ML19207A419

Transcript of 790717 Meeting in Washington,Dc Re Further Proceedings Concerning Restart of TMI-1.Pp 1-59

ML19207A419
Person / Time
Site:	Crane
Issue date:	07/17/1979
From:	Gilinsky V, Hendrie J, Kennedy R NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:
Shared Package
ML19207A420	List: ML19207A419 ML19207A424
References
REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 7908170502
Download: ML19207A419 (60)

Text

Oh s

k

g.

i

&0 NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF:

PUBLIC MEETING DISCUSSION OF PROCEDURES TO GOVERN FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN RESTART OF TMI-l

(

Place -

Washington, D.

C.

Date -

Tuesday., 17 July 1979 Pages 1 - 59

~

Tele =nen e;

02)2 c 3700 ACE - FEDERAL REPORTERS, LNC.

'l[],

2bh L

OfficialReporters I O ()g 444 North Cepitel Street 7 0 O

Wasningten. O.C. 20C01 NATIONWIDE COVERAGE - D AILY

s 1

4 DISCLAIME_R This is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on 'Ibesday,17 July 1979 at 1:37 p.m.,

in the Cc= mission's offices in 1717 H Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C.

The meeting was open to public attendance and observation.

This transcript has not been reviewed, corrected, or edited, and it may contain inaccuracies.

The' transcript is intended solely for general informational purposes.

As provided by 10 CFR 9.103, it is not part of the formal or informal record of decision of the matters discussed.

Expressions of opinion in this transcript do not necessarily reflect final determinations or beliefs.

No pleading or other paper may be filed with the Commission in any proceeding as the result of or addressed to any st:tement or argument contained herein, except as the Commission ma~y authorize.

200

,o c

'J

22 JWBeach

• ll' a

58 jwb 1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3

l i

4 PUBLIC MEETING 5l i

I i

6 !

I

[

DISCUSSION OF PROCEDURES TO GOVERN FURTHER 7

PROCEEDINGS I'

_ START OF TMI-l 8,

9l 1

10 Room 1130 11 1717 H Street, Y 4

Washington, D.

C.

1 12 i I

uesday, D July M M 13 j I

14 i

The Commission met, pursuant to notice, at 15 l-1:37 p.m.

i 16 BEFORE:

17 l JOSEPH M.

HEND RIE, Chairman 4

1:

18 '

i VICTOR GILINSKY, Commissioner i

19 f l

RICHARD T.

KENNEDY, Commissioner 20 i PETER A 3RADFORD, Cc=missioner 21 i

JOHN F.

AHEARNE, Commissioner 22 ll ALSO PRESENT:

n

,31 Messrs.

Hoyle, 3ickwit, Shapar, Ostrach, and 24 '

1 Cunningham.

3 -r_

M Reporters, Inc..I 25 :l 0

i n!

^ { j I.

/U u

'J

>l c

CR 5999 3

J. WB e a.ch

, 7/17/79 1

J w3_ a1,.

_P _R O _C _E _E _D _I _N _G _S 1

i 2'

(1:37 c.m.)

I i

1 I

3l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

If we could come to order, t

l 4j the Commission meets this afternoon to continue its 5l discussion of draft language for an order on further I

I 6

proceedings in the restart of Three Mile Island Unit 1.

i 7l We had the first meeting on this subject last week.

We i

l 8

continue that discussion here with a new paper in hand from i

(

9 ELD outlining the procedural aspects in a possible order 10 l on Three Mile 1.

l l

1 Il f You will recall that the technical s ce or the i

12 staff is still to supply us with various language on 13 l sub'stantive points to be considered in the hearing, as well r

14 as some other language appropriate for them to prepare, 15 and that will not be in hand for a couple of days yet.

It's j

16 due the 20th.

I don't know whether anyone at hand has a 17 late report on how things are going there.

e IS l Howard, do you know how they're progressing?

l 19 l MR. SH APAR:

I understand they're striving 20 i mightily to make the date, but it's going to be tight.

21 I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

And we will then meet i

i 22 expeditiously thereafter.

i 23 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

That surely does not n

24 imply that we didn't know why we wanted to shut it down in 9J al 90Dorters, Inc.

25 !

the first place.

m

'nE 2OL o.

I

4 l

2 jwb s

l i

I MR. SHAPAR:

I would think not.

l l

\\

2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

It probably indicates that i

f 3

we're not sure what we're going to require o bring it up, I

4 I think.

I i

I i

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Or a sort of drafting matter.

6 Now we'll continue the discussion on the proce-7 dures side today, as I say, looking at the draft order 8

that's been prepared.

9 I ought to say at the beginning that I don't --

10 I will not be asking the Commissioners for any sort of final f

I Il vote on the procedural aspects here.

I think we ought to 12 discuss the provisions in the order with counsel and staff, 13 but -- and I hope we can see that we have some sort of

?

Id concensus developing out df this discussion in order that l

15.

this part of the order can be tolerably well understood i

i 16 l when we turn to the' technical issues -- but I wouldn't care l

i 17f to declare it tinal language at this meeting.

It seems to 18 me that we ought to see it all as a package before we come I9 to that point.

I 20 l With that understanding about where I hope to go 21 with the discussion, let me ask Len, do you have anything l

22 l you want to add, and then I'll ask Howard --

43 MR. BICKWIT:

No.

li 24 0 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

-- to take us through the 34 al Reporters, Inc. '

25 order.

7 (l1 1-7 u-c0J u

5 3.jwb 1

Howard, why don't you go ahead, then.

2 MR. SEAPAR:

What this order at. tempts to do is l

l 3

to implement the options that were recommended and discussed i

4 at the last meeting.

5 I do have some spoeific points I want to bring to 1

your attention, some of them late-developing.

I received a l

6 phone call from Fox Trowbridge, who I notice is in the l

7 l

audience, this morning.

He is counsel for GPU, and he l

3 f

1 9

advised me, and asked me to pass on to you, as I am now l

10 doing, a statement to the ef fect that the company in its i

11 answer to the order will object to the requirement that i

i there be an adjudicatory hearing before the plant is permitted :

12 1 1

13 to start up.

That is the essence of,the message, and there 14 further discussion on it.

was no I

i i

4 15 f CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Duly noted.

i 16 '

MR. SH AP AR:

Ncw

'I 17 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

What is the ef fect of such I

la an objection, in the procedural sense?

19 i

MR. SEAPAR:

A catter for the Cc= mission to 20 )

i consider.

I 1

21 ;

COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

I'm sure we can find a i

i 2^ l

'l number of letters that have come in saying that they would

,- l object if there weren't.

I 7'

MR. S HAPAR:

Sure.

s.Fs al R eporters,.ac.

Other specific points I wanted co bring to your

~OC

} {, t1

6 4 jwb I

attention.

We had.=ame more time to review some of the 2l matters that.ere in the original memorandum, and I noticed i

3 an error that I wanted to bring to your attention.

4li I note cour astonishment, because it doesn't i

5, happen very often.

i 6;

(Laughter.)

r i

7l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Is that your assumption I

i 8

about the nature of the astonishment?

9 I

( Laughte r. )

10 I MR. SHAPAR:

There could be no other rational 11 explanation for it.

I2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

You will note we're practically I

13 '

speechless, Howard.

Id MR. SHAPAR:

On page 8 of the memorandam that I 15 sent you before, not the order that you' ve just received, 16 you recall the discussion that we had about whether there 17L were differences between a --

i 18 hli CHAIRM.E4 HENDRIE:

Where.vou are clippe d; o k a v..

4 l9 b MR. SEAPAR:

-- a recommended decision and an l

20 4 initial decision.

And I urged and reccmmended that you go j

21 l[

the route of an initial decision.

I I

'2 i Hcwever, in an attempt to get both sides of it, 4

il 23 ]

I claimed one advantage that is nonexistent for a recommended 2 ' '

decision.

I made the point -- although that argued against Reporters, Inc. d,!

+J at 25 my position -- that an advantage of a recommended decision i

[,' 'l I r)- eh

• )

L, Ga o

a

7

5. j.wb i

i I

would be that there wouldn't have to be any other briefing, 2

other than the briefing that had occurred before the 3

recommended decision was issued.

1 4

We have discovered a law case in point which 5'

indicates that is not crirect; that even with a recommended 6

decision under Lne APA, a party would have the right, either l

i I

7!

to submit proposed findings to the Commission, or to file l

O exceptions and to brief it.

l 9i So whatever that advantage may have amounted to

+

10 {

in your mind really should be cancelled.

I ll i COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

We went the " initial 12 4 l

decision" route --

13 MR. SHAP AR:

You went the. initial decision route, t

14 i anyway, but I felt compelled to bring it to your attention.

l 15 l' CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

And the correction argues even 16 more in f avor of your recommendation.

I,'(q MR. SEAPAR:

Even more strongly, yes.

!i 18 4 l

Also, I note in connection with the issues that 19 !

q are in this paper, that there's a certain imbalance between 20 hl l

Issue 1 and Issue 2.

'l' COMMISSICNER AHEARNE:

Now which paper are you --

l 2' i MR. SEAPAR:

This is the -- I'n sorry.

This 31 paper is the one you've just received, including the draft Il 1 '4 order.

And I think rhe race reference is page 4 and 5.

9-E al R eporters, IPC. 'l b

You'll see in Issue No.

1, the phrase on the o

.i I

~/ Il E 2Ob

.i u,

g 6,j.wb i

I third line, "are necessary and sufficient to provide 1

2l reasonable assurance"; whereas, when you turn to page 5, i

3' 1

you say -- we say, "will provide reasonable assurance".

i I

4l I think the "necessary and suf fi cient" was picked li l

5 l

up from the prior order, and I see no reasor, assuming you're i

l 6+

otherwise satisfied with the general tenor of the issues, 7

why there shouldn't be comparability and the "necessary and i

l l

sufficient" language being in both.

9 One or two other specific points.

i I

10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

That is, this would put in in 11 point (2), "are necessary and sufficient to proride"?

i l

12 !

MR. SHAPAR:

Yes.

I 1 ~7 Now there are two blanks in the order.

One is i

14 l the blanks of the names of the members of the Board.

I 15 i

don't think that my office should have any participation 1

16 l whatever in the selection of Board members, since attorneys 17l 3

on my staff would be representing the staff in any hearing.

\\1 18 l So I would not feel comfortable with any i

19 !

q discussions of Board members.

1 20 l Beyond that, I'd like to make a point that this d

e1 J could be a critical path item, because I noticed during the 27 last neeting there was some inclincation on your parts to l

'3 i

}

select members from outside the existing panel.

And what a

24 "

at Reporters, Inc, (j I'm saying is, no argument against that, but I feel I ought e-e

'5 4 to bring to your attention that if that selecrion process, u

~!

r,

'j d

U'

'l lbi l

9 i

7. JN3 l

if you go that route, that selection process could be on a I

6 2

critical path, here.

I think the Board needs to get in early.

I think it should become familiar with the documents.

3 i

4 1 There are all kinds of preliminary matters to address, and 5

it could become a constraint.

i 6

There's another blank in the order, and that 7l blank relates to a target date for completion of the inicial i

3!

decision.

t 9

COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

Could I just stop you l

j there, How ard?

You were referring to I suppose the possible 10 !

L 11 ll impropriety or sensitivity about, if the staff was going to 12 !

be a party in the case, getting involved in the choice of i

3!

the Board members.

l 'd MR. SHAPAR:

Y e's.

ll COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

What about the draftinc 16 of the order itself?

Is it --

MR. SEAPAR:

Well, that was my final point.

I 1

13 would hope that you would absolve me from any further o

19 :i resconsibilities in ccnnection with this matter after the d

~

1 conclusion of this meeting; and that the Office of the 20 -

'i 21 l General Counsel take over from this point sn.

J l

92 "

I think Com. ~.ssioner Bradford raised the point, 4

oq 23 !

and I think it's well taken.

From a legal standpoint, it's

, i.

?-i at R eporters, Inc.,

all.

For examcle, the Commission didn't z-a not recuired at o

25 !i need to issue this order.

Under the Ccamission's rules, l

' i),6-o h' O O

D ll

10 i

8, j,wb i

I Ili the staff can and does issue orders of this kind.

The t

t 2

staff drafts them, and the staff tries t.c case, and it's 3

done that way in other agencies.

There's no question of any I

4!

legal constraint here.

i t

5!

But I think this is a very important matter, and I

i 61 I think certain sensitivities are involved here.

And I l

l 7

personally would feel more comfortable if my involvement i

8 were ter.ainated at the conclusion of this meeting, if that's i

I 9l satisfactory to all concerned.

10 MR. BICKWIT:

I might add, I would, also.

+

11 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

I take silence as general i

12 '

agreement witn-the propositio.n.

i 13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

General agreement with the

.i 1 *' l proposition, but not in any way meaning to imply any I

15 criticism.

16 1

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE :

No, we have asked Howard, in j,' [a fact, to deal with first the procedural issues paper, and I8 secondly to draft the order, and there's certainly --

J o

I9 fi COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

The clear relationship a

tl 20 0 of this point so cogently made, to discussions that have N

21 h occurred on a number of occasions concerning the ex parte 22 rule should, however, I think be duly noted.

Thank you.

4 23 MR. SHAPAR:

All right, there's another blank in i

2 d:j the order, and that blank is the target date.

You remer.ber 1f 3i 9eporters, Inc. j,

I 25 the discussions you had the last meeting, and that was --

a D

L-rl-1 j

's h

11

9. jwb i

1 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

Let me just interrupt you 2

again, if I may.

If we ' re moving in this direction -- and 3

I didn't mean by my question to suggest a course of action --

I i

r 4

what does this mean about our possible deali.gs with the S

technical staff?

l 61 MR. SHAJ AR:

I don't think*there's any problem, 7

at least from my standpoint.

I think the situation is I

i 8l different.

You have two legal offices, and I think the I

i 9

General Counsel is your immediate legal advisor.

And this is 10 a Commission order, and you have an embarrassment of riches, I

11 -

- I may use ti. sse terms.

l 1:

12 (Laughter.)

i 13 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

An admirable phrase.

14 MR. SHAPAR:

And I think, it being a Commission q

15 l order and not a staff order, that it's only proper that the 3

16,

General Counsel provide you --

u fl 17 ll COMMIESIONER KENNEDY:

I trust our budgetary 1

1 18 ]

committees will understand that in the spirit that it was h.

19 offered.

h U

20 MR. SHAPAR:

I hope so, too.

21 "

( Laugh ter. )

i 22 I COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

What do you think, Len, j

23 l about our ability to interact with the staff?

d

,.n 6 n MR. SICKWIT:

I have no problem with interaction eE 31 ReDorters, nc. ll 2:. \\,

with rhe staff.

It's clear that the ex parte rule is not j

]

+,

o,, Uo o.

10.jwb 12 I'

in effect, and I would subscribe to the Director's statements.

MR. SHAPAR:

Of course the Corrission always has 1

1 i

options, and you could use OPE.

1 i

COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

And at what point would I

l c

~l the ex parte rule come into effect?

6 MR. BICKUIT:

It would come into effect upon the l

I 7

issuance of this order.

O MR. SHAPAR:

Notice of hearing starts the ex l

9' parte bar.

i l

10 '

Now one point is important here, though.

Even 11 l if the ex parte bar is in effect, it precludes only 12 l discussions of substantive matters in issue.

I 13 '!

COMMISSIONER AHEARNE :

Len, does the ex parte l

l 14 I go into ef fect when the order is published?

Or when the 1

15 I j

first recuest for hearing under the order --

16 MR. BICKWIT:

My reading is it goes into effect i

17 I wnen the order is published.

s 4

18 il MR. SHAPAR:

When the notice of hearing is issued.

I 19 9j COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

Well, does that then mean e

70 'l l

that we can't discuss, say, you know, the hazards of one or s

71 '!

another aspect of the situation in TMI 1 with the technical t

22 staff once this order is issued?

73 i

- L MR. BICKWIT:

No, it doesn't mean that.

It means 1

2 ~' ""

that when vou do so, it must be done on the public record,

+4 al Reporters, Inc. pt

'S 3 D. I and it must be done with an opportunity to rabut.

'i

~7

')

I li

( j e /l k

I t '

s L /

I m

11.jwbl 13 I

COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

Can the Commission get 2

briefings on the subject?

i 3

MR. SHAPAR:

The rules provide for status reports.

l

1. l The Commission has traditionally received status reports, i

I 5t but what is not prevented is --

i l

l 6l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Ycu should be on the public 7

record.

i 3'

MR. SHAPAR:

Well, the Sunshine Act itself would 1

I 9

make it an open meeting.

10 1

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Right.

11 {

COMMISSIONER AEARNE:

I have -- I think, Vic, i

12 there's another related point.

In many ways, TMI 1 and TMI 2 13 '

are linked.

Does this then also mean that once this order 14 i

is issued that similar rules now apply to discussion of i

15' '

any details with respect to TMI 2?

i i

16 !

MR. BICKWIT:

If they relate to substantive

, il d

matters at issue in this proceeding.

18 h

MR. S HAPAR:

I think the rule says, " factually 1

i 19 related casec."

p l

20'l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

Well, I find that a ul oi bizarre result.

i 2' l

't (Laughter.)

4 2 3 "'

MR. SICKWIT-New there are cases which suggest 1

2 lI m.F at Reporters, Inc. ]

- be leniencv with ti t in order to do one function, there may 25 d respect to cener recuirements.

il fn

,3,

,)

t,'

i O

L < L d

12 jwb l 14 1

l I.

I COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Let me explore it a little i

2 bit more.

i 3l One of the cuestions wnicn may come up on restart l

4 of TMI 1 is:

To what extent are the facilities at TMI 1 i

I' 5

needed for safe handling in emergency situation of say the i

6-radioactive waste water at TMI 2?

i i

7 And what is the potential -- the remaining 8

potential for an emergency at TMI 2?

What impact would that l

9 !

have on the activities at TMI l?

i 10 Now does that fall under the situation of link ge i' q

hat would bring in the ex parte bar?

i l

12 MR. BICKWIT:

If the issue relates to a matter at I 3 'i issue in this pr,oceeding, then it is subject to the bar.

I I4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Interesting.

15 I COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

Now is there any 1

t 16 l dif ference in the application of the ex parte bar say t

i I7 I, between the relations between the Commissioners and say I8 the Exec ctive Lega' Director's Office from the technical i

I, ]j staff?

Would we regard them to be the same?

20 '

MR. BICKWIT:

No.

91 :'

MR. SH AP AR:

None.

22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

With regard --

l

'3 l MR. SHAPAR:

No.

d COMMISSIONER AHEA?NE:

This could really end up

e-F at R eoorters, Inc.,

25 then precluding us from having further discussion with a

[ [8 J

^

o

,\\

l

15 1.3.j wb i

1 Denton or Valmer about Part 2, for example.

1 2l MR. BICKWIT:

Again, it's a cuestion of whether l

3l' the issue is tied to an issue in this --

4 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY :

Or say the capabilities i

l 5l of management, which is the same in both cases.

I 6

MR. BICKWIT:

That's correct.

i 7l MR. S HAPAR:

I should add that historically I 3!

can't think of any examples where that has happened, but

\\

i 9:

this is a ve ry --

i I

10 l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Well, there's a lot of --

I Il !

a lot of history --

i I

i 12 MR. SHAPAR:

-- a very different kind of a situation I

13 '

with two units on the same site.

14 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD :

Can the parties waive the 15 '

rule in some or all of its respects?

That is, take for 16 example to waive it in regard to Part 2?

ll l

17 ?

MR. SHAPAR:

I would think, yes, it could be 18 waived.

i 19 h COMMISSIONER AHEARSE:

But wouldn't you have to 20 identify who were all the parties ?

21 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

How many parties?

t 22 !!

MR SHAPAR:

All the parties.

23 l CCMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Excuse me?

n e.

1

" l' COMMISSIONER KENNEDY-All the parties.

. ce -,

.ral R eporters, InG. "

I 25 ?

COMMISSIONER B RADFO RD :

Nell, eventually we would

'k

-} -l 'i 3

c.

t 1

o;

16 14.jwb i

i 1

know who the parties were.

At the moment, it would be a 2,

challenge.

i i

3i MR. SHAPAR:

But I think, yes, it could be i

4i waived.

I I

5I COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

So --

t i

6li MR. BICKWIT:

Ncw there is --

4 7

MR. SHAPAR:

By the way --

j 8!

MR. BICKWIT:

There is another way to deal with 9

this that we devised with respect to Rancho Seco and 10 ;

Davis-Besse.

The opportunity to rebut, as we see it, l

11 !

really has to available prior to Cormission action on a given i

l 12 point.

It needn't be irrediate.

13 So that it would be possible to deal on an issue 14 with respect to TMI 2 in open session, to keep a transcript i

1 i

15 '

of it, and to make that available to other parties.and permit 16 them an opportunity to rebut anything in that transcript

'I 17:l before the Commission acted on TMI 1,

and that might be a n

I 18 !

solution to your problem.

il il 19 !

CO.v24ISSIONER AEEARNE:

But nevertheless, it still l!

20 i substantially would decrease our oversight of what's happening i

21 l at TMI 2, or it has the potential --

a, e

22ji MR. BICKWIT:

It has the potential to decrease it?

o

i 23 CO.v24ISSIONER AHEARNE :

Yes.

I 24 MR. BICKWIT:

It would keep you from considering g

e 4

. af Aeooners. Inc. q 25 ]

those matters off the public record.

i II

~GL

')I_,

i 1

Q L.

n dn

17 i

15,jwb l

I COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Why would we wish to l

I i

2l consider them of f the public record, in any event?

What i

3 would the purpose of that be ?

4

1. )

MR. BICKUIT:

I have no reason to think that you

\\

S; would.

I 6'

COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

You might want to ask a 7l question.

i

+

i i

r O'

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Well, why not ask it on 9,

the p Glic record?

10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE :

You mean, call people in 11 here every time?

3 ring them down from Harrisburg to ask 1

12,

them questions?

13 l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Make a transcript.

Issue l

~

l it.

I would, in the normal circamstances.

i 15 MR. SH APAR:

I should add, that unlike initial i

16 '

~

licensing, in initial licensing this result is not compelled I7 by statute.

Here it is.

It's not initial licensing, la g

therefore this result is compelled not just by our rules but i

19 Jj by statute.

20 i COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

This is the APA?

'l MR. SHAPAR:

This is the APA.

22 i

The purpose of it is clear.

The purpose of it is N

'34 to compel you to make a decision on the record, and on no ll 24 other information.

ReELeters, Inc.,j

.W al

'S 4

^

q COMMISSIONER KENNEDY :

It sounds like a good law l

th

i 18 16 jwb i

I to me.

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

We ll, this point --

t l

i*l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Let me go back and reiterate.

I want to be sure that I understood counsel.

i i

i 5)

It is clear that we are not barred from any information r

I 6l whatever from the staff, so long as that and all other 7

information is made on the public record and available to i

3l all partie.

i 9!

Let me just note that, as I " aid before, I think 10 t that 's very good law.

I 11 !

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Or in fact are we prohibited i

12 from status reports --

4

\\.

l i

13 l l

MR. SHAPAR:

No.

l 14 '

MR. BICKWIT:

Or generic --

15 MR. SHAPAR:

Your rules orovide for it.

i 16 MR. BICKWIT:

-- matters.

Discussion of i

17 !

generic matters.

18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

And the staff can tell us what L.

19 i they're doing in a case.

In fact, they can tell us what 20 <

,l they're doing in TMI 1, as a mat ~er of fact.

l

,]'

I MR. SHAPAR:

Yes.

,,i "l

I should raise a flag there, though.

It is a 23 '

briefinc, but to the extent that you ask questions and

l 24 '

elicit responses --

e-n el RecorMrs, Inc.,

25 d i

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

7,t becomes a discussion of the 4

7 013 2//

1

17 jwh 19 I

i I

1t I

merits.

Yes.

I 2

COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

And it's a little difficult, 3

at least initially, to consider -- to think of too many t

4 i generic issues related to the accident at TMI 2.

MR. SHAP AR:

Well, I think a status report on the 1

6' case is perfectly all right.

i I

COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Oh, a status report?

Sure.

i 0

COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

Well, let's not -- you i

9' weren't saying that we can't engage in a discussion on these 1

10 matters with the staff, were you?

11 MR. SEAPAR:

Your rules say that you will not --

12,

no one will communicate with you, and that you won ' t 13 j

entertain suca communications --

)

14 i

COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

No, no --

l 15 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY.

Except on the public r

16 i record.

q l I COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

No, no, no, I meant i

18 '

assuming they are on the public record.

q I

19 aj MR. SRAPAR:

Then I guess, by definition, it's t

20 !',

not l

"ex parte."

H 21 '

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY :

If it's on the public 22 0 record.

j.

i 23 M ll MR. 3ICKWIT:

That's right.

i 9 '4 MR. SHAPAR:

I mean, the staff files motions with 1-8 Reporters, Inc.

'S 3

you all the time.

It's on the public record.

e

~? D L

~/ 0 '-

r2 / o a

13 jwb ;

20 l

l 1

COMMISSIGNER KENNEDY:

And the staff is entitled 2l to tell us anything they wish to tell us, provided that in 3l fact it is on the public record, and that all parties have i

4 an opportunity then to contest or rebut it.

i i

I 5!

MR. SHAPAR:

Yes.

6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

And we can ask them 3

i I

7l anything that we want to know about the situacion, too.

8-MR. BICKWIT:

I'm not clear on your point of i

9, the distinction between a briefing and the discussions,

i.

10 !

MR. SHAPAR:

A briefin~ is sicolv. the kind of 9

i, 11 !

briefing the Commission gets regularly on the status of f

i 12 cases.

The staff ccmas here and tells them where the case 1

13 l is, and that sort of thing.

14 l MR. BICKWIT:

But iI the discussion relates to 15 l status, also, I don't see the distinction.

16 MR. SHAPAR:

Oh, I wasn't making any distinction 17.

there.

I'm saying it's perfectly okay to cc=municate, to 13,'

discuss the status of the case.

il 19 Q MR. BICKhIT:

All right.

Thank you.

u i

20 1, COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

I suppose you're drawing 21 a line between that, and what?

22 !j MR. SHAPAR:

And discussinr the issues.

I mean:

li 23 j Is the staff's position right or wro.g?

What should the l'

I 24 '

result be?

And that sort of thing.

That's attempting to 4 F.

al Reporters, Inc.

,5 '

in:.1uence your decision.

H u

!{

7 QL 97C

i i

/.

/

i

19 jwb 21 1

COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Why are you doing this?

2 ne think you ought to do that.

3 MR. SHAPAR:

That's right.

I 4

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

That can't be cone, in 5,

any event, on or off of the public record.

6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

That's what I was trying

~

i l

7' t o get at.

I f

8l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

It would be inappropriate i

i 9

even on the public record.

1 10 !

MR. SHAPAR:

You mean, for you to try to influence I

11 l, what the staff does?

12 ;

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

That's right.

That's 13 correct.

i l

14 I

MR. SHAPAR:

Just like --

t 15 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Sefore a Commission decision !

i l

16 '

in the matter?

17 MR. SHAPAR:

Well, you're supposed to decide the

!i 18!!

case, and rhe staff is a party.

19 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

That's right.

l 20 ]

MR. SHAPAR:

And it would seem sort of somewhat 21 inappropriate when you're the judges, relling --

l 22 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

That's my point.

i 23 MR. SHAPAR:

-- how one of the parties should il 24 conduct its case.

g

.e. F al Reporters, Inc y

^

9 25,

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

That's my point.

l\\

-D1ISSIONER GILINSKY:

Well, except that the l

2 j udges don ' t no rmally, you know, run the police force.

3, MR. SHAPAR:

Thev run everythin9 these days.

4!

They run the school systems, and you name it, they run it.

l 5l

( Laughte r. )

i 6;

COBSi:SSICNER AHEARNE:

That's an aside.

That's i

7 not related to the issue at hand.

t I

8, (Laughter.)

i 9!

COSSIISSIONER KENNEDY:

And indeed one could c.ursue t

I I

10 ;

the question that the relationship between the judiciary Il !

and the enforcement institutions at scme length, I think; i

12) not this afternoon.

13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Right.

I I4 !

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Well, with that --

15 '

MR. SHAPAR:

There's been no commission that has t

16 f not been frustrated by this rule, Commissioner Gilinsky.

17.

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

You mean, by this " law."

l il 18 h MR. SHAPAR:

By this law.

l' d

19 ]

CHAIPMAN HENDRIE:

And by the rule, too.

20 i MR. SHAPAR:

The first reaction is usually shocked n

anc t,en ce_,le:- gracually comes.

2 j ;,

increculity, i

P 22 h COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

As understandinc develors.

n 3n 23 '

MR. SH AP A R:

Those are your words, rat mine.

24 :i COMMISSIONER KENNEDY.

It is understanding of the

?S J! RfD0f ter5, Inc. i

'S,0 curnose.

Who could cossibly disac.ree with the basic

.I i'

l p

r) L

[. b l}

{ s+

d i,

23 i

21.jwb i

l I

To assure utter and total fairness.

Not I.

1 purpose:

2 MR. SHAPAR:

I don't think that argument quite 3{l holds up, because tha-a is, for example, this exception in 4l initial licensing, which is where all our big cases are.

t i

5'1 And the countervailing policy argument there is that t

6' important decisions are being made, and that kind of balance i

l 7 1 needs to be struck.

And the balance is struck in initial i

3 !

licensing so as not to have this statutory bar.

t 9'

So I don't think the argument can be pushed quite 10 i

that far.

11 1 CH AIRMAN HENDRIE :

But at any rate, our rules f

12 i i

erect an ex parte bar --

13 lj MR. SHAPAR:

Yes l

14 i l

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

-- even in initial licensing, 1 '5 even though that is not compelled by statute.

In any event, 16 as you point out --

17 COMMISSICNE R KENNEDY :

Which indicates our 1

18 l;.

extreme interest in fairness, which argues for my position.

19 0j CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

As you point out in this case, 20 1 we do not have an initial licensing, and in fact the ex parte J

'l jl bar is the statutory one.

1 22il I've spent a little time as a member of the scaff

• 3 h occasionally informing the Commission of the status o f cases,

24,

watching Cornissicners refraining from discussicn of the

.a> ace.3neri.inc.j e

25 l merits, when they break their pencils, and pull back from the 6 L

,h L.

l--

I v i 0

24 i

22 jwb i

f i

f I

table with prof anity, why there's some sort of communication 2

there, in any event.

3 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

But let all parties be 4

duly warned that communication obviously takes many forms.

I j

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Why _On't we go on and pace 6

4 further through the points in the draft order.

MR. SHAPAR:

All right, I'm almost at the end.

{

7 3'

There is another bl nk, and that blank is the time -- the 9

target date for rendering of Commission decision blank days 10 after the staff's safety evaluation.

11 l If you recall the discussion among the options

'i 12 that was provided with a firm date and we recommended against 13 l it on the grounds that fairness -- there might be a i

1 1 temptation to compromise with fairness, and it was very i

15 '

difficult to set a firm date that would really stand up 16 l because of all the intangibles, and we recc= mended a target i

17 ll 1

date.

4 18!!

n Now we left it blank, but that of course invites eo 19 H

?,

a question of what time frame, in the event you wished to

's 20 p g

pursue this concept, might be servic.csle.

l

?11 l

If I merely took a look at the schedule tnat I

~

22 j

orally conveyed to you at our last meeting, that blank would I

'3 l I

come out seven months.

Ecwever, two things would need ro be i

2d

+E at Reporters. Inc.

a 25 d

[

Number one, the question was raised about ACRS

' f; 7

~*

j>

c. ( s 1

25 2 3 j wb i

1 review.

And I understand from Denton that he is thinking of 2

seeking ACRS review.

3 If ACRS review is in fact sought, that should add i

I 4

two months.

Some of that --

5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

At least.

l l

6I MR. SHAPAR:

At least.

And that would enlarge 1

7' the overall schedule, as well.

8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Does that automatically i

i 9;

come after the SER, or prior to it?

i 10 !

MR. SHAPAR:

It comes prior to the SER.

l 11 '

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Prior to the SER?

12 MR. SHAPAR:

Yes, sir.

13 i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Well, it comes at a time when i

i 14 !j the staff is able to give the committee its draft or the u

I5 base document, but in order for the staff's presentation 16 cf its case to account for the interaction of tbo ACRS and Jo j,/ j the ACRS le tte r, you have this time after you're able to o

18 get to the conmittee with the draft report, or the base SER, I

I9 for ACRS subcommittee meeting, and full committee meeting; o

u 20 )

the ACRS letter, at least a couple of weeks for the staff to d

.I 21 1 scurry around and gather into place the additional discussion, 4

(

22 I comments, commitments, or whatever that they need, and then 1

lko 23l' thev cub 71sh a succlement to the SER or complete it if it's d

24 j a draft initially, and it's then ready to go forward witr fE

.al HfDorters, Inc. !

25 0 staff testimony.

a i >} l l

j j

i o

d e

c.

il

26 24 jwb i

l I

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

But there is an SER of 2

some character in hand --

i e

I 3!

CEAIRMAN HENDRIE:

There has to be I

i 4l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

for the ACRS to address.

5l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Yes, the ACRS finds it very i

i i

6' difficult to take a -- review a matter without having in i

I 7

hand and reported to it a set of underlying staff analyses 3l and conclusions.

Otherwise, they find themselves in effect i

9l on a full scope de novo review which gets very hard for them 10 l to manage in terme of the way they try to operate.

II MR. SHAPAR:

There would be some overlap there i

12 with additional discovery because the practice in almost all 13 I our hearings is :or the Boards to allow additional discovery 1

I4 after the staff's Safety Evaluation is put out.

And talking I

l l

15 about that 60 days that I mentioned would also cover that i

16 i additional discovery, which would inevitably be granted by I7 the Hearing Soard.

1 I3d CCMMISSICNER KENNEDY:

If the staff intends to II lo il seek ACRS review -- and I take it that there's a high

1 20 likelihood that that will be the case -- shouldn 't the order I

2IO e v that?

I e

1 22 h MR. SHAPAR:

It could very well.

I see no reason

'l d

13 n whv not.

24 CHAIREI HENDRIE :

Let me understand, Mcward.

4 tF 21 Pecorters, Inc. j 25 "

Were you just saying that che ACRS review time, which will r

'!l'

/ 5 u \\.g y l}

f

\\)

' J N

Il

I 27 25 jwb l

1!

run at least 60 days, could run at least in good part i

2f concurrently with discovery?

i i

MR. SHAPAR:

Yes.

J l

l 4

However, I would have to add to that.

And that j

j i

5,!

is, possibly that additional discovery could be confined to I

6 30 days.

It's not a very sanguine prediction, but it's at 7l least theoretically possible.

l 8

Whereas, if we figured 60 days for the ACRS 9!

add-on, I guess you'd be extending the discovery period --

l 10 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

How much time does your 1

i II i schedule visualice?

I don' t have a copy of it.

I i

12 MR. SHAPAR:

Seven months.

I 13 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

For discovery?

I thought 14 it was --

i l

15 i MR. SHAPAR:

Disco ery?

I think it was 16 '

COMMISSIONER AHEARNE :

60 days.

~

I 1

l

MR. SHAPAR:

60 days, at an earlier point in time.

n

'l 18 i COMMISSIONER KENNEDY :

It seemed to me to be 1

19 something like that.

And that 's probably a very minimum

\\:

.I 20 h number.

21 MR. SHAPAR:

I would say, unrealistic.

'20 COMMISSIJNER KENNEDY:

Y 3,

so would I.

h 1

23 [!

'3 R. SHAPAR:

I think I described it cretty much

. il" that wav.

Reoorters, Inc. }

.3 -i at 25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Your previous had discovery l'

.I r<.

y

,3

- 00

')

26 jwb 28 i

I i

I running down somewhere around 35 days after the SER came in.

I 2

I MR. SHAPAR:

Yes.

i 3

So, if you ask me to give you my best suggestion i

for filling in that blank, I'd say nine months, for the i

5 reasons I've just outlined.

6 Now you're not committed, of course, to giving any 7'

l target.

This was a suggestion to attempt to provide some i

8l discipline to the proceeding.

I 9!

If you choose to accept that option, the best i

10 l suggestion I can make is nine months.

Of course, you know, i

11 i they're not compelled to make it.

There's no law behind 12 l j

this.

It's something to shoot at.

It's like the blue books.

13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Nine months after the SER.

14 I

MR. SHAPAR:

Yes.

i 15 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

No, no.

Publication of order.

16 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

A total of nine months i

17 i for the proceeding.

i la a d

CO:01ISSIONER AHEARNE:

Hell, he said to fill in li 19 9/

"nine," and that's in the blank, "within nine months" --

1 1

20 MR. SHAPAR:

-- "after the publication of the u

'l" SER."

i I

22 COM'4ISSICNER AMEARNE:

-- "of the SER."

i o

23 l11 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Really?

il 4

'l 24 L

,l,

,rtlil 4

MR. SHAPAR:

Yes.

i' (al HeDorters, Iric. {l J

M.

i 25 '

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

That's what it says.

4 i

)

t!il

2 7 jwb f

29 i

I 11R. BICKWIT:

Howard, is the ACRS consideration 2 l-before or after the SER?

I'm not clear on that.

i l

3 MR. SHAPAR:

That's the point the Chairman 4

addressed.

5 CHkIRMAN HENDRIE:

It's after.

6' COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

So in this context, it is

}

7 after the ACRS.

i Si l

MR. SHAPAR:

Yes.

9 I

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

After the SER.

10 l l

MR. SEAPAR:

Yes.

i 11 i i

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Which is after the ACRS, 12 l

as you described it.

13 !

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Well, in initial li;ensing 14 l

cases, in CP cases, the staff publishes an SEI Years ago, 15 f they used to give the committee a draft, and then subsequently I

I 16 '

publish an SER af ter the committee deliberations.

17 l' But for many years, starting, you know, certainly I

isp by the beginning of ' 72 or soon thereafter, we published the j

n 19 SER as soon as the staff ras ab l-to get it out, and it went cl 20 l to the ACRS as well as the public.

But everybody recognized 21 '

that that was not everything the staff had to have in hand i

22 !

in order to go into a hearing and present its case; that i

23 I 1

there would have to be the ACRS letter, and a supplement --

2s l 1e al Reporters, INC. l in order to in effect at least one succlement to the SER 25 a'l ccmclete it and to be ready to start the hearing frcm staff's p

I{

l -),f s g

j L L.

V I

a

28 jwb 30 i

i i

i I

standpoint.

2 When we talk about "after publication o f the SER,"

3l here, I think we ' re talking about publication o f that first I

4 major document.

i 5

MR. SHAPAR:

Or we could make it so.

l i

0!

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Or we could make it so.

I 7

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

What does it say, now?

l MR. SHAPAR:

It's ambiguous.

O COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Yes, I know it is, but I i

10 '

don't know what the words are.

i 11 '

MR. SHAPAR:

It's ambiguous.

)

i 12 i COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Okay.

i 13 l' MR. SHAPAR:

This is a valid point.

l li.

t COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Then it seems to me it i

15 i 6

needs to be cleared up.

~

16 1 MR. SHAPAR:

Yes.

17 4

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

And now does discovery start on ll 18 1y publication -- af ter publication of the SER?

Or is it a i,

19 "l

sort of different track process that could start before or i

20 a arter?

'l l MR. SHAPAR:

Well, usually discovery ir much d

22 ll e ar., l e r.

a I l.

'3 rll CHAIPMAN HENDRIE:

Yes.

i ti 24 '

MR. SHAPAR:

It's supposed to take place much 1 RfDorters. Inc.1 eA 3

25 L earlier in the crocess.

),;

11

I 31 29 jwb l

i 1

CEAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Yes.

i 2

MR. SHAPAR:

But we've found out --

i 3'

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

But what about here?

4 MR. SHAPAR:

We found out that in practice, when 5

the staff documents appear, people want additional discovery 6l and we think it's fair that they get it.

7 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

His schedule had it Si assigned about 25 days --

9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Yes, I see it.

I I

So in part it can run concurrently with the I

11 l ACRS activity.

i 12 l MR. SHAPAR:

All ight --

13 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

3ut do you really need to l

I 'd '!

expand to nine months, then?

Yes, I guess you do.

t I

15 l' MR. SHAPAR:

I guess it depends on the degree of 16 realism you want to put into the target.

17 h I

(Laughter.)

l 18 ll ij CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Well, I'm not encouraged --

!i 19 4 COMMISSICNER KENNEDY :

Have you ever been a q

I 20 marksman?

4 21 '

MR. SHAPAR:

Yes.

As a matter of f act, I was an 22 expert.

t 23 'i!i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

I'm not encouraged by the --

24 ii at Reporters. Inc. h:

sort of the overall ability of our crocedural machinerv to te l'

deal expeditiously with serious subjects where there is strong n

P y

i

^i fl i

32 30 jwb i

l incentive for that expeditious dealing.

I'm not quite sure 2

what we can do to help the process here, but I'm really 3

dismayed that decisions which it seemed to me could be made I

4!

with an adequate development of the merits in very much less I

5l time than those we discussed are in fact apparently going to 1

6 drag on for a year and a half.

h 7

The costs of that are really very large, and I 8

wish I knew what to do about it.

I don't see anything i

I 9;

specific.

10 l MR. SHAPAR:

All right, I have one last point to i

11 !

make.

i 12 i COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Did we decide anything i

l 13 ;

about the date, or not?

14 CEAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Well, shall we put a target 1

15 '

date in?

It looks like if we're going to put it in it has l

16 l to be not much less than 8-1/2 and prcbably 9, as a better 17 '

round number, figure,'after the initial SER document.

a 18 j COMMISSIONEP BRADFORD:

I would not put a target d

19.

date in.

We don't know as much as we might abcut the o

H

'l 20 possible scope of this proceeding at this point.

We have some 21 idea of what actions we have ordered in other cases and i

22 h1 what actions the staff has proposed, but it seems to me U

23 j there's still a pretty large unkncxn in terms of what kinds 24 of contentions other parties are going to make.

eF af Reporters, Inc. }

25 a And I have no objection to a balanced exhcrtation P

l 1

/ 'l t

I i

U L '

q

31 jwb 33 I

1 to the effect that the hearing should be a thorough affair 2

and efficiently conducted, but I don't feel confident that 3

I could put a reasonable target date in.

4 And to have a target date in the order that we t

5 had put in now that was at variance with what turned out to i

i i

i i

I 6'

be the scope of the hearing and the contentions of the 1

7 parties would tend to -- I think would be a distraction to i

t 8

the Board in conducting the hearing.

9l MR. BICKUIT:

There is also the option of waiting 10 to see what the Director of NRR suggests is the issues to 11 !

be considered in this order, and then :aaking that determina-i 12 !

tion.

13 l MR. SHAPAR:

And in another option --

i 14 !

COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

housee, I don't think 15 <

the Director of NRR necessarily is going to be able to tell I

16 us all the issues in this case in the way that he perhaps i

i

't 17 could have in the case of the other plants.

4 18 il What makes this case unique, what leads to the H

lI 19 hearing before operation at all, seems to me to be far more o

.f 20 ?

the kinds of contentions that are going to be made by the H

21 '

people who live in that area, and who will have unique points

. I.

22 ;l relating to the accident and its impact on their perception P

.I 23 of the plant to raise.

The technical issues aren't that 24 different than they would have been for the other B&W olants.

• E of RfDOrters, tec. !

25 0 Thev are cerhans a 14**1a bit different because j

m yj-a e

a

32 jwb fI 34 l

1 I

of their relation to Unit 2.

2>

MR. SHAPAR:

There is another option, too, I guess, l

3 that I just thought of.

And that is, you could join -- or 4

ask the Board, based on, as the case develops, to an 5;

appropriate point itself establish a target date.

6 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

That would seem more i

7!

reasonable.

l.

8!

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

It at least gives them a chance 9

to see what the contentions are, and after they've gone 10 about consolidation of parties and sharpening of the Il contentions.

Maybe that would be a --

l 12 )

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Just change the botto.'

i 13 l sentence --

l 14 l CEAIRMAN HENDRIE:

-- about as good a compromise

(

15 '

as we could do.

?l 16 :

Nhy don' t we try that tack for the purposes of i

17 the draft order.

l 18 :

Len, I trust you' re new making ve ry careful notes,

h 19 since the duty at the close of business here passes into your l\\

20 )

hands.

o 21 I notice Howard looking pleased, and I notice 22 [

he's not making any notes.

i 23 h (Laughter.)

l e

24 d MR. SHAFAR:

Cne last point.

You notice that tae J

si Reocrters. Inc.1 i

25 order doesn't order the licensee to make the short-term 1e l]i

/ l!

'/ v /

/J V

j

3 3 jwb l

35 I

changes.

The theory there is of course that he's now down, i

2 lt and he's ordered to be in a shutdown condition, and the 3'

thrust of the order is that they can't start up unless they 1

4l do it.

So they're not ordered to do it, they're just told I

i 5

i they can't start up unless they do it.

i 6'

All right?

Now that rationale doesn't really 7

apply too well to the long-term issues.

And the reason it 0l doesn't is because the supposition is, in the event that the 9'

favorably "c >olved in the hearing, and the issues are r

10 applicant starts up again, vou're not going to want him to 1

11 l run without doing as promptly as possible the lo ng-te rm i

12 l Items.

l I

13 So once we know what the long-term items are, it l

would seem to me that they ought to be directed to do the I ~c '

long-te rm items.

16 !'

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

By the Board?

17 MR. SHAPAR: No, in this order.

h 18 9 d

COMMISSIONER KENN?DY :

In this order?

h 1

19 d

MR. SHAPAR:

This orc; oucht Oc make it clear 11 20 u that, for the long-term items, since thev..resumably will be y

'I 21 h running, while they're doing it they must do is if you think t

f 12 i

'i they must be done.

4 I l 23 '

1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Is that better covered --

24 J t

CCMMISSIONER KENNEDY-Is that for this order, or e6 a: Reoorters inc.

" C 'l the subsecuent order?

34 jwb 36 I

I I

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Yes.

Is it better covered 2

here?

There are going to be subsequent orders down the l

3' line from certainly the Commission will have to issue 4:

ultimately a further order saying:

All right, you've done I

5 these things; people agree that it's all right that you can 6 !

now start.

l 7j MR. SHAPAR:

I hadn't contemplated it.

It seems I8' to me that this order cove s everything.

It covers the i

9' short-term items, it covers the long-term items, and you've i

i 10 !

got a Hearing Board to consider it.

l II l COMMISSIONER LENNEDY :

And after the Hearing I.

12 l Board renders its initial decision and certitles the matter i

I3 to the Commission, the Commission now has to discharge it Id one way or another, and I assume by an order.

1 l

15 '

MR. SHAPAR:

Yes, reviewing the initial c.ecision --

i 16 the first initial decision, which is the short-term items.

J l,' ]

The Board will still be doing its business, I as s ume, on the q

1 I3 long-term items.

I I

I9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE :

But wouldn't that be an 20 !

appropriate -- I see.

You say the Board may at that point i

21,!

verv well not be complete on the long-term items?

l 22 MR. SEAPAR:

That's right.

H

• 3 b e

This order asks the Board to give criority to the lJ

,", d short-term items.

ef at R eporters, Inc. '

'S1 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

And to certify them.

l n

i,.r..

i

.s, n;

,I

\\J

'l

37 35 jwb t

I I

1l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Yes.

I see.

I 2

MR. S EAP AR:

And certify that partial initial i

3' decision up to you, and the 3 card will go about its business l

4j dealing with the long-term items, to the extent that it i

l5' hasn't been able to handle them at that point in time.

i 6!

MR. BICKWIT:

Which raises the question of 7

whether you would want the long-term requirements to be made i

i 8

ef ective immediately.

Ordinarily it's the kind of thing 9,

that would not be, but in this case, since you're looking at r

l to some degree the other B&W orders, there's a basis for 10 l 11 the drafting of this one parallel, would be to make those i

12 '

orders effective immediately.

13 i Therc's a distinction, in that the case of the i

14 ;4 other B&U plants you would have an agreement between the i

i 15 staff and the licensee.

f 16 '

COMMISSICNER AHEAh"E:

Well, when you say you'd 17 be having the decision-ef fective immediately on behalf of 13 the Board, you mean prior to --

H 19 ]1 MR. 3ICKWIT:

Prior to the hearing.

i 20 i COMMISSIONER AHEARNE :

Prior to the review.

21 MR. SICKWIT:

No, they would be required to start i

22 !j their long-term activit-prior to the hearing c. the review.

2

?

ll 23 P That is what you've said with respect to the other B&W 24,

plants.

'f E al Reporters, Inc. ;

25 j MR. SHAPAR:

Can you justify the reason for making 1,

'l

)

)

1

36.jwb I 38 i

i i

I 1

it immediately effective?

2 CCICIISSIONER AHEARNE:

Would you make a similar 3

requirement on the short-term?

4 MR. BICKWIT:

Well, you he-That is, at least 5

the decision up to now in all cur discussions is that you 6

would.

We have not really focused to the same degree on the l

l 7

long-term actions.

8' COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Yes, but this plant is a t

9 little bit -- the presupposition in the other cases have 10 been that when the Director of NRR reached a conclusions as Il to what are the short-term items, when those were completed 12 then the clant could operate.

i i

13 l MR. BICKWIT:

Right.

l

'4 l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

The supposit_on here is t

i 15 !

that the Licensing Board will decide whether or not those 16,

short-term items are adequate for the plant to operate.

17:

MR. SHAPAR:

But this order would allow him to I

18 proceed at his own risk, to go ahead and do the items to 19 i pick up time.

And the Board could decide later that those are n,

20

the wronc. items, and he would have done the wronc items.

't I

21 Of course, the plant won ' t be ope rating, and there 's 22h no threat to the health and safety in that kind of a situation.

.n, 23 h But the Board could, under this order, decide that those L

,,i certain items are not the correct ones, or they're not xi al R eporters, Inc. o 5

25 '

adequate.

93 i s

-//

p

?!

1

'Ia

39 l

37 j wb 1l MR. BICKWIT:

But under this concept, they would i

2 look at the long-term items also.

3' MR. SHAPAR:

That's correct.

I 1

4l MR. BICKWIT:

And the issue is whether, while they l

5!

are looking at them, you want the licensee to be required to 6!

perform them.

7l MR. SHAPAR:

And I don ' t think the Commission can i,

8!

really answer that question until they see the long-term d

91 items.

10 !

MR. 3ICKWIT:

Richt.

t I

II MR. OST RACH :

But, Mr. Shapar, that's different 12 l from your first po.nt, which was that the Commission should 13 in this order direct the licensee to take the actions that l

14 '

are necessary.

I 15 '

MR. SHAPAR:

Yes, that's correct.

l 16 l MR. OSTRACH:

Subject to the hearing.

17 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

But that's a result which would 13 p follow cresumably -- presumably that piece of language would d

l91 say, "and when the Board has decided finally on the long-a 20 '

term items, you' re required t:- implement them."

21 MR. OSTRACH:

Yes, sir.

But I'm just saying that v !! ' t h i s i s a notice or hearing.

,fou are directing the licensee h

23 l to do certain things.

He has a right -- or you're saying

^4 4

that there will be a hearing on whether in fact they have to ai Aworters. inc. q

.w 25 be done; but before there's a hearing, there has to be someone I

kJ

1. \\)

L.

/ ()

't 1

38 jwb 40 I

l l'I telling chem to do the things.

2 I'm saying that your order would have to provide 3!

that the licensee shall undertake certain long-term items, 1

4 and -- in a simple fashion, as presently it says, "the 5

licensee shall maintain the plant to cold shutdcwn until 6:

resolution of the short-term is concerned. "

l 7

MR. SHAPAR:

Well, I think there is a difference i

8 i between the short-term, which I tried to describe.

9 MR. OSTRACH:

And of course you have to make an i

10 1 order subject to that.

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Do you understand, then, i

II I

I2 how it is to be redrafted?

I3 MR. OSTRACH:

No.

14 !

MR. BICKWIT:

We have' an understanding that you i

15 '

will __

l 16 CCMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Neither do I.

i I70 MR. BICKWIT:

-- you're adopting the sug gestions J,

I3 ccming from both ends of the table, you will wait and see ii l9 h what the long-term issues are, and make the determination as 20 (

to whether you want to make those orders affect -- that 21 j order effecti7e immediately.

.I 22 I L

However, we will assume that you will want to i

23,

order the long-term action to be done, whether or not you o

,,l make that o rder ef fective immediatelv.

• h at ReDOrters, Inc. il 250' CCMMISSICNER B RADFORD:

Well, of course all of j

w/ 9 o

l

39 jwb 41 i

i f

1 this would be going on in the context of the case in which 2

I assume there will be contentions made that the plant 3

shouldn't operate, and as long as those contentions are 4

seriously before the Board, any orders as to long-term 5

actions must take that into account.

6';

MR. BICKWIT:

Yes.

You will separate those issues i

i 7

that you, at this point, feel have.to be resolved prior to 8

restert from these long-term issues.

9 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

But Commissioner Bradford 10 has brought a slightl'1 different point, if I understood it.

I 11 l His point was:

Having made that distinction, do you now i

12 !

j make that portion of the order apply to those long-term 13 I l

matters immediately effective --

i l 'e i COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

That's the point.

i 15 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

-- so that, so long as this 16 proceeding goes on, the contentions remain unresolved, and 17 '

therefore the man doesn't even know whether he's going to be 18 l able to start his plant.

t 19,'l There is some question about what you're ordering 20 him to do.

You're ordering him to do somerhing to a plant 21 which may never start again, since that hasn't been decided i

22 i yet by the Board based on the contentions before it.

1

'31 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

That's exactly the point.

1 24 I R eporters, Inc. d COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

So I guess we need to look re e 31 q

25ll at that question, because there seems to T.e there to be a i )'.

/

('i l

i f (j d d.

i 42 4 0.j wb 'l t,

I I

cuestion of inherent unfairness in the distribution of 2

risk.

l 3l MR. BICKWIT:

But that is not a different I,

4i question from the one you had with respect to the other 5'

B&W plants.

In the case of those plants, you ordered that l

l 1

certain things be done prior t

.estart; that certain things

's 7

be done in the long-term.

They were capable at that point 1

8+

in deciding that the lonc-term actions should be done.

I 9l 71 was based, I assume, on your assumption that l

10 !

the plaat would restart eventually.

I 11 j COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

The only ques. ion is:

i 12 !

Waen does he have to start doit.g them?

. 13 :

MR. BICKWIT:

That's right.

i 1 !

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY :

Before or after he knows 15 l

whether the thing is going to be started.

Because in those 1

16 cases, the plants were ordered to return to operation.

17' MR. BICKWIT:

In those cases, at the time you g

i 18 f d

issued the order, either the plants were down or told to 4

19 :i 1

stay down until they did certain things.

'l 20 n CCMMISSIONER KE!ZIEDv -

ves.

<l 21 MR. BICKUIT:

And that is the situation here.

'2 i t

The situation is not different.

i) b 23 L,

COMMISSIONER KEN';EDY :

Okay, if that distinction

,1 24 d is ma.e clear, and then the question of immediatelv effec-ei al Reporters, Inc.

25 'li tive

- the immediately effectiveness of the longer term I

i 6

I, 1]

t f

st,u

43 41 jwb l

I issue is made clear, what that means, then I can see the 2

parallel.

But right now I'm not sure that it does so.

I 3i MR. SHAPAR:

The only difference between the two i

4 situationa is the requirement in this case that there be an 1

5' adjudicatory hearing before the plant starts up.

That was 1

i 6

not present of course in the other rules.

I l

7j MR. BICKWIT:

Now another complication. if you make l

i l

8l it immediately effective and you provide that the long-term 9

issues are to be dealt with after resolution of the short-10 team issues, that it strikes me that the licensee could Il conceivably complain that here he's been told to do tl ngs 12 '

and is not being given a hearing on whether or not he should 13 be required to do them untiI a rather late stare of the 14 game.

It's a fac~ tor that I think has to be taken into account.'

l 15 l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Particularly is that that's l

i 16 '

even more true of the short-term items.

I 17 )

MR. BICKWIT:

Except that under this order --

h i

18 i COMMISSIONER KE'iNEDY:

No matter what the Board t

I9b could do, it cannot authorize it with an order of -- one a

4 h

20 i thing the Board can ' t do is authorize restart until such 21 time as those short-term iters have been completed.

a 22 l MR. BICKWIT:

But at least under this concept i

23 0, you turn to the hearing on the short-tern items immediately.

a 24 hl COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Yes.

ss w acconen in:. ;

o 25 CCMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Could I ask a couple of

\\q\\

JUL ili

,1

44 i

42.jwb i

l questions about the draft order?

l 2

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Please do.

3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Let's see, Howard, on i

4 page 4, I draw a contrast between what you have here and I

5 what you had in your previous statement.

This is the first I

6lj paragraph.

7 In your previous you had said, instead of i

l l

8 explicitly requiring applicability of certain orovisions, 9,

the Commission could direct the presiding Board to i

10 {

utilize any of the procedures which it deemed appropriate i

II I to the proceeding.

I 12 In this particular case, vou specified which I

13 ltprovisions should apply to the proceeding.

i 14 l i

MR. SHAFAR:

I guess I attempted to get it to i

15 '

say two things.

i 16 Number one, those particular provisions only 1

17 ? applied to initial lic'ensing, and we're saying that as far il 13 '

as we're concerned they apply to this situation.

l 19 [

And the second sentence says that the Licensing il 20 $

Board is instructed to consolidate participation to the o

l 21 maximum extent practicable consistent with the provisions of 22 !

that regulation.

23 l!

So the Board is told two things:

The regulation i

,, J.

j does in fact apply, even though on its face it doesn't; and 4-w o neoorms, inc. p sl 25 that to the extent they Consider it practicable, to do it.

n i m

45 43 jwb l

i i

lj COMMISSIONER AHEARNE :

Well, yes.

I was trying I

2l to get at something different, I think, and maybe there is t

i 3

nothing else to be done.

1 4!

I had thought that in your previous you were 5'

also giving directions to the Board to utilize any of the i

I 6

procedures, in addition, that they felt were appropriate; l

7l and are there no other provisions -- this could be read as S

"do not apply any other provisions."

Here are the provisions L

9 to aaply.

i i

10 l MR. S HAPAR:

I think all the other provisions of 1

Il !

Subpart G apply.

These were the ones we found out after i

i i

12 '

analysis simply didn't acolv to this kind of a croceeding 13 I and we saw no reason why they shouldn't.

~

l 14 l9 COMMISSIONER AREARNE:

So you would see no reason 1

F 15 '

to continue to use that phrase "to apply any provisions which I

16 !

the Eoard deems appropriate"?

17 MR. SHAPAR:

I wouldn ' t.

We checked all that, lo all of the rest of Subpart G applies on its face.

Isn't M

i

!I l9 that richt?

H 20 i' MR. CUNNINGH AM :

That's correct.

The reason we 21 j had language in the memorandur last week, Mr. Ahearne, about il 4

22 h one cation would be to direct the Board to use the a

23.l i,

provisions they telt applicable, was in our discussion about

l

,,a "o

interlocutory appeals.

And as we understood the discussion rai Reporters. Inc. u

,o 20 l at the table last week, it was decided to make no mention U4 9

.i.i

44,jwb 46 l

{

l i

1, of interlocutory appeals.

2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

But your interpretation is i

3!

that, as far as any of the other parts of -- sections of i

i 4

Part 2, that there's no question, and so there's no need 5!

to direct the Board to utilize any of those provisions that I

6 they might feel appropriate.

i I

MR. CUNNINGHAM:

That's right.

On cace 4, we 7l i

\\

3; have identified these sections of Subpart G which are I

i 9i applicable only to construction permit and operating license i

1 l

10 I proceedings, and which we think should be applicable to l

Il !

this proceeding and directed that they --

12 l COMMISSICNER AHEARNE:

I'm asking a different 13 question, I think.

This is a unique type of proceeding, l

14 and I'm only asking:

Is it clear that the Board will :cok e

i 15 ll ij at Part 2 and choose whatever provisions it believes il 16 appropriate, in addition to the ones you have ncw spelled 17 (

out?

'l 4

18 ]

MR. CUNNINGHAM:

Yes, that is clear, because all i

\\\\

19 d, of the others are acplicable.

We have singled out the ones I

20 :{' which on their fac; would not appear to be applicable and l

i 1

21 l said they shall be applicable.

22,

MR. SEAPAR:

Plus the first sentence on page 4.

i 23 [l "The hearing will be conducted in accordance with the

,. 1,

-~,

acclicable provisicns of Subpart G" and they're all at Reporters, Inc. ;)

x.

m4 n

applicable.

4-o l

l 5 a

.l '

i

47 45 jwb I

1 COMMISCIONER AHEARNE:

And that's clear.

All l

l 2

right.

l 3!

Another question.

The last sentence on that i

l 4'

large paragraph on page 4, you say that "the initial decision 5!

wil). be conducted in accordance with 10 C.F.R. 52.770.

l 6

It's just a clarification.

As I* read 2 770, it 7

starts out saying it will ordinarily consider the whole 8

record on review.

Now I thought one of the points we had f

9j discussed last time was, by getting an initial decision, i

10 l that would enable us to focus on specific issues and not l

II have to go through the whole record.

12 MR. S H',P AR :

I think that still applies.

l 13 t COMMI ;SIONER AHEARNE :

All right, so that the l

14 l statement here in 2.770 that says "will ordinarily consider i

I, 15 the whole record on review but may limit the issues to be

,1 ft.

i 16 '

reviewed", that's the pnint that you nad made, it does not 17 !

require us to review the entire record.

i 18 i MR. SHAPAR:

That's correct.

19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

On your "The subjects to o

20 [

be considered at the hearing shall include:" -- and perhaps 21 you would not want to answer that question, because you may i

22 '

'c e getting into that distinction -- bu* would that, under h

23 number -- you've got two items, " subjects to be considered, "g

short-te rm and long-te rm, " under "short tern," is that where 4 ;

al Reporters, Inc. l 25 it would be appropriate to consider the impact that TMI 2 might oI i

.!ih y

ov

48 46 jwb I

have on TMI l?

2 MR. SHAPAR:

I can't answer that cuestion.

3 COMMISSIONER AHEARME:

On page 7, you have 4!

specified when the supplement no the petition must Le filed.

5 Is there any advantage co putting a spec 1:1c time on wnen i

t 6l contentions should be filed, after the 20 days runs, a l

7l certain fixed number of days?

i 8l No, I'm just pointing out that the only epecific 9,

time that you have in there is that 15 days prior to the l

I 10 '

first prehearing conference petitions shall file --

i 11 !

MR. SHAPAR:

Yes.

t 12 l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Is there anv advantace that I

i i

13 i so many days following I guess when the clock runs out on i

14I when the petitions can be filed, contentions have to be filed?

15 I MR. S HAPAR:

Guy?

i 16 l MR. CUNNINGHAM:

There may be an advantage in 17 d terms of expressing or-reaffirming this Commission intention

!i 18 Y that the schedule be expedited.

The fairly standard l

ia 19 1 crocedure is to leave it to the discretion of the Board a

H u

20 J Chairman to determine when to hold his special prehearins u

l 21 i conference, and then count back 15 days and say that's when ua 22 j contentions will be due.

1 23 ';l It would be co'isible to say right now:

Initial l

1 24 cenitions to intervene within 20 days, and supplements ai Reporters, Inc. ]

4 25 J containing contentions within X days thereafter.

That would aa t,

)U /

I n

49 47 jwb I ;I indicate, as I say, Commission inten' to establish at least o

2j that much of the schedule over which it has some control.

i 1

3' COMMISSIONER AHEARME:

Has that been done in the 4

past?

5l MR. CUNNINGHAM:

Not to my knowledge.

As I say, i

i 6

it's almost always left to the discretion of the Board i

7I Chairman.

l 8i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE-:

It that it, for the moment?

l J

9 !

COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

For the moment; I'm not 1

10 i sure about whether or not to ask it.

I'll have to think a

\\

II little bit more about it.

i 12 '

COMMISSICNER 3RADFORD:

What is the significance i

13 l of the criteria for intervention?

Why not jus-the normal --

14 this is on page 6.

15 !

MR. SHAPAR:

Page 6?

16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

Yes.

Why not just leave i

17 j that to the normal standards for --

i ti II I8 d MR. S HAPAR:

Just so -- it's our normal practice d

n 19 l to do it, and j ust so that people will understand what the H

i:

20 l ground rules are.

21 'I

^OMMISSICNER BRADFORD:

Is this, though, tne l

y4 n normal Ftatuulent or --

e, li 23 b

'4R. SH? PAR:

What the requirements are?

H 2* s COMMISSIONER BEADFORD :

-- what's required.

0 4

t-F al Recorters. Inc.,

')

25 MR. CUNNINGHAM:

Thar is the standard language i

1

' J i'.y

48 jwb l 50 i

I t

r l'j used in construction permit and OL notice or opportunity tor i

2' hearing, and it quotes verbatha the rules -- the language of 3

Section 2.714.

i i

4 MR. SHAPAR:

Not quite.

I saw the word "shall" S;

in the rule, and "should" here in a couple of places.

i 6'

But that's all right.

l 7'

MR. CUNNINGHAM:

I apologize.

I t

8 MR. SHAPAR:

That's okay.

9 CCMMISSIONER KENNEDY :

It's probably just a 10 i misspelling.

l II l CHAIRMAN HENDP.lE:

On the Jr";eu" of the Board, 12 l the membership of whict you would prefer appropriately not 13 to discuss, this or'.er,

uld either specify a membership, Il l 4 or could specify that a Board is to be speedily constituted l

15 b v. the.canel chairman.

i

~

16 '!

MR. BICKWIT:

Yes, sir.

I7 g

You have the option of doing either.

1 18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

I must say, in view of the e

19 '!

time scales that are likely to be involved and the need for 20 j Board members not to have to engage in a course in self-1 i

21 [

education on atomic energy law and the Commission's i

2' id Reculations in order to deal with this matter, I would very

' 3 h, q

strongly urge that the Board be constituted frce the panel a

u-o h

and I'd be inclined to let the panel chairman select the 24

'31 Reporters, Inc,

=5 'I 2

members on the basis of his knowledge of tne work schedules i

.f' U

>U/

lI

.I

i 51 4f iWD{

i I

and assignments of panel members.

You've got to spread i

20 the load out.

I 3i COMMISSICNER 3RADFORD:

Well, I think I would 4

want at least a review and approve his proposed selection, 5

and I don't think the work schedule ought to be regarded as i

i 6l a criterion for this one.

I think this is going to be a 7'

complicated and a sensitive hearing, and really the chairman l

3!

at least ought to be somebody who is capable of handling a i

(

proceeding like that, even if it means shaking the schedule 9

10

p.

i II I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Well, and what are the merits --

i l

I2 MR. BICKWIT:

You could have him submit to you his recommendations and choose them, or suggest alternatives.

I3 I4 !

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

It would be desirable, i

15,

however, if we're going to go that direction, to get cracking i

Mb with it.

u I

l I7 {

MR. BICKWIT:

Most definitely.

Immediately.

h I3 !,

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

And it would seem to me that

\\l 19 "

the appropriate thing to do would be to have you contact the

,c ranel chairman, because it looks to me like --

21 ]

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY-Mr. Chairman, I would o,1c

-i like to object to that.

I think if we're going to do that, a

23 and anicody's going to consult the panel chairman, the o

l 24 Commission should as a body, and this should be done on the J

si Reporters. Inc. j 25 J record by a referral : rom the panel chairman of his

' ( I t.

y!0 o

1 e

si.i

50 jwb 52 i

1 I

1; recommendations, and a referral back to the panel chairman, I

2l again in writing, that if the Commission chooses to inject l

3, itsalf iv that way.

I 4-COMMISSIONER 3RADFORD :

I took Joe's suggestion 1

5 just to be that --

i t

6 1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Somebody has to tell the guy i

7 to do it, and all I wanted, instead of me calling Lazo, I l

l S'

felt the counsel could.

9' COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Yes, the General Counsel, I

10 !

exactly.

That's fine.

l II I MR. BICKWIT:

Commissioner, you would prefer that 1

12 !

it be done in writing, and we would proceed in that way?

l 13 l' COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Yes, I think the whole la thing --

15 l MR. BICKWIT:

Either way is fine.

16 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

You can certainly call 17 j him, but I think it sh'ould be confirmed in writing, and

1 4

18 his response to the Cc= mission should be in writing, and dv n

19 4 any response then from the Commission to the Board Chairman, n

i 20 the Panel Chairman, again I believe should be on the record.

e 1

J 21 ;I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

I don't ' now how people feel o

22 ll l

shout that, whether the pros and cons there --

P d

23 p MR. BICKWIT:

I see no problems.

I

,,uo The only thing approaching a " con" is that you

'g! R eporters, IPC. d' 1-o c !;

woulc, con:Ine your selection to recaers or the panel.

I :_

-s n

i Jh*\\

51.jwb 53 1,

that is what you want to do, then there are no cons.

t 2l MR. SHAPAR:

Well, I guess you might unintentionally' i

1 3

hurt somebody's feelings.

l 4,

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

In what way?

5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Turn them down.

I I

6l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Well, I must say, I'll probably l

7l find it awkward to sit here in public session and discuss t

I 8

what are alleged to be the personal merits and --

i 9l CCMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

I think that would be a 10 fair subject for a personnel meeting.

11 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

We.1, I think that's 12 c le ar.

13 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

All right, with that --

t i

I lt' COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Certainly I don't propose t

15 '

to sit here and discuss that.

But when the decision on the 16 part of the Commission --

~

17 ;j CHAIPRAN HENDRIE:

Okay, : see.

l 15ll CCMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

-- is reached in this h

I9 matte r --

s 20 'l,i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

The incoming and the outgoing i

1l 21 would be that --

4

'l u

22 a COMMISSIONER KE:INEDY:

Should be noted as a ll 4

23 !'

Ccmmission decision that that's the case, either acceptance il

'l 2' ]

or acceptance in part.

1.,

'Pi Reoorters, Inc. o 4

25 ll COMMISSIONTP AHEARNE:

Victor, you had, I thought, I

i i* i 4

.I i

54 5,2 jwb i

i 1

had been the one who had strongly expressed the interest l

2 in perhaps going outside the panel?

I 3,

COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

We ll, I guess I would l

like to give up the possibility of including someone frcm 4l not I

l 5;

outside.

6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

It's not --

i 7

MR. BICKWIT:

You could have his recommendations 1

B without ruling out that possibility.

I i

9, COMMISSIONER BRADFORD :

Yes.

I 10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Right.

1 Il !

COMMISSIONER BRADFORD :

It's not forcclosed.

12 CCMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

It's not foreclosed to 13 add one or two from the outside, but you don't have do.

14 l MR. SHAPAR:

No, it's legally permissible.

I 15 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

What procedures will be I

16 ll followed in their selection?

<l 1

MR. BICKWIT:

The Commission would simply 17 }

4 18 "

designate in their order.

k 1

I9 h COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

I would think you would U,

20 d want a chairman from the Board, simply because they'd want 1

21

'l somebody --

22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

His familiarity with the drill.

n a

23 l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY-

-- familiar with tha 4 J i

proceedings, but I wouldn't like to rule out the possibility 4

r aeoonm. inc. j

+

25 h of including screcne who is not on the panel.

4 l

f ny

,,j v

i

'I h

53jwbf, 55

\\

t Il CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

All right, Len, will you 2

contact the Panel Chairman and have us a recommendation up, 3

and I would think the sooner the better.

We're going to have 4

the technical side of the material for the draft order in 1

t l

5l a couple of days, and I don't want to hang up over the Board.

6l Yes, I see a comment ccming.

I r

7l MR. CSTRACH :

Do you wish to limit the recommen-t I

8 dations to three?

And how do you wish to divide it amongst i

9; legal and technical?

One legal and two technical?

That's 10 the normal ccmposition of the Board.

i i

II l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

I would think the Board i

12 i composition should follow the traditional practice.

Do you I

13 see any reason to come away from it?

?a 14 ;

MR. BICKWIT:

No.

i 15,

MR. OSTRACH:

I don't.

And you wish three 16 !!

recommendations?

A full complement with no spares?

i l'7 F COMMISSIONER AHEARNE :

Unless the Board feels d

1 18 h that itsould be more appropriate to add more.

lI 19 N CHAIRMAN HEND RIE :

Do you want to leave it to the l

\\

20 Panel Chairman whether he submits three, or four, five, six, h

1 21 or whatever?

22 Peter, any inclination there?

0 M

23 9 COMMISSICNER BRADFORD:

No.

I was just trvinc. to q

i 24 figure out whether -- it seems to me to matter only in the e-I 31 P eDorters, Inc.

l m 5 'a case in which we don't accept the recommendations, and I don't 4

u i

i

')

n

.l

I 56 5,4jwbj j

j l

i l

II think we do anybody any more or less of a favor by spreading I

that out over six.

i i

I 3

I guess my feeling is that, while there's a 4l slight presumption in favor of whatever is sent up to us, I

5 I really don't think we've come fully to grips with this 6'

yet, especially if we re going t; seriously consider putting l

7 1 on someone from outside, or conceivably someone from the l

3' Appeals Board; and the key doetn't real.ly lie in how many 9l names are sent up from the Licensing Board so much as a

10,

discussion that we'll have once we've got the names in l

II I front of us.

1 I2 '

CHAIRMAN H2NDRIE:

Let's make it Scb's option.

i I3 l Other aspects of the draf t order that we ought I

i 14 l to discuss?

I I

15 '

COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

Howard, at what point in the l

16 )

normal licensing proceeding is the panel impaneled by the i,

I7 h Licensing Board Chairman?

o I3 i MR. SHAPAR:

There's usually an Intervention i

i I9 h Board right in the beginning, and how soon af ter that is II u

,n a the board convened?

2l l MR. CUNNINGHAM:

Well, in the construction permit

,, i case, the Intevention Board is the same as the Board which 1

23 will hear the merits.

Only in operating license proceedings 1

24 wheru there may or may not be a hearing do you have a I Reporters, Inc. :'

ec' separate intervention panel.

But the practice is becoming 4,

i J

,l

P 55 jwb 57 i

I that, even thoca intervention panels turn out to be the l

2, panel who hoars the merits.

1 3,

So the practical answer to the question is:

The l

4 notice of hearing designates the panel.

5 MR. SHAPAR:

At the very beginning c: the i

i

.6' process.

i 7

You see, they need to get familiar with the i,

I 3'

documents as soon as possible, and there are all kinds of l

i 9,

preliminary motions that can be filed.

I I

10 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Having acquired that familiarity, I

11 '

it's generally efficient to keep the same people involved.

i 12 :

COMMISSIONER ERADFOI:D :

I suppose it wouldn ' t be a 13 '

bad thing if we could have that list in front of us at 14 tomorrow's perscnnel meeting.

I 15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

I think Ecb would prt.hably 16 t need a little bit more time than that.

I t

17:

COMMISSICNER KENNEDY:

I couldn't hear vou.

i 13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

I was thinking perhaps we 19 could have that list in cime for the personnel meeting we d,

4 20 o had scheduled for tomorrow.

21 COMMISSIGNER KENNEDY:

E'e might be able to.

22 There's no reason why we shouldn't ask him.

If he says he l

i 23 L can't do that, why we'd understand that.

If he could, we t

,1 24 would applaud it.

A ccorters, Inc. }

e. '

ral 25 !

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Are there other matters?

iln

(

,l

'J i

58 56,jwb i

1 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Your concern is the same 2

as mine:

That the sooner we can get on with this'and get 3

someone impaneled to begin this long process, and to begin i

a identification of parties -- which it seems to me is going i

5:

to probably take considerable time -- the better for all l

6 parties.

1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Other comments?

7l ai (No response.)

l 9

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

I will take the T.cment of 10 i silence as an appropriate punctuation mark and say thank I

11 I you very much --

1 12,

COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

I'm sorry, I thought you 13 had meant on the Board.

14 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Woops.

l 15 l

( Lauchte r. )

i 16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

All right, as you were.

17, COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

I don't necessarily have I

1 18 'i.

more comments, but I do want to -- I do have scme other iilf 19 f thoughts and concerns about the order and notice, and I J

il 1

20 ;

wondered what you saw as being the process to finalize it.

21 ;

CHAIRMAN HENDPIE:

If --

l COMMISSIONER BRADFO RD :

It seems to me cuicker og '1 i

23 if I just circulate them in memo f orm to each of you than 240 if we try and go through it line-by-line now, but I'm m.

i di R eporters, Inc.

25 j amenable either way.

' 1 :/.

is:

h t i n

d al

l

.57 jwb 59 I

i l

l l'

COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

Either way.

Whichever 2

is more convenient to you.

i 3

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Can that come around fairly I

4l cuickly?

i i

5l COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

Sure.

l 6

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Which I ask, on the cheerful i

7!

assumption that the staff, the technical side of the staff I

i 8

will meet its due date and we need to get crack ing.

t 9

If Peter will circulate then his comments, i

10 l once more -- now this time, I refer to the whole meeting I

II f when I say "any comments"?

I I2 !

COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

Yes.

13 ll

( Laugh te r. )

I4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Okay, thank you very much.

15 (Whereupon, at 3:50 p.m.,

the meeting was i

16 '

adj ourned. )

I end JWB 17 p i

18 !

!I 19ll!

o 20!i 1

0 21 '

li 22 !

t 23 d o

24

,1

e-ra' Reporters, Inc. q 25 0 h

r o'

3 a

i 11