ML20203D740

Raises No Objection to Treating RM Bimber Presenting Views on Burial of Very Low Level Radwaste,As Limited Appearance Statement.Bimber Fails Requirements to Be Party to Proceeding

ML20203D740
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	04/18/1986
From:	Silberg J SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE, TOLEDO EDISON CO.
To:	Hoyt H Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
CON-#286-845 ML, TAC-60875, NUDOCS 8604220315
Download: ML20203D740 (3)

Text

- - -

SHAw, PITTMAN, PoTTs & TROWBRIDGE

. m ..,~.o,..o,....o~ m m es, 1800 M STREET N W ASHINGTON. D C 20036 v t t t cc.. t .

, ,,o.,,.e..,,..

'FS .acp 21 A11 :15 -

TELEA ee . , , s- . .. .s,. .

^

QFFICE OF SECRLTAFY 00CMEilNG A stpu r ..tr.-o .

m c.SiteERo.ec. BRANCH 'ro =, c. ,

1 April 18, 1986 Helen Hoyt, Esquire Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 In the Matter of Toledo Edison Company, et al.

(Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1) t Docket No. 50-346-ML l

Dear Judge Hoyt:

Toledo Edison Company has received a copy of a letter dated April 5, 1986, from Russell M. Bimber to the NRC's Dock-eting and Service Branch presenting his views on the burial of l Very low-level radioactive waste at the Davis-Besse site. Mr.

Bimber states that he does not wish to be a party in this pro-ceeding "unless it is necessary for this letter to be included in the Hearing File." Mr. Bimber further states that "[e]xcept for Limited Appearance Statements not being a cart of the Hear-ing File, I would welcome Limited Appearance status."

l Toledo Edison has no objection to treatino Mr. Bimber's letter as a limited appearance statement. Such statements are specifically contemplated by the Commission's February 20, 1986 Order and your March 10, 1986 Memorandum and Order (Notice of Informal Hearina and Opportunity to Become a Party), 51 Fed.

Reg. 8920 (1986). However, as stated in the Memorandum and Order, "fl]imited apoearance statements are not part of the Hearing File." Id. at 8; 51 Fed. Req. at 8921.

8604220315 860418 PDR ADOCK 05000346 C PDR

i SHAW, PITTM AN, PoTTs & TROWBRIDGE '

a paeTNEn$mp e secLyo*wG **0FEStossas Componatc%S Helen Hoyt, Esquire Administrative Judge April 18, 1986 Page 2 To the extent that Mr. Bimber seeks to become a party in order to have his letter included in the Hearing File, he has failed to demonstrate standing as required by the Commission's February 20 Order and your March 10 Memorandum and Order. A petitioner's standing to participate as a party in this pro-ceeding is governed by existing Commission precedents pursuant to 10 CFR S 2.714(d). Commission Order at 4; Memorandum and Order at 3; 51 Fed. Reg. at 8920-1. Mr. Eimber has not met these standards. Mr. Bimber states that he resides in Painesville, Ohio. Painesville is approximately 100 miles from the Davis-Besse site. This distance is too far to confer standing even in a reactor licensing proceeding. See Tennessee Valley Authority (Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2),

ALAB-413, 5 N.R.C. 1418, 1421 n.4 (1977); Philadelphia Electric Co. (Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 & 2), LBP-82-43A, 15 N.R.C. 1423, 1433 (1982). It is therefore certainly too far to confer standing in a materials licensing proceeding. See Rockwell International (Energy Systems Group Special Nuclear Materials License No. SNM-21), CLI-83-15, 17 N.R.C. 1001, 1005 (1983) (additional views of Commissioner Ahearne) (greater proximity should be required in a materials licensing case);

l Boston Edison Co. (Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station), LBP-85-24, 22 N.R.C. 97, 99 (1985) (residence 43 miles from a facility too far to confer standing in a proceeding addressing spent fuel storage). Having failed to properly demonstrate his standing to participate, Mr. Bimber's request to be treated as a party should be rejected.

With regard to Mr. Bimber's substantive comments, all of which relate to radiological impacts, Toledo Edison would note Mr. Bimber's explicit recognition that only 8.5 millicuries of radioactive material is to be buried every five years, compared to 5 curies (i.e. 5000 millicuries) (and 1000 curies of Tritium) which was conservatively estimated to be released to Lake Erie each year (as described in the Davis-Besse Final En-vironmental Statement). Bimber letter at 3-4. Thus the addi-tional radioactivity which would be buried on-site is less than one-thousandth of that estimated to be discharged into Lake Erie. Given this acknowledgement by Mr. Bimber, it is diffi-cult to give much weight to the concerns he has expressed.

Accordingly, Toledo Edison has no objection to treating Mr. Bimber's letter as a limited appearance statement, but l

l

\

SH AW, PITTM AN, PoTTs & TROWBRIDGE '

A mamTNCRSmas igcgypMG NESSaogag compomatioqs Helen Hoyt, Esquire Administrative Judge April 18, 1986 Page 3 respectfully submits that Mr. Bimber has not met the require-ments to be granted status as a party to this proceeding.

V y truly yours, Q 2j% d J t '*

Jay K. Silbe/rg, P. C.

David . Lewis '

CotEnse for Toledo Edison Company JES:L cc: Russell M. Bimber Charles Barth, Esquire Docketing & Service Branch l

I

_ _ _ _ _ _ _