:.t: assess the.cumu,.

'lative ef ects:of its:recuested exemp; :.

Over the orojectec N

li f e. c f..' the plan t' s uch cumulativeieffs:- :'

a ba n do nme n t "

N.

.and improper. disposi tion ' or special no:l t a:" ra teria ls will o

t

\\

icreate a health azardLtc facility em:1.ses and..the environment.

'4.

.Co-mi gling ofEcontaminate:

aterial:with non-contaminated material, as proposed-by iss:inghouse'will make

\\c future recovery of dangerous radioacti*ce vaterials. extremely.

. difficult.if not'impossib e.

5. ' Westinghouse h s f ailed t: ss;a511sh that.the data contained in contaminateds mat'erials.a:uld be transferred i

and re tained' in or on a non-con \\taminate: c:urce.

Therefore, i

Westinghouse has failed to show th t i

n or will meet the recuirements of rec rd keeping ests is se by thehRC.

Westingho se has failed to sh*. ;::d cause for,its i

requested exam: tion and has also faile:

Orovide adequate-

.informa tion to ' evaluate its reque st fc: e emotion from 10 C.f.R.

20.301.

C.

In-Sec-ion 13-4 Westinghouse se!<s s rmission to

{

maintai.i recorcs in units other than t :Is reo ired by 10 C.f R. 20.

i Suen evomotion constitutes an-unreasora:'.e risk +o-the healtn and safety of facility emolcyeec and t s :.:lic a e also i

~

consitutes an unnecessary imoediment ::. e monitor'nc of such

~

J

' records by the ARC and the outlic in : 3 e use of ther units will be misleading to the NRC and to : i :.:lle and wi resul'

'in miscalculations.and errors Moreovsr.

. =stinchcuse hab sh:2n a

4 I

,e.

4 Pa'gd six, t

.ncsreason ar good.cause:forLits recuest.

E.-

I'n'Section?l3-S.1 Westin: house recuests tha t ' " 31 ce rts e d.

v activity' shall.be exempted f rom.' the

-i::r ' alarm require.mant s Jofl1U C.T.

170.24" in certain specifie: lccations under certain, specifiadLeon itions.

k?stinghouse bas # ailed te show gocc-

.causeLfor the#re uested exemption.

'J e s tin;heuse has also f ailed-ti define certain

=nguage usedLin the recuested exemption such

'as'" administratively imited," " remote #rce otherLcoerations with special nuclear ms. rials (emphasis added)" "nuclearly isclated" and " area."

_1. - The requested e emption is not sufficiently specific to' evaluate-the propriety of g enting. e exemption.

The.requestedexempkion::stitutesanunreasonable 2.

hazard tc the~ environment and to'th 5ealth and safety of facility employees and the public.

T.

In Section 12-5.2 Westinghouse reouests exemption frcm criticality accident requirements, IC :.T R. 70.24 at the leading

/

i location under certain conditions.. 9es:ing cuse has failed to

-shew goed cause 'gr the requested exevr icn.

The roovested exe rtien consi:;tes an unreascnable r.s< :c th environmen' anc to tne hesit-and safety of facili.. e cicyees and the eneral putlic in that:

i 1.

Trere will be no monitori ; syste meetin.,.ths li ce ns e\\

recuirements c' 10 C.T.9 70.24 ir ar 3:ea Anero e,special nuclear material is handled..

2.

f.:: emergency orocedures.;;' :e ainta!, rad in l'e exempt areas t: assure the sa'ety of :ersrn el in the arma.

l r

,m r

m A

)'

t y,m Page > Sjeven-k 3.

.No means for quick.'. 1:e ntif ying..indivicuals who 1

4 have re ived doses of 10 rads ::~ :re $i11 be maintained.

The reouirements :# 1: C.r.R. 70.24(b)(2) e.ill

-notLbefollo\\ed in areas! prone.:-:riticality.

C.- 'In S tion 13-6 Westi.c; :use. seeks e x e.n= tion rom U

tne r e cuire me n ts o f :10 : C.F.R.' 7 ~.4 2, ' T r ansf e r o f Special-

~'

nuclear ma teria l' w th respect't: te ". transfer of hydroflureric acid containi~ng trac quantities :f uranium...to nonlicensed p e r s:: n s " under sceci'i d conditi:ns.

Westinchouse.has failed to show good cause for t e reovested exemption.

Westinghouse seeks, by_ s uch - e x em::t ie n, o shi#: its responsi b li ty for centrolling.special nuclear terial to persons wh: are unlicensed to handle such material.

The r.~uested exemption consitutes an i

unreasonable risk to tne envir:- eNt and.to the safety and heal n of the ceneral public in : at 1.

Westin; house's prc:: sed "w tten instruction" and ccnditions to the first tra s'eree doe-not adeouately prctect or inform s.:: sequent re:i:lents of t e hydroflurotic acid.

2.

l'.ssting*ouse's or:::sec conditions.

inadcavate to prevent hu sn consumption c'

e hydroflurotic acin.

\\

!v.-

wes ti nghouse, by recLesting the above exendtions.

reovire a\\

has failed to adequately address

t. e licensa rkt s o f f e r\\* hi ch 10 C.F.R. 20 and 70 with resse::.: these activities q

j exemption is requested.

lbers'::s. Westinghouse has fail Ux to submit a license apolicati:-.-i:H contains "cctclete and i

accurate disclosure as to all t!.e s anc things rpouired tc te f

d l-

]

l.

.g

)

n.

D**

9 .f' S

/d "N' -

LPage>Eight I

a

co

.o cicclosed." 10.C.

.R. 70.22(e).

::emsc analication cannot' n

~

tselosure is made.-

co' evaluated:or acted upon until s.:-

1

.V.

In its license acclicatic

.sstinchouse status.in its spgcifications introduction that "

sss' specifications'shall be t e inspectable. portion of the ce 5:: ired -f acility license."

Licens's Application,

p. 5 -1. - Secti:- 7 cf the l icense Applica -

tion sta das. that the comprehensive.'..: lear F.aterials Cont:cl I

and: A ccoun\\ ing ' plan "shall be kept c ar-. of the. Demonstration Section." -Shetion 15 of the License A:olication states that

\\

the plaa is sub'mitted as a separate :::vment.

Sections 8, T

9 - 4,. 10 - 3, 11, anh12-2alsorefer:: c:cuments which'are to N

be kept part of the'Denonstration 5s:: ton.

Se c tions 19, 20, r

s N

and 21 of the Demonstration Sectic,. in turn, refer to sN separa te documents.

West'(nghouse*as ' ailed to provide a complete li ce nse - app li ca tio\\n and t:

tet the reouirements of 10 C.F.R. 70.22(e) in that:

A.

Tha above-reference'd se::icns of the licenas

\\

application have not been completes :: provided.

S.

Westin;n:use has failed t-s :2 good cauce for n.'t t

sub-itting a ec--1ste license appli:tii'en, C.

Afstinghouse har faile: *: snha ony reason nr good cause i:: faili ; to submit or dis::::a the information recuired in te 3:2ve ss:tions either sepera:!;. :: ssverally.

\\

Oavid L. Allred specifically :sts vas the\\cight tc fi e

\\\\

acditicnal: con *sntions basec en ar, 3::itions c r \\ supp le re n t s to tne' license applicatien whether I:s :v: ' rth c: vsaer not, I

g including but not limitec tc in ct a:::n certaining\\to nucles:

e r

y 4

l

[

-geiN n

-- fv matsrials contro' nd accountin;, ohys.

al security', shipping N.

c'ntainers, delivery orAspecial nucles:' sterialit: a carriir for transport,' emergency cent.

1, ant':e::etissioning of facilities and grounds.

o VI..In Section115-1,. General Li:s sad Activity Infc:mation;-

'15

,1 C e tailed Opera tions Evalua tion;. z : 15-3, Cr;anization and A ministration, Wes tinghouse sta:a s that infer?ation will be:sdoptied.

Westin;nouse, by not su::1 ping-the requitec S a f s t y A na'$'ygis b s s ' ai le d to me e t ' th e recuirements of'10 C.F.R.

x 70.22(e).

David L. Allrs soecifically ress ves the right to file additional' contentions b sed on any ea:srial or information supplied by.Westingh:use perta ing :: : e required Safety-Analyisis and Section 15 of.t'he license a:Olication.

'J I I.

In Section 16 of its license a:=licatian Westing-

?

house states.that a Regulatory Comolin :e 7anual recuired by 10 C.f.R. 70.22(a)(8) is or will be s_ :itted as a secafate s

document. 'Such document is unavaila:'s :: David L. Allred and he s:scifically reserves his rig : :: Take furtner c:nten-tions :ssed on'in'formati.on contained i-such Janual.

The

's licenss 2 cl'icetion is incem 1ste wl: :.: such information and ca*,cf be. acted upon by ths,\\RC u

'. su

h inforcation is suoplies.

VIII.

In Section 17 of its lica si 3::licati:n Wasting-I

~

house states tha t a n A L AR A i>:a nua l is ::.111 :s su:?ittec a2 a separate document.

Such ocument.s

_ availatle to Davi:

i

/

L. A11 rad and ha'soecifically.' erves. r ri;": ::

ake

\\

1

f,

~,

x T

5PageiTen D

.}.

ch i

-r ur ti c'contentiens.casof cniitd:rts:.:- cr teinsd'in r,u:n 1

r. ( -

. manna l > ~, T he'. lice nse ' a:JDlication iS i :j'O.3t,9.tiths.wt such' 4

s 's

+

material.~ ddscannet be acted'unen t

)', = ' 2; until ': U.- "

-a 1

. l\\

t s

informat' ion is avoplied.

y'$(aboveLincenu-1:rs!

IY.-

As'ns-for t ~ r : ur.'

'I!J;

. the -l'i:ense ac:lica tion inccraleti a: ::e( not wa t tM i

~

ad r e : aire me nts of 10 'C.f.R. 70.22( e),

c

~XII.A.l.

Line management components responsible forLall operations and. activities in'olving;1icensed materials;-

v 2..

Shift supervisors,'though application states l

that shift supervisors shall be first-level line managers; o

-3.

The License application does not contain adequate i

technical qualifications, training or experience of:

}

a.

The regulatory compliance manager, while stating he shall be responsible for assuring evaluation of nuclear

[

f criticality safety and radiation requirements; t

b.

The criticality engineer nor_of individuals who will. compute or perform other criticality services; d.

Designees,-though application states designees i

t may carry out the duties of the criticality and health physics engineers..

I XII.B.3.

Engineered safety of the ANFFP Special Nuclear L

Materials Building will not be adequate to protect health of i

i minimize. danger to life and property.

l t

a.

The application states SNM Building will not meet Southern Standard Building Code; b.

The application states only that SNM Building shall

{

be designed, constructed and operated for insurability;.

1 I

i

~

i 1

+,

3:

+.- x >

47

.,+

e.

J O1

i '

.f a'

1 LPage: Eleven' S

{

c.c' Building'will not be' designed;and constructed'to:

(1)I Withst$nd nuclear criticality;

' (:2 ) 'Prevend? contamination;-toithe environs 1

through contal'nment.

1 HEPA? filters are rated 99.9=psr' cent effi6ient;Ibut

,5;b.-

this.isapplicableonlhfat~ installation r

7c.;'Passingfeffluent'.through:HEPA filterLunits does not guarantee the protection of'the public/and the environs

.m

. from : thel release! of' significant amounts of radioactivity; l e'.'(1)I Highly radioactivecair could pass through' only one HEPAffilter -(which could' be cloggedib before release -

.to the environment; 9.a.

<HEPA filters will'not prevent significant releases to the environment;

,f 14.

Instrument 3.and operations requiring interlocks i

for safety of workers and environs are.not identified in.the 1

license application.

.18.b.

Westinghouse does not state location of air '

y sampling points.,

r 19.

The type of dosimetry equipment to be used is not described-in the license application.

I 22.

Nuclear criticality. detection equipment is not adequate.

The application states 7

a.

Intention of Westinghouse to continue work during i

' nuclear criticality detection outage; b.-

That portable instruments may be substituted, not I

shall be used.

This does not assure criticality detection.

i

]

I

~

gt;, -

lai'y

[g t

t L

... :f. '

l CERTIFICATE OF.'SERVICEL 1

l (I c hereby.certifyf th'at J I ' have. served - a1 copy.of: the' foregoing.

l a.

.uponl thel followir.g named ; parties ?.by mailing Lthe same ( to l them; on.-

this'. 2 N dayfof uNA, T 19'8C -

l ichnfF. Wolf;4 Esq., Chairman

' Donald R...' Marcucci, T E sq..

? Atomic Safety and Licensing

Law' Department Board.

~ '

Westinghouse Electric Corp.

3409 Shepherd'St.

,P.O. Box.3551

.i Chevy Chase, MD 20015-LPittsburgh,'PA 15230 i

Dr. Harry Foreman,' Member'

-SherwinLTurk.

-AtomicLSafety and: Licensing' JLegal. Staff-

' Board

U.S. Nuclear Regulatoryf i

Box 395, Mayo Commission-

. University of'MinnesotaL Washington', D C.

20555 Minneapolis, MN 55455 Dr. Ira L..;Myers i

Dr. Martin J.'Steindler, Member.

State Health Officer Atomic Safety and Licensing-Department of Public HealthJ Board State' Office' Building Argonne National Laboratory'

' Montgomery,'AL 36130 t

9700 South Cass: Ave.

Argonne, IL 60439 Docketing and Service'Section~(3)

Office of the Secretary-l

' Atomic Safety'and Licensing U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Board' Panel Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Washington, D.C.

20555 j

Comr..is sion Washington, D.C.

20555 David L. Allred, Esq'.

231 Oak Forest Dr.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Montgomery, AL'36109 r

Appeal Ranel U.S.' Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555 Bart Cowan.

Eckert, Ssamans, Cherin

& Mellott t

42nd Floor

- 600 Grant St..

Pittsburgh, PA 15219

'Julian McPhillips, Esq.

h j

516 S.' Perry.St.

Montgomery, AL'36104

-- gg, Cathalynq/ pon"elson j

i i

I I

t

)

e

.