ML19220A264

Transcript of 690919 Meeting in Washington,Dc.Pp 1-62

ML19220A264
Person / Time
Site:	Crane
Issue date:	09/19/1969
From:	Bond J, Williams C, Wolman A NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP)
To:
References
NUDOCS 7904170285
Download: ML19220A264 (63)

Text

f

< b l.l pcsh h)i:

/

UNITED STATES ATOMidhNERGY COMMISSION h w __

T=

Q A

]

3 b b l\\[ g IN THE MATTER OF

liETP.OP0LITt.:1 EDISDI? CC!I.;i7

~

(Thrao ble Isla::d Unit 3) ai-aceMa e :!o.53-32c s

e

~

~

e

,:(..., ;

. f..

- 1 ~J f,

_v.;.js-

~ '

Place -

g 3

.on, D ;. C.

~

Doie -

16 Eeptc;';,or IC69 P c g a s......'....:.. 0.7..

^

c'

.p.

3

• ~>

.~

^

IDUPLICATION OR COPYING OF THIS TRANSCRIPT

'"~

.BY.-PHOTOGRAPHIC. ELECTROSTATIC OR GTHER

~. -

l FACSIMILE MEANS IS PROHIBITED BY THE ORDER FORM AGREEMENT

~

^

' ~ '

~

~

Tele;: hone:

(

(Code 2021547-622:

. ^

.,7.

ACE - FEDER AL REPORTERS. INC.

^

~

. Official Reporters 415 5ecend Street, N.E. ~'

O 80M Washingten, D. C. 20C02 NATION. WIDE COVERAGE

-l - ?

' 1969

/

79041702.8 5 COPY SENT REGION ~.

'5 2'

v

t CRC 3 86 MBIL 1

1 i:

i.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

. ~

2 ATO!!IC ENERGY COMMISSION 3

r In the mat.ter of Docket No. 50-320 e'

IGTROPOL'_ TAN EDISON COMPANY (Til:CE MILE ISLI@iD UNIT 2)

U 7

C Second Floor Conference Room, Federal Offica Building No. 7, 17th & H Streets, N.W.,

Washington, D.C.

to Friday, September 19, 19G9 1

P:chcaring conference in the alova-eniitled matter 1

convened, pursuant to notice, at 1:30 o' clock p.m.

1.

3EFORE:

1.

MR. J.

D.

BOND, ChaiiTaan of the Eoard i '..

DE.

A.

WOL?CJ!, fierber,

te-DR. C. WILLIAMS, Me::ler

?-

DR. B.

EEIGGS, Alternate Member le MR. J. CAMPBELL, Alternate Chairman 19 j

APPEARANCES:

23

.)

GERI1D CEARNOFF, ESQ. and BRUCE W.

CliURCHILL, ESQ.,

2: p Shaw, Pittman, Potts, Trowbridge & Madden, 913 17th Street, N.W.

22 t Washington, D.C.

20006, representing the Applicants.

23 i.

NEIL J. NEUMAN, ESQ. and JAMES P. MUR3AY, E50.,

ro-] resenting the AEC Regulato y Staf f.

I

?.5 n l'

t

.g f -

m'

,, - l a s

d

_a

6 i

L l

1 cacce6 2

i F.LB/all i,

l.';

CONTENTS 2.' IT3M :

PAGE

,I l('

l-Appo c-ancas 7

ji

(

e ti Interventionn end/or limited appecr aces 8

3 Procedural mttters 15 l

- i Identification of significant scfoty ?.atters 32 a

'l r

Stat:raant by Appliccat 33

.j' State = ant by Staff 34 r

i Quactions by the Board 46 r

I s

' il !

i g

e t

a j i

,, i i

I Ib ',

I.

I 4

l

l t

't' g

f r

L i

1?

i l

P 19 i

~

o e

20 i, f

a p

2I r

22 j

r 23 hi t

l l

24 1

t 0

.=

y l

' * {

43q,.

sJ

!4 i

n I

F e.

M

I

?

CR8886 3

MBB/all I l EEEEEEE1EEE i

2 I

CHAIRMAN BOND:

The orehe ning conference will be in i

i 3 [ session.

(

4 This procesding is convened pursuant to en order and l.

S ]notico by the Atomic Enargy Commission scheduling this prehearing ll conference and a subsequent hearing upon the application fcr 6

i Il i

[i ruclear power facilities on behalf of Metropolitan Ediscn Ccmpany 7

8

' and Jersey Central Pcrer & Licht Company.

The nature and loca-I!

9 i; tien of these facilities will be discussed at greater length in s

e i

F 10 h the proceedings.

i r

ji f The Notice cf Hearing was published on August 27, 1969, 12 ; at Vcluce 34 of the Fsderal Register, page 13708.

References R

b necessarily will be made frcm time to ti.To to that Notice of 13 i

y ? Eearing because in it are stated many items of information con-

.3 g corning the nature of the application, the nature of the pro-

s, ceeding, how the proceeding will be conducted with reference to

[

j participation by Board Members, by the parties and by members 37 f

la i f the public whc may wish to beccme parties or participants on 1

some other basis.

g 20 I chall non extend this proceeding or encumber the rec rd by undertaking to sunmarize or to state the details of 21 }

I

! those matters unless recson for doing sc appears subsequently.

i I

" i s

23 The Commission hac designated this matter for hearing cs it is required to do under the Atomic Energy Act.

As re-24 2s quired and pernitted, the Commission has designated the proceeding l

I

'v

~b h

i i

e

i L

f h

b 4

i d..' to be conducted by and before an Atomic Safety and Licensing r.

l

[

I 2

Board.

The Members of the Board were specified in the Notice 3, of hearing.

h 4

For your information and for the record, I shall 5 l' identify those of us who were so denominated.

To my far left i

e r,

is Mr.

B.

Eriggs of Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

Immediately to my 7

left, Dr. A. Wol:aan of Johnc Hopkins University, Baltimore,

~

a

• Maryland.

To my r'.ght, Dr. Clark Williams of the Marine Resouregs 9

Council, Nassau, Suffolk County, Long Irland.

?

to,

Ecch of these gentler.cn whom I have identified is a r

., ' scientist with extensive bcckground, experience and qualifica-l 3

' tions and competency in the realt of nuclear facilities.

I will I

n not embarrass them or cxtend the proceedina by stating more.

l I

1 In addition to techniccl anc scientific members to I

34 I,

is i conprise the Dosrd, the Commis:icn ic required by lau to appoint a

l

' a person ccmpetent or experienced in the conduct of administra-16 I

i

'j ti fe proceedings.

This type of person thus far invariably has 3y been a person in the profession of the law.

So on my far rigat la i

I is Mr. Jack Campbell of Santa Fe, New Mexico, who is a lawyer 39 i

l 2's l; and a person skilled and experienced in administrative proceed-Er i

ings, having gotten scme e>.perience, certainly, as Governor for 21

! two terms of the State of New Mexico.

22 l

_I I am J. D.

Ecnd, a lawyer and Hearing Examiner undcr 23 ;

k i

the Administrative Precedure Act, and I am employed and assigned 24 25 at the Aten.ic Energy Ccmmission.

I am a lauyer.

i I

iU '

,7 P.t l

a

t i

1

S I f the Board censists of three persons under the law; P

2 but as pernitted by the law and the Commission's rules and 3.. practices, alternates are appointed so that in the event of the 1

(

.t inability of one of the denominated Members of the Board to s

participate, then tha alternate may fulfill the responsibilities 6

of that position.

P Mr. Briggs is the alternate technical anc scientific c ' me.nber; and Governor Campbell is the alternate chai rman.

3 These alcernate members, if that not be a centradic-ic / tien, have participated in discussions among us of the procedural L

l ma:ters related to this proccading and, of course, no decisional i

i q

matters have yet come before us.

7; It is anticipated that until the time of the hearing t

these members likewise may participate in our discussions of

.m y

such matters as may be appropriate for discussion among us before i

l t

m the hearing.

3,. !

I make that statenent so that all present will be t

33 apprised of how this matter has gone forward; hcw it is antici-i l pated that it will go forward until the time of the hearing; so g

2 f

j that if any person has any objection to the participation by g,

'i 7;

the alternate members in discussions about the case prior to

.' the time that it goeu actually into the hearing process, such p

': objection may now or during the course of the proceeding today g

'be appropriately stated and will be considered if so stated.

}

g y When the hearing itself is commenced, the three members t

i i

I

(

y, n., 9)

F s.: '

F p-,

li 0

?

l 6

t I

who are then present -- that is, the Chairman of the Board and L

d 2 q the two members -- will comprise the Board.

And if the alternates 3

are then not needed, their services as me nbers of the Board of l!

{

4 course are then at an end.

5 The alternate members will not and do not participate

'I 6

' in the decisional process or in discussions of mattars relating I

y [ to the determinations that must be made.

I 8

In this proceeding, of course, there are issued to be VJ decided.

It is the function of this Board to decide the issues.

g b

I

'It, the Board, mast do so upon the basis of the record that is in I!

mace publicly in the hearing proce2 ding; and the hearing process will g f rward in that manner.

It is the responsibility of 12 i the Board to decide the issues that ara nresented to it on the p"

'i fibasis colely of the record of the hearing.

He shall hear more, of g

l i

. course, about that, and the means that will be employed to accumu-g 1

!1 ate g

that record during the cou;9e of the discussion today.

e

]

The Notice of Hearing likewise gave otice that the g

i prehearing conference would be convened at the time and place

,g a

Swhere we now are situated.

I 19 :'

?

l A purpose of the prehearing conference is to discuss g

1

' th

.i e proceeding, to outline and agree upon.and derive procedures 41 h 11 land areas of inquiry and concern to be accomplished at the hear-u ing which will be convened in Middletown, Pennsylvania, at the 23 i i

time stated in the Notice of Hearing.

g

}

Having outlined for the information of any present 25

,L h,

f I

a

'7A 4, '

t l'

2... -.

l i

t 7

i i

1 who were not otherwise informed of the nature of the proceedings, 2

it appears appropriate now to have identified and stated for the 3

record the appearancac.

l

(

4 The Applicant in this prcceeding has the burden of 5

prcef in going forward; and the Applicant is represented by

[ counsel.

Would ycu please identi fy yourcelf and your associates 1 g

h MR. CHARNOFF:

Appearing on behalf of the Applicants,

7

' Me repoliten Edison Company and the Jersey Central Power & Light 3

]Cempany, Mr. Ecnd, will be myself -- I am Gerald Charnoff of 2

t l

l l

itha law firm of Shaw, Pittman, Potts, Trowbridge & Madden, 39 t

, located in Washington, D.C.

3 u

Associated with me will be Mr. Bruce Churchill of I

33 lthe sams lz.w firm; and Mr. Samuel Roccell, who is not present i

r

'.today but will be precent at the hearing, of the lew firm of u

I l

g ' Ryan and Russell, located in Reading, Pennsylvania.

I g !

Alec seated with me hare today, Mr. Cha:Iman, on my left is Mr. Jchn G. Miller, who is the Vice President and Chief L

17 l

Engineer of the Metropolitan Edison Company, and is the project g

t gdirector for the Three Mile Is.l.and Nuclear Station No. 2.

g f

i Across the table from me is Mr. Richard W.

Heward, Jr.,

,g lwho in the manager of the Nuclear Safety Division of the General r

g Public Utilities Corporation.

i

,2 CHAIRMAN BOND:

Thank you.

You are ready to proceed, 23 Mr. Charnoff?

3 MR. CHARMOFF :

Yes, sir, 25 s

[

l l

pri

'.: nu 1

s

i I

1 I

8 1

CHAIRtr41 BCND:

It is also providad in the rules and 1

}!

observed in the practices cf the Atomic Energy Commission that 2

I (the Regulat ory Staff is a party to these proceedings.

3

(

4 Uhc appears on behalf of the Stcff?

I t

L [

MR. MURRAY:

I appear.

I ac. James B. Murray, Jr.

1; 6

With m; today is Neil Newman.

3 !

f The other two gentlemen at the table are the principal 7

i d

a technical witnesses:

Mr. Ecbert Todasco and Mr. Rcymond Pcuell.

9 CHAII' MAN DOND:

You are ready to proceed, Mr. Murray?

1;

!!R. MURRAY:

Mc cre, Mr. Chzirman.

CHAIPJUUi DCND:

Thank you.

3 0

It is provided in the Fotice cf Hearing and in the 2

.I

3 Commission's rules that other persene G

sn the Applicant and is 1 the Staff raay participate in proceedings of this kind.

The L

1 r

35 metheds of such participation are fully stated in the rules and 4

fairly summarized in the Notice of Hearing.

sc f

r, It is provided that persons having an interest affected

!! may intervene as parties.

The motheds specified include the 33 l h

dfilingofappropriatepleadingsconcerningthat, and a time 39 1

within which such filing should have been accomplirhed.

20 l

We sre adviced -- or informed, rather, by the public 21 i

22 record; of the Commission that as of this datc no petitions to intervene have been filed.

,3 i

24 I would ask for a ecmment en that aspect of it frcm i

I

-, Staff counnel.

Mr. Murray?

f il q,,

, ir a j.

e

,.a o!

U h

f a

i 1

l 9

I i

1 h MR. MURRAY:

Mr. Chairrcan, may Mr. Newman speak for

~I 2 itho Staff cn this point?

,i 3

C H A I TJ iA.S 3 G N D :

You nay, "r.

Newman.

t6

(

4 9

MR. NEi; MAN:

Mr. Chairman, as of just a few moments d.

5 :egn, we have no knowledge of anyone w3shing to make a limited a

.i e ; app 2ar ance or interver.tien, other than a conversation that I have

.6;l

- 6;had with the Assistant Attorney General for the Strte of i

9 jPennsylvania, Mr. William Gross, who stated to me that he would e inor be hcre at the prehearing conference, but that, with the Bcard's approval, of course, he would like to make a 2.715 (c) i,, i I

aprecranca for the State cf Psnnsylvanic at the hearing.

j.

-l CHAIRMAN BOND:

'Thank you for that inforn.ation.

i l

{

It may be appropriate to note in passing that, as a f

3-

! representative of the State, a ecc.swhat special status is

.c i

J g acccordad to gentlemon such as Mr. Gross for the purpose of par-o 33 ticipatin; in proceedings of this nature.

t l

We anticipate no objriction and no dif ficulty in accordq

,7 i

I

]ing to General Gross such an opportunity for input into the ig I

! proceeding as he wishes to utilize.

La y

'l

}

Co you have any comment on this subject, Mr. Charnoff?

20 MR. CEARHOFF:

No, sir; except to note that Mr. Gross L

i sent to me a copy of a letter which he has addresscd to the

(.

Board -- which you may not ye t have received -- inficating or

..us p t

I! confirming the conversatien he apparently had with Mr. Newman.

l CHAIRMAN BCND:

Confirming your assumption, uc hS"o not f

gj r

i I

I

{

,g y,

.-ren r

,,; +

,. v

'I i

r

.e _..

e l

10 1

1 received a letter from Mr. Gross yet.

2 It thus appears that there is no formal notification ijof an intention to seek intervention as a party.

3

(-

l 4 l Uc might inquire appropriately at this time:

Is there 5 g p csent at this time eny person who desires or expects to seek

'I

]to intervene as a party in this proceeding?

6 I

7 i A pause and the abcence of a response indicates there d

s jare not procent any such percons.

i 1

.he Ccmmission rules and the Motico of Haaring also e.

il I

o ;ancompass the possibility that persons may wish to participate 1

lnot as partico but by way of making statements on the record.

i t'

12 The rulea provide for that; and it is somewhat requested but not f ordered in the rules and in the Notice of Hearing that such per-F

,3 14,jsons give notification to the Secretary of the Commissisn of an i

33 ' intention or a wish to proceed along these lines.

We are not infcrmed that any such formal requests have

3 1

'been filed with the Ccmmission fcr limited appearance statements.

{

ig ;

In there further information upon that subject, Mr.

39,Newman?

?-

I l

MR. NEWMAN:

No, Mr. Chairman, we do not know of anyonc 20 r

u

[ wishing to make a limited appearance.

d 6

MR. CHARHOFF:

Nor are we, Mr. Chairman.

22 CHAIRMAN BOND:

I shall inquire at this time, on behalf 23 1

24 jef the Board:

Is there present at this time any person who F

ldesiresormaydesireat the hearing to present on the record 25 s

I i

[ ' ]

.f '

F We

j

'll l

l' GB)

publiclyastatementuponthemattersatissueinchicproceeding i

2

as permitted by the Comnission's rulos?

i 2

l A pause and no response indicates that there are not d

I 4

present any persons desiring to make limited appearance state-I:

5 ments.

..il cj The Board Memberr have beon supplied with copies of the

.H 1

7 docket records, so-called, including the papers that have been i

filed in this proceeding; and presunably have avai.'.ed themselves 1

il of an opportunity to f amiliari:o themselves to some extent with 3

u i

l the nature of the application and of the expected hearing.

The r

.i jmaterial so supplied has included relatively recently a communi-3, 1

[lcationfromStaffcounseltransmittingaproposedagendaforthe lll

,fprehearingconferenceandaproposedn-narted agenda for the 33

.I hearing.

On behalf of the Board, I should extend thanks for thad.

g l

g I believe it not appropriate, and we, the Scard, believe it not appropriate to adopt that formally as an agenda to be observed.

3,

'l However, we do feel and ask you to feel that it is useful as a g

. guidelines for matters appropriately to be discussed during the 19 1

i

,; course of this prehearing.

g 0

li And if there is no objection to that suggestion, we 21 sh all, for convenience, ask that the Proposed Agenda for Preheu

(

ing Conference and the Proposed Agenda for the hearing be copiec.

g into the transcript at this point.

24 l

Is there objection to that, or comment?

25 I

,g

'T O i

j I

e y ~-

b

1l 12 r

't 1

p MR. MURRAY:

There is no objection, Mr. Chairman.

l

? '

I might make the comment there are copies of the agendi s li 3

in the rear of the room.

(

CHAIFt1AN BOND:

Thank you for that information.

We e

i s ;i shall assu: e the reporter has been provided with copies, also; 7

jor it will have been done shortly.

Is this correct?

g il 7 i MR. MURRAY:

That is correct, Mr. Chairmca.

6 CHAIRMP.N BOND:

Thank you.

3 PROPOSEC AGEMDA FOR PREHEARING CONFERENCE ta ll l

1.

Appearances t

e, 11 j n

2.

I.iterventions and/or litnited appearances U d i

3.

Procedural mattera:

I 1

,i a.

Order in which hearing will be conducted I

y (hearing agenda) i t,

p-b.

Method of introducing testimony and exhibits t

g ]

c.

Witnesses - scope and form of testi. mony 3

4.

Identification of significant safcty matters dj r

a.

Statement by Staff g

f

!l b.

Questions by Board 1,,

]

5.

Post-hearing procedures 7p I,

j a.

Transcript corrections 21 1

b.

Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law i

22 b...

6.

Other matters.

g3 l

21 i

25 i

d r

if

)

D l'

I j}

l a

'l I

13

!c 1 b PROPOSED AGENDA FOR PUBLIC HEARING 071 APPLICA"'IOS* FOR CONSTRUCTIO:7 PERMIT 2 1 l.

Opening statement by Chairman of the Atonic Safety and 3 :

Licensing Doard.

[

2.

Appearances by counsel for applicant and AEC staff.

5

[

3.

Appearances by any persons previously authoriced to e"

intervene or to make linited appearances, and related matters.

4.

Opening statement by applicant's counsel.

p F c 5.

Sunnary oral statement by applicant [10 sTR 2, App. A, 9

Section III(c) (1)).

10 6.

Opening statement by staff counsel.

1; 7.

Summary s tatement on behalf of ACC staf f [10 CFR 2, 1L App. A,Section III(c) (2)].

k, II 8.

Introduction of application, amendments and correspon-14 dence as Joint Exhibit [10 CFR 2.743(g)].

15 9.

Opening statements of intervenors, if any.

i t, t

f 10.

Statements by persons making limited appearances, if u

any.

i is,

11.

Identification and swearing of applicant's panel of

.l principal witnesses.

1 12.

Identification, swearing and presentation of qualifi-l 21 [ cacions of additional potential witnesses, for the applicant.

([-

13.

Intro 3 action of applicant's prepared testimony, includ-23 [ ing Partial Summary of Application:

24 Cross-exaninstion (if any) by any intervenors and by 25 1 t

I; AEC staf f.

t I

'l p

p

,s,.

• ,D 2

fl i

l' ll il 14 1

!i 1 ',

14.

Identification, qualification and swc tring of AEC

'l

~

l staff witncscas.

3 15.

Stipulatica on AEC testimony ccncerning applicant's s

(..

h}financialqualificaticns.

4 5

16.

Introduction of AEC staff-prepared testimony:

oh Cross-examination (if any) by applicant and by any i

?

intervenors.

sf 17.

Presentation of any intervonors' testimony:

9 :

Crcss-excuination (if any) by applicant, by other t

t w :' intervenors and by AEC staf f.

i:

18.

Questioning of witncssec by Board ma:abers.

3, i

f]

19.

Rebuttal evidence, if any.

g i; c 20.

Closing mattern, p,

CUAIRMAN BOND:

Eaving before us that agenda, an' before addressing ourselves to it, I chould like to ask 11 s

",there are any prelimincry matters of a special or particular n;

I

'e

' nature which either party believes ought to be discussed at the L

c.

jg joutset?

I y

MR. CHAR:iOFF :

No, sir.

g

.i r

i MR. MURRAY:

Mr. Chairman, if I may, I wculd like to d'

,g

6 g ask if it would be permissible for Mr. Newn.an to carry the bulk g

i i

p ! of the proceeding here, and I will just sit in the background?

1 CliAIRMAN BCND:

You may allocate the duties between yc.

i i'Ifyouasyouseefit, gentlemen.

If I misspeak and call upon you,;

g I

I

' Mr.

g Murray, you, Mr. Newman, may respond; or conversely, if I l

s.}e. ' < '.r r ;

l f.

.a I

p i

l

l 15 1

call upon Mr. Newman for an answer which Mr. Murray should give, 2

you may respond accordingly.

3 !!

MR. MURRAY:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, i;

(

l CHAIPyJW BOND:

Items 1 and 2 on the proposed agenda 4

i jee2m to have been covered at this point, which brings us to 5

'. I Item 3, entitled " Procedural Matters," under which there are 6

h

{threesubdivisions:

"a. Order in which the hearing will be i

l c n conducted (hearing agenda);" seme reference has been made to thar P

It has been observed in prior proceedings that Items t

3 J i o ", a, b, and c under numbered paragraph 3 conveniently or almost 3

L j;,l inevitably blend themselves together.

So I shall tsk that you

[

u / gentlemen address yourselves to those matters:

the order of the O

n " hearing; the method of introducing t :ti ony and exhibits; and 1

j witnesses as you propcse to proceed.

ja i

is For the applicant?

i f

i n;

MR. CHARNOFF:

Mr. Chairman, I reviewed with the Staff 1

q counsel the proposed agenda for public hearing before it was p

il sent to you; and I am in accord with that agenda; and I believe jg ithat agenda adequately disposes of Item 3a.

g As to Items b and c, the applicants' testimony will 20 include the following:

g I

~

There will be an opening oral statement by Mr. John 22

[(U i

23 Miller, whom I have introduced previously; and this is the i

24 statement es suggested by Section III(c), Appendix A of the i

(

Commission's Rules of Practice; and will describe in terms 25 l

l qf.

t O s.

'J

16 3

intended to be readily underctandable to the public the manner j in which the safety of the public will be assurad.

2 l

At your pleasurc, l'r. Chairman, we are prepared to 3

Il

(

4 have Mr. Miller introduce this cpening oral statement under cath, I

Iwhich is done in some cases; or without the oath; and uc will 9

I e lLe pleased to follow your aavice in that regard.

l 7

CHAIRMAN BOND:

Pc-rhaps that can be settled at this s

point.

Is it anticipated than Mr. Miller will be a witness?

c MR. CHARNOFF:

lie will also be a witness and one of I

jo [ the sponsors of the other technical testimony; yes, sir.

I!

CHAIFFJS SCMD:

It ir found conducive to avoiding 3;

e f

u j' confusion if the statement so presented by the witness be sub-f mitted under oath.

The ccnfusion to be avoided is determining

,3 l'

in our own minds as we examine t.'hether Mr. Miller said this when u

I he was talking or he said this when he was testifying.

e MR. CHARMOFF:

That's fine.

In addition to that opening oral statement, the appli-t n

ii, cant will introduce for incorporation into the record, if there g

!i[isnoobjection, a number of documents relating to the applicant' s g

financial and technical testimony.

Copies of these documents 20 I!'i have been furnished to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board by 21 l

4 I mail and to the AEC Regulatory Staff.

3 CHAIRMAS BOND:

May I inquire:

Are you now referring k

'l i

to the documents transmitted with your letter of September 177 24 MR. CHARNOFF:

That's right -- no, I am referring now g

r I

Fl[O p

CIf g t.V 4s e

l

O d

o i.

17 i

b a i to the documents transmitted under cover letters dated September 11 2 i!3 and Septerber 12.

hl Under the cover letter dated Septembec ;,, I transmitted 3

9

(

4 j;a copy of the applicant's Sammary of the Preliminary Safety

!i s

Analysis Report and ccpies of the technical qualifications of t

9 c ; th a Metropolitan Ediscn Company and the Jersey Cent.ral Power &

1 lLightComptny.

7 a

On S2ptembcr 12 I submitted a revisien, a corrected i

d e,

ecpy of the earlier-transmi tted copy of the financial qualifi-cations of the Jersey Central Power & Light Company.

These three i

t 9] documents will be prccente: under oath as our testimony.

i g ;

On S ptemb r 17, Mr. Chair =cn, I believe you were re-1 p

! ferring to the transmittal to you.and to the staf f and other g

i f, interested persons of a copy of an Inden of Documents which 33 referencoc and will be used by me to incorporate into the record 3

' the documentary material in addition to the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report which was previoucly submitted tc you.

These 3,

U l are documents that reflect the correspondence betwsen the appli-

,g I

cant and the AEC Regulatory Staf f.

I would hope to introduce u

1

(

al that as an exhibit; and I would expect that the staff, which I as been consulted in connection with the prepcration of that h

i document, will join me in introducing it as an exhibit.

HA A

ay ask for clarification there?

23 l

i lThisSeptember17letteranditsenclosuresappear, from a hesty 24 and superficial examination because it was received by me this

,3 l

y TCO I

l 6

t l

P 4

18 D

morning, this appears to brine within this record items which nommally in other proceedings have alrecdy been made a part of 4

i

.1 the record.

Do you hcVe a comment on that, Mr. Neuman?

(

MR. NEWAN :

Yes, Mr. Chairman.

The comr:ents that are e

h enclosed in the le tter -- which, by the way, we have not receive:

5 t.!

I et --

y c

l 7 ;

CHAIPRAN BOND:

I wo;1d ha glad to charc my copy with li i

3 jyou; to lend it to you if you wish.

5 e.

(Handing to Mr. Newman.)

d

- 4 MR. NEW!GN:

Thank you, Mr. Chcirman.

i I

The enclosure here is basically an index of documenrs y jwhich -

you are corrcet -- ha.s been before subritted by the AEC r

I g

Regulatory Staff in mattors of this natura.

But in this pro-

! ceeding the applicant has r.cbiuitted it; and we will join with u

,l

]hin in sponscring this as cn a;:hibit at the hearing.

g l

h CHAI?Kdi SOND:

To stimulate ccmment, I will ask:

I

, j

!didn't recognize this to be a ca nietc inde

: of the total tra-g ditional Joint Exhibit A.

Was I in error?

,.3 t

Mr. Charnoff, do you wish to comment further?

g h

fl MR. CHARNOFF:

I think, based upon an examination 73 1cf the cases during the last few years, this would be representa-

,1

\\ tive of exactly the Exhibit A contents that have been introduced

([,'

I i,in other cases of this sort.

This is the comolete index of all r

o 24 the correspondence between the applicant and the s t af f.

li CHAIRMAN BOND:

Docs it purport to be a total and g I; t

t ii

..u,.. m.

p

}

!i l

i

m_.,

(

19 1

complete index of all that will be in Joint Exhibit A7

[

2 MR. CHARNOFF:

Yes, sir.

3 CHAIRMAN BOND:

Thank you.

That enlarges and alters

(

4 my understanding.

5 MR. CHAR 10FF:

I would like to point out, Mr. Chairman, c,,if 1 may go on at this point, that the financial tectimony will ll be sponsored by two gentleuen:

Mr. Raymond E. Werts, who is a, the Controller of the Metropolitan Edison Company, will sponsor a

i e

the testimony relating to the financial qualifications of the E

io lI; Me tropolitan Edison Company; and Mr. John S. Burchell, who is o

'l pl the Controller of the Jersey Cantral Power & Light Company, uill 33 1

32 y present testimony as to the financial qualifications of the Jersey 1

Central Power & Light Company.

13 t

14 i I might note here, MJ Chairman, that these documents I

!'j 6 mand the application in part.

We understand --

15 1

CHAIRMAN BOND:

Excuse me.

By "these documents," what l

g, 3

I do you mean?

37 l

MR. CHARNOFF:

These are the financial qualifications

,g i

] testimony that will be sponsored by Mr. Werts and Mr. Burchell.

,g CHAIRMAN BOND:

They will amend the application?

m,)

l

~3 MR. CHARiiOFF:

They do amend the application in part; l

or will when they are so formall, introduced.

C -

The two basic changes, as noted in footnotes to the 23 testimony, relate to the estimate as to the cost of the plant 24

~

I5 and to the division between the Metropolitan Edison Company and j

.34 '

ot 'Q

..s i

A

L i

20 r

1

tluy Jersey Central Power & Light Company of the ownership of z

that plant.

3 l It is my understcnding that these changes are now being lreviewedbytheAECstaff; and I would expect, frox. conversations

(~

4 e

1 5

'I have had with the staff, that the staf f may file supplemental i

6 testimony in addition to documents previously submitted to you 5

j y

with respect to the effects of such changes on the staff's Iconclusione as to the applicant's financial qualifications.

8 ah The other document is the applicant's Partial Summary i

l

,o /'of the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report; and this summary will i

d 6

ilbe sponsored by a panel of eight witnesses representing the 3,

i

l!! applicants tietropolitan Edison Ccepany and Jersey Central Power g

~l t

g p& Light Company, the GPU Nuclear Powar Activities group, Burns u

and Roe, Inc., the architect-engineer, and Babcock and Wilcox, i

t

[ithe nuclear steam supplier.

l 33

'i

(

I would assumo,Mr. Chairman, to follow the customary practice here, I 'fould propose that the sponsors of the technical p

g testimony be sworn en bloc.

Their technical qualifications 3g are attached to the prepared testimony; and unless there is ob-g ljecti n, we w uld propose that that testimony be 4.ntroduced into 20 I

the record as if it is read.

g l

The only exhibit that we will introduce will be Exhibit 22

{

.A, which we have already discussed.

And in addition to all of 23 i

this testimony, we may have additional teetimony in the form of 74 written answers to any questions or inquiries that the members of c

g r

,3 4

21 the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board mcy address to us here 1

l 2

today.

And that would conclude the testimony of the applicant.

I 3

CHAIRPAN BOND:

Thank you.

g

(

Perhaps I should say at this point an additional 4

I 5

, statement or two about the procedure.

1l s[

Reference was earlier made to the alternates and their N

- j' participation.

Of contrse, it will be observed -- and the record l

jmight show -- that the two alternate members are present.

Their 3

i' l'pe.rticipction includes the discussions among us; bot also their li 9

(

3 participation in the prehearing conference, there to have an D

j opportunity to make inquiry at any time about any of the matters 3,

ill!which are under discussion in order that, in the event they should T

i3 il.; be called upon to serve as Membars of Lhe Board, the record t

13 ll l

1which they will have will be addressed to matters which they n

i t'

i feel are of concern to them.

g l

Accordingly, questions frcm the Board may emanate from a,

i hopefully noc juat the Chairmcn but from my colleagues to either g

i is j side of me, including of course the alternates, r

f Perhaps with that introduction I should ask:

Are g

l there any questions on any matter at this time?

20 There are some questiona which it is felt may usefully g

e be deferred until further along in the proceeding.

,2 MR. CHArciOFF :

Mr. Chairman, I would like to cover two 3

6 other minor procedural points.

g I would like to record for the record that we have

,-a

(

e ii 4.I f '

t' a.. _ Qq

w 22 i

j placed, in accordance with the Notice of Hearing, an updated 1

2 ; copy of the application and a copy of our prepared testimony in i

l the Middlet.own Borough Co;tmunity Building.

3

(

4 In addition to the panel of cight sponsors of the 5 ;

technical testirt.ony and the two sponsors of the financial i

r, ' testimony, we will have present at the public hearing a number i,

j. of other genticmen who may be helpful in answering any questions i

7 il a

the Bot.rd or the AEC may ask.

Their technical qualifications 1

j will be availfale; and I would propose to have such persons sworn 9

I l in as necessary or as apprcpriate if they are calle.d upon to ia El respond to any questions, if that is agreeable to you.

L h

37 :l CHAIRMA!! EOND:

Specifically responding to your last n

g question:

On behalf of the Board, that method of proceeding i

seems quite appropriate and is approved.

34 I

is ]

Ind to go bac': further, in a general way it may be iobserved that the method of presentation as you have outlined it is consistent with practicsc which have been engaged in in prior 3,.

I

' cases; and we, the Board, feel this will be an appropriate and g

use#ul way to go forward in the conduct of the proceeding.

g it f

MR. CHARl:OFF:

Thank you.

That concludes my contri-r g

i l butions to Items 3 a, b and c, Mr. Chairman.

7 g

CHAI3. MAN BOND:

Thank you.

22 I

23 On behalf of the staff, Mr. Newman?

I l

I MR. CAlipBELL:

May I ask a question?

I noted that this 74

~'

l application was amended to change the location of i:hgsitg,of, thcl r

25 r

s.s

.v I

l-l-

li r

i 23

propoced fccility.

Did that amendment occur befcre there was 1

9 d

1 2 j any rsquirea.cnt ter public notice?

Have all publications of d.

3 ' public notice that arc required by the statute reflected the

(

a present proposed location of the site?

5 j F.R. CHARNOFF:

Yes,11r. Campbell.

There was an earlic:

i 3

application in early 1968 reflecting the intent to locate that il

[ plant at the Cystor Creek cite.

My recollection is that the AEC L

!I a I. published a notic: of receipt of that application in tne Federal I

'i 9

Register.

ic d Earlier this year by Arendment No. 6 the cpplicant i; y recorded with the AEC the proposed location of the plant at the i

Three Mile Island site.

And my recollection is that the AEC u

]? again published a notica of receipt 4-

'he Federal Register.

e 33 1

l l

But in any event, the Notice of Hearing with respect n

1 to this prcpoacd hearing was published, as the Chairman noted, 33 is j on August 27 and followed that notice by a considerable period l

i I

3of time.

L g

d 1

MR. CAMPBELL:

Is that same situation true, Mr.

16 ll 1

[ Charnof f, with regard to the other rather significant amendmants,.

g

!i such as the structural organization?

g

l MR. CHARFOFF:

Yes, sir, all of the amendments to the 21 0lIapplication, that is, Amendments 1 through 10, were all filed with g

(

i the Atomic Energy Conmission prior to the Notice of Hearing on 23 August 27.

There have been no filings with the Atomic Energy i

24 qI

~

O Ccnmission since then.

y l

r r

t.;,'-

V i

i i

i li i

I l!

le f

f f

24 ll I 1 The enly change that we have proposed to make to any-3!'6 2 !! t~ ing in the application are those items I have mentioned with a

3

' respect to the estimate of the cost of the plant and the divisior

('

il

!as bctueen the Jersey Central Power & Light Company and Metro-4 5 ii politan Edison of the ownership of the plant.

h k

D R. DI LL

.'>.RI :

That division is mercly of the financial 6

p I

pobligation?

It han ncthing to do with the management or the r,

i e yoperation?

'l 3 -

• / 7 CHT.RI:OFF:

That is corroet.

Dy an earlier arend-i t

to,j mont, Amendment 10, it was mcd2 clear that the Metropolitan Edi-h k

33 l son Company would have -- I'm scrry, Mr. Chairman; it was Amend-b

^

ig sment No. 9 to the licence application, which was filed on Mey 7, n,,'1969 -- to define the assurption by the Metropolitan Edison

.I t

)

t:

Conpany of full responsibility for construction and operation ofi I

=,

the plant.

l 1

i is !

That, along with the other amcadaants, was filed 37 prior to the Noticc of Hearing.

t

!}

CHAIRMMI BOND:

Are you informed as to whether the

[,

g 1

ig ]Conmissic., published a notice, apart from this later and posniblg 4

,l curative Notice of Hearing, published a separata notice of the

g f

g change of ownership, item ene?

The change of respcnsibility as Hl between Jersey Central and Metropolitan Edison?

The change of 22 l

] location?

l i

i l

Those are scvaral questions.

24 25 MR. CEARHOFF:

I will answer them with one answer.

My 9

i I

s o} s~.

1-g, y L

,._ y L

3

4

.l

}

25 ha 1 d recollecticn is that follcwing Amendment 6 there was another 0

0 notice in the Federal Register with respect to the receipt of 2

h

's ! Amendment 6, giving nctice of the proposed location of the plant

?

(

4 at Three Mile Island.

1, 5 i As I say, that is my recollection.

I would like to il n

a y have the opportunity to check that.

And perhaps staff counsel u

hcouldconfirmthat.

/

!I M

s It was that amendment, I believe, that indicated h

9 [ that Metropolitan Edicen cnd Jersey Central would share in the I

a 4

to ownership of the plant en an ocucl basis; and that amcndment I

!]I cleo proviced for certcin recponsibilitiec with regard to the j;

h o

l j; ;! constructica of the plar.t to remain with Jersey Central Power &

h n

Light Compcny.

I i

It is my recollection there was no notice in the 14 ;

j Faderal Register following Amende.ent 9, which provided that is u,

Matrcpolitan Edisen would he responsible for the ccastruction

i g Iand operation of the plant, and that Jerscy's participation in f

a t

ig ; the plant would be only that of a fincncial owner.

i Mr. Newman might confirm this.

33 MR. NE E di:

Mr. Chairman, in checking through our 20 i i

l records here, I note that a Federal Register notice did go in g

1

} immediately af ter the Amendment 6, I believe, which would indi-2, g

cate that notice of the change of location was duly published 24 in the Federal Register.

i 25 On the other two, I would have to check a little further l

j

<y vg w

D

1 i

i

(

26 h.

.!lthrough my files here.

I suspect that when Mr. Charnof f says it I

b 2 1,is correct -- after a recess a little later, I could give you J

the informtien cn it.

'(

4 CHAIRMN; EOND:

It isn't necessary at this time to hav e 5

definitive information, if it ever beccces necessary for us to i

jhaveit.

Hovover, it is a point which I would suggest that you 6

l 7

gentlemen of counsel might lock into to ascertain uhat are the ij facts and what are the remotely possible infirmities of notifi-e r

? j cc tion that might exist if there should be an absence of public 1

! notice of a substantial change in the ownership of the entity o

ii i; ll which is to build and operate this facilities.

This might t

I e h bc sometimas called a super-legalistic question.

l 13 t However, I am sure you can recognize that possible if I

l questions might exist which you would wcnt to answer to your own' g

! clients' satisfactica.

g g

Tha Board has no great apprnhenciens about this statute.

l l

ll It is just brought to your attention for further looking into itl 37 l

l i

nj' Perhaps you will wish to co.nr.ent on it at the hearing.

,g I

MR. CHARNOFF:

Mr. Chairman, we will certainly look

}

g

l a

i into it.

I share the Board's lack of apprehension with ragard 20 to this.

23 MR. NEWMAN:

The staff will lock into this matter also, 22 I {-

fir. Chairman.

23 MR. CIdGBELL:

I would think, Mr. Chcirm'_n, the princi-t 24 pal question would be on the site location; and apparently that 25 f

Ii I

l Y

~

.~.

1 l

27 i

1 was covered by a notice.

f CHAIRMAN BOND:

There is no great apprehension among 2

fanyofus.

3 h

4 MR. NEWMIJJ :

Mr. Chairman, if the applicant has com-3 qpleted with its presentation of evidence?

l 6

MR. CHARNOTF:

I have, sir.

7 CHAINGW BCND:

The presentation of statements.

Tne

! applicant has conpleted and responded to some questions which c

!i g [ brought on the discussion.

U ll You may proceed for the staff, Mr. Newman.

1

-l

,1 M2. NZUMAN:

Thr.nk you, Mr. Chairman.

j.

g Again referring to Items 3 b and c of the proposed 3,

i lagenda which has to do with the technical witneises, the pro-33

f dposed technical witnesses and testimony and exhibits

Our g

g principal technical witnesses will be Mr. Robert Tedesco and a i;ftt. Raymond Powell, who have both been introduced to you prior t

17 ; in this proceeding, this prehearing.

Their professional qualifications will also be intro-Is iduced as testimony and hopefully be incorporated into the record

,o

,\\

!\\

llcs if read.

And we do have copies for you at this time, which I

'c I

lcan either pass out to you now or at a recess or at the end of g

the proceeding, whichever you prefer.

22 CHAIRMAN BO"D:

At a convenient recess point.

23 MR. NEWMAN:

All right.

74 1

23 We also reserve, of course, our right if necessary, L

4 o~

i

,0

.s.

h

6 i

I 28 E

i I

i

~

l bared upon questions asked by the Board, to bring any other 2

' witnesses frca the sr.aff that we might feel would be necessary i

Ijaad helpful to the Bc,ard.

3

(

4 CHAIMWi BOND:

That reservation is approved.

'l s

MR. NEWMill:

Thank ycu.

F I

The principal staff testimony in the technical field s

4 7,will be the Staff Safety Evaluation dated September 5,

1969, t

3 which has been forwarded to the Board, the applicant, state and c.

local of ficials.

a I would like to point out just one mctter regarding n.

'this Safety Evclustion if I might at this time; and that has to 3:

u do with Appendix C.

I 3-In Appendix C it makes reference to an earlier report 4

i t

i p,

tby the Environmental Meteorology Branch, Institute for Atmospheric E

d u

Sciences, of Juna 19, 1967.

For the Eosrd's convenience we have jadditional copias of these reports which are on record, I might y

aid, in the Public Document Rccm; but we thought it might be g.,

i-h.alpful for the Board to have copies, g

N Mr. Murray is passing them out to the Board, and we g-t iwill have additional copies for the applicant if they wish.

2c CHAIRMAN BCND:

Thank you.

t

.)

The tranceript I am suro will show, I believe, as you Ca 22

'have stated, that these documents which you have distributed are k

23 patters of public record already.

24 MR. !!EUMAN:

Regarding our financi al testimony, Mr.

3

, Lt

'.', ~ ys x

a

I,l b

I 29 1 !icharles A. Lovejcy of the Office of the Controller hac prepared il 4

lihir, testimony and affidavit, and this was forwarded, again, to 2

l Ih the Board, to the parties, to state and lecci officials, on 3

I

(

4 S2ptember 5, 1969.

t t

5 As the applicant has noted, additional information i

3 hra now been rcccived in the r.pplicant's testimony dated Septem-t 7

bar 3, of Mr. John S. Burchell of Jersey Ccntral and Mr. Raymond l1 g ]E. Werto cf M3tropolitan Edicon, which does give additional 4

1 9

information concerning the coct cf the plcnt and the division o

to.of ownerchip.

?l l

It would be th) intentien of the ctaf f, with tho 11

'l..

l Board's approval, that Mr. Lovejoy will supple.T.ent his testimony!

3 :.

I and rich supplement will bt forwarded verv shortly to the Board; h

'i 14 ' and then if the Beard wiches, and it in satisfactory to them, we.i d

15 !of the ctcff would requect that Mr. Lovejoy need not be at the l

4 I

,c,] hearing, but that his tectimony be incorporated into the record j

^

l 37 !las read.

Lnd we will, cf coursc, supply an affidavit by Mr.

f.

I L vej y as to his sponsorchip and the authenticity of the testi-la I, moni".

p' i

3 l CHAIPl!Idi BOMD: On that matter, the most the Board can l

l do at this time, which we believe also is adequate, is to say 21 that upon receiving the supplemented or amended testimony pro-22 posed to be issued or offered by Mr. Lovejoy, upon examining 23 I

if the Board then finds or believes it desirtble to

gthat, g4 0

25 hexamine Mr. Lo/ajoy upon his testimony, we of the Ecard will b

i i

g

\\

Nfg, L

1

- - - ~ ~ - - - -

6

l 30 t

l undertake to give notice in time at the minimum for you to have I

i 2

'Mr. Lovejoy present.

I l

This assuranco is given, of course, on the assumption 3

(~

4 that the testimony cc amended will be offered under oath at the s

hcaring by way of stipulation, in which stipulation it is agreed

(

6

'thct the tectireny mcy be received and crocc-examinatier. and 7,prcsontatis' of the witness are waived by the parties.

i l

So if that satisfiec your inquiry in that regard --

a 9

Do you wich to comment, Mr. Charnoff?

l I

to h I

MR. CHARNOPF:

Yes, Mr. Chairman.

'i

}

Subject to our review of Mr. Lovejoy's supplementary 3:

ii ectimony, the applicant would have no objection to the procedures t

12 I

i3 Loutlined by staff counsel.

b

.: U I might propose, teo, that if the Board would indicate h

L hthat it has no quections with respect to the financial testimony 35 is offered by Mr. Burchell and Mr. Worts, and if the AEC staff has l no questions to ask of either of those two witnesses, I might L

17 i

' propose that their testimony, just as Mr. Lovejoy's, be intro-le

duced and incorporated in the record as if read, and under affi-39 davits from both of those gentlemen; and perhaps they too might 20 be relieved from appearing at the public hearing.

21 L

22 In that connection, we would be perfectly happy to wait

()

i luntil some appropriate later time to know whether it would be 23 your pleasure to have them appear or not.

74

,5 i

CHAIRMAN BOND:

Who are the witnesses whom you would I

s.. p

<vr q q

.u L

mw+

y i

t, I

i 31 i

i I

!thushavepreviouslyexcused?

1

! dEh I

2 l

MR. CHARNOFF:

Mr. Burchell of the Jersey Central Power i

3 jG Light Ccapsn*j and Mr. Werts of the Metropolitan Edison Company {

'(

4 CHAIRMAN BOND:

Upon that matter the Board takes time lto consider and ask:that you bring it up further.

There may 5

}'ba some observations that would ' e helpful to all cf us which b

6 l

7 Iwe can evolve among ourse3ves as Members of the Board shortly.

i e

l Feturning to the proposal concerning Mr. Lovejoy's o

9 testimony, it is suggested that in revicing and amending and d

supplcmanting hic testimony, Mr. Lovejoy should give -- we ic q ancicipate that he will give -- consideration to tha divisions of i,

i rasponsibilities and obligations between the corporate applicants.

12 i:

I f

n ;t Perhaps in doing so he could a.dA a bit more of defini-il j tiveness to some of the assumptions which he has mada in deriv-j 3:

P hing the c0nclusions which he will have reached.

I rg 0

That is a hearty, parhaps rathor generalized statemant.

g i

l.

37 Do you wish to ask about it?

1 MR. NEWMAN:

Yes, Mr. Chairman.

As far as adding 3g g II definitiveness to some of his assumptions, do you mean the assump-

,g

'tions he will be making in his supplement, or any assumptions pg I

ha made within his original testimony?

g t

CHAIRMAN BOND:

Let's include both.

22

.C i

MR. NEWMJdi:

Thank you.

23 24 l

I might add, if I might, Mr. Chairman, as far as the i

i p g, ; applicant's witnesses, that we -- again subject to our Mr.

I i

6.- -

'776

'u k-

l i

'I 32 f. [! Levejoy s review of the new testimony of the financial witnesses a

i.

[ thr.t we also would have no objection to their not appearing.

E i

3 L I micht also add, Mr. Cheirmen, that if the Board i

h qwishes, the staff is also prepared to have two additional exhibi :s; 4

h 5 9 one would be, the professional qualifications of the Advisory i

I e jj Ccmmittee on Reactor Safeguards; &nd the second would be an 11

. exhibit made up of the professional qttalifications of the prin-P Cipal mechGr5 Of our Esgulatory Staff khD have reviewed the 9 'epplication.

io CHAIRMAN BOND:

The Board thanks you for your willing-I 3;, ness to precant those documents.

Unless scle unfcIcseen need I

i, therefor arises, you may rest assured that you will not be calle d i:

d n

cpon to provide them for the record.

I l

MR. NE%vJdi:

Thank you, Mr. Chainnan.

l l

is That concludes our ccverage of Item 3 b and c.

CHAIR *dui ECED:

Thank you.

This brings us to Item 4 m

i,-

cn the agenda, Identification of Significant Safety Matters, i

,g which is subdivided into parts a and b; "a" being Statement by Staff; and "b" being Questions by Board.

y to We of the Board would add an "a'" or some other numbert i

t

in there so that the applicants would not feel neglected in that 7;

l l

l subdivision; and we will af ford to the applicant an opportunity f-22

.C.

23 to make or present at this time any statement they wiah to make regarding tho identification of Significant Safety Matters.

24 MR. CHARNOFF:

Mr. Ch airm an, I might facetiously note 25

' ' f 'r

• ~ >"! 1'~

4 am-w-

L l'l i

33

' that at no tiac during the licensing process does the applicant 1

{

2 over feel neglected.

I

[1 CHAIEMAN BCED:

Wo didn't want to set a prr: cadent.

3 7

(

4 ER. CEARNOFF:

The epplicant's technical testimony, r

5 thc!t is, the Sunnary Coscription cf the Application, represents C.

i for our part c definition cnd daccription of those matters which 6

1 l

7 were significant to the revieu of this pcrticular spplication, r

e l

i a fi Mr. Chairman, and we have ncth ng cpocific to add at this point.

s a

9 ]

CHAIFlW: B02:D:

On bchcif of the staf f, Mr. Newman?

I to XR. M12DIAN:

Mr. Chairman, we have herc a prepared i

'J stt.tcisnt by the Rcquiatory Staff dealing wi*.h Significant t

3i jScfetyMetters.

I might suggt:t, if I could, sir, that we will i3 : pcus out ccpiec of this to tha Ocard *** to the applicant and f

d I

. if the Board wiches, that this could be incorporated into the l

y

'l r-irecord as read.

1 F

6

.l CHAIRHTJi DC:D:

Perhaps all participants might so wish, in 1Il 6

17 You mcy distribute the copicc, and chile you are dcing so I would 3

[

L

[ask:

Would this statement about which ycu have sp0 ken complete 16 the staff statement regarding Identification of Significant 3g I

i 23 1 Safety Matters?

t MR. NEWMAN:

Thct is correct, Mr. Chairman.

g CHAIRMAN BOND:

Wall, tc look ahead, we find that i

(L i Cuestionc by the Board is Item b unfer 4; and in order to afford 23 to the Board an opportanity to review for itself briefly its 24 i

i i

I 23 position upon that matter z.s well as its position upon the t

i n r.

<m 1

5-

.b t

a l

t

l'

I/

34 l,!

i! proposed irecrporation into the record of the statement, this r

E i I might be a convenient point for a brief recess.

t 3 p ile will endeavor to recenvene in about ten minutes.

M

(

4 (Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.)

F r,

CEAIPJGN BOND:

'1he conference will be in session.

On rending matters, the Board finds that it is a j useful and convenient way of getting into the record the e I prelimincry statement by waiving the cral presentation thereof; h

r 9

and accordingly, the prehocring conference statement will at ii

[ this point be copied into the transcript, there to be considered {

3; as the prehearing conference state =2nt presented by Mr. Tedesco.

MR. TEDESCO:

On April 29, 1968, the Jersey Central e

o! Power & Light Company applied to the Atomic Energy Commission

,3 I

for a conctruction permit end facility license for a proposed se Unit 2 of the Oyster Crcok Nuclear Station at the Oyster Creek u.

.' site in Ocean County, New Jersey.

On Marh 10, 1960, Amendr.ent

c t

17 'No. 6 was s.uhmitted, changing the locaticn of the proposed 4 facilitiy to the Three Mile Island site in Dauphin County, 3,

l' 1

Pennsylvania.

The facility was redesignated the Three Mile 39 I'

"l Island Nuclear Station Unit 2, to be co-owned by the Jersey 23 Central Power & Light Company and the Metropolitna Edison It

} Company.

Arendnent No. 9 was submitted on May 7, 1969, making l

[".

j the Metropolitan Edison Corpany responsible for the design, n

)

4 3

construction and operation of tne Three Mile Island Nuclear l 9 2c Station Unit 2 (THI #2).

il s {,

ey*

g.

.. e s a

t l

a

35 1

The proposed pressurized water reactor designed by The h

l Babcock & Wilcox Company will operate initially at core power 2

i 3

I levels up to 2452 Megawatts thermal (Mwt).

However, it is

(~

4 expected that this core power level can eventually be increased

'to 2772 Mwt.

Accordingly, Metropolitan Edison analyzed, and the i

s i

i G

} regulatory staff evaluated, the engineered safety features of I

tha reactor, and the accident concequences at the 2772 Mwt power a, level.

The thermal hydraulic core characteristics of the reactor 9

were analyced and evaluated based upon the 2452 Mwt power level.

io fl We have reviewed the det -ils of the design of the nuclear steam si supply system based on the 2452 Mwt power level and have con-t cil cluded that it is accaptab.'.e.

12 13 The nuclear steam supply system proposed for TMI (2 h

.s la h. is similar in design to the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station P

15 Unit 1, Oconee Nuclear Station, Rancho Seco Nuclear Station, i c,4 Crystal River Nuclear St& tion, and Russellville Nuclear Station r

e P!!which are all undar construction pursuant to Commitsion-authorizad i-0constructionparmita.

18 o

I 19 We and our environments.1 consultants and the Advisory F

20 Ccumittee on Reactor Safeguards ( ACRS) have reviewed the variaus t

1 21 cite -related f actors presented in the application and amendmente I

i 22 On the basis of these reviews it was found that the extent of 23 flood protection to be provided for the Three Mile Island site l

24 will require further review during plant construction.

The 25 required level cf flood protection will be baced upon the c,

.v

..m.

i ll f

t

t 36 i

1 llProbably Maximum Flood (PMF) for the Susquehanna River at the

,. j site as calculated by the United Statcs Corps of Engineers.

As i:

3

'l[noted in our Safety Evaluation, the exact PMF level at the site l

(_

Iwill not be available until the middle of 1970.

Consequently, S

i Metropolitan Edison has indicated that protection for the Three l

L' 6

Mile Island site will be adjusted to meet the U. S.

Corps of i

7 Engineers official PMF level to assare that safe shutdown of both e

. nu: lear units can be accompliahod if the PMF were to occur.

b

~

l' o

This commitment by the applicants is considered adequate, and in D

~

we and our consultants will review the cdequacy of flood pro-t L

l.

l '.

o tection propcsod for the site.

w 12 r

• be U. S. Geological Survey hta commented f avorably on' O

geological and other hydrological aspcccs of the site.

The l Environnental Science Services Administration (U.S. Weather 9

Eurecu) hac commanted favorably on the meteorology of the site.

I I'

The Fish and Wildlife Service of the Department of ll the Interior recommended that pre-cperational and post-operational 17 1s 0 radiological surveys be made and that the applicant cooperate i

i d with the Fish and Wildlife Service and interested Pennsylvania 19 i

20 i agencies in the development of the plans of these surveys and in I

i 21 !

ether areas.

The applicants will cooperate with interested L

22 State and Federal agencies.

23 Our seismic design censultant, Nathan M. Newmark Con-24 sulting Engineering Services, has determined that the design of i

25 the Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2 will be j

.Y 279 I

i i

i i

1 37

! adequate to ensure that the plant can withstand those reismic 1

i

accelerations which have been ectinated by our seisnological 2

]cencultant, the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey.

3 t

(

We have evaluated the consequences of potential acci-4 j dents which could involve relecse of radioactivity frc.n the 5

[ Unit 2 site and have concluded that in the unlikely event of any 6

Il l of these accidents the potential doses from the re. lease of radio-L 7

1

! activity would not exceed the guidelines set forth in 10 CFR g

t r

l' Part 100 of thw Commission's regulctiens.

3 i

l (1

Unit 2 will be protected against En aircraf t strike

3 1

fand accompcnying fire to tl:e same criteria as were required for 3

lUnit 1.

Further development work and evaluation will be per-p*,

H

!!iformed during the detailed design of Tn! F2.

This includes work i

3,3 i

y related to core etability, core thermal and hydraulic character-t

! istics, fuel rod clad failures, high fuel burnup performance, 15 b

I

} internal vent valves, control rod drive tests, once-through steam g

I

! generators, in-core nr.utron detactors blowdown forces on reactor

,7 1nternals, chemical spray system, and radiolytic hydrogen con-18 i

trol.

Wo conclude that this developmant work aill be completed g

during the final design phase of the TMI (2.

These development so prograns will provide the data necessary to construct tha TMI #2 g

in a e rdanca with tha criteria and specification sat forth in 22 t

the application.

23 The ACRS has also conducted an independent review of g

this plant and has made comments and recommendations in its report 3

an

p9 1

38 gcf July 17, 1969, to Chairman Seabcrg.

We have considered each 1

4t cf the recomrendationc and will be guided by all of them in our 2

i b

3 continuing revicw of the Three Mile Isiznd Nuclear Staticn Unit

' (

2.

5 The ACRS letter concludes that with due consideration i

l to the various items mentioned therein, "The Unit 2 proposed for 6

7 f dra Three Mile Island site can be constructed with reasonable i

a assurance that it can be cperated without us.due rir.k to the health

(

9 :itnl safety of the public."

..j We have concluded, on the basis of our review of the sn d

] spplicction and atuandraents that appropriate firidincs can be i

E l aade on each of the issues cet forth in the Notice of Hearing

,2 33 in this proceeding.

i L

l ia CllAIRMAN BCND:

Pending also wcs the request by g'

cpplicant's counsel for a tentative statement at least by the t

l Board concerning the possibility of excusing or exonerating some 3e

?

I L

37 ; proposed witnessss for the applicants at the hearing.

n la j I would ask preliminarily to stating a position if r

f it would be a significant inconvenience for the applicant to g

l I have present those witnesses?

20 Perhaps as you dcbate on that I will spetk further.

21 lIt may assist you in developing your response, Mr. Charnoff.

22

('

23 The Board has some feeling that it may be appropriate f

during the course of the proceeding to have presented on the 2,

25 I record responsec to questions or statements addressing themeelven l

i I

.". > (.#7 r)4

.T i

. s.

O

i i

39 the answers to I 'l.to matters of possible broad policy sicnificant, i

,'hwh4ch might bect be precented by responsible executive officers

~

t!iof and for the applice.nt corporatio.is where authority by virtue 3

'g

(

4 n

)

l of their position c.nd by virtaa of corpercte ections is ascer-k tainchic from an c:< amination of the ultimately fint.1 record as d

- 1

]itwillbemade.

H Doca that cccist you or provcho questions, Mr. Charnofi ? ~ E ' D MR. CHARSOFr: It provckes queatienc. 9 il CHAIR *Cd! BOUD: P rocr.e d, [-, q i .. p MR. CEAENFOP-I'c. E o nt.I, both Mr. Eurchell and Mr. f

Ecth,

' Werts can be here if the Board prefer; their precence. i hcwever, cro very much involved in rate proceedings that Jersey i d. i ~.! Contral and Metropclitan Edisen are now vigorously pursuing; so l that the answer to your quastion is that there,would be some in-i '- e i P ! convenience if they hed to attend. I U But cartainli if any of you gentlemen have any questiors 1 dto ask, they can be pressr.t to respond to questions with respect I' l U to their testimony. 13 i! The lattar part of your statement that provokes ques-N tions relates to the presence of some persons in some undefined 20 IIO positions of authority who might recpond to questions that you 21 ll. micht wish to ask. That puzcles to a little bit in that I think U 22 ( we would have to hear frcm you and freu them the questions you 22 24 vould like to ask, bacause it may well be that neither Mr. L 5 Eurchell nor Mr. Werts ar2 the proper pocple to respond to theseT I .y ts. ' h ) U I

40 ll qu.as tions. Perhaps sema other officers of the applicants or any t hp of the af filiated companies are more appropriate fcr that purposa. 2 c So that parhaps wa might defer the decision as to whom we should ( 4 have precar.t until af ter we hear with scme opccificity the nature C cf the questiens that are on your mind. i: c !! CHAIPMAN BOND: For iliuctrative purposes only I will II l undertake to ascist you. But it might be asked at the hearing: j Kho here has the authority to speak uith the full vcice of each 3 i!cf the applicants to say what its -- the corpcration's -- policy, 9 I t ] has been determinad to b', with reference to a natter?

And, o

illustratively, it might be a financial mciter; it might be a p 3 u (lmatter relating significantly to design or conctruction respon-L .i 1sibilitics. r o o l l [ Dces this help yo?? u 'i 6 s nn. CEARNCrF: It helpc in the sence of the following: .c jthe response might be helpful, and that is that if Mr. Miller, l i w l i g j vho os on ny left, who in the Vice President and Chief Engineer IIl i of Metropolitan Edison, has the authority to respcnd to questions [ 33 I i

of the type that you have mentioned --

.o ~ i 1 lr. CHAIRMAN BCUD: Encuse me -- MR. CHARNOFF: -- so long as they relate to the commit-g ments of the Matropclitan Edicon Company as to the design and the (H lfinancingofthisplant. ~3 3 When it comes to the detEils of the financing schemes, 24 hcwever, we may need to have somebody else from the Metropolitan y ~ry, t s,.. j l r Iw'

y 41 1 Ediscn Company. _lll 2 l We also expect to have at the hearing -- and we hr.ve i l 3 with us today -- Mr. George Ritter, who is c'he Vice Presider.t (~ 4 rof Jersey Central Power & Light Company, and who is one of tie ( 5 cc-signers of the appli catic,n to the Atomic Energy Commissicn, his t's ecuivalent position at the Jersey Centrctl Power & e ' r' '>-j,._ ght Company and can speak for them. l a, CHAIPMAN BO9D: Excuse me. May I interrupt just to i g i say we have no reason to deubt the truth and accuracy of what I h]yousay. Arc thcce statomente corroborated by matters which are y L j' or will ba of reacrd in the procceding? 3 t MR. CEARNOFF: Are you addreccing yourself to dele-q .i j gations cf authority that each of them may have from their 33 ii

4 particular praaidents or chief e

:scutite officers?

13 CEAIEUW BOND: This would be helpful. I g MR. CHAENCFF: If you are, we could eithsr have the r r 17 a prssidents come -- and I would prefer not to ask them to attend - d la ' but we cculd have copies of statements of. authority that would t l d(; support the statements I ha're just mace. 39 ] CHAIRMAN BCND: You as a lawyer would not disagree that'. g

1. such execrpted, validated copics of minutes would perfect the jl

_41 chain of ti tle of authority in the of ficers to spetk, would ycu? t f.(' MR. CHARMOFF: I think so. 43 DR WILLIAMS: Where are the hearings? 74 I ?5 l MR. CHARMOFF: Where are the hearings?

• f6 W0

I 6 ij 42 J I [ DR. WILLIAM 5: That these gentlemen are g'_.ing to be I,( attending on rates. In Harrisburg or Tranton or where? 3 l Mn. MILL 2R: I don't kncw that there is any scheduled ( 4 at that particular time. S cre.e * . be in Harrisburg and Reading; J: 5 jj others in Morristo:in and Trenten. S 3 DR. WILLIANS: If th2y are in Harricburg, it won't 1. 7 tche long to get to Middletoun and back. h 6 J MR. CHAR 2!OFF: Either or both of the gentleman can be l ? ]prococt. If there is cny doubt in your mind as to whether you ? I 10 have cny questionsfor then, we will crrange to have both of them 11 present, if it would be helpful, cbvicusly. 12,i If you are clear in your mind before the hearing and 'l t you have ne questions for them, it would be helpful if you would 12 t d. I ', let me know and then I could arrange to relieve cm of the burden 14 t i jof being here. 15 l 16 i I am a little troubled by scme of the questions Mr. ll Band has been cching t i I at f amiliar with the f act. that in a very 17 .1 1 ic . recent case there were questions of the same sort that were asked i' 19 JAnd what troubles me a little bit in: What is it about this d i particular case that would require submission in the record of 20 21 authority from the Chairman of the Board or from the chief i executive officer of the organization to those persons who l 22 l l

s ' submit the application?

24 To m'y knowledge, this application is virtually like i I 25, overy other application that has bsen submitted to the Atcmic i {lf" '_ Y b i A

\\; L il 1 43 l a l!! Energy Comaission for a license and was signed under oath, as 1

l. '

[ required by the statute, by officers of the applicants. Every 2 l t O w 3 y anondment to the application has been signed by officers of tho ( 4 conpanics under oath as required by statute. ) t I In no case that I know of, up until a rec 2nt cace 5 g' c whero this quecticn was raised, nnd up until today, have I ever b 2cn informed of the nacd for inclusion in the record of a 7 1 e statement stating that the perrons signing and submitting these !! applicationa under oath are authorized to speak or sign these 9 e applications for the cc=pany. i:. Uc are perfectly prepared, I might say, to provide i ' such inforn.aticn for you. But I would want to point out that t 13 there is nothing in the Commiscicn's regulations nor in past i, practice that would suggest t, hat that is necessary, j o i r CHAIPJ"d1 BOD: We could have an enjoyable legal debate is e 3., about that, which uc will undertake to avoid. l / A corporation acts thrcugh its agents and officers

7

. whom must act within the scope of their authority, which must be 16 li real, not solely apparent. ig It is apparent from the documents that the of ficers 20 l19 signing the application do have the authority to ccmmit their 73 corporate principals to the obligation and to the fulfillment of 12 , (L..' - of obligatione stated. 23 r It la nct unprecedented here, nor is it in just ene j u 25 h cther case, that the applicants have been requested to have the 11 il hl 'lt 'N;b L o [ fi s

L 44 1 record to show that those who speak purportedly with the voice l ? cf authority for the corporation indeed do have such authority. 3 Ccamitments of a substantial nature and commitments relating !!significantly to safety matters are explicit and implicit in all ( 4 5 of the applications and all of the proceedings. 6 Conceivably a perhaps legalistic challenge could be 7 made or a legalistic defence on behalf of the corporation might I. jbe interposed if we for the Commission should rely solely upon a s l inference of authority rather than having the record to show 9 to explicitly the e. intance of authority. 33 This is our feeling. You have indicated for the appli-12 l cants that the matter relatively simply can be resolved by 13 presenting, for example, excerpts of either bylaws or minutes cf 14 meetings reflecting the official corporate actions. 15 This type of question admittedly has not been presented i i ic g in numerouc other proceedings. It is not in our view an irrele-I lll vant questien in a proceeding such as this in which we have joint 17 N la i applicants with divided and shared responsibilities and obli-lgationswiththecorporateaffiliationswhichexist, g i-20 Does thic leave the matter satisf-ctory to you? MR. CHARNOFF: Yes. I certainly didn't raise the 21 r i other point to debate it. I was puzzled by it. It is a rela-n C~ 23 tively new development. But we certainly can respond by present i-L l 24 tion of the kind of statements you indicated would be satisfacto ry. 25 CHAIRMAN BOND: Thank you. t s.} { ' <3p.- a i E 3 i 1 4

( Il 45 i 1 i MR. CHARIiOFF: Mr. Chairman, may I ask in that connec-h 2 4 tien, again in come attempt to relieve scma people frcm being i 3 ;l here who might otherwise have other activities which would 'e ( 4 call them to cther locationn: May we submit to you in advance 11 4 5 of the public hearing tastimony relating to the question you h s !l have juct raised and rcquest of ycu, if possible, the opportunit-f f' 1 [ to consider this testimony and to determine uhether it adoquately a c s{disposesofit; or uhether ycu vould wish the party in support .!l of that testimony to procent it at the pthlic hearing? 9 I to f CHAIEMi BOND: You have asked a question in terms thau ii !I was preparing to make on behalf of tha 3 card, and I will en-I!large it to include specifically Mr. Eurchcll and Mr. Werts. We i: il

f. will leave all of these gentlemen in tha sama status,as it were, i3 l

i 14 by saying that at this time the Board is not prepared to fore-L jl cast a willingness to waivo the appearanca and testimony by 15 is j thcae gentlemen, including such presentations as ycu might make o ll on the corporate autherizatica uattar. 17 d f Eovaver, you may and are en.ouragad to submit auch 18 ! additional testimony as you would proposs; and if upon e::nmining ig 20 that ths Board is able to reach a conclusien that might enable you to excusa or to notify your witnessas that thair attendance 21 1 22 : might not be requirad, we will enda2ver to afford to ycu reason-( abic no tice. 23 I 24 ; Wa recognics that this ccy cppear to place the status 25 l of your potential uitnesses in a someuhat different categcry than i l

s. r

<, s;g l g

46 [

Mr. Lovejoy in that we have stated that, with reference to Mr.

e I s ? ?IcVejoy, unless we notify ycu to the centrary, his attendance d l will not be required. 3 (~ 1l, If you have no objecticn, we trill leave you in the d il 5 0 othcr category; that we will, if we are able tc de so, advice you d a 4 that Mr. Surchell and Mr. Eerts, er either, or both, and/or n i other witnecces upon corporatc natters may not be needed -- if a 1: we aus eb1e to do so. 'l' 3 : KR. CHAENOFF: That is perfectly satisf a(. tory. We t 'I

c " appreciate whatever attentien you can give to this mctter.

l)

i CHAI2XAN BOND:

Very ucll. The.nh you. I There appear frca my notes to bc no furths: reserved e ? ?3 matters. r I N Were there other r.atters explicitly reserved or mcttera

4

.1 q which apprcpriately need to be discussed noer? There appears to be none, L iu., r b i L Thic brings us to Item db, Questions by the Board. 7 .) 13 d At this time customarily Mcmbers of the Ecard and E il E [ Alternate Pembers likewire prezent for the information of the 39 ,1 Ii' na rties matters which may be of scae concern to them and abcut L v r i g which the Board Mercbers would like the parties before it -- that is, the applicants and the staff -- to prepare or present s. 22 er be prepared to present additiencl testimony and evidence over z: i 24 and above that which has been made known to us thut far in the r 25 procesding. i p b i l ) 4 I l .I r

\\

I i 47 l I shall at this point yield the ficor and defer to my 1 a i W l colleagues. We do not have a typed or otherwice organized list 2 i that we can distribute to you in lieu of oral presentation. 3 ( > Instead thesa matters will be developed by way of intcrrogation 4 i 5 i and discu3rica er.ong ut,. } The ordar of praeantchion of questiono is ad hoc. 3 D.7. BRIGG3: In the application the applicant discuncca i. r ,i 'the problert of hydrogen generation in the event of an accident a jand discustes tha non,= fc.r limiting t!e concentrations of hydro-3 ] gen and tlu containnont purge system appr.rently being the proferrad 33 cysten for doing this. 1: a l

- 1 I wculd lihs, if I wara to ha prauent at the hearing, i

jlto hear something chout the alternativac 13 that are n.Ontioned. .I It is mentioned that if the purge syctem turns out to be unsatis 3 33 factory, that an alternative vill be used. I would like to hear

scasthing ehout tho alternctices that are being concidered and 33

/the status of those alternatives. p t ,g DR. UILL:JJIS: I might add, if fir. Briggs isn't there, I ![! I vill requeat it, and I had a comeuhet similar question. g q CHAI1ri;.E BOID: To ma'ce that enply clear new and for g al, any question nou asked by any member, even though it may 21 be stated in singular numbar, ic a que: tion presented on behalf 22 f the Board. 23 24 CR. BRIGGG: In the Staff Analysis there is a discus-jsien of the aprcy nystem fcr removing iodine in the event of an pg e s.}, ( '

1. 7(30 a

~.

l' l 48 i i i l

i ccciden c; end thcre is a statement to the effect that the staff f

2 0 calculaces a dose reducti c fcctor of apprerimately 4 and e d??e 6 b I' 3 Ireduction factor of 6 being required te achieve an allowable (~ b ji doso; and thero is a further statement to the effect that tha

I

- nh staff concludac that a reduction f actor in exceas cf 6 can be U il  !! chtained. I I would like to have some clarification cf those 7 8 jstatements, particularly the latter one. And I think probably 9 sor'.e additional discuccion of the ctetus of the work on iodine 'a jand whct additional resocrch and dsrelcpzent is required to I 1 cucurs that the system that will be installed in tha containment a 'uill be ; cctiefsetory syctcm. i " I DE. WOLMAE: I h v2 a few questione, Mr. Chairmcs, r a " I directcd prehably to both the applicant end the attff. g One cf tham decle with ycar protection fcr your probable 1s msnimur floods. As I recd the miterial in both the applicent's 37 ;. material and the staff Analysis, I have the improstion that you l 13 vould during or just before a mcximum ficed attanpt to raice i. W

your dike oc that your structures would be protected.

And with-i 20 out belaboring the point, I would hope that you would look at 21 that again and give me some imprescion as to how practicably and 22 succastfully that might be manipulated when, scy, 1.5 million 23 CFS is coming down the rocd. E# My second ccament has to dcal with what I think appears n in both docunantc or Ecries of documents. It has Faen noted i I. 'gg ory p.- ........ _ ~ _ _... _. 3 _

l 49 1 q ere this cfternocn that the Deputy Attorney Genertl of the h j 2 State of Penncylvania will appear. You refer to ntgotiations with $ th-3 Corceavaalth of P nnsylvania, pcrticularly the licalth Depart"- 3 i.l I 4 !! ment. I wacid ba interested in having sc=e indication of what i dr 5.jthe racult of thoce consultaticac have been; whethsr there is 'I 1 writton indication other thsn the Deputy Attorr.ey General's c; En-5 T i; fcrt Ic0=inc ststment as to the attitude o that control agency. 7 1 a "hirdly, I nercly want to reinforce the comment made j by Dr. Briggs en the whole idec is of the receerch and develop-u .c

n. eat phase uhich I find, as hc does, sor.cwhat open-ended as far n

3 as moving into any operating sequence ultimately. i, i Dr. Eirggs has commented on the hydrogen or the L 12 [ ! general ga.7 ecus waste discussion. and I would like, if pocsible, u l L I bcth the applicant and the staff to give us scce indicatian as w E- !4; te whether or not, nunbcr one, they have referred at all or y, = i a.; attempted to indicate what the cumulative cituation is going to t be by the edditien cf what new would be a fourth plant on the 37 r came rfver, pluc perhaps the fifth one at Calvert Cliffs; with i in f E !j particulcr referenca to what we may loch forward to in the g i il yg a ndditive tritiun situation on the Susqushanna River which I H k need h:1rdly remind you 'is the acjor contributor to the Chesapeska g efliBay cituation. o

3 l Earc, tco, I don't think I need to strecs the fact l

i ~ 2: ; this is a matter of considarchle public importance. There is k l 73 t; nc indication in the text of either the applicant or the atttf l n Ip' ono her, #d y +. -.. - -,...

i i, i i n 50 l I. dthct tha curulative acpects hcVe been looked at or diagnosed or 1 a 2 calculated. I think the board ic of the feeling that is very l h 2 !.l badly m dM. ,1 ( 1 Althcugh of lerrer inpcrtanc2, I would like also 4

• ii{ to hcvc ccrothing ccid ebcut ths sans cre.ulctivo cifect with

's

I5rc;pect to the diccharx.c of krypton frc.: the whole anxies of a

,o ' pla.ta, nct only en the ptrticulcr cite with which you are con-j 7 l ca.m. ed, but the whole complcr. which is new cppscring. c .I I ask also co.e elEbcration of year qunlity accurance 9 ojpr:gr:r.,chvionclyduringconstruction. More specifically may ( l. l ' I scusct thct you gi te con:. ind!. cation of the fes:uancy of 3; t -linapectional servica frcn the s-tndpoint of quality during 3,> i i3 construction. Ara you thinking of a qurlity accu nnce man coming 3 u 'encs a nonth, s ce a week, onc2 a year, or whct? i I u s g.I Tnic cter.3 frcs the fact that in so';c inctancan that i ' c unlity arcu anco inspection he been quite infrequent, and I r 3 Vould like scCS EOSurtnC3 the.t this conception is erroneous en b 17 l l,

i. ray pcrt.

19 There is one core thtt I would simplv like to list for t( ycu. In accc of the appendiccc in the ctsff discucsien there is g the comment by the Fich and Wildlife group. All I would like ,1 c i I to know with respect to that is thet they mske a curtain number 2 u., 23 of recermendaticne to the applicant and the staff that a number I [iofactiviticeehouldbeinitiated4ndpursued. But I have no c4 li ' indic: tion either in the tant or in their letter as to whether ,9 9, - onn 6.7

• s,.
• f4 1b

.I s

'l I I l' 51 1 [tM.c has fallcn on barren ocrc or whether this is actually I r b 2 23..ing inte agracz. ant. .3 l 3 { DR. WILLIA"I: My col'.cag ice on my lef t h:1ve covered t 4 jguite a in of my points. Actually, we have discuccad some of

1. 6 E ; taca thin morning anyuay and wo are in agresnent on some of them.

l ? HHm avar, I might a: k onc or two clightly more spec'.fic ones in 1 7 ! addition to tht cumulative effectc on tha chole river basis h E qsyrter. ~ It unan 't clecr to to how the. tt:0 plants are going to v a; O.be operatcd, t'.at is the Throa P.ile Island No. 1 and Three Mile t DIsland No. 2, in tcrt.:s of the relence of efflunnce. If I undor-I' w I '2 stzad thingt correctly, that the CFR 2 limite apply to the total leasec of tSe twc plcnte at cll tic.ec, both on en annual 1 -. t a iercraging basis and on an i.creidate basis; cnd so I chink I would. i like a little moro cinrificatien which I didn't find -- although L U [ I admit I haven't read cvory werd in the PSAR's. But as to how 13 thct will ha managed t.nd hit ahs intent of the operators is, 17 r

(

13 i I an ascu~ing that, as stated in the PSAR and -also in ,u le jthe sm?ndmants to it, that Motropolitan Ediscn will have the 0 L to pr.clusive oparating recpencibility for both plants. They have 'Lt fer Ec.1 new, and I acs=a chey will hcVe it fcr No . 2. 21 1 I . i I also was a little curious as to what scrt cf releases t 22 i l lof the effluence will be mcda; vhether they will be. batcl wise se 23 dltbat the average annual may take place ovc. a pericd of five or 24 b O isix dayo over the ccurce of the yecr; or whether this is going

5 i;

i eo L h n i h _x; A

l 52 1 to be spread out vary smcothly over the whole year, or just how 2 ! this is proposcd to be handled. 3 I gather from the storage facilitics that are avail-( able that it could be relesed in rather short periods, and then 4 5 have 1cng pericds at which thera was no release. s I can't remember whether in the hearings on the Three t q!;Eile Island No. 1 we brought up the quartion of the exclusion 7 e jaroa which includes, as I undarstand it, water which is open 1 for boating, fishing and so on by the public. Now in some cases, a O 10 off my local waters, the Coast Guard has the responsibility for I 3 pa rolling ucters and that sort of thing. It was not clear to f 12 me whether you have a Ccmmonvealth polica boat there or whether P f' {lg 33 the Metropolitan Edison Conipany will have some kind of continual 14 surveillance er what. In other words, what is the jurisdiction? i i is, P! hat is the arrangament? And how do you expect to keep people 1e Iout of the area if it is necessary at any time? 17 I had a couple of other questions. They are rather I lal minor. Maybe it is not worth bringing them up, i 39 One of them was, we wore just curious as to why Burns t 20 l and Roo has a different design for taking ' care of the tendons 21 than the Skiller Associates had, when we were assured last timo i ~ it was the best way. I am sure they are perfectly adequate. 22 L 23 This is just a matter of curiosity. 1 24 I think that was all I had -- except I also had a I 73 i question about the dikes. I didn't quite get the sa=e impressior, I L y y; r e-O

i i P 53 r 1 ,that Cr. Wolman did, that you were going to sandbag them. But i jI was a little curious as to how you would, if you are going to 2 3 baef the.? up, whether the foundations as laid down now or as I { they havn been laid down -- I acsume mayba they are already in -- 4 jwhether they were adequate to take care of this beefing-up or 5 G what. 0 9 I a2 all through now. 3 D2 WOL'iAli: May I just say on ths.t, looking at the e!,evations of your dikes was wast led m2 to the fealing that you 3 qdesign or your peak flood is going to top them. I was interested -- i; I l

and I don't want to pursue it here -- I was interested in how 3

l r

you wo'lld meet that over-topping.

By accessibility? By i.; i 'j helicopters? Boats? It struck me aa. i3 rather difficult opera-m o ja h tion when you are ecming dawn with 1.5 nillion CPU. i: As I l I l'ccy, I don't vant to purcue it here, but I would like to be 3 I, 1 etlightened. [i g g g CHIJ.E172! EO'ID: ',1 I would like to ocho and emphaci::e a llittle more than curiccity abcut the reasons for otherwise rathe2 3g I

unaxplcinedly saying grouted strands are good; this engineering g

i 20,jgroup fav rs them; and the other engineering group favored ii I'cdjusttble degrees strands; and the virtues of thoco were rather 21 i extensively portrayed in another proceeding g These grouted atrands we enticipate have g.rcat virtues, 23 i 1 but wa didn't percalve them as clearly thus fari is ttat right? 2 I 25 DR. WILLIAME: That's right. It is like sont auto.T.otive n; n o \\) L s }. e<* t I h 1 a

y 54 1 }'ongineer scying the thingc the engina ic better in the rear than 4 2 i jin the front. But I would like to know why. 4 h 3 ER. N ?imLL: Kr. Chilirman, I thought it might be 4 vell to determine hora at the prehocring conference, in connec-5 ! tic-. with cumula tive effectc, *. hethor the applican t has any doubt ij 5, hcbout the lecal escocts of ths,c; cr are you prepared to treat il 7

tha effect of the effluenc2 both to the air r.d to the water as E j thay relcte to the e

tisting enviren: cent, total environnent, lie S 'jinclu6'ng the pressnt d'.cch?.rge f rc:a e:<icting nucic1r power plants

!I b {in this vicinity? Or are you tretting this matter as related 1: gonly to the effect of this. plant itself, or thic unit itself, o a L ilepte.rt frca ths cus.ulc.tive sspects? h j Mn. CHA?ro7F: Are you acres.c3.ng that quastion to 13 i ira for ancrarina ncu? l i l 1-2 MP.. CJJIPEELL: i 1 I ns addrecsing it to the applicant. i " jIthoughtperhapsiftherewasdcubtw: could clear it up new. l 1 'A. CHAFro?r: I think you cre quite corract in identit i M fying what ecy be any question that might become apparent and the i '9 l,way in which we might like to respond to tha question at the i 2i i public hearing. And thet is that the applicant of course is i t I Ii rcquired to demonstrate thz.t his propoted facility can be con-22 {. etructed so that it will be opercted tiithin the regulatory

• 11nito establiched by the U. S. Atomic Energy Cennission in 23 24

'10 CFR Part 20. And I think we will be prepared to show that i ., _ l " hwe can do that. h j sy -ano a I li O

1 ? 55 l l t. f I think our application doaonstratas that, and I think N 2 q the Staff Ivaluation and the Acas report ccnfirm this; and we 'lr3would be glad to discuca any c: poet of the plan which relatea 3 't 1 4 l5 to th at. ~ il fg

9 Cn the other hand, I think that we should not bear the 1

burden in this kind of & procseding to defend the adequacy of I e .I i

- i. Part 20 in the light cf X numbt cf plants that might be built i

i, 7 :>in any on2 particular loc:tien other than our cem; and I think l a 1 that this le the question you wcra probably being c little senci, t ' tiva to. And I shr.ra thct concarn. g i 1 Cn th2 cther hcnd, for the infor.mation of the Board, F I thin't ws are prcpared to ha cc helpful c3 we can. But I do a l think the isaus befora the Board f : thic particular caso is:

3 Wi?.1 this particular facility, tog

ther with the sister facility,

{ n i l cn ths cane Islcnd, be able to oparrte within the applicable i regulctory limits? And vc tiill cddracc curselvas to that par-t- i, ticular quer tion. Well,Idon'twanttoleavetheimpres-l

3 M'1. CE

!'32LL :

j sion th:t I am raicing a d0ubt in =y or the Scard's mind as to g [ '. Whather cr not the burden thould include the recognition of exist-2-0 ing environmentc, uhatever it rey be. I raised the question l 7 i l becauce it appocred to na frc:n what Dr. h' clean said that he is 22 !.j seeking infer:.ation which doecn't precently appear in the docu-23 jtenttryevideneshora, and which ycu ccy not, up to this tine a li n p at least, have intended to have available at the hearing. And F I .l. i r oog. 'l. {. i.. s A _

i .w. g t i; I just fcit it wac appropriate to try to cero in on that at this 1 prchcaring conferenc2 se the Board woule know what they might P [ be abic to expact fron you by way cf evidence as to this matter. 3 ( l This is rather c bacic quscticn in both the legal 4 s h sense anc. in the cons of policy by the Co=ission. It has come h j! up in nome other hearings in rather not indirect but not sub-3 i i stantial wayc. I cimply wanted to find out what the applicant's F l reiction to that was. And I didn't renlly cet it from what you e i 9 ' caid.

o If I understocd that you said, it is that you consider qyour ecgal burden cnly to be lim'.ted to v.eeting ths requirements ii

• cf that sectic.a of ths. rcgulations to which you referred as to 12

' a single facility under an application ar,-d not to relate to the g 33 l impact of addition.1 effluence to the air or the utter as a L renult of Edding to an alrondy s::isting facility or facilities i3 g in that area. Is ths.t your position? 6 i7 ; K3.. CHAEOFF : In thic particulcr prococ#ing it is -- i3 : as I understand it, the issue is: Can we demonstrate that we a meet thosa limits that apply to this particular plint in this .t 20 particular location? L I think the question that you are addressing yourcelf 23 I to is whether er not the regulatory limits that the AEC has 2., C'- developed Edequately anticipate or recogni::e 20 fact that the 23 j environment may receiva effluence from a numbar of plants up and p 23 down a given river or in the general area. And Dr. Wolman did r { 9 L .m m, =-%--- m= . = - = =

• i 57 1

i refer -- and it did trouble me the way he asked the question -- lI i!it did refer to cumulativa effects on the river, including Cal-2 U t(- vert Cliffs, which is many miles dcunstream from this particular 3 t (~ 0plcnt. 4 tl t! 5 I think it is not our burden to, in this case, to 'i 1 s d denonstrate the sufficiency of the AEC regulations which are it purported to adequr_.toly protect the public health and safety, a : recogni=ing the fact that a number of plants may be releacing

t..

9.effluSDCe Within the p&rmiSSible limits. i to ' DR. WOL7Ati: May I clarify how I happened to go so far d2enstrecu to Calvert Cliffs by simply rer.inding you that it ti 7 tr ; would be natural for ce to look et the fact that the major tribu*l i,. 13 taiy to the Bay is the one on which tha== particular plants are ! i 14 sected. L is q And secondly, and here uc have the situation of a 16 rather interesting nature, not discounting in any fashion your i; j 17 legal position, on which I have no competence - you have the [ is ii interesting situation of having two plants to be owned largely .lI'

and operated by the same owner or the same operator on the 39 zo, same site whero you have in fact joint discharges; in some 2;

instances physically joint, and in others hardly separable. 22 j Again, a; I say, I am not pcscing on whether or not I(2 23 i this is your respcnsibility. 24 MR. CHARMO"F: I think Dr. Williams had mentioned that P a! Part 20 does by its terms embrace the situation that we are facert i i p l s, 5 - sr0 n P i l i p 4 _

58 I with directly; namely, having two units at the sane site and 2 tha limits applicable to those; so that that circumstance of a I- \\ 3 1 your question -- it in clearly relevant and we will be perfectly I ( 4, happy to treat with thct. U 5 g It is the brctder rtage of your question that I suspec u I i t was troublesema to Mr. CampbcIl and is troublescwe to rae, in g r ( terms of trying to dispoca of it ir. this particular proceeding .n, s which is limitad in scope. ? i 9.' As I ucy, howevar, we will be glad to discuss it with m l' j ic 1 you to the e.v. tent we cre abic to de so, and provide any enlight- 'k t 1 encent the.t we can do co with regerd to this question. But I 3, y a il F

! think if we were to do se, we would point o :t and characterize 12 a

! it as i.eing perhtps outsida or irrelevant in terms of this I 33 t ipartictler proceeding. u i 1 1 1 3s But neverthela.:s, to the extent that this proccading I

c re

r_ int en uncontested ona, I would think that via would be glad to give you whatever enli;;htenment we may have to offer.

t a t 18 MR. CAIG23LL: Mr. Chairman, may I inquire if this v [ ,g matter has been considered by the staff? Not neceEsarily in r ja ' this ca.ss. But is there any work being done by the staff in L l 21 ', this rEghrd? Or has the matter not come up? 22 MR. NED'.N: This matter is being considered by the J l 23 ; s tcf f c r by th a Co. mission. k But we would agree with the appli-i 24 cant, at least as we believe he has stated, that it would not i exactly be apropos as an issue before this Board in this 25 ; t 4 g' f? s,; a ) m 4

59 1 procacding. i 1 DR. WOI.I'AN : Even if I were to insist that I would 3 like to be enliohtened? U { 4 MR. NIE*ni: lie would discuss the matter if the Board 'uculd like to hear discussion on it, of course, 5 CHAIM M BOND: e f The Board inJiter the applicant.3 and i the staff to provido state: cents of position or tentative pocitions ?. t l

upon tho.7c mattcrs.

I believe that is the unanimous view of this e I t s Bca-d and it alternates. t ic MR. N"CGE: Fine, Mr. Chairman. i 33 MR. C2DBEIJ.,: t I probcbly wouldn't understand it if thdy I e ;j explained it. I was just trying, Mr. Chairman, to get the point { clear at the prehearing conference as re-n the extent of what this Ecard was es:pseting the applicant 2nd the staff tc present in i.I is this regard. I think the positions have baan state.d now, and I I ic a= satisfied, t i 17 l CHAIRIGli BCND: It is not the expectaticn of this Board h to try and pass -judgment on the legality.of the Ccumission's L g i g j rules and regulations in these areas. i a MR. MURRAY: That was the understanding I wantad to i 21 get, Mr. Chairman. i l l CHAIRMMI BOUD: 22 (' The questions that have been asked have covered almost all matters I had on my list, which was E3 , greatly reduced in our pre-conference discussions among us. 24 2b! The one technical matter I should like to hear or seo 1 i t, s.w., e 2 l y,

6 60 1 and have an e):pansion by the staff cf its discussion of the "'~ ~ 2 i moderator coefficient, which concindoc rather inconclusively. 3 Perhaps you can add scue to the reasons for the position, 4 ! whatever it is that you arrive at. 5 A specific question I chculd like also to address to l 6 l t' 2 Oppliccnta cr.d the s tafL ".o y o u ig,- c current or accit2.onal i 7 infCD30 tion indicating thG VClidity of CESteption2 With reference al to accident analyses, particularly the iodine plate-out asst =p-r iI ticn? If co, we would be intaracted in having that provided; i s 'cnd your viewc on it, U2 i l J 1 Thero appatr to be n0 othar quoctions. 9 ~" i 12 Dn. ERIGGS: I hnve ene moro. This in related to L i 13 icther quaetionc th2t have been arked, I think. 14 There is a conitcring program in effect at the cite u ] noa, I believe the PEZ.E indicatss, and it does give some recults G i f j' cf thiE progrEm. I thin?c in the discussion it might be halpful, M i 17jiftheraareLdditionalrecultsavailable, to present soma of h li la ' than and to give more information abcut the distribution of i o ' radicactivity; that io, whtt isotopec are there at the procent 20 ! time other than potaccium that are centributing significantly I i 11 to tho activities? 22 r 7_ That's the only one I have. 23 CHAIRMAh ECMD* That seets to complete the questions 24 by the Board. It brings un to Item 5, Post-Hearing Trecadures. 25. And under that category, an well as undar category six, I s..( f' Q O a U i mm-- -

I L l 61 I r I traditionally it is fe.und that those are matters which better 2 can be dattrmined at the hearing nearing the clece thereof. 3 Ic thero agrcament 'Aith that? I ( 4 g MR. CliA220FI': Yes, sir. l 5 i MR. NCa*'JI: Yes, sir. il h 9 CHAIR ~CJ1 BOUD: There appears to bn. s b l h'i One other matter which on behalf of the Ecard we shall 7 t a prec2nt. It is Enticipated that the Me:aberc of the Board mEy i Iwishtomr_hsavisittothesiteoftheproposedplant. L 9 It is ]notourdecireorwichthattherebeanescortedteuroranything ie 6 I . of that nature. EO.mver, if we may have assurance of access i. t I 1thrcugh proper local channels to the cite, we would hope to be i ;s ] there, assuming the weather and other cone.litionc permit, , g on the i3 .i; Sunday af ternoon preceding thic heering, there to drive upon, 2.5 a a 1perhaps to get out and walk, and to lock ut what we may see at t .t ,c -'the sitc. i i j MR. CIildiNOFF: That wculd be perfcctly appropriate. I. f We will advise the people at the site to e::pect you, ( 3 i '- ;\\ CIIAIR3'AN LOND: Thank you. i .c ,i U 20 g Arc there any other matters appropriate for comment it ily or discussion at this time? k y-I 22 There appear to be none. The purposes of this pre-23 hearing conference appear to have been accomplished. Accordingly, i i 'the I. earing will be convened at the time and plae specified in u 9 ,the Notice. And until that tico and place, this proceeding now 25 a r s.U: m e t ja ( i u j(**

• sm-

---=-w. ,..,,,,..}}