ML20212C882

Memorandum & Order (Schedules for Further Filings & for Prehearing Conference).* Petitioners & Staff Ordered to File Contentions by 870330.Tour of Facility Spent Fuel Pool Also Requested by Board.Served on 870303

ML20212C882
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png
Issue date:	02/27/1987
From:	Bechhoefer C Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:	MASSACHUSETTS, COMMONWEALTH OF, NEW ENGLAND COALITION ON NUCLEAR POLLUTION, NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), VERMONT, STATE OF
References
CON-#187-2638 87-547-02-LA, 87-547-2-LA, LPB-87-7, OLA, NUDOCS 8703040019
Download: ML20212C882 (7)

Text

_ - _ .

6

yy'E0 LBP-87-7 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 9 F -2 P3 Z0 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD f Before Administrative Judges Charles Bechhoefer, Chairman Glenn 0. Bright Dr. James H. Carpenter .7 ? No 0 31987 In the Matter of VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER Docket No. 50-271-OLA POWER CORPORATION -

(Vermont Yankee Nuclear ) (ASLBPNo. 87-547-02-LA)

Power Station) )

) February 27, 1987 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Schedules for Further Filings and for Prehearing Conference)

Pending before this Board are requests for a hearing and petitions for leave to intervene in a proposed expansion of the spent fuel pool of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, a facility located in Vernon, Vermont, approximately five miles south of Brattleboro, Vermont.

Petitioners are the New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution (NECNP),

the State of Vermont, and Attorney General James M. Shannon, on behalf of the Comonwealth of Massachusetts (Massachusetts). Responses to each of the petitions have been filed by Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp.

(Applicant) and by the NRC Staff.

0703040019 870227 DR ADOCK 0500 1 f)0

4 2

All three petitioners seek intervention as parties under 10 C.F.R. 5 2.714. In addition, Massachusetts also seeks to participate as an

" interested State" under 10 C.F.R. 5 2.715(c).

The notice of opportunity for hearing in this proceeding was originally published on June 18, 1986 and required that intervention petitions be submitted by July 18, 1986 (51 Fed. Reg. 22226-27, 22245-46). No one sought intervention, although NECNP did file certain comments on July 21, 1986 (apparently supplemented by filings dated 4 September 19, 1986 and November 19,1986). On December 31, 1986, however, the Commission re-noticed this proceeding, on the ground that the original notice, due to oversight, had omitted any notice of the applicability of the hybrid hearing procedures set forth in 10 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpart K (51 Fed. Reg. 47324). The new notice permitted intervention requests to be filed by January 30, 1987, but conditioned their timeliness on a petitioner's invocation of the hybrid procedures.

(Normally the hybrid procedures could only be invoked by a party, but the Commission's revised notice permitted petitioners to do so.) The three petitions before us were filed on January 29 or 30,1987, and each has invoked the hybrid procedures. They are thus all timely.

Under governing intervention rules, which are the same for hearings involving hybrid procedures as for other proceedings, a petitioner for intervention as a party must demonstrate standing--i.e., that its

" interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding"--and the specific aspect (s) of the subject matter of the proceeding as to which the petitioner wishes to intervene (10 C.F.R. 6 2.714(a)). In addition, l

3 prior to the first prehearing conference, a petitioner must set forth at least one valid contention (10 C.F.R. 52.714(b)).

Both the Applicant and Staff agree that Vermont and Massachusetts I have standing to intervene pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 5 2.714. We agree. In addition, as the Staff observes, Massachusetts would qualify to participate as an " interested State" under 10 C.F.R. 5 2.715(c).

. Subject to the submission by each of at least one acceptable contention, we are prepared to admit Vermont and Massachusetts as parties. In

addition, subject to the admission of at least one contention sponsored by any petitioner, we will permit Massachusetts to participate as an

" interested State" on matters not encompassed by any of its accepted contentions.

NECNP could establish standing to participate either as an organization or as a representative of one or more members. To establish organizational standing, NECNP would have to demonstrate that it (as an organization) will be injured and that the injury is not a generalized grievance shared in substantially equal measure by all or a large class of citizens. Transnuclear, Inc. and Exxon Nuclear Co. (Ten Applications for Low-Enriched Uranium Exports to EURATOM Member Nations),CLI-77-24,6NRC525,531(1977); Portland General Electric C_o. (Pebble Springs Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2), CLI-76-27, 4 NRC 610, 613-14 (1976). NECNP has not sought to establish this type of organizational standing.

In addition, an organization such as NECNP may also establish standing as the representative of members who themselves have an

e 4

interest that may be affected. HoustonLightingandPowerCo.(South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2), ALAB-549, 9 NRC 644, 646-47 (1979);

Public Service Co. of Indiana (Marble Hill Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2), ALAB-322, 3 NRC 328, 330 (1976). Residence of at least one member in close proximity to a facility, standing alone, would establish such an interest. Virginia Electric and Power Co. (North Anna Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2), ALAB-522, 9 NRC 54, 56 (1979).

NECNP is apparently seeking to establish its standing through representation of the interests of one or more of its members.

To follow this route, a petitioner must identify at least one member (hy name and adeross) whose interest may be affected and provide some concrete indication that the member has authorized the organization to represent him or her in the proceeding. Houston Lighting and Power Co. (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1), ALAB-535, 9 NRC 377,393-97(1979). NECNP has pointed out that approximately 100 of its 450 members live in the Brattleboro-Putney Vermont area (apparently within approximately 30-35 miles of the facility), that over 50 of them live within 10 miles of the facility, and that the health and safety of these members in particular would be jeopardized by the requested members. But NECNP has failed to provide the name and address of any of these members or authorization for NECNP to represent them in this proceeding.

Although the interest and authorization of one or more of these members would likely be sufficient to establish standing under the criteria set forth in North Anna, ALAB-522, supra, we cannot admit NECNP

_. }

E

{s i

O 5

I i

j as a party unless it provides the name, address and authorization.of at

.least one member with a sufficient interest in the proceeding.1 At the p present- time,-NECNP may amend its petition without leave of the Board (10 C.F.R. I 2._714(a)(3)), and the Staff recommends that we provide NECNP with an opportunity to do so. As set forth below, we are providi.1g NECNP that opportunity and setting forth a schedule for it to do so. 2 i

In addition to establishing its standing, a petitioner for intervention must set forth the aspect (s) of the proceeding in which it wishes to intervene. All 3 petitioners have done so, and the Applicant and Staff offer no objection to our finding those statements to be sufficient. We find at least one of the aspects set forth by each petitioner to be within the proper scope of this proceeding and that all of the petitioners have fulfilled this portion of the Commission's intervention requirements.

l I Authorization may perhaps be inferred from the nature of the organization, but NECNP has thus far not provided sufficient information to support such a determination. Allens Creek, i ALAB-535, supra, 9 NRC at 396. l 2

Although we have authority to grant intervention as a matter of discretion, NECNP has ru: addressed the criteria under which we l could consider its intervention under that authority. See Pebble i Springs, su ra, CLI-76-27, 4 NRC at 616; Metropolitan Edison Co.

(Three Mi e sland Nuclear Station, Unit No.11. CLI-83-25,18 NRC 327,333(1983); Florida Power & Light Co. (St. Lucie Plant, Unit No. 2) LBP-87-2, 25 NRC (Jan. 16, 1987).

s 1

6 In sum, Vermont and Massachusetts have established the standing and

" aspects" requirements, and NECNP has also fulfilled the " aspects" requirement. NECNP need fulfill only one additional requirement to perfect its standing. All petitioners must submit at least one adequate contention to participate as parties. Accordingly, we are providing for a prehearing conference and establishing dates for the filing of contentions, further information concerning NECNP's standing, and responses by the Applicant and Staff.

Based on the foregoing, it is this 27th day of February,1987 ORDERED:

1. Petitioners for intervention must file (mail) their contentions by Monday, March 30, 1987.

2. NECNP must file (mail) additional information concerning its standing by the same date (Monday, March 30,1987).

3. The Applicant is requested, at its earliest convenience, but no later than March 30, 1987, to provide each Board member with a copy of the application letter, dated April 25, 1986, together with any updating information concerning the application which has been filed with the NRC.

4. The Applicant and Staff are invited to respond to the above filings of petitioners. Such responses must be filed so that they are in our hands (as well as the hands of the petitioners) by Monday, April 13, 1987.

t 7

5. A prehearing conference is hereby scheduled for Tuesday, April

' 21, 1987 (commencing at 9:30 a.m.) and, to the extent necessary, Wednesday, April 22,1987(commencingat9:00a.m.). The conference will be held at the U.S. District Court, Post Office and Courthouse Building, 204 Main Street, Brattleboro, Vermont.

6. The Board will hear oral limited appearance statements (see 10 C.F.R. 5 2.715(a)) from 9:00-10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, April 22, 1987 (or such lesser time as is necessary to accommodate speakers who are present). If necessary, the Board will schedule other oral limited appearance sessions later in the proceeding.

7. The Board desires a tour of the spent fuel pool of the facility, including equipment utilized in cooling the facility, accompanied by representatives of any petitioners (or parties) who wish to attend. The Board calls upon the Applicant to arrange such a tour for.either Thursday morning, April 23, 1987 or (if time permits) the afternoon of Wednesday, April 22. (After receipt of proposed contentions, we will have a better understanding of the time the conference will require.)

FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD l

A S# A Y "

CharTssBechh'oefer,Chaftman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 27th day of February,1987

. - . _ _ --- -- - - - - . -