|
|
Line 2: |
Line 2: |
| | number = ML20148S927 | | | number = ML20148S927 |
| | issue date = 11/21/1978 | | | issue date = 11/21/1978 |
| | title = Responds to 780919 Ltr Requesting Advice from NRC in Presenting Case Against the Choice of Fulton Site for Nuc Plant | | | title = Responds to Requesting Advice from NRC in Presenting Case Against the Choice of Fulton Site for Nuc Plant |
| | author name = Moore V | | | author name = Moore V |
| | author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION (NRR) | | | author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION (NRR) |
Line 11: |
Line 11: |
| | contact person = | | | contact person = |
| | document report number = NUDOCS 7812040242 | | | document report number = NUDOCS 7812040242 |
| | | title reference date = 09-19-1978 |
| | document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, NRC TO PUBLIC ENTITY/CITIZEN/ORGANIZATION/MEDIA, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE | | | document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, NRC TO PUBLIC ENTITY/CITIZEN/ORGANIZATION/MEDIA, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE |
| | page count = 2 | | | page count = 2 |
|
---|
Category:CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS
MONTHYEARML20086R8251984-02-27027 February 1984 Forwards Brief on Issues Re Liability for Fees & Expenses. Related Correspondence ML20083H6231984-01-0404 January 1984 Forwards Vs Boyer Executed Affidavit Which Should Be Filed W/Util 831229 Papers ML20083J5681983-12-29029 December 1983 Forwards Objection to ASLB 831230 Proposed Decision & Order Dismissing Proceeding W/Prejudice.Motion for Summary Decision & for Termination of Proceedings as Moot & W/O Prejudice Encl ML20042C0981982-03-26026 March 1982 Concurs W/Bwr Owners Group 820205 Ltr Re Schedule of NUREG- 0737,Item II.K.3.18, Mod of Automatic Depressurization System (ADS) Logic. Suppl to Original Study Proposed in 820205 Ltr Will Be Submitted by 820930 ML20005B5031981-07-0202 July 1981 Informs That Study Completion & Final Rept Submittal Re Quarry Blasting & Concrete Curing Are Scheduled for Sept 1981,in Response to NRC 810421 Request for Addl Info ML19346A3491981-06-11011 June 1981 Notifies That Error Appears in Page 5 of Brief Re State of Nj Participation Before ASLB as Interested State.Nj Never Participated in Proceedings ML20002A9971980-12-0505 December 1980 Requests That Util CP Application Be Withdrawn W/O Prejudice & CP Proceedings Be Terminated.Motion Encl ML20062J2801980-10-0202 October 1980 Responds to NRC Request for Info Re Implementation of TMI-2 Action Plan Requirements.Initiation Levels of HPCI & RCIC Sys Should Be Separated So That RCIC Sys Will Initiate Higher Water Level than HPCI Sys ML19338C6471980-08-12012 August 1980 Requests Info Re Fulton,Pa Proposed Nuclear Plant Site ML19330C3711980-07-0808 July 1980 Requests Placement of Pk Allison on Official Svc List as Representative of Fulton Township.Wj Sidebottom No Longer Represents Township.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20125D6481979-11-30030 November 1979 Responds to Re Util Application for Early Site Review at Fulton Township.Commission in Process of Reviewing Application to Determine Suitability for Docketing for Hearing ML20125D6431979-11-30030 November 1979 Forwards 791130 Response to T Spackman Re Util Application for Early Site Review at Fulton Township.Ex Parte Communication Rule Prevents Substantive Response ML20125D6511979-11-27027 November 1979 Forwards T Spackman Re Util Application for Early Site Review at Fulton Township.Requests Comments ML20125D6541979-11-18018 November 1979 Requests That NRC Cancel Util Application for Early Site Review at Fulton Township.Plant Would Infringe on Rights of Property Owners in Immediate Vicinity.Util Should Reapply When Specific Plans for Plant Have Been Made ML19250A5041979-10-17017 October 1979 Forwards Response to NRC 790913 Request for Implementation of Actions Contained in NUREG-0578 Re TMI-2 Lessons Learned Task Force short-term Recommendations.Response Is Consistent W/Bwr Owners Group Recommendations ML19248D2471979-07-10010 July 1979 Requests Careful Consideration of Martic Township Supervisors Resolution Opposing Early Site Review ML19207C4771979-07-10010 July 1979 Requests Careful Consideration of Martic County,Pa Supervisors 790604 Resolution Opposing Early Site Review. Portion of State of PA Should Not Have Clustering of Nuclear Facilities ML19253A2211979-06-0404 June 1979 Submits 790604 Resolution Opposing Early Site Review & Requesting Rejection of Application.Reasons for Opposition Include Excessive Density of Nuclear Facilities in Area & Lack of Emergency Evacuation & Sheltering Plan ML19225C4941979-05-29029 May 1979 Urges NRC to Deny Any Early Site Review Requests for Facility ML19254D5871979-05-23023 May 1979 Forwards Ny Times 790506 Article Re Siting of Nuclear Reactors.Requests Comment ML19248C9261979-05-14014 May 1979 Supplements Response to IE Bulletin 79-08.Review Under Way. No Tech Spec Changes Anticipated ML19261D7751979-05-0505 May 1979 Urges on Behalf of Peach Bottom Township,Pa That Site Be Reviewed at Time Plant Needs to Be Constructed ML19261D7831979-04-30030 April 1979 Opposes Const of Addl Nuclear Facility in Area ML19254D5861979-04-12012 April 1979 Submits Three Requests from Lancaster County Planning Commission:Denial of Early Site Review Application,Shutdown of TMI-2 Until Waste Removed & Request for NRC Comments on Other Nuclear Accidents & Significance to Lancaster County ML19261D7811979-04-0707 April 1979 Requests,On Behalf of Drumore Township,Pa Supervisors, Termination of Early Site Review Plan.Opposes Const of Any Type of Electrical Generating Plant ML19261D7851979-03-0202 March 1979 Opposes Application for Early Site Review ML19269C8531979-01-16016 January 1979 Informs Since Const Permit Application Has Returned to Normal Licensing Path,Util Will Resume Normal Communications W/Parties & Will Send No More Monthly Rept Ltrs ML19322A1391978-12-14014 December 1978 Informs NRC That Planning Commission Will Be Spokesman for County of Lancaster ML20147J2931978-12-0606 December 1978 Emphasizes Importance of Submmiting Accurate & Complete Info to NRC by Licensees & Applicants.Info Submitted Must Be Substantiated by Data & Calculations.Licensee Must Notify NRC of Any Inaccuracies or Enforcemment Action Will Result ML20148S9271978-11-21021 November 1978 Responds to Requesting Advice from NRC in Presenting Case Against the Choice of Fulton Site for Nuc Plant ML20150C3261978-11-14014 November 1978 Forwards League of Women Voters of Us Natl Energy Position Paper.Paper Discusses Energy Growth Rate,Energy Source Mix & Fed Policies & Reg Actions ML20148K3911978-11-0808 November 1978 Ack Receipt of to R Denise of Nrc.Nrc Will Cooperate W/League of Women Voters of Lancaster County to Hold General Meeting Re Subj Facil.S Kirslis Will Be Sent as NRC Representative to Discuss Lic & Regulatory Process ML19261D7861978-07-0505 July 1978 Opposes Application for Early Site Review.Requests Termination of Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19261D7801978-05-31031 May 1978 Advises That Fulton Township,Pa Planning Commission Opposes Const of Electrical Generating Plant on Proposed Site. Requests Termination of Util Application ML19261D7791978-05-12012 May 1978 Responds to 780501 Ltr Re Proposed Meeting on Behalf of Fulton Township,Pa,Requesting That NRC Not Grant Early Site Review ML19241B1881978-03-0808 March 1978 Responds to 780130 Ltr Re Site Info.Intends to File Amend to CP Application for Adjudicatory Early Site Review. Terminating Proceedings Would Waste Applicable Work Already Completed 1984-02-27
[Table view] Category:NRC TO PUBLIC ENTITY/CITIZEN/ORGANIZATION/MEDIA
MONTHYEARML20125D6481979-11-30030 November 1979 Responds to Re Util Application for Early Site Review at Fulton Township.Commission in Process of Reviewing Application to Determine Suitability for Docketing for Hearing ML20148S9271978-11-21021 November 1978 Responds to Requesting Advice from NRC in Presenting Case Against the Choice of Fulton Site for Nuc Plant ML20148K3911978-11-0808 November 1978 Ack Receipt of to R Denise of Nrc.Nrc Will Cooperate W/League of Women Voters of Lancaster County to Hold General Meeting Re Subj Facil.S Kirslis Will Be Sent as NRC Representative to Discuss Lic & Regulatory Process 1979-11-30
[Table view] Category:OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
MONTHYEARML20125D6481979-11-30030 November 1979 Responds to Re Util Application for Early Site Review at Fulton Township.Commission in Process of Reviewing Application to Determine Suitability for Docketing for Hearing ML20125D6431979-11-30030 November 1979 Forwards 791130 Response to T Spackman Re Util Application for Early Site Review at Fulton Township.Ex Parte Communication Rule Prevents Substantive Response ML20147J2931978-12-0606 December 1978 Emphasizes Importance of Submmiting Accurate & Complete Info to NRC by Licensees & Applicants.Info Submitted Must Be Substantiated by Data & Calculations.Licensee Must Notify NRC of Any Inaccuracies or Enforcemment Action Will Result ML20148S9271978-11-21021 November 1978 Responds to Requesting Advice from NRC in Presenting Case Against the Choice of Fulton Site for Nuc Plant ML20148K3911978-11-0808 November 1978 Ack Receipt of to R Denise of Nrc.Nrc Will Cooperate W/League of Women Voters of Lancaster County to Hold General Meeting Re Subj Facil.S Kirslis Will Be Sent as NRC Representative to Discuss Lic & Regulatory Process 1979-11-30
[Table view] |
Text
l lf y
f * "% o, UNITED ST ATES yA ..
~
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMisslON 3 . 1. .....e .
c WAc m oTON.o.c.20sss
% ,!@f f
J. . # HOV21'is78 Docket Nos. 50-463 and 50-464 L Mr. Thomas Spackman II Griest Road - R. D. 1 '
Peach Bottom, Pennsylvania 17563
Dear Mr. Spackman:
This is in response to your letter of September 19, 1978 asking for , -
advice and guidance from the NRC in p 2senting your case effectively against the choice of the Fulton site for a nuclear plant. He are pleased to respond to this request, since it is the policy of the NRC to be helpful to all pcrties in a proceeding in apprising them of their rights and privileges in presenting their views at appropriate times in the NRC review and hearing processes.
You are correct in assuming that you and other intervenors will receive copies of all correspondence and data regarding the application (by the end of this year) for an early site review (ESR) for the proposed Fulton Generating Station. According to the ESR regulations (Enclosure), the applicant may choose which environmental issues he wishes the NRC to review. Although you express the view that intervenors would wish to have a say in this choice so that matters of importance to them will be adequately covered in the review, the regulations restrict the choice of general issues to the party that requests the ESR. Previously admitted intervenors may raise specific contentions within the scope of, and directly related to, these general issues, if such contentions had not been raised previously and good cause is shown for raising such additional .-
contentions. Such contentions, as well as previously admitted contentions which are within the scope of the general ESR issues, will be considered at the ESR hearings.
Although not legally prohibited, it is generally not practically feasible for an intervenor to apply for a separate ESR on issues of his own choice.
A more frequently foliowed course for an intervenor is to bring up con-tentions regarding his own interests during the construction permit (CP) hearing. However, if an intervenor has contentions regarding specific ESR issues, he should bring them up during the ESR hearing. Further litigation of issues considered at the ESR stage will not be allowed at the subsequent CP hearing unless significant new information is available which would require a relitigation of the ESR issues; thus it is important that intervenors be prepared to litigate the ESR issues at the ESP, hearing.
Other appropriate issues of importance to the intervenors and not within the scope of the ESR proceeding may be contended at the CP hearing, which i 7812040242
fir. Thomas Spackman II will be scheduled subsequent to the ESR proceeding. The staff will provide copies of the ESR application to all parties as soon as it is accepted for review. This will provide the earliest notice of the subjects Philadelphia Electric Company (PE) proposes for early review.
With regard to the effective timing of intervenor comments, it is help-ful for the NRC staff to receive comments from intervenors and all other interested individuals and organizations as soon as possible after the acceptance and docketing of the application for an'ESR. The comments should be limited to the specific ESR issues being reviewed. Comments on other issues should be reserved for the CP review, when they will be con- .
l sidered by the staff in preparing the draft and final environmental statements. .
In answer to another of your questions, intervenors will be notified of all NRC-PE meetings and will be apprised of their right to attend as observers. Regarding legal representation at hearings before the ASLB, i
many intervenors have found this advisable. However, it is not a legal I
requirement, and boards and the staff counsel present at hearings have generally tried to be helpful to intervenors representing their own interests.
In the interest of avoiding delay, the attempt is usually made to start the ESR hearing before the ASLB about a month after the issuance of the Final Site Environmental Statement. However, intervenors need not wait for this statement to prepare testimony in support of their ESR contentions.
Several months will transpire between docketing of the application and I the ASLB hearing.
I Enclosed also is a copy of NUREG-0180, which offers some clarifications I of the ESR regulations. I hope that these documents and the responses given above will provide helpful guidance in effectively presenting your .-
l view about the Fulton site.
Sincerely, kg h 7/6& \.c.
Voss A. Moore, Assistant Director for Environmental Projects Division of Site Safety and Environmental Analysis
Enclosures:
As stated cc: The Honorable Robert Malker
~ - - -
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _