ML19326B046: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 17: Line 17:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:w
{{#Wiki_filter:w o
          -                      -
l      l 8      80curta            e                                                  i      !,
o l      l 8      80curta            e                                                  i      !,
_            me            ,                                                  ,      _
_            me            ,                                                  ,      _
l V
l V
   '    MAY261972 m            Q
   '    MAY261972 m            Q I
                              '
em= w m.: ,g Puelig ergessengs aneca        p q                '
I em= w m.: ,g Puelig ergessengs aneca        p q                '
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ru                ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISS10N BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL 80ARO in the Matter of:                                )
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ru                ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISS10N BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL 80ARO in the Matter of:                                )
THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY                        )
THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY                        )
Line 31: Line 29:
ILLUMINATING COMPANY (Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station)              )
ILLUMINATING COMPANY (Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station)              )
{
{
                                                                                          !
EXCEPTIONS TO THE INITIAL DECISION intervenor Coalition For Safe Nuclear Power hereby submits the following exceptions to the initial decision of the Atomic              !
EXCEPTIONS TO THE INITIAL DECISION intervenor Coalition For Safe Nuclear Power hereby submits the following exceptions to the initial decision of the Atomic              !
I Safety and Licensing Board rendered on May 19, 1972:
I Safety and Licensing Board rendered on May 19, 1972:
Line 37: Line 34:
: 1.      The Board erred in excluding testimony from any                f t
: 1.      The Board erred in excluding testimony from any                f t
of the parties upon the issue of environmental            .
of the parties upon the issue of environmental            .
                                                                                        '
harm from plant operation. By foreclosing this        i I
harm from plant operation. By foreclosing this        i
evi dence, the Board foreciosed inquiry into the                :
                                                                                          '
I evi dence, the Board foreciosed inquiry into the                :
major alternative of plant abandonment following              fr NEPA review and the influence that continuing                  I
major alternative of plant abandonment following              fr NEPA review and the influence that continuing                  I
{      {
{      {
Line 48: Line 43:
8008060 2 D          .      I
8008060 2 D          .      I


_
                    -
      ,
1-    1 i
1-    1 i
                                                                          -
i 1
i 1
                                                                      !
                                                                      <
        .
      ,
                                                              .
: 2. The participation of the Regulatory Staff l
: 2. The participation of the Regulatory Staff l
as a party to the suspension hearing violated the intervenors' rights to a Yair adversary hearing as is inherent in the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
as a party to the suspension hearing violated the intervenors' rights to a Yair adversary hearing as is inherent in the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
(Tr. 12) 3    Conclusion four in Section F of the initial Decision is unsupported by substantial, reliable and probative evidence, since the Board eliminated                    l any evidence as to the " outcome of NEPA"
(Tr. 12) 3    Conclusion four in Section F of the initial Decision is unsupported by substantial, reliable and probative evidence, since the Board eliminated                    l any evidence as to the " outcome of NEPA"
>                                                                        0 review and the " irretrievable commitments"              g
>                                                                        0 review and the " irretrievable commitments"              g effect upon that revi ew.
                                                                        !
effect upon that revi ew.
l (p. 44 of initial Decision)-
l (p. 44 of initial Decision)-
: 4. Intervenor Coalition for Safe Nuclear Power 3
: 4. Intervenor Coalition for Safe Nuclear Power 3
Line 70: Line 54:
conduct of- the proceedings as follows:                  ;
conduct of- the proceedings as follows:                  ;
(1) intervenor was not allowed to cross-                j examine each wi tness as di rect examination            <
(1) intervenor was not allowed to cross-                j examine each wi tness as di rect examination            <
i was completed, (2) the transcript reflects
i was completed, (2) the transcript reflects numerous occasions where the permiteest witnesses cenied that they had prepared                    l some portion of the written testimony they
:
,
numerous occasions where the permiteest
'
witnesses cenied that they had prepared                    l
'
some portion of the written testimony they
                   ~
                   ~
had previously sworn was theirs (ali motions to strike such testimony were overruled), and (3) the Feoeral Power Commission, through
had previously sworn was theirs (ali motions to strike such testimony were overruled), and (3) the Feoeral Power Commission, through 1
                                                                            ,
1
;  _
;  _
l
l 2-                            l
                                  -
2-                            l
                          -. _
                                                -


                                  ..
      .    .
                ..
        -
          .
Mr. A. L. Tolston and Federal Power Commission counsel were allowed to appear and act as a party to the proceedings. In essence, the proceedings corresponded more clearly to a town meeting than an adjudicatory proceeding.
Mr. A. L. Tolston and Federal Power Commission counsel were allowed to appear and act as a party to the proceedings. In essence, the proceedings corresponded more clearly to a town meeting than an adjudicatory proceeding.
                           -(Tr. 375-414)
                           -(Tr. 375-414)
Line 102: Line 68:
             .U. S. Mail on May 23, 1972:
             .U. S. Mail on May 23, 1972:
Secretary (20)                        Gerald Charnoff, Esq.
Secretary (20)                        Gerald Charnoff, Esq.
U. S. Atomic Energy Commi ssion    Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbrid ge
U. S. Atomic Energy Commi ssion    Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbrid ge Washington, D. C. 20545              910 17th Street, N. W.
    -
Attn:    Chief, Public Proceedings  Washington, D. C. 20006 Branch Atomic Safety and Licensing Algie A. Wells, Esq.                  Board Panel Atomic. Safety and Licensing          U. S. Atomi c Energy Commi ssion Appeal Board          .
Washington, D. C. 20545              910 17th Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20545 U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C. 20545 Martin Malsch, Esq.
Attn:    Chief, Public Proceedings  Washington, D. C. 20006
"  '
Branch Atomic Safety and Licensing Algie A. Wells, Esq.                  Board Panel Atomic. Safety and Licensing          U. S. Atomi c Energy Commi ssion Appeal Board          .
Washington, D. C. 20545 U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C. 20545
'
Martin Malsch, Esq.
Office of General Counsel U. S. Atomic Energy Commission
Office of General Counsel U. S. Atomic Energy Commission
.              Washington, D. C. 20545 s                C. \/O
.              Washington, D. C. 20545 s                C. \/O
                                                             / AIO M ., G ."\% h A J_ rome S. Kalur
                                                             / AIO M ., G ."\% h A J_ rome S. Kalur
                                                             /
                                                             /
,
(
(
_3_
_3_
f}}
f}}

Revision as of 01:01, 1 February 2020

Coalition for Safe Nuclear Power Exceptions to 720519 Initial Decision.Board Erred in Excluding Testimony from Parties Testifying on Issues Re Environ Harm from Plant Operation.Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19326B046
Person / Time
Site: Davis Besse Cleveland Electric icon.png
Issue date: 05/23/1972
From: Kalur J
COALITION FOR SAFE NUCLEAR POWER, JAMISON, ULRICH, BURKHALTER & HESSER
To:
NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP)
Shared Package
ML19326B041 List:
References
NUDOCS 8003060824
Download: ML19326B046 (3)
v • d • e


Text

w o

l l 8 80curta e i  !,

_ me , , _

l V

' MAY261972 m Q I

em= w m.: ,g Puelig ergessengs aneca p q '

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ru ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISS10N BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL 80ARO in the Matter of: )

THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY )

and Oocket No. 50-346 -

THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC )

ILLUMINATING COMPANY (Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station) )

{

EXCEPTIONS TO THE INITIAL DECISION intervenor Coalition For Safe Nuclear Power hereby submits the following exceptions to the initial decision of the Atomic  !

I Safety and Licensing Board rendered on May 19, 1972:

[

1. The Board erred in excluding testimony from any f t

of the parties upon the issue of environmental .

harm from plant operation. By foreclosing this i I

evi dence, the Board foreciosed inquiry into the  :

major alternative of plant abandonment following fr NEPA review and the influence that continuing I

{ {

financial expenditures could have upon the I l

adoption of the alternative of abandonment.

(See pp. 6-10 of Initial Decision) (Tr. 447-448) i I

8008060 2 D . I

1- 1 i

i 1

2. The participation of the Regulatory Staff l

as a party to the suspension hearing violated the intervenors' rights to a Yair adversary hearing as is inherent in the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

(Tr. 12) 3 Conclusion four in Section F of the initial Decision is unsupported by substantial, reliable and probative evidence, since the Board eliminated l any evidence as to the " outcome of NEPA"

> 0 review and the " irretrievable commitments" g effect upon that revi ew.

l (p. 44 of initial Decision)-

4. Intervenor Coalition for Safe Nuclear Power 3

was denied a fair hearing because of the 1

conduct of- the proceedings as follows:  ;

(1) intervenor was not allowed to cross- j examine each wi tness as di rect examination <

i was completed, (2) the transcript reflects numerous occasions where the permiteest witnesses cenied that they had prepared l some portion of the written testimony they

~

had previously sworn was theirs (ali motions to strike such testimony were overruled), and (3) the Feoeral Power Commission, through 1

_

l 2- l

Mr. A. L. Tolston and Federal Power Commission counsel were allowed to appear and act as a party to the proceedings. In essence, the proceedings corresponded more clearly to a town meeting than an adjudicatory proceeding.

-(Tr. 375-414)

I

\ <-- t D

\ dd.Ct'$.d> .x h ?,N g (_

n Jerome S. Kalur Coun$el for Intervenors CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the Exceptions to the ini tial Deci sion were served on the following, by deposi t in the

.U. S. Mail on May 23, 1972:

Secretary (20) Gerald Charnoff, Esq.

U. S. Atomic Energy Commi ssion Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbrid ge Washington, D. C. 20545 910 17th Street, N. W.

Attn: Chief, Public Proceedings Washington, D. C. 20006 Branch Atomic Safety and Licensing Algie A. Wells, Esq. Board Panel Atomic. Safety and Licensing U. S. Atomi c Energy Commi ssion Appeal Board .

Washington, D. C. 20545 U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C. 20545 Martin Malsch, Esq.

Office of General Counsel U. S. Atomic Energy Commission

. Washington, D. C. 20545 s C. \/O

/ AIO M ., G ."\% h A J_ rome S. Kalur

/

(

_3_

f

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML19326B046&oldid=2361679"