ML19249A128

Transcript of 790731 Meeting in Washington,Dc.Pp 1-42

ML19249A128
Person / Time
Site:	Crane
Issue date:	07/31/1979
From:	Gilinsky V, Hendrie J, Kennedy R NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:
Shared Package
ML19249A130	List: ML19249A128 ML19249A148 ML19249A158
References
REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 7908210067
Download: ML19249A128 (42)

Text

.

l-)]) g,

,j

_7 6

i

..s i

!**f e),n' T % 1 -i l I gn. -

p %de

, f L'-

g g 'l l;.;j u...x i J""

l 9;

t NUCLE AR REGUL ATORY COMMISSION e

IN THE MATTER OF:

PUBLIC 5EIT!NG CONTINUATION OF DISCCSSION OF IS5UIS IN pzs;Aa7 07 73I_1 g

Piece - Washington, D. C.

I i

O cte. Tuesday, 31 July 1979 peg,,

t_4; f

l g4'z O A 4 I

...e-e-.:

i

x : :

I ACE - FEDER.C. REPORTERS. D C.

Oltd Repor:ers 7908210p 9-7 l

m sec n c ::irei 3,.,,,

d //

1 Wcsningen, O.C. 20C0 i NATICNWICE COVERAGE - D AILY

1 DISCLAIMER This is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on Tuesday, 31 July 1979 in the Commissions's effices at 171i H Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.

C.

The This transcript meeting was open to public attendance and observation.

has not been reviewed, corrected, or edited, and it may conta.1 inaccuracies.

The transcript is intended solely for general informational purposes.

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

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

No pleading or other paper may be filed with the Commission in any proceeding as the result of or addressed to any statement or argument contained herein, except as the Commission may authorize.

=

nAS 842 o

2 i

f i

1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA i

2l NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i

1 3;

4 PUBLIC MEETING i

5 CONTINUATION OF' DISCUSSION OF ISSUES IN RESTART OF TMI-l i

i l

6' i

i 7l i

8' Roca 1137 l

1717 H Street, N.

W.

9 Washington, D.

C.

I 10 6 Tuesday, 31 July 1979 11 The Commission met, pursuant to notice, at 1:10 p.m.

12 j BEFORE:

73 DR. JOSEPH M.

HENDRIE, Chairman j

14 VICTOR GILINSKY, Commissioner l

15 !

RICHARD T. KENNEDY, Commissioner i

I 16 i PETER A.

BRADFO RD, Commissioner 17 !

JOHN F. AHEARNE, Commissioner i

18 P RESENT :

t 19 !

Messrs. Bickwit, Ostrach, and Crane.

I 20 2i 22 23 24 Ac.e. cum accor.rs. inc.

25 842 046 a

dK 6245-3 HEER l

t-1 mte 1 l

1 :!

P ROCEEDINGS 2'

(1:10 p.m.)

2i CHAIFLN901 HENDRIE:

Why don ' t we kick of f.

The 4.l subject is the TMI-l order.

1 I

5-We have some comments from the general counsel to i

I 6

assist us in (stting on with the discussion of the order.

I 7

think, Len, do you want to tell us where you have gone here, 5j astd then we will move on from there?

4 9

MR. BICKWIT:

Yes.

In this memo, we have attempted 10 to summarize the results of Friday's discussion and draf t 11 l some language in accordance with agreements that were reached.

12' Where no agreements were reached, we tried to draf t up the 13 1 options.

la We have also included some options for the items 15 that were not addressed on Friday.

16 As the first order of business, we suggest that a draft order which would extend the period of time for issuance

'^

of the supplementary order to the July 2nd order, on the assumption that you won' t finish up by the expiration period 22 or the recuired period for a new order, which is temo rrcw.

21 The draf t order is Attachment A to the memo.

And we have a 22 few proposed additions to that draf t order, if the Commission 23 is included to go ahead with something of that nature.

21 COMMISSICNER GILINSKY :

Was that on the assumption

_.,m.,,, a w w s..,c.

S that we continue with the research briefing, that you didn' t 842 047

m t'e 2

I 4

i i

1l think we could make it?

2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

I'm not sure whether we will make i

2!

it by going through the af ternoon.

I have had some expression 4

j of interest and a little time to think about some of these i

5' things, and we might or might not reach a majority decision l

6 on an order if we cancel the briefing.

But I don't have any 7

place to take the budget.

Si I think we need to go ahead with that briefing, to 9l have such discussion as we can reasonably have between now and I

10l 2:30, and to continue with TMI-l meetings, which I will Ild sandwich in.

There may be some further work the counsel could 12 do for us leading out of today 's discussion, just as the 13 memoranda in hand flowed out of the last discussion.

U COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

It seems to me there's a good 15 deal to be said.

We ought to try to make these deadlines if 16 we possibly can, auf I think there is as much money involved here as in the research budget.

It would seem to me no t inappropriate to push on.

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Well, since I have reason to 22 believe that there won't be a unanimity of view on the 2I Commission, and since on other occasions and on other subjects 22 we have all variously deferred to one ano ther where somebody 22 wanted more time to mull over circumstances, why, I don't really 22 feel that we cca make it.

.... %.m =,2c r w.s. m e.

c What I do have in mind -- : don't know whe ther we 842 048

mte 3 5

l I

I can manage the meeting temorrow or Thursday -- we will if we 2;

can manage it.

But in particular, what do people's schedules 1

3i look like on Friday afternoon?

Now, Peter has got to go away

'l 4 i Thursday afterncon and Friday morning, but could be back.

l 5l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

I would suggest temorrow, if i

6 we could.

We're scheduled temorrow af ternoon for a preliminary I

7 budget markup.

And I would suggest, as far as I am concerned, 1

3 )

before doing any preliminary budget narkup, I would at least 91 like to take a half a day to think through, having heard all 10 of the budget reviews.

So I would suggest tomorrow af ternoon 11 ll is good.

12 :

COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

I can ' t do that.

I've got 13 to be in East Lansing tomorrcw night -- no, I'm sorry.

That's la Thursday night.

15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

So tomorrow afternoon, as I recall, 16 it is Wednesday af ternocn.

I think everybody is here.

Why don' t we try that?

'?

Dick, we're talking about further meetings on TMI

?

and an expression of interest en pressing fo rwa rd.

It looks 20 as though we could put in some substantial time tomorrow 21 af terncon by doing without that markup session or all or a good 22 piece of it.

Is that eco scon for you?

22 COMMISSICNER KENNEDY:

I don't know what my calendar 2

shows.

O the rwis e it's fine.

.n. w,v am a,,, me.

25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

I think if you can manage it, O /(C 84oL o

mt'e 4 l

6 1

1 1

Peter, let me know as soon as you can what the difficulties 2

are on Friday.

i 3i COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

If the rest of you can be 4j here, I can get back.

I 5

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Okay, let's try and do that.

6.

Sam, let us note here that we will go to TMI-l 7l tomorrow afternoon and Friday afternoon.

8i Now, I guess the Friday af ternoon session, Sam, why 9 ';l don' t we put budget markup session or TMI-1, because if we

'l 10l don't need it for one we will ne9d it for the other.

And if 11 I you have trouble with that, Peter, why, give me a holler.

12 Vic, you are going to be away Thursday afternoon as 13 well, but you are going to be back on Friday?

Il COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

I don't think so.

15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Well, why don't we go ahead.

I 16 think it would be useful as-a first step, since, as I say, I am not inclined to think that it will take us a couple of 2

more days discussion.

I think we ought to amend as we see fit the extension order to the loth and agree on the language of 2C that, and turn to the other issues back in the base order.

2' Len, did you say you had things to add to it or 22 subtract from it?

22 MR. BICKWIT:

Yes.

As drafted, the reference in the 22 first sentence to "further crder" may be confusing when it's a. n fr* 3 r 36 G eoc F *f r $ i nc.

t( 25 put together with the reference in the second sentence to, O k,b

mte 5 7 1 1 1l further order, since we mean something dif ferent by that. So 2' to differentiate, we would say at the end of the first sentence, i 2' "further order of the Commission itself permitting res tart," 'l period, and then strike "further" in the second sentence. So 4 i 5 that the second sentence would read: "Provided that it would f 6 also issue an order within 30 days." And in the third sen-7. tence strike "further" again. l 3: COMMISSIONER KENNEDY : I would have struck most of e 7 l the sentence. It doesn' t even necessarily represent an adequate 10l description of the facts. J l l MR. BICKWIT: Our feeling was that it did. 12; COMMkSSIONERKENNEDY: I think all it says is the 13 Commission has not yet completed resolution of all the legal I* and technical issues involved, accordingly. I don't wish to 'S characterize the progress or lack thereof, nor do I think it ,6 relevant. COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I have no problem with '2 striking that out. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Any obj ection to doing without 22 " substantial practice"? "The Commission has nct yet completed, 2' accordingly," et cetera. Goed enough? 22 Le t 's see. Can I ask for a decision cf the 22 Commissio n? CCMMISSICNER KENNEDY : Are we finished with that ..,.: m, v aaccr, w :.c. 25 sentence? I have ano ther change. e<. u

mte 6 I 8 I a I 1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE : Go ahead. 2 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: I think verbosity is no t 3i needed, e i ther. I think the last sentence need only say: 4 "Accordingly. the Commission hereby extends the period of time. " i 5' CRAIRMAN HENDRIE: What would you reccmmend now? I 6 "Accordingly, the Commission" -- 7i COMMISSIONER KENNEDY. " Extends the period of time t 8 until Friday, August 10th. l 9) CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Objections from anyone? The 1 10l legal staff, Ccmmmissioners, what have you? a 11 ! MR. BICKWIT: No, that is perfectly legal. 12 l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: So now it is not only factually 13 " co rrec t, but legal. u la CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Let's see. Do we have any other 15 additions or subtractions? i 16 (No response.) CHAIR 21AN HENDRIE: Let's see. We will need this ~3 order -- I think we're going to need this order, because by the time you get there, even if we were in complete agreement 22 tomorrow af ternoon -- I think we ought to just vote for it with 27 the understanding that if it becomes unnecessary because we 22 all agree with one or another of this this afternoon in 22 15 minutes, why, it wcn' t go out. 21 On that basis, I would ask us to -- all these in sch tf 34 R exr***$. i nc. 25 favor of the extension in the order as amended, to indicate g47 052

mte 7 l 9 1-by saying ay'a. 2 (A chorus of ayes.) 2' CE AIRMAN HENDRIE: So ordered. i, 4 Now, back to substantive matters. Let's see. Of 5l the issues listed w= have hacked away at, we had a sort of l 6' tentative agreement on the language involved in the Commission J l 7 review of licensing board decisions on cross-examination. On 3 i discovery it was kind of a split p roposition. It was a 2-1-1 . i. 9 ! division of the house. 1 10! Why don't we review that and see if ';e can either 11 d confirm in the 'aay that came out or come ta another decision? 12 ; Len, would you help us distinguish between the options, and 13 ' let's see where people would like to move. 'A MR. OSTRACH: There are three options on discovery. 15 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY : Before we get to this, one ,d ' minor thing. In passing by the language which is included in A and B of Roman II, I assume that we are not signifying 'I assent to or acquiescence in this as language. I am no t prepared to give that. 2: CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Certainly no t in any finally and 2? irrevocable sense. 22 COMMISSICNER KENNEDY: Fine. That's all I wanted to 22 know. Tha t 's fine. 21 CCMMISSIONER AHEARNE : But Dick, do you have scme .,zwuv uccr m. -c. 25 significant subs tantive matters? 17 053

mte 8 10 i 1+ COMMISSIONER KENNED'l-I want to have the opportunity 2' to look at it, which I have not had. 3 MR. CSTRACH: There are three option; for discovery. i t 2 The first would be to compile a repository of all information i 5 about the Three Mile Island accident and to require parties 6 in the TMI proceeding to resort first to that information i I 7 compilation before resorting to any discovery against one a Sl a no ther. Any party who then does wishi.to employ the 9 discovery process against another party would have to satisfy i 10l the licensing board that the information he or seeks is rele-il vant to the proceeding, is no t available in the data compila-12 tion, and that permitting the discovery 'ill not result in an 13 undue delay or impose an undue burden on any party. 14 And at the last session we discussed that our 15 intention in using the word " undue" there was delay or burden M out of proportion to the relevance of the information sought. The second option would be to provide tha t the Commission's normal rules for discovery in adjudicatory I# proceedings would apply to this TMI-l proceeding. It would 22 also create a compilation which wculd be available for the 21 parties, and it would also provide that it would be an adequate 22 response to a discovery request to say that the information 2' sought is available in the compilation, provided the person 21 asking for the request provides suf ficient information to .nur uaw er c. 25 locate the document. 842 0c34

mte 9 i 11 I 'l This would then be concluded by saying the licensing 2' bo ard may, and when appropriate should, in the interest of 2: j us tice, lind t the extent or control the sequence of discovery i .I j to prevent undue delay or imposition of an undue burden on any 4 5 f party. That is a power that it already has under the 6 Commission's regulations. 7, COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Is that a direct cite to EI the regulations? .i 9 MR. CSTRACH: It is not a direct quotation from the 'l 10 ! regulations. I believe each of the words is in the sections II I of the regulations that we refer to. W.e move them around a 12 little bit. 13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Could you explain that a little la bit more when you say you move them around? l 'i l MR. CSTRACH: I can read you the regulations. It 2740(c) provides for protective orders. It says that" "In a discovery proceeding he presiding officer may make any order 2 which justice requires to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression or undue burden or expense." 2 COMMISSICNER 3RADFORD: How has " embarrassment" been 21 defined? No, don' t worry. That is just an example that comes 22 to mind. 22 MR. CSTRACH: The licensing board has power to 22 provide the discovery, except certain matters may not be ..e 2M *f 31 2WGC r '*'t. i"C. 25 inquired into. The scope of the discovery may be limited ec 842 055

mte 10 1 12 I u! 1 '! certain matters or the discovery won' t be on certain subjects. 2740(d) provides that: "The presiding officer, for 2 the convenience of parties and witnesses, and in the interest l of justice, may control the order by which methods of discovery 4 5 or the sequence by which methods of discovery may be used." 6 MR. I . WIT: I think the short answer is when we 7 :i use the word "may" taat is parroting the order; when we say i I 3^ "should" that is going a slight step beyond. 9 ! COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: What's the difference between i l 10 ] the second and third? Il ! MR. OSTRACH: The last sentence. 12 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: No. 3 simply lacks the admonition 13 ' that the licensing board may and when appropriate, et cetera, 14 et cetera. 15 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY : I knew. But I'm asking if it that is really a dif ference, because the regula tions call f or tha t a nyway. 2 MR. BICKWIT: The regulations say "may. " This says "where appropriate, should." 2: COMMISSIONER KENNEDY : You visualize that as a Oi significant difference? 22 MR. SICKWIT: No. 22 MR. CSTRACH: Its only s ignificance might lia in the Il fact that in normal practice licensing boards, like federal

re v uew,, t x 25 courts, do no t participate a - all in discovery proceedings 056 BAL

mte 11 13 1 I unless the parties really bring an issue to them, and they view their role as essentially passive. By pointing out to a 4 2 licensing board the availability of these alternatives, it .l4j might be more willing to take an active role in monitoring 5 discovery. 6 But certainly it already has each of these powers 7, and there sas no intent here to give it any powers that it 8 f otherwise would not have. 1 4l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY : It seems kind of odd to be 10.! reminding them of the rules, unless we are in fact instructing i II them to take certain actio ns. I mean, do you interpret this I2 ' as an instruction or just a reminder? I3 a y!R. BICKWIT: An instruction, where appropriate. 14 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Where appropriate in the 15 interest of justice. u COMMISSIGNER KENNEDY: There's an interesting column in this morning's " Washington Post" concerning the word ~ " appropriate." It is instructive in itself. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Other comments? 5 Well -- T COMMISSICNER AHEARNE: Scmeone writing in to us, 22 bringing the board in into the issue of trying to decide ques-22 tions of when discovery should be allowed and to what extent would, rather than expedite, could very well just bring cn a ~ ,.. :,., aw..,.:. c new rorass of paper and slew chings down. <} Ohl i o

mte 12' 14 i i 1I MR. L ' NIT: We addressed that in our previous 2.' memo, and it does add and subtract. In our view, it would i 2i speed things up rather than slow them down. It is not as if 'l, j the board played no function in discovery and the rules are 4 5 no motions or pieces of paper in the absence of this. It i6' deals with it at a different stage. l 7, COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Let me ask: If this is in aj f act not a reminder, but an instruction, why would you give 7j dif ferent instructions to this proceeding than in other J, 10l proceedings? a 11 l MR. BICKWIT: My answer would be that, first'of all, 12 ! it is an instruction that I would be comfortable giving in i 13 every proceeding. la Secondly, in this case there is no denying that there 15 is sentiment on the Comnission to move as quickly as possible, 16 in light of the f act that this plant is down and there is feel- '7 ing that if it should operate, the proceeding ought to move as quickly as possible to so allow it. MR. OSTRACH: There is the point that this is a plant 2: shut down subject to an immediate order. These people have 21 not had the benefit of a hearing before the crder ordering 22 shutdcwn was conducted. This is simply a reminder, if any, to the board that 21 it shculd keep that fact in r.ind. .e.J r *f as M eCor *t's. M gt oughh O 25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: That reinforces r U

mte 13 15 t Il that the counsel's acceptance of that principal as a general 2 principal is a wise one. I couldn' t imagine distinguishing i 2; this from other cases in the interest of justice. i 4 COMMISSICNER BRADFORD: That was exactly my diffi-5 culty. It really dces seem to me that unless one is somehow i 5 underlining this proceeding and saying, in this one we want 7 you to emphasize this section more than you normally do, there 3l just isn' t any reason for including it. Now, I do see it t 94 working both ways. That is, if you pick through the right i 10, phrases you get something to the effect that the board may, a I when it's appropriate in the interest of justice, prevent Il 12 ; burdens in discovery of any party against any other party. 13 And there,are obvious situations where they shall. i. That doesn't speak to the question of whether the I5 hearing will move more or less quickly, but whether one or 4 more parties will be more or less burdened. But that tco is already in the rules. ? 22 2! 21

AF. ** y Ef 0C Ut's.. "C.

25 842 059

CR 6245 42 HEER/pv 16 .i I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE : I think there are distinguishing 2, features that make the promptness aspect, bring it a little bit 3 more to the fore here. The normal CP case or OL case, why, the J j parties are well aware when these things will arrive at appro-4 !,priate stages for hearing. So, discovery could be carried out 6, over a reasonable period while other things are going on. That 7 may or may not be the case here. 8! We'are sort of starting from scratch, and I at least i l ' ave expressed on several occasions concern over the length. of 9 10 time that apparently is required in this proceeding or will be Il ' required in this proceeding to come to a decision. It seems 12 to me that whether it is up, down, or sideways, that we owe,asa 13 expeditious a decisionmaking process to the parties as is con-U sistent with fair and adequate treatment of the issues. 15 ' Let me resound the 2-1-1 split, since there is an 16 additional vote, and see if I can devleop a direction out of i7 this. 'I Vic, you didn' t get your t o cents ' worth in before. COMMISSIONER GILINSKY : Well, I would think the usual X rules would apply. I certainly don't object to a general state-21 ment in the order saying we would like this to be a proceeding 22 which is handled with some discipline, but as for the specific 22 questions of discovery, I would treat it as we have handled other proceedings. _a.;.cm =,oer m m. CHAIR. MAN HENDRIE: So that would put you at three Or 842 060

pv2 17 i I perhaps two. 2 '; Okay, we have managed, then, either a 2-2-1 or 2-1-2. 2 Could I encourage, in the interest of seeing whether we could 4 move this point, would people be interested in converging on 5 Option 2, since it is in the middle? i 6 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY : I would not. 1 7, CHAIRMAN HENDRIE : Let me sample the other side of l 3 ! the thing. 1 9 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: What were you doing? 10 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I was trying to see whether people II i would be interested in moving off the extremes toward the middle. I2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Toward Option 37 13 ' CHAIRMAN HENDRIE : Toward Option 2. You're trying to Il count me into a corner. And Commissioner Kennedy will continue 15 to feel that the first option is the right one. 16 Do I get anf other sentiment? I John has stood there since the beginning, so I guess '2 he will continue. Vic, did you ever decide between 2 and 3? 2C COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, I would go with 3. 2I COMMISSICNER BRADFORD: Are either of you interested 22 in moving up to 2, to see if I can develop a consensus in t'he 22 middle? 21 COMMISSICNER 3 RADFORD : I would be intersted in kncw-ct Mera' 2eCCr*tf5 i a C. ing what John is considering. 842 001 25

pv3 1 18 I t CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: If he goes away, that could develop 2 a majority somewhere else. l 2i COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I guess I should have met with .I 4 l him before the meeting. 5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. 2 still seems to me to be 6 the appropriate approach. Perhaps Peter and I can meet after 7' the meeting. But I would still think 2 is the right way. 3 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, let's see if I can' t pry 9 somebody loose to move toward the center. 10{ COMMISSIONER GILINSKY : Well, it's obviously going to 11 be 3, with or without that sentence. We just have to work it i t 12 l out. 13 CHAIFLNGS HENDRIE: Or the first option. 14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: That seems kind of unlikely; 15 ' isn ' t it? 16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE : I don't kncw. It is 2-1-2. If 17 you have a reason why it should ntore likely move down than up, why, help me along. Well, let's leave it 2-1-2, for the moment. Ecw about the sItisfactory ccmpletion of required 21 actions. We agreed last time that the condition that obtains 22 for an OL is a reasonable way to leave it. And this is counsel's version of the right way to reflect that. 22 The immediate effectiveness question -- n vers %wn m. e 25 MR. BICKWIT: Mr. Chairman, before you move on, let 842 062

f pv4 1 19 3 i 1 me just make two points about that language so you are clear. 2 ' In the draf t there is reference to the fact that this satisfac-1 2 l tory completion shall not be an issue in the hearing, a nd we 1 4' understand this language as modifying that language, so that it i 5 would be possible for this to become at issue at the hearing at 6, the board's discretion. i 7 And secondly, it is not precisely the same as OL i sl treatment, the way we had drafted it, because the OL rule that 9 l we are referencing allows for operation prior to satisfactory 10 ] completion of some items, and we had understood in your previ-11 ! ous discussions that you wanted completion as a condition to i 12 ' operation. 13., CCMMISSIONER KENNEDY: That's not what I visualized. 14 As a matter of fact, I wrote in my notes that we were going to 15 proceed on the same basis as with an OL. 16 MR. BICKWIT: It was unclear to us. That is why I 17 raised the point. It was unclear to us exactly where the Com- ': mission was. COMMISSIONER KENNEDY : At least now my view is clear. COMMISSIONER BRADFORD : In the case of an OL, they can 21 proceed without satisfactory completion; that is, completion

2 satisfactory to the s taf f.

So, you' re talking here not about

having -- or in the CL case, not about having the beard be 22 satisfied, but having the staff be satisfied?

"Ct If tf 48 At00 f *t's i.'C. 25 MR. BICKWIT: Yes. Unless the board wants to be 842 063

pv5 20 I satisfied, in which case it can be. 2 Let me read fran 50. 57 (b). It says: "Each operating 3 license will includs appropriate provision with respect to any a uncompleted items of construction, and such limitations or con-ditions as are required to ensure that operations during the 6 period of the completion of such items will not endanger public 7 health and safety. It is contemplated that operation would be a allowed prior to completion." .l 9l COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: The way I understood where we l 10 ; were last time is that we were putting the board on the same II relationship to operations as a board in an OL proceeding, but 12 l' that as a separate matter we have said that the staff had to be 13 satisfied,as to the completion of the actions. And in that la sense, it would be different from an OL proceeding in which the 15 ' staff would have some option to permit operation as long as the 16 ' staf f were satisfied that interim steps could be taken. I MR. CSTRACH: In one sense, this is different from an '2 operating license proceeding, but in another it isn't, because in a sense, the world of actions is divided into short-term 22 actions and long-term actions. And with respect to the icng-21 term actions, those are like the actions during which opera-tions -- 22 COMMISSICNER B RADFORD : What you're saying is that 2* decision is being made at the point at which we can't -- Es E t*tf 31 a TOC r*tri i

• 0.

9 MR. CST RACH : Yes, where the licensing bcard cuts that 842 064

pv6 I 21 a I up. And once you analyue it that way, I think the parallel with 2 the OL stage is exact. The board approves the taking of certain i 2l requirement of certain actions, long and short term. As to the i 1lshort-term ones, 4 the staff says they are completed, and then 5 with the Commission's review that we discussed, prior operation l 6 can begin while the long-term actions are being ccmpleted. 7; So, I believe the language is essentially consistent 3 with the OL procedures. 9l COMMISSIONER BRADFORD : Was there any particular, i 10 l reason for saying the board "shall have authority to require II staff," as distinguished from requiring all parties to perform I 12 j detailed steps? l 12 MR. BICKNIT: Only that, in the normal case, staff 14 would be the ones certifying completion. The board would 15 l naturally turn to staff for such advice. U MR. OSTRACH: Actually, there is another reason, as well. We were considering a situation where the board was going 2 to order certain actions to be taken, contingent only on staff ~ certification, and the board might want to know, since the staff 21 would have that authority, what staff was going to view as the 2I steps that it was going to approve. 22 For comparison purpose, the parties might want to ccm-22 ment on what staff proposed as the detailed steps necessary to ,'R C. effectuate it, but it is only the staff, it is describing what .act. ** tf 9l Rt00 f *tf1

• C they intend to require.

That is why it is only the staf f that 842 065

pv7 ~! 22 i-is asked, and the parties would then comment, "No, tha t wo n ' t 2 be enough." 2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: The only reason I think it

, may matter is:

In this case, it's at least possible that emer-5 gency preparedness could play a larger role than it does in most i e, OL situations, and you have at least a possibility of parties 7 such as the surrounding towns or the state or others who are 3l going to have a role to play in the programs. That might be 9lofvalue, too. i 10 ' MR. OSTRACH: We did not intend to prevent those par-11 ties from giving their views on what they thought would be i 12 ' sufficient steps. We thought that would be best done in terms 13 of commenting on what staff felt it was going to accept as !4 satisfactory completion. 15 MR. BICKNIT: In the second sentence it says : "With 15 respect to any uncompleted items, the board shall have authority

7 to take such actions or impose such limitations or conditions."

By this reading, it will be capable of going to anyone it wants in order to guide it in the imposition of such limitations and even to have a hearing on the question. 21 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Other comments? 22 (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: If we leava the las; phrase on 2: there, indeed, the short-term actions which are specified in -a amere newm I c. 25 the order are aimed at ccmpletion before restart. 842 066

pv8 I f 23 I COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Those are consistent with 1 e 2 actions from the other B&W reactors. 2 COMMISSIONER AHEAFNE : Except in that table. 1 4/ CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: They are consistent, Dick, provided 1 5 we recognize that there has been a sort of an ongoing develop-l 6 ment, and that because this one comes later it has more in the 7 initir' stages. The other plants will have to do the same 3 things. 9j COMMISSIONER KENNEDY : I thought that the words 10 i "short-term actions" had a generic sort of meaning. II ! CHAIRMAN HENDRIE : The short-term actions here are I2lnotlimitedtoanidenticalwith. There are some more of them. I 13 ' COMMISSIONER KENNEDY : But if an order ala the Rancho ?2 Seco or Davis-Besse or any other is going out in this case, it 15 would have included those, anyway. u' - CHAIRMAN HENDRIE : Yes, except for such specific ones

7 that show that you don' t get mixed up with TMI-2.

2 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: But they are the sort of class of short-term actions that we talked about in the past. So that 22 seems to me to be wholly appropriate and, indeed, necessary. 2I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I will note the short-term actions 22 include complying with the A regulations of NUREG-0573, and I think it is clear enough from the table, but I will point out 2* that, for instance, that one of the Category A items in that c.:,,,,e a oce..,s. me 25 table is a commitment to a relief and safety valig gef tin @ [3 7

pv8 i 24 1 program, which is going to take an extended period of time. 2 And the requirement for completion before filling, checking this 3 box on a possible restart decision is that the ceramitment to the 4 program, a program description and schedule, and commitment to 5 it, be made and not that the relief and safety valve testing 6 be completed. 7: COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Is that what the words would 3 mean, Len? I 9! MR. BICKWIT: Now, you're saying, under there words, 1 i 10, you are saying that completion of the short-term items is a 11 condition. 12.! CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, that's why I bring it up. I 13 I had better point out that the so-called "shvrt-term items" in la Table 3-1 include specimens as follows: Short title emergency 15, power supply requirement, position description, complete imple-16 mentation. That is unambiguous: You do it before fou check

7 that box for restart.

'2 Next,, relief and safety valve testing is the short title. Position description is submit program description and schedule. It appears to me that one conforms with Tab] 2 B-1 21 Category A items if you submit the program showing a pregram description and schedule and commit to a program that you are

indeed not under this language recu2 red to cceplete the testing 22 of the valve.

But I think we need to understand that. _c,.sv., i a,oc r,,, me. 25 MR. BICKWIT: Yes, I think that is a re . ablg

pv9 25 1 interpretation. It could be read otherwise in this language. 2 But I think tnau is a reasonable interpre:ation, if that is your 1 3l understanding. I i ai COMMISSIONER KENNEDY : If it could be otherwise, then i 5 I suggest that we fix the language so it can't. 6 MR. OSTRACH: Actually, Commissianer, the short-term I7 l actions that are defined here, the short-term action that the 3: licensing board is going to order, which may well differ from ?, the short-term actions as described in the notice of hearing 't 10, and to the extent that the licensing board, the staff presents 11 ' to the licensing board that issue that the Chairman was just 12 ' describing, I am sure that they would present to him such terms 13 as " submit a recommendation," and the licensing board would then 14 order that there be some bidded such proposed plan that was 15 taken care of. 15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Steve, are you saying then that J the board, when it says there, " short-te rm actio ns, " it does 3 not refer to the term "short-term actions" as ref erence d in the order? MR. BICKWIT: No. It may change the actions. 2i MR. CSTRACH : These are the ones the Commission is, in 2: effect, proposing but the ones the board orders will depend on how the hearing turns out. 2; CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I must say I don't see a need to act 4 ** er36 2eCCr*tel.f*L 25 change tha words. I think they are all all right. I just want nf7 OL0

pv10 26 a 1; to make sure we all understand. 2 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY : I am getting confused about

i 3l what kind of an order this is. This order appears to be an order

'l 4 by the Commission we are sitting and discussing now, reads : "The 5 licensee shall take the following actions with respect to TMI-1," 6 and then it lists all of these things. i 7 I assume. since one of them was that the licensee 3 shall comply with Category A recommendations as specified in 9l Table B-1, that he was being ordered to do it and that the i 10 ; licensing board wasn' t going to change all that. Yet, that is 11 ' what I thought I was just hearing. l i 12 ' MR. BICKWIT : You were just hearing that. l 13 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: What is it he's supposed to do, la then, during the process of the hearing? 15 MR. BICKWIT: Ultimately, what he's supposed to do '6 are these actions plus or minus those recommended by the board and ultimately approved by the Commission. He must do those actions as a condition to restart in his plant. If he chooses to 'o those that are in this order now, it may be that he is 22 doing the wrong ac*4cns. 21 We will not know that until a conclusion -- 22 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY : That's the same discussion we 2: had with respect to the long-term actions. 22 MR. BICKNIT : That 's right. c.;.crei =.oorms. m: 25 COMMISSICNER KENNEDY: Well, why don ' t we j us t go back 842 070

pvil 27 la to my earlier statement? 2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIF,: It may be a more agonized situation i 3 I here in many ways, but it's not all that different from either 4 the CP or OL stages. At the CP stage, the applicant has pre-5 sented an application, he's done a lot of engineering work and 5 invested a lot of money and engineering hours, if not hardware, 1 7; on the basis that he understands what is required of him, and 3' that he is carrying out those things he understands to be 9 required. And he beli 2ves that he can make a case for that. I 10 And at the OL, he has built a plant on the basis that 11 he believes meets the requirements and will be licensed for .I i 12 ' operation. i 13 But af ter all, in neither case does the permit of a 14 license issue in fact through a proceeding, if there is one at 15 the OL sta 3. There always is one at the CP stage. Until the It proceeding in question is completed, the initial decision is '7 issued, and, in fact, until whatever appeals are made are worked 7 out. COMMISSIONER KENNEDY : I think there is a difference. The Commission has just said -- the Commission which is appoint-2 ing the board has just said -- in order -- he must do these 22 things. 22 MR. BICKWIT: We haven't said that. What is contem-21 plated is it would not say that. It would say as a condition _ # :.c.rsi a. ace... m: 22' to restart, do whatever the following tells you and whatever the 842 071

pv12 28 1 Commission ultimately says, you do. 2 COMMISSIO:fER KENNEDY: I am glad we have extended to 1 3l August 10, because we have a good deal of discussion to go i 4 through here. 5 MR. BICKNIT: It say s these are our best estimates as 5 to what you must do as a condition to restart. 7 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Okay. 3 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE : Recognizing discussion to come 9 ' further on this point, with regard to the language under com-t i 10 l pletion of required actions, I guess it still looks all right. II COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Except for the fact that the 12 l counsel suggested that the words might have been read differently i 13 from the way we understand them. And my suggestion, in that l' case, they ought to be rewritten so they will be understooddin 15 the way we understand them. 15 MR. BICKWIT: That can be done, but I just want to add '~ that that may not have any consequence in the end, because, as Steve points out, it will be the board and, finally, the Com-mission that determines what actions are required and what constitutes completion of those actions. 2I COMMISSICNER KENNEDY : That is a different quescion 22 that we come to. But first we ought to get these words corrected 2: CEAIPJ60i HENDRIE: I think we ought to have a little 22 tag-in with regard to the 3-1 table, just to avoid the implica-s.wer e neoc ees. c. 25 tion that where the 3-1 table says "cccmit to a program," the b 01V

pvl3 29 order isn't read as saying " complete the test program." 2 Okay. Immediate effectiveness of long-term actions. 3lNow, let's see, Len, would you or Steve review the bidding for end42 4 us? 5 a t 7 3 9, 1 I 10 11 12 t i 13 15 16 4 4 e e 4 % e em ob m 9 h6 -e.. y er, a. w r,rt c.

• C se

CR 6255' 30 HEER 1 t-3 mte 1 Ij MR. BICKWIT: You've got two options before you as 2 a result of the last meeting, a third that our of fice is put-2j ing forward. l The first would not require the licensee to begin 4 5-work immediatelv on implementing the long-term actions and 1 6' would permit the board to set a date for their completion 7: based on the time af ter restart allowed to other B&W f acilities. 8l The second would be the most immediately effective: an order requiring the licensee to implement all long-term 1 10 l actions that are now required of the other B&W facilities, d II and would provide that when other long-term actions are 12 ; required of the other facilities, they would be required at I3 ' TMI-1. Il Now, our option is in the middle of those two, but I5 clearly not squarely in the middle. It is much closer to the l' second option, but it would differ slightly. We would not require the licensee to begin work on the long-term actions, 2 but we would make restart conditional on a beard finding that the licensee had implemented those actions as promptly as 20 practicable, and would permit the board to recommend that the 2' restart be delayed an appropriate amount of time if those 22 actions had not been so implemented. U This would avoid placing the Commission in the 2* posture of actually ordering work done while at the same time

A m* te p 2 DOC F **'t

. SC. c it was deliberating on whether to permit the facility to 842 074

31 mte 2 l .i I operate again. It would allocate risks between the licensee 2 and the public in a manner similar to the way in which it 3 would be allocated for the short-term actions, except that l 4 the stakes would be higher, in that we assume that the. long-1 5 term actions would take a longer time to implement. So that 6 if the licensee chose to wait in the hopes of persuading the 7 board and the Commission that it di'd not have to perform these 3l long-term actions, it could significantly put off the restart 9i of its plant if it were ultimately determined that those i l 10 i actions had to be required as a condition to restart, or that Y 11 l implementation had to be far along as a condition to restart. 12 So that in each case the licensee is free not to 13 perform, and in each case if he fails to persuade the board 1.: and the Commission, in the last analysis, that he ought not 15 ever be required to perform, then the penalty for h im would !6 be a delay in restart. ~7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, your memo no tes that, at firs t blush, at least, Commissioners Kennedy.and Bradford lean toward the firs t, Commissioner Ahearne toward the second, and as I remember my own position, I leaned both ways, although no t a t the same time. There is no thing equivocal abcut my 2: po si tio n. Are there druthers? Vic, you missed this the first 21 time around. This was one of the high points cf the day. > ~ ev n w m ,,c. 25 CCMMISSICNER GILINSKY : I think the general counsel's 842 07i

32 mte 3 i i 1 ! proposal seems all right. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Let's

see, 2-1-1.

2i I have to sample up, because we have a third option. i 1 We have to choose one, two, or three. 4 i i Peter, you initially chose one. Why don' t you think 5 6 about it while I query the other end of the table. 7, What is the feeling down here? al COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: I have already expressed mine. 'i 9i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: You are still on the first option. I 10'! John? 11,l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I s till like two, 12 ' COMMfSSIONER GILINSKY: If I understand what you're 13 " saying, the Commission is not ordering these long-term actions 12 to be undertaken, but at the end of this proceeding the board 15 will consider the progress on these long-term actions in deciding. MR. BICKWIT: Yes, whether the plant can restart. COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Assuming other actions have been taken and the board is otherwise satisfied. 20 MR. SICKWIT: Yes. COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Which it would do in any case, isn't that right? MR. BICKWIT: If the order were not immediately effective, my guess is in many cases the licensee would not do ... w v necce,,,c. 25 that. He would contest the order, and only when he lost the 842 076

mte 4 33 i 'i 11 contest would he get going on these required actions. 2 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Wouldn't the board in any 3 case taken into a ccount what progress is being made toward 4 dealing with the long-term issues?- i 5l MR. BICKWIT: Not if none has been required. If all i 6 you have out with respect to long-term issues is, in effect, a 7 proposed action, which is an order which is not made immediately i ai effective, and an invitation to the licensee to contest that

i 9 i proposed action, I would think it would be highly unfair fot i

1 10 1 the board to condition restart on performance of that action. 11 ] MR. OS TRACH : I would expect the bcard would look to 12 the amount of time it would have to decide how long a time 13 can be allowed for long-term actions to remain outstanding. la If it had seen that the applicant had not begun them, tnen it 15 i could say the Commission allowed other licensees, to the extent li that long-term actions were similar for them, a certain period of time, say from whenever the orders were issued until January 1st, 1981, we ought to give a somewhat similar amount of time to this licensee. That would be because the board would no t count 21 against the licensee the time spent in the hearing during which 22 the orders were contested. CCMMISSIONER 3RACFORD: That is what they do between

4 options one and three.

Three says to the board, you can't do

-,n, ac m

,-c.

5 tha t?

042 07,/

mte 5 34 I 1 'i l MR. OSTRACH: Three says the bcard can do that. 2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I though t three said you 3. can't start up again -- can start up again? 4 4 MR. BICKWIT: Three says you can' t start up again 5 unless you have completed these actions. i 6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: it says the board will take 7.i into account. 1 3 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: So what is the practical 1, 9l difference between one and three? i 10 ' MR. BICKWIT: You mean between two and three? Three II 1 is very much closer to two than it is to one, in that under 12 two you are actually formally required to get going. 10 CCMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Righ t. Il MR. BICKWIT: Under three you are not required to 15 get going, but you risk -- your risk is substantial if you 16 don't and you do not persuade the beard in the end and the ~ Commission in the end that you should not have been required to do it. CCMMISSIONER BRADFORD: But under one you are also 22 not required to get go-ing. And the penalty, it seems to me, 21 under one and three is the same, that is, at the point at which 22 the board tells you you could restart. 22 MR. 3ICKNIT: I have been assuming under me that 21 there really is nc penalty. , : - n. =,c,c e w s. ee 25 CCMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Unless the board thinks scme 842 078

35 mte 6 i 1 l' of the long-term actions should be preconditions to restart. 2 MR. EICKWIT: There is always that. 2 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I guess I am troubled abcut { requiring that long-term actions be completed unless these are 2 5 Commission requirements. 6 MR. BICKWIT: But you are not making the short-term 7) actions Commission requirements, ei ther. You are treating i S; this -- this proposal is to treat the long-term actions very I a 9l similar to the way you treat short-term actions, which is to 10l say you don' t have to do them, but if you don' t do them either 'I 11 d their completion or their implementation on route to comple-12 tion may be made a condition. 13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: The board can take them into la account, depending on how it regards their importance. 15 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I must say, I think one and three are very much alike, at least as I intended one. COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Then you should have no I trouble with three. COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Exactly. I'm no t having 22 trouble with three. 2i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: In that case, let's see if I can 22 get John to split a vote here. Where would you like to take 22 up a stand on this one? Il COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I guess I still prefer one m n v noc... e. 25 as I understood it. But three is acceptable. I may be missing 842 079

E e mte 7 i 36 I some thing, because Dick once agreed with me on one and now he 2 doesn't agree with me. 1 2' COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: I don' t think they are the l 4 same at all. q 5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: It may be that both of yor. I 6 had agreed on one, seeing one differently. 7; COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: I don't think so. It is that i 3l I don't believe one and three are all the same. They are quite el 9] different. l 10 j MR. BICKWIT: I agree with that. h 11 COMPESSIONER BRADFORD: Counsel agrees with you. 12 Well, what do you see the licensee doing under three? 13 ' MR. BICKWIT: I see him, in all probability, doing la the action, starting right away to complete the actions. And 15 under one I see him not doing so. In two I see him doing so 16 because he's required as a matter of law to do it. COMMISSIONER BPADFORD: But even though under one, i first of all, there's a certainty he 's going to have to have I them done, or a strong likelihocd he's going to have to have 23 them done some day. 21 COMMISSIONER AEEARNE: At least my reading of one 22 is that his clock on the long-term actions starts at that 22 point that the bcard says, all ricat, do these short-term. 2' COMMISSIONER BRADFORE Nell, his clock is what the .. :nn, nw vr. c. 25 board says it is. 842 280

mte 8 ] 37 i .I I I I' COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: But at least my interpretation 2" would be that is the way you would read number one. i 2' MR. BICKWIT: We may have drafted this harder than i 2j you intended it. We have it drafted as there being virtually i 5' no penalty for doing no thing. i 5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: In a sense, it is a deferral. 7; COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Okay, but you do have more i 8I time. A licensee who has a presently shut down plant that 4 9I. he hopes to start, faced with the possibility when he restarts I 10 it, he could get a timetable which could conceivably require II l that he shut it down again in order to take some particular I2 l steps in it, that if he seriously thinks he's .ing to restart t I3 ' it, it would seem to me that he would be very likely to take 3. at least those actions that he didn't violently object to 15 taking, while the plant was shut down. o 16 MR. BICKWIT: Unless he-thought he could persuade the board that they wouldn't be required. COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: The prospect which it seems to me is highly remote, given the f act that every other plant of 22 that type has been ordered to do the same thing. U Now, what could motivate this guy to think tha t he 22 would be unlike all the o thers in respect to the need to do 22 these things? Ncw, he might wish, just because he's got an excess of legal fees and too little other monies, to go spend 4M er y Mf DC F'** 5. ' 9C. 95 ' tis money :- .;s lawyers to prctest these particular matters 8/n42 08i

38 c.te 9 1 l 1 11 and contest them with the Commission. 2 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Why do you think one and 2{ three are different, then? Aren' t you making the case that .l 41 they are the same? I 'l 5 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: No, I don't think so. 6 MR. OSTRACH: Ccmmissioner, I think the dif ference 7 is in the timetable If the licensing board does order the 3 1 Sl long-term actions, makes them required, it would allow a .i 9 ) certain amount of time. Now, it can either -- there are two 1 10j main time periods to choose. One of those time periods is the u 11 I amount of time which other B&W plants would be given to 12 complete the long-term actions. 13 ' COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Three is okay for me. la CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Let me ask about three. 15 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I'm sorry, I thought you 16 said 3:00 o' clock for the research briefing. In that case, I would like to have Steve explain to 'I me once more the differenc'. between one and three. i? CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Peter has to decide whether it is 22 really a one or really a three. 2: CCMMISSIONER BRADFORD: If you .1 just let me 22 listen to Stere for a minute, I might be able to do th a t. 2: Start again. 22 MR. OSTRACH: The board is going to order a decision . i v.tr y R e'y]e roe s !*C. 25 requiring that long-term actions -- to be long-term actions d/ 032

.c 39 mte 10 i I l are to be complete. There are two dates, two logical dates 2 th at it could choose. 2; One is the date at which the Ccemission required 1 4j the long-term actions to be ccepleted by other B&W plants. 5 I'm assuming that they order essentially the same lo ng-te r... 6 actions as were imposed in the other one. That would be a date, 7 perhaps, let us say, January 1s t, 1981, 17 months from now, 3 15 months from now. That would, assuming the hearing doesn ' t i 9l finish until March or something like that, that wcufu mean the i 10.l licensee would only have nine months in which to complete n, II ' those actions. Other plants were given 17 nonths 'te haa$le I 12 ' them. 13 The board might also choose a different date. It i. might choose a date 17 months aftey.'its decision, believing 15 that, just as the Ccmmission gave these people 17 months u-af ter imposition of the requirement, so it should give 17 months af ter impcsition -of requirements. I believe that under the first option that would be the way the board would most like? v co since it would not 22 that the licensee was cblige.ted or shculd be held to assume 2' have been obligated during the pericd of time it was certesting the. provisions. So the dif ference is in three the beard wculd 22 be told basically, to the extent applicable in the circun-stances, use the date the Ccmmission selected for those ...:,,- va.... m c long-term actions to be ccmpleted as' the date that you're 842 085

Ste 11 - l 40 i i l 1j going to hold the licensee to, which means that right now the 2 licensee should be moving as promptly as practicable. 2' In the first option, the beard would choose the i 1 a :i amount of time the Commission gave, which would mean the 5' licensec could begin then. That is the main distinction 6 between one and three. ] CO>MISSIONER BRADFORD: It really would be a matter -- 7; 2 I think that is probably right. Depending upon, A, what the i 9 board did with its discretion, and, B, what the license chose 10 to do in anticipation of the situation, that the two really g 11 l could work out quite similarly. If you've stated the extremes, 12' the extreme for one is further out and the extreme for three 1 13 ' is probably further in. 1! Well, three is acceptable to rae. 15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Is one still acceptable? 16 cob:MISSIONER BRADFORD: Review the bidding for me. Do we have two votes for one and two for three? ? CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: 'le s. Jchn, will you withdraw from two? COMMISSICNER AHEARNE: Sure. I' CHA!? MAN HENDRIE: John had originally said either two cr. three are all right. 3ut he slid dcwn to three because 23 he sees a force gathering there. 8 /{ 2 08! 21 Ycu had indicated that either one or three were okay, - e.c y " fx r e f e g w .. c,

5 and that leaves me the dilemma, if I go up and vote wat'a fou

~..f mte~12 41 I l 1 on one, I can't tell whether I've got a split Ccmmission 3-3. 2' (Laughter.) 2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Which is going to be hard to 4' explain in seme quarters; or whether it is 3-2. And if you've i 5-got a preference between the two, why, that helps settle it. 6 COMMISSIO TER BRADFORD: I have a preference for 7 ! deciding the question. My intellectual preference is one. I 3! But I would much rather get this settled. So I would vote 9 for three. 1 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Let's not let principle get 1 11 l in the way. I2 ' COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: If it were a principle, I I3 would s tay with one. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: If you will stay with one, I will 15 vote for one and we will outvote these folk. 10 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I will stay with one. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I'm just trying to find somewhere, 'I if I leap in, it will be a clearcut majority. And I can' tell. IO CCMMISSICNER KENNEDY: You just did. 2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: 3-2 seems to be a clearcut majority. 22 CCMMISSICNER KENNEDY: There's only five. Whichever way you voted, you're the swing vote. ..,,,,24.c..,,,. 5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I will vote for one because it 842 085

.,7 mte*13 i .42 1, 1 ! seems clearer-cut to me. I still have some problems with the 2 langcage in three, which seems to run back and forth. "Be performed as promptly as practicable as a condition to restart." 2 i I don't knew, I will vote for one and declare that 5 Peter will still stand there, and we have a quavering slight i 6 edge for option one. And I will furthermore declare we have l 7j gone as far as we can reasonably go today. And the 3 Ccerissioners are asked to please return in 15 minutes, i.e., 9 at 20 minutes to 3:00, to hear the Research budget. In e-3 (Whereupon, at 2:25 p.m., the meeting was adjourned.) 11 ! 12 e o1 u 15 u-x =

-,,,, a,x,.,,,,,:

s 842 086}}