Town of Gardiner,Ny Response to NRC & Applicant Briefs Re Town of Gardiner 790713 Amended Petition to Intervene.Nrc Should Recommend Town of Gardiner as Intervenor & Extend Intervention Limit from 50 to 200 MilesML19209B438 |
Person / Time |
---|
Site: |
New Haven |
---|
Issue date: |
08/02/1979 |
---|
From: |
Keeping W, Straus D GARDINER, NY |
---|
To: |
|
---|
Shared Package |
---|
ML19209B436 |
List: |
---|
References |
---|
NUDOCS 7910090716 |
Download: ML19209B438 (9) |
|
|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20002A2101980-10-16016 October 1980 Certifies Svc of Motion to Terminate Proceeding on 801016 ML20008E0211980-10-16016 October 1980 Motion to Terminate Proceeding Due to Dismissal of Case 80008 by Ny State Board on Electric Generation Siting Re Environ Compatibility.Attempts to License nuclear-fueled Plants at New Haven or Stuyvesant Sites Abandoned ML20008E0291980-10-16016 October 1980 Withdrawal of 781109 Application to License nuclear-fueled Generation Station at New Haven or Stuyvesant Sites,Due to Dismissal of Case 80008 by Ny State Board on Electric Generation Siting ML20008E0251980-10-16016 October 1980 Withdrawal of 781109 Application to License nuclear-fueled Generation Station at New Haven or Stuyvesant Sites,Due to Dismissal of Case 80008 by Ny State Board on Electric Generation Siting Re Environ Compatibility ML19340B3861980-10-16016 October 1980 Withdraws 781109 CP Application.Cites State of Ny Siting Board 800523 Denial of Motion for Rehearing of 791012 Order, Dismissing Case in Which Applicant Sought Certificate of Environ Compatibility & Public Need,As Prime Motivator ML19323H0361980-05-23023 May 1980 Order by State of Ny Board on Electric Generation Siting & Environ,Denying Application for Rehearing.Proceeding Closed Due to Substantial Uncertainty About Facility Ownership. Related Correspondence ML19260C3971979-12-0303 December 1979 Reply in Opposition to Applicants 791112 Motion for Rehearing Re Ny State Siting Board Dismissal of Proceeding. Applicants Failed to State New Arguments.No Beneficial Purpose Will Be Served by Rehearing.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19291B8871979-11-21021 November 1979 Statement in Opposition to Applicants 791112 Motion for Rehearing Re ASLB Order Dismissing Application.Applicants Failed to Establish Present Intention to Build Plant. Certificate of Svc Encl ML19211A2321979-11-20020 November 1979 Notice by Ny State Board on Electric Generation Siting & Environ.Replies to Utils' Application for Rehearing of ASLB Order Dismissing Application for Certificate of Environ Compatibility Will Be Accepted If Filed by 791203 ML19210E7551979-11-12012 November 1979 Requests for Reversal of Ny State Board on Electric Generation Siting & Environ 791012 Dismissal of Application Or,If Reversal Denied,For Rehearing.Ownership of Proposed Station Did Not Constitute Sufficient Grounds for Dismissal ML19253C1931979-10-29029 October 1979 Motion for Indefinite Delay in Proceeding.Case 80008 Before Ny State Board on Electric Generation Siting & Environ Dismissed on 791012.Urges Deferral Until Applicants' Motion for Case 80008 Rehearing Decided.Ny State Order Encl ML19250C3801979-10-17017 October 1979 Notice to Parties by State of Ny Board on Electric Generating Siting & State Environ Dept of Public Svc. Contrary to Board 791001 Order Re Discussion of Application, Proceeding Will Continue & PASNY 791016 Argument Considered ML19209D0631979-10-12012 October 1979 Order Dismissing Application by Ny State Electric & Gas Corp & Lilco for Certificate of Environ Compability & Public Need to Construct Plant.Applicants Have Not Demonstrated Statewide Need for Facility ML19260A4261979-10-12012 October 1979 Order by State of Ny Board on Electric Generation Siting & Environ Dismissing Ny State Electric & Gas Corp & Lilco Application for Environ Capability Certificate & for Public Need to Construct Facility ML19254E6481979-10-0202 October 1979 Notice Issued by Board on Electric Generation Siting & Environ of Ny Dept of Public Svc Re Util Application for Certificate of Environ Compatibility.Public Meeting Will Be Held 791012 in Albany,Ny,Re Termination of Proceeding ML19210B7681979-10-0101 October 1979 Memorandum on Standing of County of Columbia,Town of Stuyvesant,Concerned Citizens for Safe Energy & Mid-Hudson Nuclear Opponents.Members Reside in Geographic Vicinity & Involved in Specialized Ny Electric Energy Issues ML19259D3941979-10-0101 October 1979 Suppl to Petition to Intervene Submitting Revised Contentions.Includes Allegation That Assessment & Other Related Matters Re Alternative Fuel Sources,Submitted by Applicant to Nrc,Are Inadequate ML19275A5151979-08-16016 August 1979 Opposes Briefs of Intervenors State of Ny Atty General, Public Svc Commission & Ecology Action of Oswego Submittal in Response to Util Brief in Opposition to Interlocutory Appeal.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19209A9321979-08-0606 August 1979 Response to State of Ny Dept of Environ Conservation, Columbia County,Town of Stuyvesant & Concerned Citizens for Safe Energy Comments Re State of Ny Public Svc Commission 790725 Recommendations.W/Certificate of Svc ML19253B2991979-08-0606 August 1979 Answers Util 790725 & Ny Dept of Environ Conservation Responses to Public Svc Commission 790710 Order Re Intervenor Ecology Action of Oswego Motion for Dismissal of Application.Urges Dismissal.W/Certificate of Svc ML19209B8591979-08-0303 August 1979 Brief Submitted by Intervenor State of Ny in Response to Util 790725 Brief.Supports Intervenor Ecology Action of Oswego Interlocutory Appeal Re Dismissal of Util 781122 Application.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19209A5781979-08-0202 August 1979 Response to NRC & Applicant Briefs Re 790713 Amended Petition to Intervene.Nrc Response Inadequate.Requests ASLB Expand Geographical Area Under Consideration,Based on Radiation Measured During Actual Event ML19209B4381979-08-0202 August 1979 Town of Gardiner,Ny Response to NRC & Applicant Briefs Re Town of Gardiner 790713 Amended Petition to Intervene.Nrc Should Recommend Town of Gardiner as Intervenor & Extend Intervention Limit from 50 to 200 Miles ML19208C3741979-07-25025 July 1979 Brief in Opposition to Intervenor Ecology Action of Oswego 790426 Interlocutory Appeal Re 790413 Denial of Motion to Dismiss Application.Applicant Should Have Opportunity to Prove Case.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19253B3511979-07-23023 July 1979 Request,Submitted by Intervenor Town of Kinderhook,That Ny State Board on Electric Generation Siting & Environ Dismiss Util Application.Grounds for Dismissal Thoroughly Stated by Intervenor Ecology Action of Oswego ML19209B3751979-07-23023 July 1979 Brief on Behalf of Town of Kinderhook Recommending That Application for OL Be Dismissed for Reasons Stated by Ecology Action of Oswego & Ny State Public Svc Commission ML19208C3701979-07-16016 July 1979 Request,Submitted by Intervenors Columbia County,Town of Stuyvesant & Concerned Citizens for Safe Energy,For Extension to File Supplemental Memo & for Investigation Into Applicant Intentions to Pursue Application ML19208C3281979-07-13013 July 1979 Memorandum Submitted by Applicant Re Standing of Intervenors Citizens for Safe Energy,Mid-Hudson Nuclear Opponents,Ulster County Environ Mgt Council & Town of Gardiner.Responds to E Mead & Town of Conesville 790619 Petition ML19261E7471979-07-11011 July 1979 Order Certifying Intervenor Ecology Action of Oswego 790426 Interlocutory Apppeal to Ny State Board for Electric Siting & Environ W/Recommendation for Dismissal of CP Proceedings. Application Is Premature & Legally Insufficient ML19207B4741979-07-10010 July 1979 Statement of State of Ny Dept of Environ Conservation Per 16NYCRR70.20.Lists Alternate Sites & Modes of Generation. Fossil Alternative Site Must Be Considered in Conjunction W/Use of refuse-derived Fuel ML19275A0741979-07-0505 July 1979 Notice Per 16NYCRR70.20.Columbia County,Ny,Town of Stuyvesant & Concerned Citizens for Safe Energy Will Testify Re Alternate Site,Facilities & Source of Power as Discussed in Draft Eis.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19207B5561979-06-27027 June 1979 Comments by State of Ny Dept of Public Svc on Proposed Protocol for Conduct of Joint Hearings Before NRC & Ny State Board on Electric Generation Siting & Environ Issue. Identification Should Occur After Issuance of Des ML19276G6081979-06-26026 June 1979 Reaffirms 790611 Comments.Application Is Summary of Util Findings & Conclusions.Nrc & Intervenors Must Develop Record on Which Siting Board Will Make Final Decision ML19247A8531979-06-26026 June 1979 Response to Util 790611 Proposed Joint Protocol & Discovery Rules Submitted by Intervenors Columbia County,Town of Stuyvesant & Concerned Citizens for Safe Energy.Definitions of Issues Violate NRC Rules ML19208C6421979-06-20020 June 1979 Interlocutory Appeal on Denial of 790320 Motion for Dismissal.Case 80008 Should Be Dismissed for Reasons Set by Ecology Action of Oswego ML19225C7461979-06-19019 June 1979 Resolution Authorizing County Legislature Chairman to File W/Nrc Appropriate Petition & Other Documents on Behalf of County,So as to Become party-at-interest Re Ny State Electric & Gas Co Application for Two Nuclear Units ML19241C0051979-06-14014 June 1979 Intervention Statement Offered at 790614 Public Comment Session ML19225A3581979-06-11011 June 1979 Support for NRC & State of Ny 790427 Proposed Protocol for Joint Hearings Submitted by Ecology Action of Oswego. Suggests Mod for Joint Hearings Discovery Process,Memo of Understanding,Schedule & Procedure for Joint Mailings ML19225C1051979-06-11011 June 1979 Ny Dept of Public Svc Reply to Comments Offered by Various Parties at 790523 Prehearing Conference on Proposed Joint Protocol in Case 80008 ML19224D7131979-05-31031 May 1979 Certification That 790319 Petition to Intervene & 790510 Contentions Truly Set Forth Position of Mid-Hudson Nuclear Opponents,Inc ML19241B3301979-05-29029 May 1979 Contentions Re Site Selection.Util Has Underestimated Multiple Generation Units,Has Not Considered Proximity to Schools & Has Discriminated Against Rural Populace ML19241B3331979-05-29029 May 1979 Contentions of Safe Energy for New Haven Re Environ Matters. Util Inadequately Determined Energy Needs,Has Not Performed Sufficient Research on Alternative Sources of Energy & Has Not Assessed Impact of Accident or Kv Lines ML19241B1221979-05-18018 May 1979 Initial Util Answer to Intervenor Contentions.Identifies Contentions Which Can Be Presented Unopposed at 790523 Prehearing Conference.Seeks ASLB Extension for Filing Supplemental Answers.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19224B8681979-05-11011 May 1979 Submits 40 Contentions as Suppl to Petition to Intervene Re Need for Addl Power,Consideration of Alternatives,Site Selection Process,Impact on Existing Health Facilities, Financial Capacity & Effect on High Voltage Transmissions ML19242A4251979-05-11011 May 1979 Amend to 790313 Petition to Intervene,Adding New Considerations ML19269E3671979-05-10010 May 1979 Submits Specific Contentions Re Environ & Radiological Concerns.Assessment of Impact on Farmland Is Inadequate Re Estimation of Value & Use of Land & Adverse Impact of Dust, Noise,Litter & Traffic on Area Agriculture ML19242A6381979-05-0909 May 1979 Resolution 112 Objecting to Location of Public Hearings Outside of County ML19224B8141979-05-0707 May 1979 Ny Dept of Public Svc Response to Ecology Action of Oswego Interlocutory Appeal of Denial of Motion for Dismissal of Application.Recommends Denial of Appeal ML19224B7091979-05-0404 May 1979 Request by Util for Denial of 790313 Petitions to Intervene. Filed by Town of Gardner & Ulster County Environ Mgt Council.Petitions Lack Standing & Fail to Justify Discretionary Intervention.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19224B7001979-04-27027 April 1979 Proposed Protocol for Joint Hearing Before NRC & Ny State Board on Electric Generation Siting & Environ Re Common Issues in Const Applications of Long Island Lighting Co & Ny State Elec & Gas Corp 1980-05-23
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20008E0251980-10-16016 October 1980 Withdrawal of 781109 Application to License nuclear-fueled Generation Station at New Haven or Stuyvesant Sites,Due to Dismissal of Case 80008 by Ny State Board on Electric Generation Siting Re Environ Compatibility ML20008E0211980-10-16016 October 1980 Motion to Terminate Proceeding Due to Dismissal of Case 80008 by Ny State Board on Electric Generation Siting Re Environ Compatibility.Attempts to License nuclear-fueled Plants at New Haven or Stuyvesant Sites Abandoned ML20008E0291980-10-16016 October 1980 Withdrawal of 781109 Application to License nuclear-fueled Generation Station at New Haven or Stuyvesant Sites,Due to Dismissal of Case 80008 by Ny State Board on Electric Generation Siting ML19260C3971979-12-0303 December 1979 Reply in Opposition to Applicants 791112 Motion for Rehearing Re Ny State Siting Board Dismissal of Proceeding. Applicants Failed to State New Arguments.No Beneficial Purpose Will Be Served by Rehearing.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19291B8871979-11-21021 November 1979 Statement in Opposition to Applicants 791112 Motion for Rehearing Re ASLB Order Dismissing Application.Applicants Failed to Establish Present Intention to Build Plant. Certificate of Svc Encl ML19210E7551979-11-12012 November 1979 Requests for Reversal of Ny State Board on Electric Generation Siting & Environ 791012 Dismissal of Application Or,If Reversal Denied,For Rehearing.Ownership of Proposed Station Did Not Constitute Sufficient Grounds for Dismissal ML19253C1931979-10-29029 October 1979 Motion for Indefinite Delay in Proceeding.Case 80008 Before Ny State Board on Electric Generation Siting & Environ Dismissed on 791012.Urges Deferral Until Applicants' Motion for Case 80008 Rehearing Decided.Ny State Order Encl ML19210B7681979-10-0101 October 1979 Memorandum on Standing of County of Columbia,Town of Stuyvesant,Concerned Citizens for Safe Energy & Mid-Hudson Nuclear Opponents.Members Reside in Geographic Vicinity & Involved in Specialized Ny Electric Energy Issues ML19259D3941979-10-0101 October 1979 Suppl to Petition to Intervene Submitting Revised Contentions.Includes Allegation That Assessment & Other Related Matters Re Alternative Fuel Sources,Submitted by Applicant to Nrc,Are Inadequate ML19275A5151979-08-16016 August 1979 Opposes Briefs of Intervenors State of Ny Atty General, Public Svc Commission & Ecology Action of Oswego Submittal in Response to Util Brief in Opposition to Interlocutory Appeal.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19209A9321979-08-0606 August 1979 Response to State of Ny Dept of Environ Conservation, Columbia County,Town of Stuyvesant & Concerned Citizens for Safe Energy Comments Re State of Ny Public Svc Commission 790725 Recommendations.W/Certificate of Svc ML19253B2991979-08-0606 August 1979 Answers Util 790725 & Ny Dept of Environ Conservation Responses to Public Svc Commission 790710 Order Re Intervenor Ecology Action of Oswego Motion for Dismissal of Application.Urges Dismissal.W/Certificate of Svc ML19209B4381979-08-0202 August 1979 Town of Gardiner,Ny Response to NRC & Applicant Briefs Re Town of Gardiner 790713 Amended Petition to Intervene.Nrc Should Recommend Town of Gardiner as Intervenor & Extend Intervention Limit from 50 to 200 Miles ML19209A5781979-08-0202 August 1979 Response to NRC & Applicant Briefs Re 790713 Amended Petition to Intervene.Nrc Response Inadequate.Requests ASLB Expand Geographical Area Under Consideration,Based on Radiation Measured During Actual Event ML19253B3511979-07-23023 July 1979 Request,Submitted by Intervenor Town of Kinderhook,That Ny State Board on Electric Generation Siting & Environ Dismiss Util Application.Grounds for Dismissal Thoroughly Stated by Intervenor Ecology Action of Oswego ML19208C3701979-07-16016 July 1979 Request,Submitted by Intervenors Columbia County,Town of Stuyvesant & Concerned Citizens for Safe Energy,For Extension to File Supplemental Memo & for Investigation Into Applicant Intentions to Pursue Application ML19208C3281979-07-13013 July 1979 Memorandum Submitted by Applicant Re Standing of Intervenors Citizens for Safe Energy,Mid-Hudson Nuclear Opponents,Ulster County Environ Mgt Council & Town of Gardiner.Responds to E Mead & Town of Conesville 790619 Petition ML19207B4741979-07-10010 July 1979 Statement of State of Ny Dept of Environ Conservation Per 16NYCRR70.20.Lists Alternate Sites & Modes of Generation. Fossil Alternative Site Must Be Considered in Conjunction W/Use of refuse-derived Fuel ML19207B5561979-06-27027 June 1979 Comments by State of Ny Dept of Public Svc on Proposed Protocol for Conduct of Joint Hearings Before NRC & Ny State Board on Electric Generation Siting & Environ Issue. Identification Should Occur After Issuance of Des ML19276G6081979-06-26026 June 1979 Reaffirms 790611 Comments.Application Is Summary of Util Findings & Conclusions.Nrc & Intervenors Must Develop Record on Which Siting Board Will Make Final Decision ML19247A8531979-06-26026 June 1979 Response to Util 790611 Proposed Joint Protocol & Discovery Rules Submitted by Intervenors Columbia County,Town of Stuyvesant & Concerned Citizens for Safe Energy.Definitions of Issues Violate NRC Rules ML19208C6421979-06-20020 June 1979 Interlocutory Appeal on Denial of 790320 Motion for Dismissal.Case 80008 Should Be Dismissed for Reasons Set by Ecology Action of Oswego ML19225C7461979-06-19019 June 1979 Resolution Authorizing County Legislature Chairman to File W/Nrc Appropriate Petition & Other Documents on Behalf of County,So as to Become party-at-interest Re Ny State Electric & Gas Co Application for Two Nuclear Units ML19241C0051979-06-14014 June 1979 Intervention Statement Offered at 790614 Public Comment Session ML19225C1051979-06-11011 June 1979 Ny Dept of Public Svc Reply to Comments Offered by Various Parties at 790523 Prehearing Conference on Proposed Joint Protocol in Case 80008 ML19225A3581979-06-11011 June 1979 Support for NRC & State of Ny 790427 Proposed Protocol for Joint Hearings Submitted by Ecology Action of Oswego. Suggests Mod for Joint Hearings Discovery Process,Memo of Understanding,Schedule & Procedure for Joint Mailings ML19241B3301979-05-29029 May 1979 Contentions Re Site Selection.Util Has Underestimated Multiple Generation Units,Has Not Considered Proximity to Schools & Has Discriminated Against Rural Populace ML19241B3331979-05-29029 May 1979 Contentions of Safe Energy for New Haven Re Environ Matters. Util Inadequately Determined Energy Needs,Has Not Performed Sufficient Research on Alternative Sources of Energy & Has Not Assessed Impact of Accident or Kv Lines ML19241B1221979-05-18018 May 1979 Initial Util Answer to Intervenor Contentions.Identifies Contentions Which Can Be Presented Unopposed at 790523 Prehearing Conference.Seeks ASLB Extension for Filing Supplemental Answers.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19224B8681979-05-11011 May 1979 Submits 40 Contentions as Suppl to Petition to Intervene Re Need for Addl Power,Consideration of Alternatives,Site Selection Process,Impact on Existing Health Facilities, Financial Capacity & Effect on High Voltage Transmissions ML19242A4251979-05-11011 May 1979 Amend to 790313 Petition to Intervene,Adding New Considerations ML19269E3671979-05-10010 May 1979 Submits Specific Contentions Re Environ & Radiological Concerns.Assessment of Impact on Farmland Is Inadequate Re Estimation of Value & Use of Land & Adverse Impact of Dust, Noise,Litter & Traffic on Area Agriculture ML19242A6381979-05-0909 May 1979 Resolution 112 Objecting to Location of Public Hearings Outside of County ML19224B8141979-05-0707 May 1979 Ny Dept of Public Svc Response to Ecology Action of Oswego Interlocutory Appeal of Denial of Motion for Dismissal of Application.Recommends Denial of Appeal ML19224B7091979-05-0404 May 1979 Request by Util for Denial of 790313 Petitions to Intervene. Filed by Town of Gardner & Ulster County Environ Mgt Council.Petitions Lack Standing & Fail to Justify Discretionary Intervention.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19224A6871979-04-0303 April 1979 Answer Seeking Denial of 790319 Petition to Intervene Filed by Mid-Hudson Nuclear Opponents,Inc.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19224A7021979-03-20020 March 1979 Answer to Intervention Petitions of Various Groups,Including Ny State Energy Ofc,Oswego County Farm Bureau,Ecology Action & Safe Energy for New Haven.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19224A6771979-03-19019 March 1979 Mid-Hudson Nuclear Opponents' Petition to Intervene as Full Party Re Alternate Site Considerations,Need for Facility, Financial Qualifications of Applicants & Cost of Proposed Plant ML19224A6981979-03-16016 March 1979 Petitions to Intervene in Proceeding.Asserts Health & Safety Will Be Adversely Affected by Plant ML19224A6831979-03-12012 March 1979 Petition to Intervene,Submitted by Columbia County,Ny,Town of Stuyvesant,Ny & Concerned Citizens for Safe Energy,Inc ML19224A6851979-03-12012 March 1979 Supports Petition to Intervene Submitted by Columbia County, Ny,Town of Stuyvesant,Ny & Concerned Citizens for Safe Energy,Inc.Notice of Appearance & Certificate of Svc Encl ML19224A6991979-03-0808 March 1979 Petitions to Intervene in Proceeding.Asserts Health & Safety Will Be Adversely Affected by Plant ML19224A5971979-03-0505 March 1979 Ny State Energy Ofc'S Petition to Participate as Interested State.Certificate of Svc Encl 1980-10-16
[Table view] |
Text
__.
.
.
,
'
. .o,\shii
. \ D
- .,
- f UNITED STATES CF MERIG f 4,,N ,4hp ,,
NUCLEAR RIGJIAICRY COMISSICU
-
p s- e 7, th'#
%f N' Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board f.:. 3 Joint P:tceedings
)
In the Matter of 1 NEW YORK ELEL'TRIC & GAS CCRPCRATIOti )
) DOCKET !CS. Sni 50-596 AND IONG ISIAND LIGHTING CCMPlaT )
) STN 50-597 (New Haven 1 and 2 Nuclear Pcse Plants) )
) -
State of New York Department of Public Service Board of Electric Generation Siting and the E:rtirement
)
In the Matter of )
NEW YORK ELECTRIC AND GAS CCPORATION )
)
)
AND IOG ISIAND LIGHTING CCMPAhT ) CASE 80008
)
)
(New Eaven 1 and 2 Nmlaw Power Plants) )
)
)
ICWN CF GRDINER RESR2;SE TO NRC STAFF AND APPLICANT BRIEFS CDCERNING ATEED PETITION TO D7TERVDZ FII2D JUIll 13, 1979 1117 031 7910 090 7gg
'
.
.
.
.
.
Staff recomend that our a: tended petition to intervene by right in the Nea Haven cases (5/11/79) be denied for want of standing to intervene. Staff rejects our claim of being 'affected' by isotcpe radiation frcm an accidental release at New Eaven ccr: parable or wrse than Three Mile Island-2 (M-2) . This recomren-dation is based en expert testirony from NRC staff Irmber Charles Ferrell. We dispute the conclusions of staff and the simih* conclusions of applicant regard-ing our standing in the New Haven cases. We believe that staff, and particularly staff's expert, has not adequately respnded to our amended petition. We will give reasons for this mnclusion in this brief. We request that the Atcmic Safety and Licensing Board grant us standing based on the measural rMmtion attribut-able to M-2 found 200 miles away frcm T-2 scma 4 weeks after the event. We further request that the Atcmic Safety and Licensing Board in their decision to grant us standing also expand the geographical area norrally c:nsidered 'affected' based on the measured radiation resulting frcm an actual event rather than the arbitrary '50 miles' established two years ago in the oft cited 7.VA Watts Bar case.
F :m case law, staff agrees that standing should exist fcr organizations "within the geographical zone that might be affected by an accidental release of fission products." (reference 6, staff brief 7/13/79) . In our amen".ed petition 133 to intervene we indicated that the rms'*.er:ent of Xe at Albany, New York, 200 miles frcm the presumed release point, TMI-2, 4 weeks after the event, sined that a similar or wrse accident at New Esven would affect the citizers of Gardirer.
In their brief, staff disputes this suggestien, depeniing on expe.rt testineny, concluding that a M type of accident at New Haven would not "significantly" affect the citizens of Gardiner based on the rep rted 133Xe reasurement at Albany on May 2,1979. Staff and censultant have gratuitously aMM the concept of 1117 032
'
' significance' which isn't in the qteted AIAS-125 and NIAB-183 decisions.
Furthe=cre, neither staff rcr consultant define 'significant' They, rather, baldly assert that the increase in radiation above background is "not significant" (brief, p 4; affidavit p 1 aM p 6)despite abundant medical evidence that 1cw levels of radiation are ' super-effective' as a function of dese in causing bio-logical effects such as cancer ( 1979, Science, v 204, pp 155-164). Mr Ferrall appears to be an experienced health physicist; he should kncv of these researches and address them in his affidavit.
Mr. Ferrall and sta'f reintain that the neasured radiation dose from 133Xe at Albany was much less than background, which w must live with, and is, there-
,
fore, ret significant. This conclusion cbfuscates the fact that radiation acts cumulatively. 'ihe background radiation to which we are all exposed does, in fact, cause a fracticn of humn mm, a fracticn of human birth defects, a fraction of humn mutations, a fracticn of total human ai w se and death. Any increase in radiation expcsure would ingease hiraan diwee ar:d death. at leant propertion-ately. Mr. Ferrell appears to be an experie"ced hea'.t physicist; he should know this and address these facts in his affidavit.
1117 033 In his a##Wvit, Mr. Ferrall attends only to the rescrt of 133Xe at Albany msured by the New Yor'c State Dept. of Health. In fact, the New York Sta'a Dept.
of Health didn't mnure any other isotopes. We indicated clearly ir_ cur amended petition to inteLm that 133Xe is ret mm11y found in the atmcsphere, is a normal fission prtduct, and rest p:cbably resulted frcm the cperation of a nuclear reactor (fallout f:rm weapons tests might also give 133Xe bot the isotcpe has a short half life and no atrospheric or vented underground tests wre rescrted near the May 2, maasursent) . Both staff and applicant (pp 2-3, and p 11 of respective briefs) inply that we rmst prove that the measured 133Xe came frcm SiI-2 before
- + w - , u -
._ - --
.
.
-
.
inplication because, if the 133Xe didn't cxxm frcra 'IMI-2 or weapons tests, it must have ccme frt.n no::aal reactor operation; maybe Indian Point, or Fitrpatrick, cr Nine Mile Point, or Verrent Yankee, et other epting reactor nearer Albany and of distance ctr= arable (rot identical) to the distance between Gardiner and New Haven. If the measured 133 Xe didn't ccme frtru the 3/28/79 'lMI-2 incident, then staff and applicant would be forced to cerclude that reunaa. option of New Haven 1 and 2 could lead to increased radiation in Gardirar. Howver, since s
it would be from norral operation rather than a singular incident, the total radiation to which w muld be ex;esed muld be nnch greater.
.
We suggested in cur amended petiticn to intervene ("... exposure of Gardirar-ites...to even rcre radiatien than Albanians...") that those closer to an incident muld receive nere radiation than those fr-ther away. In fact, maybe this is at the . base of the Watts Bar ruling under dispute here. There are tse aspects cen-cerning the relative aucunt of radiation received frcm a chmin11y inactive substance such as 133Xe:
111,/ 034
- 1. since the isotope is dispersed frcm a point throtsh an approxi: ate F&#.ere near the point of release, it will beccce less concen-trated as it nuves away frczn the point of release;
- 2. cince it takes time for the radioisotope to nove frcm point of ralem to point of measurenent, sczne decay will have occured and '
the iscL 9 activity will be less than when it was released.
Mr. Ferrall alludes to #2 in his 45 (a##Wvit, p 3) . We canrot agree with his conclusion that 133Xe ceasured at Albany was simply what might be called the
' worldwide' dispersal of 'IMI-2 isotope releases. First, the ' worldwide' disnersal wculd be stratospMc, not tropospheric, and Xeren shouldn't fall out. Semnd, it seers doubtful (we're wil1%g to be corrected by the NRC which nay have the data) that the entire atrosphere of the planet has 133Xe at a level 2% of the background at ALany- a mh4=m cencentration frcm ccr:plete dispersal through the atresphere. But this is a necessary corollary of Mr. Fenell's conclusion
,
.
_4_
.
.
adopted by staff. Cw. sider also the ratter isotope de,y. The New York Dept. of Health masuremnt was about 4 weeks after the M-2 incident (precise tires of release and measurcnent are rot k:an) . This is 28/5.27 = 5.313 half lives of 133X e. 'Ihe atoms reasured at Albany near May 2, muld have been 25313 = 39.75 time as active on March 28,; this corresponds to 80% of the Albany backg=und.
ML11tiply the ratio of atrospheric mlum to volume of atrosphere measured by the New York Dept, of Health by the calculated activity of the 133Xe en March 28, to apprcximate the total 133Xe released from M-2. In a second calculation, divide the result of the first by the fraction of total fission produc^s in Babcock and Wilcox reacters which 1s 133 Xe, the result should be the total radioactiv1ty released in the M-2 incident (within an order of ragnitude) . F:rm the total radioactivity and the distributi-on of fissien products, it should be p ssible to ml<hte the mss of products released at M-2 assumina, of course, tPat the conclusion of Mr. Ferrell and staff that 133Xe masured at Albany was an exarple of worldwide distributien of the the M-2 release. If the result is betwen 0.1 and 10% (2 orders of nagr.itude) of the mss of 23 % plus 238g (wtd.ch fissions when converted to 239 Pu), we might begin to accept Mr. Ferrell's crnclusion. If not, then we kould hope that Mr. Ferrell and staff would withdraw their cenclusion.
l i l .,l 0, 3 5 Mr. Ferrell and staff conclude that Albanians were exposed to a tiny fraction of annual backgracund. They think, apparently, that the e.xposure was limited to the time of measuremnt. However, expsure might have been considerably greater, not only because of the increased radimetivity closer to the tire of release (see above) but also because the 133 Xe may have been irradiating Albanians for
-
a nonth instead of an hour (the time of exposure used by Mr. Ferrell) . The length of ex;osure sculd depend en how fast the 133Xe reachai Albany frem M -2. It doesn't seen possible to h%e this exactly, but estimation of lower limits is feasible. Assume that Albany is 200 miles frem M-2 and that nevere.T - <
.
133X e is through the at::csphere near the earth's surface (t:orcspheric) . We krrw that surface winds- atrospheric I:ovment- near the surface can reach as high as 50 mph in these parts (nonthly storrs) . But icwr wind velocities are rcre w...un.
Let's assume an average wini speed of 10r:ph. Then, 200mi./10gh = 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br /> which 133Xe frcm M -1 to Albany.
is p:obably near the minim e transit time for the Further <-almlations of total 133Xe radiation of Albany are tspting but probably not mrranted due to lack of inforration. Ecwever, the point should be clear.
Albanians and tMse living closer to 'IMI-2 may have received a considerably greater svyrtion of background than Mr. Fanell calculates or the New York State Dept.
of Healtn indicated f:cm their single, late, measuremnt.
.
In our amended petitien to intervene, we clearly indicated that the neasured 133Xe was a mininun ("... dose in Albany was a minin:m"); we see no rmen to change that cenclusion and regret that Mr. Wrrell, who should haow these things as an experiaW health physicist, and staff chose to ignore our con.:1usion. Father, they erpha. sized hcw small the radiation dcse was in Albany based on a single, short tern, measurestent weeks after the causative incident witPaat any censideration of the ratters taken up here. 'Ihis is deceptive.
,
111,7 036 In cur anended petition to intervene, w clearly ir iraated that the 133xe measured in Albany was the only isotope measured but that different isotcpes had '
also been released at TMI-2 and were prebebly as widely dispersed in tra atresphere, ground and surface waters, in soils, and in the focd cPain which supper +a our existence. These other isotopes in different states of matter were sirply not ireaeared. Mr. Ferral' c.cse to igrcre this point as well and inplicitly assu:ed 5
133Xe anc. then only that the only source of '24I-2 based radiation in Albany was for an hcur on May 2,. Again, this is deceptive. Scrte of these other isotopes have longer half lives than 133X e and scne are concentrated in particular htran tissues
( U5 nl ,
.
'
. ,
,
. 6-biologically active because of this concentration. A scod health physicist will
. W ze these ell established facts and res;cnd. Likely he would agree tPat the measured 133Xe radiation at Albany, 200 miles from M-2 was a rini.m and that the actual radiation dose to sensitive tissues in the human pcpulation at.
Albany was greater than he had originally calculated based on a single isotope mamired in an hour and after passage of 5 Palf lives.
But how much greater? And was it 'significant'? Would the citizens of Gardiner be "affected" by a New Haven incident? '!he concept that staff advances is, really, that if the dose of radiation is small enough it will not ' affect" the huran popu-lation no matter 1rw large or how long eriosed- tha dose will be " insignificant".
(And it realns fur staff to define and defend whatever that dose is; the brief centained nary a mentien of the limi-t of significance) . We naintain that ag, dose of radiation above the oW ray plus terrestrial plus blommiated 40K (and including m'b1 radiation) is significant. In the eve-t that radiaticn to which a person is exposed penetrates a cell er is released within a cell, darage w4i'
.
occur which can lead to cell death cr to changed genotype which can lead to disease and death of the affected individual. By advanci.W the concept of " insignificant" radiatica dese, staff is defining a class of radiation released to or in lls which has no o effect. We deny that such a class of radiation exists. We believe trat the burden of proof is en staff to detenstrate that there is a radiatien threshold below which there is no biolcgical effect, what could a defined as an " insignificant" dose. Failing that, we believe that staff must recc: mend and the Atcrcic Safety and Licensing Board agree to admit the ".t:wn of Gardiner as Intervenor g right in
-
SW-596 arsi SM-597 and in their finding to extend the geographical limit for inter-vention frun 50 miles to 200 miles based upon evide.nce (rather than guesswerk as in htts Bar) arising fran the M-2 incident. -
. ..
. .
'
- .
.
_7-FURIEER 1htciSE 'IO APPLICANr'S ER.HT OF 7/13/79 We have alre ady discussed % logical consequences of quastioning the seura of 133Xe measured at AlF 'ny Lund r applicant's brief. Applicant ccrcplab.s at our suggesti~a discusse. above. On p 11 "...rere recordation or detection...of an event sct.: . f es frcm .he event render.s tle consequences of the event significant at the location of the detection." Applicant then discusses an aralogy which he thinks represents our point "... seismic events that are neasurable.. .even tens of thousands of miles away frcm the earthquake... igm the hec.'th and safety of persons located at any point of measurement or detection."
'
4plicant's analogy is a poor one in ' chat he attributes the cause of inpaiM health and safety to the phenomenon of observation in atta:pting a reductio ad absurdum. Applicant's nore serious point seer:s to be that sirple meammt of radioisotopes at Albany doesn't prove that any harm will cme to persons at Albany.
(his is, of course, a variant on the radiation threshold or " insignificant" dose argurrent' of staff, see above) . We must agree with applicant as far as he goes.
We couldn't- ever- prove that a peJ.cular atcm of 133Xe disintegrated in a par-Hmlw cell of a particular person and -M that cell to grew cut of centrol through nutation of a growth antrol gene taking over the material of the persens body and weakening him so that pnenia ensues and the person dies (a hypothetical but rest plaimible ==1 chain). But we can and do naintain that 13h (or other isotopes) could disintegrate.....and the persen dies' There is rbundant evidence co m
ca that radiation can be a precipitating cause of cancer....of huran disease and N
death. 'Ihe "-arement" to 'which applimt attributes cai'ulity in his analogy [
~
denonstrates the presence of substances- radioisotopes- which could initiate such a causal chain; not the reasuremnt but the thing neasured. The causal chain as
'
described could not occur without the radioisotope. So the isotope (whether measured or not is irrelevant but the measurenent alerts us to the proMbilities) is necessary
. ..
. .,
<
'
,
(and it ray be sufficient, also) to " affect the health and safety of persons lwated at (the) point of measurenent".
On ppu and 12(in two places), applicant questions the ccrc.petence of the authors of the amerxied petition to intervene and of this brief. 'Ihis is nest un-fortunate since the points we rake are verifiable and should stand on their nerits.
'Iheir valir ity a
shouldn't depend on the mede.eials of those who write them. We can supply our credentials if M wishes; however, we suggest that he ocnsult his own experts and if he finds anything unsupported or unsuppertable or if he finds a clear error (not just a difference of cpinion) in our amended petition or this brief, then he ray better question our competence. .
$k '
dLW Wi u m Keeping, Su w._ m mr T
a0 ~e David straus j~
Envi.mtal Ccmnission Gardiner, New York August 2,1979
.
1117 039