ML19308B225
| ML19308B225 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 11/22/1967 |
| From: | Harris J, Reeder S, Tally J PIEDMONT CITIES OF NORTH CAROLINA |
| To: | US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7912160139 | |
| Download: ML19308B225 (6) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_. _ _ _ _ __ W l.s. -
. ; .
&L .
. Cw di IWi1DE3 ,, l t
P80D. & UTIL, EAC.704,f,2,70,gf'/
/ . .
s'
. ./ .
. M.:a -
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ' ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION 1
'. *))
IN Tile MAe A6R OF - s[y.,-[ #y , l DUKE POWER COMPANY ) -
) DOCKET *NOS. 50-269*
l (OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION ) 50-270
) S0-287 -
;
UNITS 1, 2 and 3) ) . 'l 0f
\gg)1
- c. SUPPLEMENT TO' ' 6, ., '
INTERVENORS' EXCEPTIONS TO INITIAL DECISION OF [[@..([.!)h
.cd,
' ( 1 ' . '.- -
a- [ . ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD AND N[N l* REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT i' 'N .- Cities of Statesville,'lligh Point, Lexington, ' Monroe, Shelby, and Albemarle, and tho & S Towns'of Cornelius, Drexel, Granite Falls, D00IEIID Newton, and Lincolnton, all in North Carolina, gj, 151EC A Intervenors b NOV221967 > h Off!Cs af fte Sa Ct;;ry 'b
- 13:ls PrGC:tCags.
unca-Jack R. IIstris ega . Suite-207 ' i Stimpson-Wagner Building , Statesville, North Carolina *' .
~
J. O. Tally, Jr. . P. O. Drawer 1660
- ~
Fayetteville, North Carolina , Spencer W. Reeder _,- Spencer Building . St. Michaels,' Maryland
. .- Attorneys for Intervenors
~
November 22, 1967 - ink $ I6013h:
- f. .
m - l .. ., ' l , ,
; , ;
ONITED STATES OF AMERICA . t,
/
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
/-
;
I I IN THE MATTER OF .
,) .
)
DUKE POWER COMPAN'l ) Docket Nos. 50-269 :
) 50-270 :
50-287 (OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION ) '
)
UNITS.1, 2 and 3 ) i
- ., SUPPLEMENT TO .
;
INTERVENORS'
;
EXCEPTIONS TO INITIAL DECISION .
;
OF . . ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD - AND "
;
. REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT ,
The Intervenors, Cities of Statesville, High Point, Lexington, Monroe, Shelby, and Albemarle and Towns of . i i Cornelius, Drexel, Granite Falls, Newton, and Lincolnton, l-all in North Carolina, hereby, in apt time, supplement the t' grounds for their "Intervenors' Exceptions to Initial '
\
Decision of Atomic Safety and Licensing Board and Request for Oral Argument " filed November 21, 1967, by the addition there , .
;
to of the following-paragraphs for insortion therein at the l places indicated, and request oral argument thereon, as. , , l, . l .followss' , l
.. . , ., . l l
l l . i ' i
/
l ., i. 1
'O E f
. . 6
~
l ,. .
; ..
I t .
- ,
. _ ____---.__z____ _..__i_,,_ ;_ _ , , _ _ _ ,
.s
~
i f ; 4 i I SUPPLEMENT A TO GROUNDS FOE INTERVENORS' EXCEPTION 1 (To be inserted on p. 8 of Intervenors ' Exceptions afte. ; i the words "The grounds for this exception...are:"
!l
- ;
. l The Board's attempt to treat the "proj ect" rather / l than the " reactors" as the " utilization facility" to be ;i
;. !
licensed is unauthorized by law and contrary to law. The . ill utilization facility involved is the reactor, and not , 1
. the entire Oconee Nuclear Station, or any part thereof, .
other than the reactor. Section 11 cc of the Act de-fines " utilization facility" as "any equipment or device except an atomic weapon, determined by rule of the ccm- .i I, mission to be capable of making use of special nuclear
, material. . . ; or (2) any important ccmponent part es- '
pecially designed for such equipment or device as, deter- _ mined by the, Commission." But, by the Commission's Rules . and Regulations,10 CFR Part 50, Section 50.2(b), the T ' l term " utilization facility" is limited to "any nuclear , I reactor other than one designed or used primarily for the. )
'l The Commissio'n has
/ formation of plutonium or U-233." - .
Y .
,f
< never even determined that any ccmponent .part 'of the re- ,.
actor especially designed for such equipment is capable ' i j of making use o: speciaA nuclear material and therefore t . . l "a utilization facility" within the meaning of Sec.11 cc (2) of the Act, supra. Therefore,.the, Board's attempt to treat the " project" rather than the " reactor" as the"uti- .l lization facility" to be licensed is unauthorized by law ,. and contrary to law. ,
- i 6 ,
- i
. b
- - - - -- . .. r . . . - - ~ . - ._.,,s,.. .m. .% . . ., - .
i . I
. ., ~. s s -- .
- ,
SUPPLEMENT B TO GROUNDS FOR INTERVENORS' EXCEPTION 6 ! (For insertion following page 15 of Intervenors' Exceptions.) . The Board's extension of the statutory definition of . l "Research and Development" goes so far that if applied to
. l the research and development activities which the Commission j is authorized to conduct in its own utilization facilities ,
j i.
. or by contract with others under Section 31 of the Act, it .
i. would justify the building of the Oconee Nuclear Station by ; .' I the commission. But Section 44 of the.Act expressly forbids . the " Commission to engage in the . sale or distribution of - energy for coinmercial use except such energy as may be
, produced by the Commission incident to the operation of -
;
. !research and development facilities of the , Commission, or i
of production facilities o'f the Commission." Similarl.y, . the Congress by simultaneous amendment of Sections 101 and ; 103 (P.L. 84-1006, 7 Stat. 1069, Sections 11 and 12) has i forbidden the "use" of any utilization facility without a license, has authorized by express words the J.icensing of . the "use" of any utilization facility only under Section 103, *. and has not expressly nor by implication authorized the i , licensing of the "use" of any utilization facility under i l
. ;.
Section 104. So, Co,ngress, under the doctrine of exeressio l unius exclusio alterius, by expressly requiring the licensing of " commercial" utilization facilities under Section , 103 of 1 . . I . - ,
. l
,==
( * = = %-
- m-+ =--,,-e -- - -. . , - -e --
l
s. i f e , I the Act has prohibited the licensing of utilization facilities for commercial use by " noncommercial" license ! t
.. i under Section 104.of the Act. . l.
i
;. .
I E t
.e
, .E 9
. ~ ;
i . .
. t o
i y .
., I
; , , , s .
'1
( g 1, . ;. - . . . s s ,. , . . t 1s * . r $ .
~
. . .n i
..'t*<* _
o
, l ;' , * .
' 5 I ,
. g
, -;
1 a . i . .. , 4 *4
* , ,/
. . o e
.L *
,- e
'[+ .
.. 6.
. g
*. ' . . 2.
- r q . '
y ,
. N e.go qgepegy, ee, .g.es .+av.**- .s'e'* .n o me."-*- em .W" eM*"**""*--- " - --
k'
1 I .. . j - . ;
+
as herein supplemented, , h'!!EREFORE the Intervonors pray thaMhc Commission sus- *
. . ;'
tain each and all of the abovo listed exceptions; and, as to each .
, , j and all, overrule the Board; and that the Commission dismiss the application of Duke Power Company as unjurisdictionally submitted . -
under Section 104(b) of the Act; and direct the resubmission of an ' I . application by Duko, if Duko so wishes, undoi Section 103 of tho . Act; and that the Commission allow and order oral argument upon
- these exceptions'an'd this appeal from the Board to the Commiss h a. -
.. . r Respectfully Submittod, 1 City of Shelby .
; ;
l City of Statesville , City of High Point - City of Lexington .
.. City of Monroe
- City of Albemarlo '
Town of Cornelius . Town of Drexo1 '
. Town of Granito Falls .
Town of Newton - Town of Lincolaton, . .
. North Carolina ..' .
- -' BY: .
;
#/t .h _ . .
I
* (Jack R. liarris Suite 207, Stimps.on-Wagner Building esville.,A' orth
' ,_' 'l
... arolina.'
l ( { /
. j ^ . ) L . N .s @ M & .,, ;
Jy% Tally, Jr./f -
,i
p'. 0 ' '
~....-
- ga'j.Drawcr'1630 yotteville, North Caro 1 S a
- i , _. .
M.w.au ! . j GAA -
<- Sppncor W. Reeder V *
' , .. (
,- , Spencer Building . ..
- 6t. Michac,1s, Marylan,d"-
' 5 22 November 1967
- .Their Attornoys .
. . e ,
; *' ,. . . , * . -..
i ( , . . s I {......-..-...==i=s=------- V, . . .
~
" - - ~ ~}}