ML19326A851

Supplemental Petition for Leave Intervene by Living in Finer Environ Re Issuance of Cp.No CP Can Be Validly Issued Until NEPA Requirements for Thorough Environ Studies & Detailed Environ Statement Are Fulfilled

ML19326A851
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	01/18/1970
From:	Exans V, Oster I AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED, LIVING IN A FINER ENVIRONMENT
To:	US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
References
NUDOCS 8003050755
Download: ML19326A851 (10)

Text

M) ,

gr ?O

, ,;+*

o D D<l iT:;ITED 5T/.TES G: IJ l'hICA ATO:HC E:ERGY C;D:IS71(J: Cv1

)

In the IStter of

) T:ocket i o. 53-3h6

'IOLEDO EDICO:; CCI'PAliY, ET AL.

)

(Davic-I-ecce !Nelear Pover )

Station Unit 1) O(

CERTIFICATE OF SE..iICE I hereby certify that copies of SUFFIEIC::TAL PINITIOII iti: ILAVE TO IIITERVLFr:

cubmitted by Vicki Evans, Co-Chairman of LII1;)10, and Irvin I.

1970 in Octer, Ph.D., Faculty Advisor to LIln..., cated i:ovemler the cantioned natter have been nerved on the followinc Ly deposit in the United States nail, first class or air cail, this 23rd day of liovember 1973:

'7 alter T. Skallerup, Jr., Esq. Leclie IIcnry, Ecq.

"uller, Cency, IIenry & IIodge Chaircan, Atomic Safety and 133 Cuens-Illinoic Euilding Licensing Eoard 435 Madison Avenue 1155 Crest Inne Toledo, Chio 43 60h 1: clean, Virginia 22101 Gerald Charnoff, Esq.

James P. Cleason, Esq., Alternate 3hau, Pittman, Potts, Troubridge Chairman and I*ndden At.omic Unfety and Licensing Eoard 910 17th Street, II. W.

Donahue, Ehmantraut & Gleason 1:sshincton, D. '. 2003o 11125 Rockville Pike Rockville, Mar: land 23352 Paul 'J. dallig, Esq.

Dr. Valter it. Jordan EcEulatory Otnff Councel Cah 111dge I ational Latoratog U. S. Atomic Facrcy Conniccion P . O. Bo:: X rachington, D. C. 20:45 Oak Ridge, Tennescee 37330 Wilson 'T. Cnyder, Ecq.

Dr. Charles E. ilinters Puller, Sency, lienry & 11oace 3303 Fernwood Road 333 Ovens-Illinoic luilding Bethecda, Maryland 23334 h05 ~.adicen Avenue Toledo, Ohio 43 00h Dr. John C. Geyer, Chnirnan Department of Geography and Lonald II. IInucer, Esq.

Environmental Zncineering The Johns llophins University ?ne Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company Laltinore, Maryland 21218 P . O . B o:: 5333 leveland, Ohio hh101 80030507I 7 1

m

_ ice I 53-246 I'r Glenn J. 2anpcon, Vice I4r. iiocer 1. ..illinna

• tonic Encrc- Jourdir,nto -

Prec1Ccnt - Power Jtetc of Ohio Levclop tent The Tolcio D11 con Conpany Lcpartment hPO McGicon lwenue 05 Sotth Front .?,trcet Toledo, Ohio h 3601 P. O. Eon 1031 Colunbn , Ohio h3::15 Honorabic Ecrn T., Johnson President, Locrd of County Connicsioncrr

• Ottcua Count," CoIrthouse Fort Clinton, Ohio h3 h52 L ?detd. Y L t- /WI . _ _ _ _

Office of the Secretarj ol' tb Connirnion cc: I4r. 3kelle:up l'r. Encelhardt Mr. Yore II. Steele II. Caith

d-UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION in the Matter of )

)

TOLEDO EDISON CO. and )

CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ) Docket No. 50-346 ILLUMINATING C0. )

)

(Davis-Besse Nuclear Power )

Statloa) )

SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE This Supplemental Petition for Leave to Intervene is filed on behalf i

of the student group at Bowling Green State University called Living in a Finer Environment (hereinaf ter " LIFE") .

Interest of Petitioner LIFE is a nonprofit membership group organized under the rules of Bowling Green State University pertaining to student societies. LIFE is

made up of students and faculty advisors dedicated to the protection of man's environment, employing legal action where necessary. LIFE has, through education and initiation of action, sought to protect the environ-ment from various forms of pollution. By seeking advice from within and outside the university community, it assures that positions taken are thoroughly supported by scientific evidence. In its activities, LIFF does not concern itself with the pecuniary Interests of individuals; rather,

.it seeks to assure the preservation or restoration of environmental quality on behalf of the general public. Its concern with environmental 1

protection is well.known in northwestern OHIO especially considering the

It c1carly is an fact that It had been organized only In April, 1970.

Interested party with respect to environmental considerations of nuclear power plants and particularly so in the case of the Davis-Besse fluclear Power Plant because of its proposed proximity to Bowling Green.

Interest Affected The Commission has acknowledged in its proposed regulations relating to the National Environmental Policy Act (35 Fed. Reg. 8594, June 3, 1970) that the issuance of a construction permit or an operating license for a nuclear power plant constitutes major federal action which may signifi-The AEC also acknowledges cantly affect the quality of the environment.

that these actions can not be taken until the detalled environmental statement required by NEPA has been prepared. Part of the mission of LIFE is to guarantee that whenever major federal actions which may affect the environment are proposed a full exploration of the Impact of the project on the environment and alternatives to it is conducted. Only when the nec-essary facts are known is it possible to make the judgment required in considering issuance of a construction permit for nuclear power plants.

Contentions This construction permit application cannot be granted until the requirements of the Hattonal Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) have been met. Several aspects of the AEC's procedure and methods of implementation of those procedures applicable to granting construction permits are in direct confilet with NLPA. Proceeding to hold hearings on the proposed construction permit without resolution of many of these conflicts will needlessly delay the ultimate decision on the construction permit.

The purpose of these hearings is to determine whether to issue a

t 3

construction permit for the plant. The applicant contends that a prompt decision is necessary in order to meet public power needs. However, If this proceeding results in the attempted issuance of an " outlaw" permit in-which attempted Issuance occurs without compliance with HEPA, a court Junction will be obtained which will prevent the permit from being issued and will significantly delay construction of the plant. Zabel v. Tabb_,

F. 2d (C. A. 5th, July 16, 1970 holding that HEPA requires the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers to fully consider all environmental factors HIckel, before granting a dredge and fill permit). Ullderness Society _v.

F. Supp. (D.C., April 23, 1970, order of court granting pre-Ilminary injunction against defendant for failure to comply with flEPA);

Sierra Club _ v. Laird, F. Supp. (Ariz., June 23, 1970, order of Court granting preliminary injunction against defendant for failure to comply with NEPA). Any hearing for Issuance of a construction permit which is not preceded by preparation of the detailed environmental state-ment based upon thorough environmental studies, all as required by NEPA, is in violation of flEPA. The hearings should be a forum for all sides to discuss the impact of the environmental statement on the proposed con-struction permit.

The anderlying purpose of flEPA Is to guarantee all citizens that no major federal action which will significantly affect the environment is taken until a thorough study has been undertaken which determines the probable impact of the proposed action on the environment, any unavoidable probable adverse environmental effects, development and description of alternatives to the proposed action which will reduce adverse environmental effects, the relationship between short term uses of man's environment and maintenance and echancement of long-term productivity, Irreversible and Y

4 Irretrievable commitments of resources as a result of the proposed action and consideration of the views of other federal and State agencies. To date the response of the AEC to this mandate has been deplorable. The detailed environmental statements flied with respect to the proposed issuance of construction permits or operating licenses are merely summartes of summaries received from other agencies and from the applicant. In every case the environmental statements reflect the fact that future studies will be conducted to determine the environmental Impact of radioactive re-leases, cooling water discharge, and the Ilke. Conclusions, without underlying data or reasoning, are given in rejecting other alternatives to the plant design, location, operation, use, etc.

The Applicant's Environmental Report flied by The Toledo Edison Company on August 3,1970, is a classic example of these self-serving unsupported conclusions which the Commission merely summarizes in its so-called detailed statement. Moreover, while the Department of Health of the State of OHIO tacitly " endorses the issuance of a construction permit for the proposed Davls-Besse Nuclear Power Station" Dr. E.W. Arnold in his letter of October 14, 1970 to Mr. Harold L. Price, Director of Regulation, quickly adds that the aforesaid endorsement is given "pending full consideration and satisfactory resolution of any testimony offered at the forthcoming pubile hearing which tends to confilet with the radt-atton evaluation and findings of the commission's regulatory staff and of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards". Dr. Arnold also points out "Lle contend, however, that the (Environmental) repore does not contain sufficient detailed Information to permit an Independent evaluation of l

the total environmental Impact of the proposed faellity if the evaluation I

must be based solely on the content of the report. The report is particu-i

larly lacking in specific qualitative and quantitative data relative to the environmental factors of greatest current public concern--the antici-

~

pated Icvels of radiological and thermal emissions to the environment under normal operating conditions and under foreseeable accident or emer-gency conditions". These contentions coming from so-called appropriate State and/or local agencies "which are authorized to develop and enforce environmental standards" (letter from Mr. Price to the undersigned dated November 6, 1970) serve to reinforce the Petitioners' claims--namely, that the purpose and Intent of the NEPA is not being adhered to in the current proceedings.

The Commission has not yet released its detailed environmental report with respect to the Davis-Besse plant, but an examination of the proposed Appendix D to Part 50 (35 Fed. Reg. 8594, June 3,1970) and of reports flied with respect to other plants (see for instance the Detailed Environ-mental Report flied with respect to the proposed Shoreham Nucicar Power Plant) demonstrate that the Commission considers its job to be nothing more than providing a synthesis of the Applicants unsupported conclusions.

Clearly no attempt is made by the Commission to conduct, or request other federal agencies to conduct, the necessary studies to determine hard facts upon which conclusions are based.

The studies which must be conducted need not be carried on by the AEC Itself. Their obilgation is to see that some federal agency, with the requisite expertise, prepares the studies. The applicant and Intervenors may if they wish prepare their own studies but there must be at least one independent, federally sponsored study of each relevant environmental fac-tor. The results of those studies, particularly examination of alternative proposals, may result in a conclusion that the location, design, or

6-existence of the proposed nuclear power plant must be different than that suggested by the applicant, if such a possibility did not=txist, there would be little purpose, other than window dressing, in prepa-Ing environ-mental reports. It is, therefore, premature for the Board to conduct hearings on the presently proposed location, design and existence of this nucicar power plant.

In addition, even if the AEC had prepared and submitted sufficiently in advance a proper detailed environmental report with the studies required, these hearings would necessarily have to include a discussion of the report and an opportunity for the applicant and the general public to express their views on the proposed modifications in design, location and existence of the plant. The notice of hearing in this matter does not even suggest that environmental factors will be discussed. A construction permit can not be validly issued without discussion of all relevant environmental factors. It is the worst kind of administrative chaos to attempt to resolve the design, location, etc. of a nucicar power plant at one hearing when factors which are relevant to that decision and which will ultimately affect it are not discussed.

For instance, the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 sets a State's water quality standard as a minimum standard to be applied by the AEC in issuing construction permits. It should be noted at this point that these standards have not yet been approved for the State of GH10 by the l Department of the Interior. The detailed environmental statement may in-dicate that the specific location of the proposed plant requires even higher water quality standards which can only be met by a change in plant design. These design changes will affect the safety analysis of the plant.

I increased costs as a result of the design changes may warrant a relocation l

l I

of the plant to an area where less stringent water c ality standards are required. In short the issuance of a construction permit involves the kind of polycentric problem which can only be resolved when all relevant factors are discussed in one hearing.

Under present AEC procedure as exemplified in this proceeding, hearings for construction permits are undertaken even though the thorough environ-mental studies and detailed environmental statement required by NEPA have not been submitted and even though the hearing does not propose to thoroeghly investigate environmental factors. No construction permit can be validly issued until these NEPA requirements are fulfilled.

g 6 s ,u - 2 e - -

For the reasons stated above LIFE requests that it be permitted to Intervene in this proceeding to challenge the issuance of construction permits to the applicant.

Respectfully submitted, f

6W3%7

\$v i

Vicki Evans Co-Chairman of LIFE J

(Living in a Finer Environment)

Box 15 Bowling Green State University Bcwling Green, Ohio 43403

. - 3A>

I nvin 1. Oster, Ph.D.

• Faculty Advisor to LIFE and Pr*fessor o of Biology and Anatomy Bowitng Green State University Bowling Green, Ohio 43403 4 SWORN TO before m o_ , cb- o t, a notary public A 'I in and for Wood County in the State of OHIO!Jthis /7 day of November,1970.

1 i

, m dh 0:a . ! >l: 1

!! tary PublIc. (

MAGDELENA Y. DAKEn, Notary 1%bh g 4

~

ht cm.nty, Ohio - . Hy Commission Explres: 7/4 Jb/Md My Commission Ex pir es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1-11ovember 18, 1970

)

, .-- ,_ ,_ . . _ _ , , , .