ML20214U990

Reply to Licensee Response to State of Oh 860904 Petition for Leave to Intervene.State Seeking Opportunity to Advise Commission as to Serious Safety Concern Re Eventual Full Power Licensing.W/Certificate of Svc

ML20214U990
Person / Time
Site:	Perry
Issue date:	09/29/1986
From:	Sigler S OHIO, STATE OF
To:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
CON-#486-927 OL, NUDOCS 8610020055
Download: ML20214U990 (6)

Text

.. .

f5 .

927 DOCKETED September 29, IgggRC

'86 OCT ,1 R2:00 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ,

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE Or HCi t ';HY 00CKETiltu a EPViu.

BEFORE THE COMMISSION DRM!CH IN the Matter of:  : Docket Nos. 50-440 OL

50-441 OL THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC  :

ILLUMINATING COMPANY, et al.  :

(PERRY NUCLEAR PONER PLANT,  :

UNITS 1 and 2)  :

STATE OF OHIO'S REPLY TO LICENSEES' RESPONSE TO OHIO'S PETITION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE I. INTRODUCTION On September 4, 1986, the State.of Ohio petitioned this Commission for' leave to intervene as an interested State

' pursuant to 10 C.F.R. Section 2.715(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice. By way of this Petition, the State is seeking to preserve its ability to protect its citizens and to guarantee that it not be denied the opportunity to be heard in this matter. The State asserts that, regardless of the late point in the licensing proceedings, the contribution of the State s insights, knowledge and advise in matters it is so intimately aware of, can only aid the Commission in making its effectiveness review. On September 19, 1986, the Licensee responded to the State's Petition, requesting the commission to deny it.

h00 G

DO Dso3

I. -

II. DISCUSSION The State of Ohio requests intervention in order to be a participant in a proceedings whose outcome will crucially impact on the lives of many Ohioans. The State of Ohio concedes that it is seeking intervention late into the licensing process, however, there in no express time requirement for a petition to participate as an interested governmental entity pursuant to 10 C.F.R. Section 2.715(c). In fact, 10 C.F.R. Section 2.715(c) was intended to encourage the participation of governmental bodies by abrogating some of the technical requirements applicable to other types of intervention. Indeed the Commission's general policy behind 10 C.F.R. Section 2.715(c) is to afford an interested State a reasonable opportunity to participate in licensing proceedings, whenever the request is made.

The Licensees' response to the State's petition argues that "the Governor's decision to rescind and reevaluate bis prior approval of Perry's off-site emergency plans does not provide adequate justification for intervention at this late date",

Licensees' Response at 5. The State is not presently seeking to raise the adequacy of the off-site plans as a contention to be litigated. The State is, however, seeking an opportunity to advise the Commission as to a serious safety concern it has relating to the eventual full power licensing of the Perry plant. The fact that the State has raised no contentions is not fatal to its petition. An interested State participating

f.

~

in a proceeding pursuant to 10 C.F.R. Section 2.715(c) is not required to set forth contentions as preconditions to its participation. In the Matter of Gulf States Utilities Company (River Bend Station. Units 1 and 2), ALAB-444, 6'NRC 760 (1977). There is no express requirement for an interested State to file contentions, though the State may be required to specifiy the issues on which it desires to participate. 10 C.F.R. Section 2.715(c). The. State of Ohio is merely specifying, in advance, an issue which deeply concerns it and upon which it is seeking to advise the Comraission concerning the pending effectiveness review.

III. Conclusion -

For the reasons states above, the State of Ohio requests that the Commission exercise its discretion and grant Ohio's petition to intervene. To deny the petition would lessen the important role of State and local governments in NRC 1

i- proceedings. The State's participation in the renainder of the i proceedings can only serve to enhance State, IIRC and licensee l communication and cooperation on an issue of vital importance to all parties. These parties are necessarily going to have to work together in the future on many issues that will arise concerning the Perry Nuclear Power Plant and to disallow the State's participation at this point would be counterproductive and would deny the Commission valuable advice on important issues, r

.-__, _._ __,_-. ,,m__,- . . _ . -

F. .

DOLKETED Respectfully submitted.

ANTHONY J. CELEBREZZ g"J%EP 31 R2:00 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF OU O OFFICE OF SEtnt; Ahi 00CKEring a SEpvici.

BY: Sha.um O A BRANCH SHARON SIGLER V Assistant Attorney General Environmental Enforcement, Section 30 E. Broad St., 17th Floor Columbus, OH 43266-410 (614) 466-2766 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a foregoing copy of the State of Ohio's Reply to Licensees' Response to Ohio's Petition for Leave to Intervene was served by regular mail postage prepaid on this 29th day of September. 1986, to:

Jay Silberg, Esq.

Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 2300 N Street h'ashington, D.C. 20037 Lando W. Zech, Jr., Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Thomas M. Roberts, Commissioner U.S. Nuclear Pegulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 James K. Asselstine, Commissioner U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Frederick Bernthal, Commissioner U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Kenneth M. Carr, Commissioner U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

f. -

William L. Clements. Chief Docketing & Service Section Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Alan S. Rosenthal, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. W. Reed Johnson Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Howard A. Wilber Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 James P. Gleason, Chairman 513 Gilmoure Drive Silver Spring, Maryland 20901 Mr. Jerry R. Kline Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U . S '. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Glenn O. Bright Atomic Safety and Licensing Board  ;

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l Washington, D.C. 20555 John G. Cardinal, Esq.

Prosecuting Attorney Ashtabula County Courthouse Jefferson, Ohio 44047 Colleen Woodhead, Esq.

Office of General Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Was';ington, D.C. -

20555 Terry Lodge, Esq.

Suite 105 618 N. Michigan Street Toledo, Ohio 43624 l

l l

l

2 Ms. Susan L. Hiatt-8275 Munson Avenue Mentor, Ohio 44060 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Donald T. Ezzone, Esq.

Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Lake County Administration Center 105 Center Street Painesville, Ohio 44077 William C. Parler General Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 C+1 SHARON SIGLER U Assistant Attorney General i

9

, , . , . - , - n.,,-- - . - - -r,,- - - --.- ,- ,-, - , , , . a , - - ,---- ,- -