ML20205J055
| ML20205J055 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 01/26/1986 |
| From: | Anthony R ANTHONY, R.L., FRIENDS OF THE EARTH |
| To: | NRC, NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| CON-#186-874 ALAB-828, OL, NUDOCS 8601300087 | |
| Download: ML20205J055 (2) | |
Text
&
WC, l
Y
.. s. s, r.a u non contolos hu 1.
F: %. C-.
Limerick M. Lts. Unib I A r Laet e t ho. $0p52,N f @f p
January 26,19e0-MOTION bY R. I. ANTHONY /F0E FOR NRC REVIU OF ALAb-828, LATED 1/16/86
,>g, Anthony /FCE appeals to the Commission to review the Appeal Board s,decis' ob i
i x:/
on our appeal of 4/30/85 to reopen the record,dmied by the Licensing Board and affirmed by A.B. and to reverse the Board's decision of 1/16/86, ALAB-828
- 1. In considering the three factors for reopening the record AB was mistaken in ruling the appeal untimely. We assert that it was timely because the actual use of the offsite radioactive measurements and the boundary calculations were first published in the February 1985 Releases Report.
(ALAB-828,p.5 )
- 2. (829,p6.)
We agree with AB that "the most important factor to consider" is that radioactive relesses to the envirom nt constitute a "significant safety e
issue".
We believe that the' Commission will find that we have raised a signifi-cant safety icaue and " the public health and safety must be a preeminent concern where significant safety issues have been raised." (828, p.16). AB misjudged the occupancy factor (p. 7) since there is a much higher frequency of. exposure on the railroad right of way and the river than at the site boundaries where there are no habitgtions.
By contrast r ilroad workers could be expoedd for success-a ive days and weeks in doing maintenance werk or track replacement,and fishermen and hunters might return to the same place of exposure for many days extending over months. And as for the contamination of food-source anipals, fish in the river and rabbits, pheasants,and ducks on the banks and enbankment could be con-stantly exposed and used for human food.
We do not think that Ms.M.T. Miller's affidavit is specific enough to be in any way conclusive ( p.8.) that the release levels have not been degradedpith the result of increased public exposure,for the benefit of PEco to operate " more efficiencly ",which we call more carelessly and dangerously.
- 3. As to the third factor we assert ' hat thiis is a matter of a significant safety issue and the outcome,i e. in the operatica of the plant and setting of No. release li: site would have been different if the calculations had been based on the railroad and river exposures rather than the site boundaries. We think the S@
Commission will find that we have prevailed on the three factors for reopening.
(D O (1.) In considering our petition to reopen the record the LB agreed that w
tav the low level effluent releases had never been contested.
We think that the public safety requires that this safety issue be thoroughly evaluated in a public h
hearing.
We assert good cause for filing at the time we did because we could not
" have know whether there were releases and how they would actually be calculated in'the operation of the plant until the 2/85 Release Report.
(ii) We agree with LB that no other means existed to protect our interest.
/
MC$
W
__ 2 __
Wo dicagree with AE that a cection 2.206 petition might protect our intereat.
We believe the Commission will agree that the only means for adequately protect-ing the public interest and our interest is through reopening of the record in (Pell) a public hearing on effluent releases.
(iii ) We believe that LB and AB erred in their denial that we could contri-bute to a sound record on effluent releases.
We offered Dr. Holholt's expert testimony to LB,as AB admitted (p.14 ). We promised to provide this testimony in a hearing before LB and the Board never took advantage of our offer to con-tribute in this expert manner to the record. AB cannot,therefore, reasonabily I
claim that Dr.Molholts testimony constitutes new material on appeal which was not presented to LB.
We assert that there is no equity in giving weight to the NRC's affidavits franexperts without balancing that against the affidavit of Dr.Molhalt and providing further opportunity for him to make further valuable additions to the record in a hearing.
We trust the Commission will remand this consideration to the Licensing Board. Our contention and Dr.Molholt'.s testimony are essential for the protection of the public.
(iv ) Both LB and AB found this factor weighs in our favor.
(~, v )
The issue of effluent releases is one of the most pressing safety issues for the public in the continuing operation of the Limerick plant.
Low level radiation and even higher levels of radiation often on a daily basis can result from the nuclear process and PEco's operation of Limerick with accompany-ing effluest releases.
The licensing process has not taken account of the risks involved.
It is a serious flaw in the process that this issue was not consid-ered in the course of the hearings.
Since intervenors had not raised contentions it was the responsibility of the NRC Staff to do so. They did not.
Broad [ng the issues in this respect only means including a public safety consideration which should have been the subject of public hearings before any operating license was issued.
Before there is any further subjecting of the public to this significant risk we petition the Commission to order the remedy-ing of this defect by remanding our contention to LB for hearings.
The Board has correctly identified this safety iissue as " a preeminet ooneern"(p.16) but it erred in not recognizing the r6.dioactive effluents as a significant safety issue.
We petition the Commission to correct this.
We believe the Commission will find that we have satisfied the factors for reopening the record and filing a late filed (as it is called ) contention.
We move that the Commission reverse the decision of the Appeal Board in ALAB-828 and remand the issue of efflent releases to LB for the filing of conten-tions and hearings.
NRC AB,LB,Dooketting, PEco Respectfully submitted,
- ' Others on Serv. List, h,-/- /. /QnWyg Box 186, Moylan,Pa. 19065
/