ML19254C851

Supplemental Memorandum in Support of Ctr for Development 790420 Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing.Alleges Discovery of Contradicting Applicant Submittal

ML19254C851
Person / Time
Site:	05000574
Issue date:	10/03/1979
From:	Asher T, Bogin M CENTER FOR DEVELOPMENT POLICY
To:
Shared Package
ML19254C846	List: ML19254C845 ML19254C850 ML19254C851 ML19254C852
References
NUDOCS 7910180014
Download: ML19254C851 (4)

Text

e p cg 3 g oci 31373 >32,'

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA #$JA,'1 M /g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION q bda

% no t In the matter of )

) Application No. XR-120 WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP. ) Docket No. 50-574

)

(Exports to the Philippines) ) Application No. XCOM 0013

) Application No. XSNM0 1471 SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM 0F THE CENTER FOR DEVELOPMENT POLICY IN SUPPORT OF PETITION TO INTERVENE AND REQUEST FOR HEARING On April 20, 1979, the Center for Development Policy (" CDP")

filed with this Commission ("NRC") a " Petition for Leave to Intervene and Request for Hearing" in the above-captioned matters. This Memorandum and accompanying Affidavit are submitted in support thereof.

I. THE STANDARDS FOR INTERVENTION ARE SET GUT IN THE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION ACT AND THE NRC'S REGULATIONS.

The standards governing intervention are contained in the regulations on public participation, 10 C.F.R. 4% 110.80 through 110.13, promulgated by the NRC under congressional mandate contained in the Nuclear Nonproliferation Act ("NNPA") of 1978, 42 U.S.C. s 2155. The tests for intervention are (a) whether the proposed intervenor has an interest which may be affected, 10 C.F.R. b 110.82(b)(4), or (b) that intervention would be in tne public interest and would assist the Commission in making the statutorily required determinations, 10 C.F.R. 5 110.82(b)(3).

CDP meets both these tests.

i189 15 7910180 C) / /

II. CDP HAS AN INTEREST IN THIS EXPORT PROCEEDING.

As demonstrated in the attached affidavit of Lindsay Mattison, CDP has a vital interest in monitoring the flow of resources from the United States to developing nations, conducting research and analysis of development programs and their effects, and disseminating this analysis to the public and interested public officials. In sum, CDP's public interest activities give it a previously recognized and legally cognizable interest in these proceedings.

This interest was recognized by Congress in enacting the public participation section of NNPA:

[I]t is the intent of the Committee to guarantee the citizens and public interest groups their right to make their views known during the export licensing process.

H. R. Rep. No.95-587, 95th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 22 (1977).

(Emphasis added.) Clearly Congress wanted the NRC to allow public interest groups such as CDP the right of intervention in nuclear export licensing proceedings.

III. CDP'S INTERVENTION WILL ASSIST THE COMMISSION IN MAKING ITS STATUTORILY REQUIRED DETERMINATIONS.

As demonstrated in Mr. Mattison's affidavit, CDP has spent much time, effort and money in studying this proposed export. CDP has brought to the attention of the State Department and NRC much evidence which otherwise would not have been in the public record. These efforts on CDP's part are continuing and more relevant and undisclosed evidence is being discovered every day.

CDP's involvement allows the NRC to make the statutorily required judgments on the widest possible record, thus ensuring that the NRC's decision is based upon all the relevant facts. 18% i16 2

As documented in Mr. Mattison's affidavit, CDP is the only group other than the NRC and the applicant that has both the interest and the financial resources to be able to develop independent evidence in this matter. It has been involved in the proceedings in the Philippines (the Puno Commission) and has served to relay information from the proceedings in the Philippines to the NRC and developments in the United States to the Philippines. Without the participation of CDP, the Commission's judgment on this matter will necessarily be one-sided, for there is no other way that evidence critical of the applicant will e developed.

IV. A FULL, OPEN, ADJUDICATORY PUBLIC HEARING IS REQUIRED IN THIS INSTANCE.

As demonstrated in Mr. Mattison's affidavit and by the record in this case, CDP has discovered much evidence which contradicts that submitted by the applicant. It is hornbook law that in matters where the credibility of witnesses is questioned, the only method to discover the truth is through cross-examination. This is the instant situation and therefore ar.ly a full, open, adjudicatory public hearing with full cross-examination will serve the purpose of discovering the truth. Only in this manner can the proposed export be scrutinized adequately.

Additionally there are many individuals who have extensive knowledge of the project under consideration but who will only divulge such under comoulsory process. A full, open hearing will be the orily way to procure this information.

i184 117 3

Thus not only is an oral public hearing necessary, but to adequately prepare, the NRC must allow the parties full discovery rights. This will result in the fullest presentation of evloence and thus allow the NRC to make a decision on the broadest possible record.

V. CONCLUSION.

In conclusion, CDP has demonstrated in its original Petition and this Supplement that it meets the standards for standing in this matter'and that only a full, open, public hearing can adequately assure that all the relevant evidence will disclosed.

Respect lly submitted, 1#dL Tnomas R. Asner 4

bT/ JL Matthew B. Bogin Thoma Asher, P.C.

1232 . enteenth Street, N.W.

Third Floor Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 452-1540 1184 118 4

Thus not only is an oral public hearing necessary, but to adequatelj prepare, the NRC must allow the parties full di~scovery rights.

This will result in the fullest presentation of evjcence and thus allow the NRC to make a decision on the broadest po s,s i t i e _

record.

V. CONCLUSION.

In conclusion, CDP has demonstrated in its original Petition and this Supplement that it meets the standards for standing in this matter and that only a full, open, public hearing can adequately assure that all the relevant evidence will disclosed.

Resp lly s u b,n i t t e c ,

[

Q l't Inomas x. Asner

.o f ~/ .,/ ,Y f,7 hs / ~

Mattnew a. Sogin Thomas R. Asher, P.C.

1232 Seventeenth Street, N.W.

Third Floor Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 452-1540 1181 119 4