ML20236W093

Reply to Staff & Naesco Objections to Joinder of Necnp & to Naesco Objection to Standing.* Advises That Jointer Issue Involves Only Question of How Pleadings May Be Captioned. W/Certificate of Svc

ML20236W093
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	07/30/1998
From:	Backus R BACKUS, MEYER & SOLOMON, NEW ENGLAND COALITION ON NUCLEAR POLLUTION, SEACOAST ANTI-POLLUTION LEAGUE
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML20236W070	List: ML20236W068 ML20236W093
References
98-746-05-LA, 98-746-5-LA, LA, NUDOCS 9808050074
Download: ML20236W093 (6)

Text

~

00CKETED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA USNRC BEFORE THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION  % AUG -3 All :18 Before Admistrative Judges:

OFFICE 'J sm~ . . -

B. Paul Cotter, Jr., Chairman RUE. u A<u -: "

Dr. Charles N. Kelber ADJUDL '

. ,f,j:p Dr. Linda W. Little In the Matter of )

)

North Atlantic Energy ) Docket No. 50-443 Service Corporation )

) ASLBP No. 98-746-05-LA.

Seabrook Station, Unit No.1 )

)

Rockingham County, New Hampshire ) l 1

REfLY TO STAFF AND NAESCO OBJECTIONS TO JOINDER OF NECNP AND TO NAESCO OBJECTION TO STANDING I. NECNP SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO JOIN THE SAPL PETITION In answers filed under date of July 27, both Staff and North Atlantic Energy Services Company (NAESCO) continue to object to permitting the participation of the New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution (NECNP) in the June 5 petition for hearing filed initially by the Seacoast Anti-Pollution League, (SAPL) although the Staff concedes that the standing affidavits are sufficient. Both continue to assert that joint captioning of the pleadings must be disallowed because NECNP has not addressed the requirement for late filed contentions of 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1), although both appear to concede that this change involves only the question of "whether this proceeding would bear the name of two petitioners." NAESCO pleading, page 9, 9800050074 980731 PDR ADOCK 05000443 G PM ,

l- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

3

(

i see staffpleading, page 6.

i i

In support to their position, Staff and NAESCO cite Public Service Co. OfNew Hamnshire (Seabrook Station), Unit 2, (CLI-84-6,19 NRC 975 (1984) where the Commission declined to rule on ajoinder request. Passing the question of how a refusal to decide a question l

can be cited in support of the Staff /NAESCO position, there remains the fact that the cited case is i

not the same as the present proceeding. Unlike the situation in CLI-84-6, here the joint i petitioners are represented by one legal team and have committed to proceeding jointly in all i aspects of the proceeding. In addition, in the cited case, r.ithough the Commission indicated it was not deciding the issue ofjoinder, it did proceed to decide an issue on behalfof the joining party (SAPL) although the original petitioner effectively withdrew the initial petition.

Finally, your petitioners would point to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.714(f) which provides this Board with ample authority to assure that the petitioners do not fail to honor their commitment to proceeding in a common, joint e.nd unified manner in this proceeding, so that, in fact, thejoinder issue really does involve only a question ofhow the pleadings may be captioned.

To reiterate, NECNP will file no separate contention, offer no separate witnesses or documents, and conduct no separate examination o(discovery in this proceeding.

II. NAESCO'S OBJECTION TO STANDING IS WITHOUT MERIT 1

Naesco, unlike Staff, purports to find the standing affidavits submitted by both I organizations deficient. According to NAESCO, the affidavits do not allege " particularized l' __

harm."

The affidavits are sufficient. They allege residence and other personal activities within the so called emergency planning zone of the Seabrook reactor, and that !!e personal health and safety of the affiants will be threatened by an accident having offsite consequences. The gist of the contentions is that the requested exemption, if granted, will increase the probability or  !

I consequences of an accident at Seabrook, including the steam generator tube rupture event, which the NRC has long acknowledged presents an event which can bypass all engineered safety features, including the containment.

NAESCO's response is to reference a section of the Final Safety Analysis Report and the Staff's proposed "no significant hazards determination." As to the FSAR, NAESCO claims it establishes that, even in the event of a steam generator tube rupture accident which resulted in a

" reduction in margin" (page 7) there would be no particularized harm since the FSAR states such an accident would only cause dosev'well within the exposure value guidelines."

This argument results in a reductio adabsurdum, because, on this theory, there would never have to be any required steam generator inspections at all. Clearly, the periodic inspection ,

of steam generators is important to safety, and NAESCO's suggestion to the contrary should be rejected. In addition, the question in determining whether an exemption may be granted includes a finding that doing so would not cause a significant reduction in the margin of safety, (10 CFR 50.92), whether or not the alleged harm is bounded by conclusory statements in the FSAR.

l As to the citation to the Staff s proposed finding, NAESCO's argument is, to put it mildly, i

circular. The very issue the petitioners are proffering in this proceeding is whether the Staff s l proposed determination is correct. For NAESCO to cite the decision under review as establishing l l

l the correctness of that very decision is without merit l

Respectfully submitted, Seacoast Anti-Pollution League, New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution By Their Attorneys Joshua Gordon and Backus, Meyer, Solomon, Rood & Branch DATED: July 30,1998 BY:

e 8l,Mr<4*-

< Robert A. Backus 116 Lowell Street, P. O. Box 516 Manchester, NH 02105 (603) 668-7272 1

I l

k

DOCKETED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA USHRC BEFORE THE NUCLEAR PEGULATORY COMMISk O b ~

Before Administrative JudgesDFf C. 02 E RULV Y 2 B. Paul Cotter, Jr. , ChairmarpDJtJD C,E ~ !aFF Or. Charles N. Kelber Dr. Linda W. Little In the Matter of )

)

North Atlantic Energy )

Service Corporation )

) Docket No. 50-443 Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1 )

) ASLBP No. 98-746-05-LA Rockingham County, New Hampshire )

)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of SAPL and NECNP's Replyt to Staff and NAESCO I Objections to Joinder of NECNP and to NAESCO Objection to Standing have been served on j the following by deposit in the United States Mail, first class, this 31" day of July,1998. l l

Office of the Secretary B. Paul Cotter, Jr.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman j Washington, D.C. 20555 Atomic Safety ad ...icensing Board {

Attn: Docketing and Service Station U.c Mudcar Regulatory Commission l (Original and two ccpies) Washington, DC 20555-0001 Steven R. Hom, Esq. Dr. Charles N. Kelber l Office of the General Counsel Administrative Judge i l

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Washington, D.C. 20555 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 i

Lillian M Cuoco David A. Repka Senior Nuclear Counsel Winston & Strawn l Northeast Utilities Service Company 1400 L Street, N.W.

107 Selden Street Washington, D.C. 20005 Berlin, CT 06037 ]

__________-____-__A

Adjudicatory File Office ofCommission Appellate Adjudication Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Dated: k) W /97,.~ - /h W4 h ;

/ A' / R'obeTt h. Ba"ckss' For SAPL and NECNP i

l l

l l -------------- - _ --- - J