ML19318B994: 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 20: Line 20:
=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:. . .  .      . . - . __ ..    . - . _ . _ .            . - . ~ _        . .          .- ..          .
{{#Wiki_filter:. . .  .      . . - . __ ..    . - . _ . _ .            . - . ~ _        . .          .- ..          .
                                                                                                                          -      --        -
           )                                                                                                                                      ;
           )                                                                                                                                      ;
  .-
l                                                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5
l                                                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5
Of          ODltygg        .
Of          ODltygg        .
Line 30: Line 28:
i In the Matter of                                              )
i In the Matter of                                              )
                                                                                       )
                                                                                       )
                                                                                                                    -
pc      &    %g s
pc      &    %g s
                                                                                                                                       / fy  /
                                                                                                                                       / fy  /
NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC                                        )  Docket No. 50-367          'k                f          !
NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC                                        )  Docket No. 50-367          'k                f          !
'
SERVICE COMMISSION                                        )                                N Q 'I^~$ }~ g /
SERVICE COMMISSION                                        )                                N Q 'I^~$ }~ g /
(Bailly Generating Station                                    )  (Construction Permit Nuclear 1)                                                    )      Extension) 4 OBJECTIONS OF THE CITY OF GARY ET AL. TO THE PROVISIONAL ORDER OF MAY 30, 1980 i
(Bailly Generating Station                                    )  (Construction Permit Nuclear 1)                                                    )      Extension) 4 OBJECTIONS OF THE CITY OF GARY ET AL. TO THE PROVISIONAL ORDER OF MAY 30, 1980 i
The City of Gary, Indiana, United Steelworkers of America
The City of Gary, Indiana, United Steelworkers of America Local 6787, Save the Dunes Council, the Bailly Alliance and
'
Local 6787, Save the Dunes Council, the Bailly Alliance and
         ~
         ~
I                      the Critical Mass Energy Project (hereinafter "the Gary peti-l tioners") hereby request thit the Board reconsider its Provisional                                                        j
I                      the Critical Mass Energy Project (hereinafter "the Gary peti-l tioners") hereby request thit the Board reconsider its Provisional                                                        j
.{                                                                                                                                                l i
.{                                                                                                                                                l i
t                    Order of May 30, 1980, to the extent that it concludes that the                                                              !
t                    Order of May 30, 1980, to the extent that it concludes that the                                                              !
                                                                 .                                                                                l Gary petitioners' contention is outside the scope of this pro-                                                            3
                                                                 .                                                                                l Gary petitioners' contention is outside the scope of this pro-                                                            3 ceeding.                                                                                                                    i
                                                                                                                                                  '
!
ceeding.                                                                                                                    i
'.                          The Gary petitioners believe that the Board has properly interpreted the scope of a construction permit extension proceeding to encompass significant' health and safety or environmental matters                                                      i l
'.                          The Gary petitioners believe that the Board has properly interpreted the scope of a construction permit extension proceeding to encompass significant' health and safety or environmental matters                                                      i l
that the Board determines cannot abide the operating license pro-
that the Board determines cannot abide the operating license pro-
Line 54: Line 45:
;                    has erroneously concluded that the Commission's requirements for i                    siting and emergency evacuation ha'e                                  v    not yet changed so substantially
;                    has erroneously concluded that the Commission's requirements for i                    siting and emergency evacuation ha'e                                  v    not yet changed so substantially
;
;
as to make.it appropriate for.this Board to' reevaluate the Bailly
as to make.it appropriate for.this Board to' reevaluate the Bailly i
                                                              -
i
,
site at this time.                    Order'at 29-30.
site at this time.                    Order'at 29-30.
                             . As we pointed _ out. at the Prehearing Cor)ference (Tr. 119-138),
                             . As we pointed _ out. at the Prehearing Cor)ference (Tr. 119-138),
                                                                  -
                     ;the NRC has already adopted interim rules which condition
                     ;the NRC has already adopted interim rules which condition
       ~
       ~
                                                '
           .s ooesco3%                  p                                                                                                          ,
           .s ooesco3%                  p                                                                                                          ,
                                    .                              ----. .              -..      .-            -    ---.            -


    .
.
the continued operation of a plant or the granting of a license on a showing that the populations within specified emergency planning zones can be evacuated within a reasonable period of        I time. 44 F.R. 75169 (Dec. 19, 1979). Because of the unique circumstances presented here -- most notably including the fact that construction of Bailly is just 1% complete -- we contend that it is contrary to all notions of the public health and safety to now approve the construction of an entire plant at this site without any consideration of whether the populations surrounding Bailly can be evacuated in the event of a nuclear accident.
the continued operation of a plant or the granting of a license on a showing that the populations within specified emergency planning zones can be evacuated within a reasonable period of        I time. 44 F.R. 75169 (Dec. 19, 1979). Because of the unique circumstances presented here -- most notably including the fact that construction of Bailly is just 1% complete -- we contend that it is contrary to all notions of the public health and safety to now approve the construction of an entire plant at this site without any consideration of whether the populations surrounding Bailly can be evacuated in the event of a nuclear accident.
If the Board's concern is that the Commission's rules have nei been formally made final (Order at 29), we would point out
If the Board's concern is that the Commission's rules have nei been formally made final (Order at 29), we would point out that the Commission is considering the emergency planning regu-lations on an expedited basis. As is evident from the attached Memorandum to the Commissioners (dated June 3, 1980), the interin rules -- which are in any event in full force and effect right now -- cre to be adopted on a final basis imminently.      We there-fore submit that, to the extent the Board feels clearer guidance from the NRC is required on the siting and emergency evacuation issues, the Board should stay proceedings pending final adoption of the applicable ruler.
  -
As a final matter, the Board has indicated that it will admit th    City of Gary as an Interested Municipality pursuant to 10 C.P.R. S 2.715(c), notwithstanding the fact that its sole contention regarding emergency evacuation is not admitted.      As  !
that the Commission is considering the emergency planning regu-lations on an expedited basis. As is evident from the attached Memorandum to the Commissioners (dated June 3, 1980), the interin rules -- which are in any event in full force and effect right now -- cre to be adopted on a final basis imminently.      We there-fore submit that, to the extent the Board feels clearer guidance from the NRC is required on the siting and emergency evacuation issues, the Board should stay proceedings pending final adoption of the applicable ruler.
As a final matter, the Board has indicated that it will admit th    City of Gary as an Interested Municipality pursuant to 10 C.P.R. S 2.715(c), notwithstanding the fact that its sole
                                                                            !
contention regarding emergency evacuation is not admitted.      As  !
is indicated in the attached affidavit of Charles A. Ruckman,    l l
is indicated in the attached affidavit of Charles A. Ruckman,    l l
Corporation Counsel of the City of Gary, Gary intends to pursue      !
Corporation Counsel of the City of Gary, Gary intends to pursue      !
                                                                         ;
                                                                         ;
                                                                            !
l
l
                                                                            !


    .
.
its claim that its emergency evacuation contention is properly within the scope of this proceeding and should therefore be addressed by the Board. If this contention is not admitted, therefore, the City of Gary does not wish to appear specially.*/
its claim that its emergency evacuation contention is properly within the scope of this proceeding and should therefore be addressed by the Board. If this contention is not admitted, therefore, the City of Gary does not wish to appear specially.*/
Respectfully submitted,
Respectfully submitted, Diane B. Cohn Suite 700 2000 P Street, N.W.
                                                              -
Diane B. Cohn Suite 700 2000 P Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20035 (202) 785-3704 Attorney for the City of Gary, et al.
Washington, D.C. 20035 (202) 785-3704 Attorney for the City of Gary, et al.
  .
9
9
           */The Ruckman Affidavit has been approved by the affiant and executed copies will shortly be served on all parties.
           */The Ruckman Affidavit has been approved by the affiant and executed copies will shortly be served on all parties.
                                                    -
                                                                                                                 .}}
                                                                                                                 .}}

Revision as of 06:12, 1 February 2020

Objection to ASLB 800530 Provisional Order.Urges Reconsideration of Order Concluding That City of Gary,In,Et Al Contention Is Outside Scope of Proceeding.Secy 80-275 Advises Adoption of Interim Rules Re Emergency Planning
ML19318B994
Person / Time
Site: Bailly
Issue date: 06/24/1980
From: Cohn D
COHN, D.B., GARY, IN, Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy Project
To:
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML19318B995 List:
References
SECY-80-275, NUDOCS 8006300396
Download: ML19318B994 (3)
v • d • e


Text

. . . . . . - . __ .. . - . _ . _ . . - . ~ _ . . .- .. .

)  ;

l UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5

Of ODltygg .

] BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOAR -

g(_f, g D//,g .-

% 9'*%, gI980 . &  ;

i In the Matter of )

)

pc & %g s

/ fy /

NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC ) Docket No. 50-367 'k f  !

SERVICE COMMISSION ) N Q 'I^~$ }~ g /

(Bailly Generating Station ) (Construction Permit Nuclear 1) ) Extension) 4 OBJECTIONS OF THE CITY OF GARY ET AL. TO THE PROVISIONAL ORDER OF MAY 30, 1980 i

The City of Gary, Indiana, United Steelworkers of America Local 6787, Save the Dunes Council, the Bailly Alliance and

~

I the Critical Mass Energy Project (hereinafter "the Gary peti-l tioners") hereby request thit the Board reconsider its Provisional j

.{ l i

t Order of May 30, 1980, to the extent that it concludes that the  !

. l Gary petitioners' contention is outside the scope of this pro- 3 ceeding. i

'. The Gary petitioners believe that the Board has properly interpreted the scope of a construction permit extension proceeding to encompass significant' health and safety or environmental matters i l

that the Board determines cannot abide the operating license pro-

)

ceeding. Order at pp. 26-28.- We submit, however,.that'the Board

has erroneously concluded that the Commission's requirements for i siting and emergency evacuation ha'e v not yet changed so substantially

as to make.it appropriate for.this Board to' reevaluate the Bailly i

site at this time. Order'at 29-30.

. As we pointed _ out. at the Prehearing Cor)ference (Tr. 119-138),

the NRC has already adopted interim rules which condition

~

.s ooesco3% p ,

the continued operation of a plant or the granting of a license on a showing that the populations within specified emergency planning zones can be evacuated within a reasonable period of I time. 44 F.R. 75169 (Dec. 19, 1979). Because of the unique circumstances presented here -- most notably including the fact that construction of Bailly is just 1% complete -- we contend that it is contrary to all notions of the public health and safety to now approve the construction of an entire plant at this site without any consideration of whether the populations surrounding Bailly can be evacuated in the event of a nuclear accident.

If the Board's concern is that the Commission's rules have nei been formally made final (Order at 29), we would point out that the Commission is considering the emergency planning regu-lations on an expedited basis. As is evident from the attached Memorandum to the Commissioners (dated June 3, 1980), the interin rules -- which are in any event in full force and effect right now -- cre to be adopted on a final basis imminently. We there-fore submit that, to the extent the Board feels clearer guidance from the NRC is required on the siting and emergency evacuation issues, the Board should stay proceedings pending final adoption of the applicable ruler.

As a final matter, the Board has indicated that it will admit th City of Gary as an Interested Municipality pursuant to 10 C.P.R. S 2.715(c), notwithstanding the fact that its sole contention regarding emergency evacuation is not admitted. As  !

is indicated in the attached affidavit of Charles A. Ruckman, l l

Corporation Counsel of the City of Gary, Gary intends to pursue  !

l

its claim that its emergency evacuation contention is properly within the scope of this proceeding and should therefore be addressed by the Board. If this contention is not admitted, therefore, the City of Gary does not wish to appear specially.*/

Respectfully submitted, Diane B. Cohn Suite 700 2000 P Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20035 (202) 785-3704 Attorney for the City of Gary, et al.

9

  • /The Ruckman Affidavit has been approved by the affiant and executed copies will shortly be served on all parties.

.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML19318B994&oldid=2367541"