ML20115G546

Supplemental Petition for Review of Aslab 850212 Order Dismissing Graterford Inmates Petition for Directed Certification of ASLB 840205 Order.Commission Should Instruct ASLB to Permit Contentions.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20115G546
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	04/16/1985
From:	Love A GRATERFORD INMATES, LOVE, A.R.
To:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
CON-#285-618 OL, NUDOCS 8504220242
Download: ML20115G546 (7)

Text

I (0l , l UNITED STATES OF AMERICA U C l NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Commission E APR 19 P254 i

GIF!CE OF SECRGAP(

1 q

In the Matter of  : 00CMEilNG 4 SERV!Cf BRANCH l

! PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY  :

1

l (Limerick Generating Station, y Units 1 and 2)

NOS. 50-352 and 50-353 gg' h INTERVENOR GRATERFORD INMATES' SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION

] FOR REVIEW OF APPEAL BOARD ORDER DISMISSING 4

i PETITION FOR DIRECTED CERTIFICATION I j I. INTRODUCTION il P

On February 21, 1985, Intervenor Graterford Inmates filed with the Commission pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 2.786, a Petition for Review of an Appeal Board Order of February 12, 1985, dismiss it without p r ej ud ic e , the Notice of Appeal filed'with the Appeal Board by the Inmates regarding an interlocutory discovery ruling by the Licensing Board set forth in an Order of February 5, 1984.

The matters which brought this issue before the Nuclear Regula-NtoryCommission are as follows: On September 18, 1981, the Graterford Inmates filed a Petition to Intervene in the above-captioned matter. On December 13, 1984, the Inmates' attorney received from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania via the Pennsyl-vania Bureau of Corrections, an unclassified copy of the radio-logical emergency response plan for Graterford (heretofore to be 8504220242 850416 PDR ADOCK 05000352 Q PDR t

03

' Ci qb

I l

. j l

l referred to as Plan 1). After a review of the said plan by the inmates, their counsel and their expert, Major John Case, field i ,

l director of the Pennsylvania Prison Society, a decision was made to request full disclosure of the Graterford plan. To this end, J

't the Inmates filed a l'otion requesting full disclosure which was II hdocketedonDecember 19, 1984. On January 29, 1985, the Licensing d

ll Board, after hearing testimony from concerned parties, denied the h

i Inmates' request for full disclosure of the plan. The Inmates a

then moved for a stay of their obligation to file contentions I

[ within twenty (20) days of the Licensing Board's refusal to re-

ques t further disclosure. This stay was requested due to a prior 4

j Board Order of April 20, 1984, which granted the Inmates twenty

}

'l (20) days after receipt of the evacuation plan for Graterford in order to submit specific contentions regarding such. The Inmates then appealed the Order of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board which rej ected said appeal on February 12, 1985. The Inmates i then moved with the previously mentioned Petition for Review, which was filed on February 21, 1985 before this Honorable i

!j Commission.

II. Dispute Additional Disclosures of the Radiological Emergency Response Plan for Graterford, the Intervenors have been Denied I

the Right to base their Contentions upon Additionally Disclosed Information.

I i

I I

Pursuant to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board's I

suggestion in their February 12, 1985 rej ection of the Inmates' appeal, all parties concerned have met twice in an attempt to work out a solution per the Appeal Board's recommendation. Using the auspices of a protective order, the Inmates' counsel and thei::

retained expert, Major John Case, field director of the Pennsyl-l I

p vania Prison Society were permitted to review a second document jl entitled, The Emergency Radiological Response Plan (heretofore

!i j referred to as Plan 2). Said review was conducted at the State Il Correctional Institute at Graterford, Pennsylvania on March 18, 1985. Present at that time were Angus R. Love, counsel for In-ma tes ,- 11aj or John Case, designated expert, and Theodore Otto, counsel for the Bureau of Corrections. Initially, the Inmates note that the second plan represented considerable more detail than the first plan. The first plan was 27 pages long, and the second plan was 86 pages long.

A second meeting was held in response to this issue on

• l March 22, 1985 with all parties concerned meeting in Harrisburg, i

flPennsylvania. Initially, it was the Inmates' intention to drop the present action as they were satisfied with the further dis-closure brought forth by the review of Plan 2. However, during the discussions of the meeting on March 22, 1985, it became apparent that the Inmates would not be allowed to update their previously filed contentions which were based only upon the 4

information received by the review of Plan 1. Thus, the Inmates continue to request that this Appeal be heard by the Honorable Commission for the previously mentioned reasons and for the reasons cited herein. The purpose of requesting further dis-closure of the plan was to obtain a better understanding of said i plan as it relates to the Inmates. The initial plan was so vague and uncomprehensive that the Inmates had little or nothing upon j which to file their initial contentions. Those contentions werel lprimarily-basedupontherequirementsembodiedin10C.F.R.50.47 )

regarding emergency planning. These contentions were filed only i

after a stay request allowing the matter to be litigated prior to I

i the filing of any contentions was denied by the Licensing Board  ;

on January 29, 1985. The Inmates are now told by the Licensing )

Board that their original contentions will be the only contentions which will be taken into consideration by said Board.

"The contentions were stated in a pleading en-titled Proposed Contentions of the Graterford Inmates with Regar to the Evacuation Plan Filed February 15,1984.g-

" Footnote 4. We find these contentions to be the sole issue of the inmates. .We reject any

! attempt by the inmates to ' reserve the right to file additional contentions...' if access to an unsanitized plan was granted. (See Memorandum and Order on Graterford Prisoners Proposed Contentions ASLBP No. 81-465-07 OL April 12, 1985.)"

The Inmates protest that the additional ~d.isclosure and discussion of said issues will not be given consideration by the Licensing e

Board, thus they must continue to pursue this appeal.

1

4 A possible compromise on this issue was suggested during the meeting by the NRC staff in the person of Donald Hassel, who il suggested that the Inmates be allowed to respecify the bases for l

l their contentions in light of the additional disclosure. The

Licensing Panel rejected this possible compromise in addition

! l l to the Inmates' request to refile contentions. Thus, the In-

[mateshavebeendeniedtheright to refile their contentions and ;

1 j the right to respecify the bases for their contentions, despite 1

u

] the allowance of further disclosure, i.e. a review of the Plan 2.

l f For these reasons, the Inmates have no other option but to con-tinue to pursue their request for full disclosure and to i

l' supplement said request with a provision regarding the right t

l not only to review the additional information, but to update f

l

! their initial contentions based upon a review of the second plan.!

I jl For these reasons the Inmates respectfully request this Board to i

i i instruct the Licensing Board to permit contentions based upon l the additional information received.

Respectfully subm' ted,

, ) dA4 M ^

AWGUS R. LOVEj,/ E% QUIRE Attorney for Inmates, SCIG v

i L

I o .

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA l

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Commission In the. Matter.of.  :

PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY- :

i (Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2)  : NOS. 50-352 and 50-353 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Angus R. Love, attorney for the Inmates at the State lj .

l Correctional Institute at Graterford, hereby certify that a true and accurate copy of the Intervenor Graterfoicd Inmates' Supple-mental Petition for Review of Appeal Board Order Dismissing Petition for Directed Certification, in reference to the above-caption'ed matter, was mailed first class, postage prepaid, on April 16, 1985, to the following list:

Administrative' Judge Helen F. Hoyt- Martha W. Bush,. Esquire Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Mmicipal Services Building U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission 15th & JFK Blvd.

Washington, D.C. 20555 Philadelphia, PA 19107 l

Administrative Judge Jerry Harbour Atomic Safety & Licensing l1 Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Appeal Board Panel i U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Canzission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Adninistrative Judge Richard F. Cole Robert J. Stwar=m, Esquire

- Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Sugarman, Denworth & Hellegers U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission ~ 16th F1, Center Plaza Washington, D.C. 20555 101 North Broad Street

-Philadelphia, PA 19107 Ann P. Hodgdon, Esquire Cotmsel for NRC Staff Docket & Service Section Office of the Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission- Washington, D.C. 20555 (3 copies) '

Washington, D.C. 20555

Mr. Robert L. Anthony Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esquire 103 Vemon Inne, Box 186 Conner & Petterhahn bbylan, PA 19063 1747 Penna. Ave, tM Suite 1050 l Washington, D.C. 20006 David Wersan, Esquire Asst. Consumer Advocate Jay N. Gutierrez, Esquire l Office of Consumer Advocate U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cormission 1425 Strawberry Square Region 1 Harrisburg, PA 17120 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comrission Phyllis Zitzer Washington, D.C. 20555 Limerick Ecology Action P.O. Box 761 Frank Rotmno 762 Queen Street 61 Forest Avenue Pottstown, PA 19464 Attbler, PA 19002 Charles W. Elliott, Esquire Zori G. Ferkin, Esquire Counsel for Limerick Ecology Action Governor's Energy Council 325 N. 10th Street P.O. Box 8010 Easton, PA 18042 1625 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17105 Eugene J. Bradley, Esquire Counsel for Philadelphia Electric Mr. 'Ihomas Gerusky, Director 2301 Market Street Bureau of Radiation Protection Philadelphia, PA 19101 Dept. of Environmental Resources Ibiton Bank Building, 5th Fl. Edward G. Bauer, Jr.

'Ihird and Iccust Streets V.P. and General Counsel Harrisburg, PA 17120 Philadelphia Electric Co.

2301 Market Street Spence W. Perry, Esquire Philadelphia, PA 19101 Associate General Counsel FEMA, Roon 840 Steven P. Hershey, Esq.

500:Cr Street, SW Cormunity Ingal Services, Inc.

Washington, D.C. 20472 5219 Chestnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19139 James Wiggins Senior Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comuission P.O. Box 47 I

Sanatoga, PA 19464 )

Tinothy R.S. Carpbell, Director i j,M 1m N A Dept. of Emergency Services AN6CS R. , Ifa'QU1RE ~

14 East Biddle Street tbntgome County Ingal Aid West 01 ester, PA 19380 counsel r Inmates, SCIG Director, Penna. Emergency Management Agency Basenent, Transportation & Safety Bldg.

Harrisburg, PA 17120