ML19326B360

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Transcript of 681015 Prehearing Conference in Washington,Dc Re Identification of Issues & Settling of Procedural Matters for 681030 Hearing in Russellville,Ar.Pp 1-43
ML19326B360
Person / Time
Site: Arkansas Nuclear 
Issue date: 10/15/1968
From:
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:
References
NUDOCS 8004150737
Download: ML19326B360 (43)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:__ [ hg O .w V 4 \\ UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION '1, f 0 5.*. ( x i IN THE MATTER OF:

Docket No. 50-313 ARKAMSAS PC'JER AUD LIGil? CCMPA?sY

_---_.._.._..-_..._..g i l PR2-!!Eh2ING CONTERElCS Place - c., ash 5n, tan, p, c, Dcte - P a g e s......'...:.. 4.3.. Octslier 15 1960 i THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS OR COPYING OF THIS TRANSCRIPT POOR QUALITY PAGES E,.5 IS PROlllBITED BY Tile ORDER l \\1E,T Itegulaton>' Docket Fib Telephone: (Code 202) 547-6222 ,(' 1 ACE - FEDEll Al, IlEP0llTEllS. INC. Official Reporters 415 Second Street, N.E. Washington, D. C. 20002 j 8304150727 7' NATION. WIDE COVERAGE \\

I ?.p c. l 1 R D _.5 1 BEFORE THE 2 ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION 3

__-_----______---------__-----x

() 4l In the Matter of: l

Dochet No. 50-313 5

AREisNSAS POWER AND LIGHT COiPANY l gl i ___-__---___---__-__--_---__----__x I 7 Room 115 811 Vermont Ave. N. W. O Washington, D. C. .a-0 jl The pre-hcaring confercacc came cn for hearin'g, ', g u) ; pursuant to notice, et 2:15 p.m. I l ~... y;, BEFORE: ..u s s I zf ALGIE A. WELLS, Chairman DR. LAURENCE R. QUARLES, Member 1; R., D. BRIGGS, Member. { fr ~ y; ,a 14 ; ALTERNATE MEMBERS.PRESENT: c i, 1 35 j J. D. BOND, Chairman DR. JOHN GEYER, Member 1G APPEARANCES: j W. HOPACE JES;2LL, ESQ., and PIiILIP K. LYOU, ESO., of - i 17 House, Holmes & Jew' ell, 1550 Tower Building, gg l Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 and ,ROY B.~ ENAPP, ESQ., 1725 K Street, N. W., Washington, g { J D.- C. 20006, on behalf of the Applictr.t. 00' ! [ THOMAS F. ENGELHAFDT, ESQ., Regulatory Staff, Atomic Energy Commission. g I ac 23 " r x, 24 ) q 15 ii b O d

J 2 1 cbl PROCEEDINGS ') CHAIRMAN WELLS: This is a pro-hearing conferance 2 a s r. S that is scheduled in accordance with the Notice of Hearing. Q 4 It pertains to an application by Arkansac Power and Light 7 5 Ccmpany for a construction permit for a pressurized water s reactor to be located at a site in Pope County near 4.. 7 Russellville, Arkansas. ,. i?.. m d We arc convened at the place designated in the, .I 9 Notice of Hearing, we are about 10 or 15 minutes after th'e i %? ' ? 10 time designated but I think it is clo:.0 enough. The date is pr p yy October.15th as prescribed in the Notice of Hearing. Oa. d. a e g October 30th in Russallville there will be a hearing conducted 3 13 in this matter. This is only a conference detigned for purpose of identifying the issues and settling procedural. '; y ', g 15 matters. 3' tg This Board is compose 0. pf Dr. Laurence Quarels, on ~ ,4 my right, and Mr. Beecher Brig;;s, on my left. My nano is 17 g Algie Wells and I have been designated Chairman of the Board. - c g Dr. John Geyer has been designated as a technik hh o. f cally qualified alternate of the Board and Mr."J. D. Bond 3 has been designated alternate Chai:r.an of the Board. Both ~i Mr. Bond.and Mr. Geyer are with us th.is afterncon, but un- .,9 ~ O .,3 fortunately there is not room up here for them. I see them. sitting in the back of the room. g 3 ) '~' 3l As alternates, Dr. Geyer and Mr. Ecnd will participa :e { ]

3 with the Board in tha dicer ssion of mattara partaining to tha eb2 1 2 preparation for the hearing. They will not participato in ( J) L making decisions unless they should baccme members of the 3 i O 4i aoara ta accora= ace view ene avv11 cad 1e rutea =aa reuutseioa=- E:: cept to say that Dr. Quarlen in Dcan of the [ 5 College of Engineering at the University of Virginia and 3 Mr. Briggs is Director of the Molten Salt Reacter Program f at Oak Ridgc, I think I can dicpenso at this conference with O u,4 4; the customary statement on the background of the Board men-M(A o bers, as I believe these gentleman are well-known to you. w I y, Dr. Geycz' and Mr. Bond are also well-knoun. . q., ~ Dr. Geyer ic the Chiarman of the Departcont of Sanitary Enginjur-~ ja ing and Water Reccarch at Johns liopkins University and

3

^ Mr.BondisaHoaringE.naminerwithalonganddictinguished} y '~ career, uho is procently assigned to the U. S. Atomic Energy g commicsion. to Copion of the Notice of Hearing which I have ~ 17 g! mentioned earlier are available if any of you would like to have a copy so that you can folloe the proceedings with perhcps ~ g I a little more interect. t.0 1 I As I mantioned earlier, thic conference is pri-l i Ot : l merily a procedural one. We will not cahe evidence as The main reason for ue being here this afternoon is such. I ,,-1 b [ to settle procedural probican, erchangt tectimony between av. /my 1 / al I the parties -- I think we only have tuo partica -- identify g3 1 1;

4 cb3 1 witnesses and identify principal substantive matters that will' F (~) 2 be discussed at the hearing. 3 Mrs. Barther is our Reporter and we would like for []) 4 you to feel free to interrupt us, Mrs. Barther, whenever you [ c feel it is necessary to understand anything that is scid. 4 a The Applicant, Arkansas Pcuer and Light Company, h. L. 7 made timely answer to the Notice of Hearing and the Eoard has 4', roccived notification of the appearance of Mr. Horace Jewell,, y[- o y.q.- 0 Mr. E.dward B. Dillen, Jr., Mr. Philip K. Lyon, and Mr. Roy .W ,.i> ,.c y. e, s-w ~ B. Snapp on behalf of the Applicant. "I [p

o

.r; w l ,,.Mr. Jewell, perhaps you would introduce yourself;.- Yk gg 12, and your collaaguas, co that the rmcord vill shc> your presence'. IS MR. JEWELL: I am Horcce Jewoll. On my right is Mr. fj'

r

'14 Philip Lyon. ' Both of us ero frcm Little Rock. And on my 1 g left is Mr. Roy Snapp of Washington. And we are here today

s representing the applicant.

i . I.'p g CHAIRMAN WELLS: Thank you very muen. t s 10 The Board has also received notice of the appearance i ,z } - g of Mr. Thomas F. Engelhardt on behalf of the Regulatory Staff f the Atomic Energy CommisLion. 20 Mr. Engelhardt, perhape you would introduce yourcelf i _.<. : l e ~ 22 I cnd your colleagues fcr the purposes of the record. 5 MR. ENGELHARDT: I am Thomas F. Engelhardt and I .u. g,q j represent the Atomic Enorgy Commission's Regulatory Staff. I i l To my left is Mr. Heil Newman, who will be assisting 3

-^ W F ^ 5' ~ .h cb4 1 me during the course of these proceedings, although Mr. Newman + p 3 is not admitted to the bar as yet. IIe will shortly be so sj v./A. g., e 3 admitted and until such time he will not file with the Board' ' ti a Q 4 a notico of official appearanco in this proceeding. 3 To my right is Mr. Charles Long and to his right 3 . is Mr. Albert Schwencer, bothl of whom will be the staff's 2 7 principal technical witnesses et the forthcoming hearing. i...d 8 CHAIRMN WELLE: ' Thank you, Mr. Engelhardt. ,f>"p c. c o . I believa I'can cay that in addition tio representing' N u ,, ~ _ _ 3 m p ; };-. to the Regulatory Staff, Mr. Engelhardt and'his ccllenquoc are prepared to ascist the members of the public'uho may wish. told', -l-egl it ,p \\ 12 concult with them 'concerning the regulations and procedures, s s

s applicable to this.w.onference and the h, earing which ua willM',;. c,;1

') c 13 . c. p:n ...w. ..$ q n y w 14 hold in Re =a31v411e., They will I am cure be' glad to give'any M) f"' 3> 4 g.3 assistance decired, if the marr.bers of the public can contactif 15 rs them at the appropriate time. ,4.( ../ 3 17 ! The Boaro is not inforned of any request to inter- ~ ) y, ~ ~' ja vene in thees proceedings.. The Notice of Hearing prescribed H v. .c 9:c, .. v +. .a 'r' the request for intierve,n, tion be ~ submitted not later than ul-

13

~* c October 10th. If there is anyone present who desireo to inter-g vene and can show good cause for not cubmitting his petition os 3 vitt.in the preceribad' time, we will be glad to considor the ) request. 3 'l p., = (No responce.) b g3 CIIAIRMAN WELLS: The record will please show there r

l

'J

N W. 1 - 6~ + .I eb5 1 was no such request made. .,l j x., 1 2 We have on the other hand received three requects from 9 3 persons who would like to make limited appearances. One is' T w 4 from Mr. E. F. Wilson, Director, Division of Radiological s. E q U 11ealth of the Arkansas State Board of IIealth, r ,e-y ~ I wonder if by chance Dr. Wilson is here this dfter.'.y. ,3 7 noon? s., n:. J{,,J., g.f. .~ .O Nj+$ (?:Q ',nyn2)J[% 8 MR. JEWELL:. ; He is not, Mr. Chairman. /'MWS A n 'g :3 ~ y :.; w. D . Thank lyou', Mr. ' Jawcil. ' . Qgn[4Qi CHAIRMAN WELLS:

WK to The. Board has in' formed Mr. Wilson that he uould-be J I'?

C'. 19 w . I (. p @.x m u . permitted to,make a limited.cppearance_on' october.30th. .v l ~ g ", {

  1. w-i y, t In addition, the Board has recoived a request from M Ot Dr. Howard K. ' Suzuki, Professor at the' University of Arkdb N G

13 + ;.: - , gg wr o.s. ...e. ~ .. s g,# ~ 'This; request;was only'recei'ved[. y$.

4 Medical Conter in Little Rock.

4 c < c.a.9 ;% x . c ^y, g;p '

  • !W jg either yesterday or today.

If I hear no objection from th~.C.yj [e ~z parties, the Board will inform Dr. Suzuki that he will ba Ner}

g

^1,q- [7 ~ we-g

7 mitted to make a, limited. appearance.

Q .sv. s. ut$ igV (No response.) e,p3.g IC ,O . n g.g. y, .w + Hearing no objection, we will soSYO #)3: x i~ CHAIRMAN WELLS: 10 { V; -)g; inform Dr. ' Suzuki. O _e 5,. e u y We received another request for limited appearance 2,. .< f

q e

from Mr. S. Ladd Davies, Director of the Arkansas Follution-22 Control Commission. 'If there is no objection the Board uould g ,,{ propose to inform Mr. Davies he would be permitted to make a' " p w _3 V g ( limited-appearance. I_ l 9. )' a e .I'_

s' . - (., 7 s ,e cb6 1 MR. ENGELHARDT: Mr. Chairman, I notice in Mr. Davies' 2 { letter, his last sentence indicctes that his statement will ..y,. ..-e 3 M confined to thermal and chemical aspects only, since the 4-radiologica'l aspects are under the jurisdiction of the Arkansas g 5 State Health Departmont. Tnis statecmant is not entirely ac-s curate, and it also indicates that this individual vill b,e, b, speaking in connection with matters which the Atomic Energy',_. ... f.,.,. n -. x ' "., f'. o commission has no direct jurisdiction over at this time. ? . ~ r w. 'I ~ .I ?* g q D , Would_it be the intent of the Chairman in respond-t, g4 ., - p .m . r3, e 13 ing to this roquest to indiccta to Mr. ~ Davics the -cr.tont of ' R,Q .this Board's' jurisdiction in ordsr to provide him with,some C.,F ; a t1 .s 12 well, what shall we say, to, one might say, straighten him ~. Z5: 4 13 out on exactly what it is_that this hearing is to' consider and / -) a a_..;t. @'0 '.','w; Q,!Y,W ' + , E. % d, 'e w 4 ~-~Ap.; e4*t. ~' yst y 14 the scope.of the Com:hission's jurisdiction? ~ .f.) @#T j$ 3 & o; 9 15 CHAIRMAN WELLS: Well, it might bc Vorthwhile. I 7 5 13 was just wondering, I'm not sure the Board would,uant to do ; _,,',' r - ~ y. 17 this in our brief 1etter. 'I might refer to the regulations.' ~ to At the tims of the hearing I think it would be ~ap' Y .- f.,l .~- propriate for the; Board to inform him what are the -limits of"[ & ?:;f 3 ,e ;. -c . py.9 e r .C ] L y .our jurisdiction. ~

2; MR. ENGELHARDT:

I think it would be appropriate 3g W for hin, since he does cosm te be a little confused on who 22 y has jurisdiction in various matters,' to provide that bach -i s y ground and if the Board so decircs, at the time limited ap ~' 25 Pearances are called at the hearino, I would be happy to make 1 i >.l ,N 8

+,

v. s- . ;.x _.8_'s.3 3W cb7 1 9: cuch a otatsment if ths Board does not. choose to make' s ..w. 2 .p-4 statement. - m s

  1. A t'@,..

f \\ v 0 4 :( w. ~.4* CHAIRMAN WELLS: Thank you. You might evenifin.d ite ~ ' 4 O., useful if you could seck him out' on the morning co he'wouldj.., 5 know beforehand. rw; ; My suspicion is that there will be no diffi-- ^ lf. 2 Idon'tsupposeheisgoingtowanttoi;*]}%}[ft. e culty with this. 2 ,.,w w ++ 7 wander too far afield. r .c, ' w ;;c;;%.,e. $ ~ o - MR. ENGELHARDT: With that comment,-I have-no;s.:.,3obje 4 ,d ', ~ , y.: y9 tio'n to.the Board's admitting this i.9dividual as a limitedi,.9 D ._ d

  1. n e

$f? to

appearee, J. -a
g-
.m,. g

..~e. .s x n A g @-. g* E r s. ~, . 7 m 33 %.. 4 u,. i. - CHAIRMAN WELLS: Thank you. , m-w?

r. C.

c

,j,f.%.,n.f,f.J.r g.. s. 9 =a :,

tg 'Does the-applicant have any commor.t on that? ..y 2 c y 2x v. 13 MR. JEWELL: a Y I; f.J ~ The. applicant has no objectio. ,3 nto/a?w?'.',~~ 'O C h ~ limited'appearan,ce by Mr IDavies.. ,..:. ', +: ?: 14 O.:h u m. $ A. p .., m.. m S' x.

3

. Df' ' CHAIRMAN WELLS : ~ +/ .D- .c 15 4r' Goed. Then I' belie re' that takes ' to care of that. e t..:.. 7's 'I would likto acknowledge and express the~ Board's. [ w u 17 d; e i appreciation to Staff Counsel for taking the initiative in s '. i 0 ,4 ~ o developing a! propose.- 's L %

3
,

s

'd. _ w, 0.5 gg d agenda for this afternoon's meeting', (It.

...r.x.. '.-,.-

=r g.

n has been' submitted,1f'I understand' correctly, Mr. Engelhardt ' s, - 39 _y j with the con'currence of your colleage, the Applicant'ri Coun-2! i l 'el? s 22 gi MR. JEWELL: That's right. + 1 i n, CHAIRMAN WELLS: i h If you have enough copics of the i ' agenda, you might uish to let any person who is interested in 23 1 L j 1 l s

i m t tg s tha cg:ndo have a copy co thny can follow it as we discuss it'.. cb8 1 f 2 MR. ENGELHARDT: May I inquire if all of the Board [), t 3 members have copies, in which case wa will just pass the rest 4 of them out to the rear of the room and they will be avail-4 G able. 0 CHAIRMAN WELLS: I believe vc have already covered

  • Items'l'and 2 of the proposed agonda.

sc y We cone next to the t.,, o procedural items. q s. 4 { m, g N o 3-A 'f the proposed agenda again brings us to another $ w o y .m4 b proposed agenda and,this is the agenda for the hearing. go ..n. Before we came over this afternoon, the Board had an opportunity $o [) E g i .~' ...pw s g go over this suggested agenda. He think it in a very good ~ 3 ,o w,. J,~ 73 one. Again', thank you for it. / 1,. i 9

g@j i;.

(. I am ra..s., 't g ther inclined to think', however,"that tho _; 6 - n www g# S 4 s ..gy adoption of this ' agenda ~~ought to be ' the adoption of' an agenda ' ,3

  • % 'S5 g 4 a

for a guide rather than something that ue would rigidly follow, 33 w because for 'one reason or another it might be desirable to - ' 37 3 a modify it. e j ? ,;g ,, o .a MR. ENGELHARDT: - It certainly.Was the intention of.s-s -y 6 the staff in ~ submitting this to tha Board to have it considered , 40 1; a as such, as a guide, subject to change by agreement of the g i Board and partiec during the cource of the hearing. 9 g e ? 23 l m p WELLS: G d. Thank you very much, g MR. ENGELHARDT: I have additional ccpics of thic (a') g proposed agenda. Would there be any useful purpose served l I 1 1 I L n

10 cb9 1 here in 'istributing copics to those in this room or shall (] 2 we reserve on that until the hearing? \\/ ~ end 1 a O 5 f 1. -.s, P e

  • }

l 3 e 1 O g*, s gfj ( g 10 4 4 5 " et# .I' 12 13 -+ .e 9 .,i.( ' ? i,. !4 ,,s y, >~ iG .', a ys. - I 17 4 10 v. ~ 10 3 21 ) O t 2: i \\ v y W.! I 4

6 DB #2 11 as ty 1 1 CHAIRMAN WELLS: I am inclined to think it would be ' ! m, 2 !. better to keep such copies as you have for the hearing. If r i i 3 we should have a number of people there, they might like to read 4 it. g sj MR. ENGELilARDT: We will have a number of copics J j 6 ; of the agenda available for public distribution at the hearing. 4 m 7 CHAIRMAN WELLS: Good, thank you. M,.., j The next item on the agenda is the method of_ intro-i e}i _~ 7 j 4; ; ei ducing testimony and exhibits. _..sJ,7, ' l [ Would the staff counsel or would the applicant like 39 g. 3; to speak to this, tem? f(g c'f[.. l n I g MR. JEWELL: The applicant, Mr. Chairman, proposos i ~ 8 of course to introduce its summary description of the unit 13 (m) I g ,f, \\> I g! as an exhibit and as its primary testimony in the ces_e. i, . y:n CMl

Q,

{ s +

3. [

We would propose to have the summary sponsored bp 2 r \\ ge !.lMr. Harlan llolmes, who is the nucicar project manager for v-17 Arkansas Power and Light Company. j i CHAIRMAN WELLS: Mr. Jewell, pardon me, I get the 4 13 c.. impression that'you are not being heard in the last row. Even}, ] ,3 ~. g though it is a small room, our public address system is not i jworking. ,Could you speak a little louder, pleaso? 21 I MR.-JEWELL: Mr. Holmas will'also be the chief g Q g

witness for the applicant for answers to the questions of the -

I t g N Board which may be presented this afternoon to us. ~ ('T . li, ' s' gd In addition to that, the applicant proposes to have i il p 0 [ ~

p s ty 2 ~ 12-. ~, %.~ t -W u.. I Mr. A. B. Cohen, the Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer .,]. I' i ' (m) 2 .c 'w! testimony as to the financial ability of the conpany and its + n .v. c. 3 technical qualifications. This is the proposed testimony of 1>1 4 4i the applicant.

y l

.y 5l CHAIRMAN WELLS: Mr. Engelhardt, do you wish to add; gq;y, .s-i-[,$h s anything?,, . p :'.~c .m 7 MR ENGELl!ARDT: Yes, sir. The principal staff .v, fp ' +: At technical witnesses wi1[be Mr. Charles Long and Mr. Albertf.jg (%s . x 4 5.G a { e ~ m, v ld.c:E, i,)m 'e- -l.4 0l Schwencer. 4 dit w M 5 *el[ There may be additional witnesses cdde:1 'to this group; S, R to .f- .; 4 K f 33 who will be identified at the. hearing. But at this time..it.isy Q' s - %.4, .3 . x intended that Mr. Long and Mr. Schwencer will be our principa17.. p/,

. c 32 4

s ' & !?f? X ?. $ ! witnesses with respect to the technica1' matters related to. ?.? 'T fp T 13 ,,) & b m ' N.,- , 49 :... ~- \\

CQ$(?'Ql 14 this~ evaluation of the application..

, 7. -;#fM, / %.. FW .o j o ~7.+;.+ r we,

cj In. addition, the Regul'atory Staff propesos to offerf., {
r xt

..sv. so testimony of Mr. Charlos A. Lovejoy of the Office of Couptroller C* .e. c4;. y W.y., 17 of the Atomic Energy Commission who uill testify with respo Q;,r %% to to the technical qualifications of the applicant. 7Q gy 3e_y 7

~

,7 & t g :- I might say at'this time that the staff is prepare;d; 3' T;' gg a .= a ..m z c g3 to distribute to. the Board and to the parties a statement of, i. q professional qualifications of Mr. Long and Mr. Schwencer andL 3

j

.I,w u i, the prepared testic.;ny' of Mr. Charles A. Lovejoy with respect ~ G-t j 23 jlto the financini qualification of the applicant. And if the l to ask Mr. Newaan to distri I ze; Board so desires, I an prepared n i V I 23; bute these copies. I i h

~ . Q .ty 3 13 .t p.i c 1 ' Additional ' copies of this testimony will be forwarded _ ~ _. f I 3 to the public officials of the State of Arkansas, so that t ... ~ / ..s 3 ,their records will be complete prior to the commencement of the ? 1 w;. Q,/y. 4 !, hearing. ~ ? A p .f..+. 16 li, CHAIRMAN WELLS: All right. You may distribute those S g_ c !j at this time. 1 .e 7 MR. ENGELHARDT: While Mr. Newman.is distributing r h. 1 - t ..; p a '[y-[c a these documents, I might also add that the staff intends to 7. s + 0{ introducs'its principal..evidenco~uith respect to the , f }

i. n..#c.t evaluation of this application in the forn.of a staff safety; [

f-to t GE ' evaluation which hasf previously been distributed to the bo,Dr. } ard. - j. , 11 7 } y, ~-

g $ and to the parties.

This staff scfety evaluation was transmitte i I to the Board under cover of a letter from the staff counsel ' ' fi: ' M 13 Wl..* ~ ( ;,. 7%d' igy M M l; 8.6 te l dated October 1, 1968.,- .4 L, '.0n-

1. 57,..

^ '., ~ .w

gl;

-c s.. m The testimony of Mr. Loyojoy which you hava just '1 J2' is L received has been prepared by Mr.- Lovejoy and an affidavit.,to,. J l ~

7 '! that effect has been prepared and if it is agreeable with the. ;

M c :: Board and with counsel for the applicant, I would like to P 33 q, g.:( ,u. request that Mr. Lo'vejoy's', testimony in this proceeding be _ '.g 7 -= 33, l .f+ s i; stipulated and accepted into the record of the transcript of .g l he hearing as E.f read without Mr. Lovejoy's presence at the ~ t 21 L 3 [ hearing. The affidavit would provido the appropriato sponsor-g' - 33 l, ship and authentication of that testinony of Mr. Lovejoy. L u .~ 0 CHAIRMAN WELLS: Mr. Engelhardt, anticipating that this proposal might be made as it has boon nade in most of the t T I> ,f, a s r -r.---

ty 4 14 w I cases, the Board has consulted on this and we see no ro: son' \\; .-

  • 2

+ 2, why Mr. Lovejoy should appear.. I think we ought to read this a testimony, though, and perhaps let ycu know by the end of this. I ~;, y Q 4t conference whether or not that is still our opinion. ~' y. b U[ MR. ENGELHARDT: I think if we can roccivo infor-l .-a. Gl mation within a week or so that,.the Board has no questions;t'o 1 S .c -7 ask of Mr. Lovejoy, that will be a sufficient time, se if'~the, N-Board does desiro Mr. Lovejoy's presence, appropriate trave 1 Q} c. g

)fe o

-c . m ~. 3 u. 4% o arrangements can' be ma'de for his appearance at the' hearing. T.;x# b". ft o;34 y% w to CHAIRMAN WELLS: Good.

t. -

ec s' MR. ENGELHARDT: G *e. .g The final matter. I might mention g;'

f ~.
t

-11 in with respect to staff exhibits, the staff uculd propose to -(( W - l offer two exhibits at the aring, Staff Exhibit 1 uould con .:Ihii 13 &c - ygi gr tg, sist of a statisment; c he profession'al qualifications of theh igg yg "a s w[ members'of the Advisory Conmittee on %setor Safeguards, ,!$, ]. om .i +" g L and Staff Exhibit 2 would provide the professional qualifications w ffy: (* } 4: 37 / of the principal menbors of the Regulatory Staff who partici q l "n ,e pated in the ovaluation of the application. $;h Cy ,g ,.. ;<. j :1: _e d kje 4 That,I believe,would constitute'the' Regulatory ' OF %. 19 .,m :. g u. ~ Staff's caso in this prodeeding. JC '. Z ; 2c ,~ q e CHAIRMAN WELLS: Thank you, s1 ( c gg i If I understand correctly, what ycu and Mr. Jewell i, have said, you have covered item 3-b and 3-c. u., h MR. ENGELHARDT: There is one pending =atter which I o (V noglected, and that is the matter of Joint Exhibit A, which ) 33 l I

..? ty 5 151 ,~ 1 l under cover of a letter to the Board dated September 17, 1968, s (~} 2 the Regulatory Staff transmitted to the Board copics of the i '.v w 3 application and pertinent documents relating to that applicction.~ ' cy g Included in that collection of documents was an index cf the i. /. O record for hocring. This is a three-page document containing s 14 items. Itisthisdocument,whichthestaffwouldproposo[. ~

c..

7 i 7 as the Joint Exhibit A to.1 ntify thoso documento which are

}

4 , gy. ~ s essential, which consist of the application and portinent. f+wR

m. v 4:m 4-r o

documents which_I'have identified and to which the staff... ~.

s. -

~ ,W . t. + .e.. to ; proposos in its motion to receive the joint exhibit to req 6csti % E ..SM v x

si that all documents contained in this listing may.be.used~by.:.. ;. 4-4

. g g-in.Boardandpartiesbyreferenceforwhateverpurposeisnecessary[Q i ? 4 Ow t r, during the course'of the hearing. In other words, 'this- ..e ..:a '. %. .1, a m ] 5.' s > ~ R Y,Yh record for hearing index which I have just identified would'.Q:g.g 14 a ry a constitute Joint Exhibit A and all cf tha documents i'lentifiedl i i i. s te ; in this index would be used and could be used b'y Board and. _ ' e j . y

4 z.y x
7 [ parf.los for whatever purpose is nucessary by reference and thus~

l g! incorporate them into'the record of the proceeding. p.,, C' ' N.." p j . WM, ID ^ / CHAIRMAN WELLSi-That is satisfactory to the Board W ', ,o ~,.

..q c
j r

i m al Mr. Engelhardt. W j 1 MR. ENGELl!ARDT: I have copies of this 1.dex to wh'ich ,l i, a !,I have been referring which I would be happy to distribute to n O i i a} the membere of the Board if they desire or I shall cucit that c !until I offer this as Joint Exhibit A at the hearing. 3,4 p p h CHAIEMAN WELLS: I think it might be useful for us w j. o l w+

~. .c .z ty 6 16 m 1 to have a copy. If you don't wish to do it now you can do it at ~ {' 2 the end of the conference. Ifyouhavenothingfurthertoadd( w - c: .2-3 as far as the Board is concerned, I think that completes 7 ~ .j, 4

      • " 3-C,m;

~ Q, 5 We come next to item 4, the ider.tification of i .w ,M'- ~~~ o ;..significant safety matters. ,,r., 7 Norna11y, and I see you have so indicated on this. 1

t,

.p..4 a proposed agenda, the. staff ~would make a statement at this; aff. w.,. o time.on these; issues., m: %:x o s.y :g~ , to, ^ MR. ENGELHA'ADT:..~ Wc do have suah a ~s.tatenont that j- +., -11' we'arelpropared to read,into the record. No also_have pro y; b.k. . I p !

.43 printed copics of this_ statement which we can make availhble 12 3
+

v.:. m 33 to the* Board to-folloe,while Mr. Schwencor is readin'g tho' state-.../ ~ l1 : l' [5lbk $f' for,,. J. - = w ~. 6.: . ' &.. :. ~ ? =,.. + if the' Board ~so desires,.it can be incorporata_d^into W. ggjment e V - y: - .,g -.. ~ g.,~g v..y +

;.w this record asiif road. ~

3, ,e. to CIIAIPJtAN UELLS: Let me consult with the Board for,a: x. e-moncnt.:! yy l. s [ I think what would be most useful to us, Mr. g ,7 _ <. y. ; - g *.m

s..

m;a m g Engelhardt,jis_if you wos1d be good enough te give us tiie M,,O l ,. W .c Q: -_ I prepared statement and we will read it and save you the trouble? g , >~ i - of reading it orally. We night take about 10 minutes to do 21 I { that, or maybe even.less. ~ Q, I { MR. ENGELilARDT: Very good. gl Mr. Newnan will distribute those copies. o CHAIRMAN HELLS: To enabic those of you who are a i .l l 6 y

ty'7 17 I attending the conference, to take a rest, we could call a 'l (] brief recess while no read this and reconvene in 10 minutes / 3 v m. 8 "ron now. 1 {) 4 (Recess.) ~ 5 l! CHAIRMAN WELLS: Will the necting come to order, e, please. f,. 7l Mr. Engelhardt, thank you for the statement and it' h '. l

1

<an a has been helpful for us to review it. I think we are now. f. 7l( 9l .,, -!s A re &' l prepared to indicate to the applicant and to,the staff the.,.i l.Qh , a. \\ 10! general lines of questions that the Boar'd has in mind. Y, j gp ti i ._MR. ENGELHARDT: May I inquire, Mr. Chairman, as %.. Jo c s - e i 12 ( to whether this stateceitt will bc incorporated into the L 13 ' transcript of the prehearing conferenco? - ' $;.- ?.3 7'y 'y .... J: ~ . _~ j 's {- 14 !. CHAIRMAN. WELLS: As if read, yes. .Q+ Qi(v..- K.

  • s.

,e

D MR. ENGELHARDT:

Thank you. ,-[ r. u.. f-e 30 We will nake a copy available to the Reporter. [ n l ,,7 i 17 CHAIRMAN WELLS: Thank you so much. i I (The Prehearing Starement 4.'ollows:) j' O,, 33 f w,'p;j$f 2 , y. zg l ~ l ggxx = l PREHEARING STATEMENT I . 2 I 21 ! ARKANSAS POWER.AND LIGHT COMPANY f I ~ RUSSELLVILLE NUCLEAR UNIT 1 0 n! nj The Arhansat Power and Light Compry (APGL), by L rI application dated November 29, 1967, and subsequent amendments,' I a has requested a license to construct and operate a pressurized 1 t N

4 ty 8 18 ~ I water reactor, identified as the Russellville Nuclear Unit, in (~3 2, Pope County, Arkansas. ~ v) t 3l The proposed reactor is designed to operate initially / 4 ' at core power levcis up to 245? megawatts thermal (Mwt). The 5 ' applicant anticipates, however, that the reactor ultinately e will be capable of operating at a core power level of 2568 Mwt. 7; Accordingly, the applicant and we evaluated tha engineered a safety features of the reactor, and accident consequences at. [T 4 ..s o a power level of 2568 Mwt, an{ evaluated the thermal-hydraulic; j to, characteristics of the reactor on the basis of a* core power ' '. 'd' s

.n q.,.

level of,2452 Mut. W - p w. 12 Since the initial filing of its applicatian, the ~ i w J N 13j. applicant has made three significane changes in the designy; p of the plant: (1) the con'tainm nt buildidg design has IY '7 -,.m 3.. 10 revised to provide for thrco instead of six vertical ~ m g buttresses and for 240-degree instead of 120-d,egree span of horizontal tendons,'(2)'the energency core cooling system was 17 i { s j reviscd to provide more complete separation and better pro- ~ g tection against. failures, and (3) the electrical system was g redesigned to provide' automatic selection of offsite power fbr' 3; 21 l energency conditions. In addition, the applicant cado tho i ! f 11 Wing significant changes in the plant design as a result ~ 22 of the regulatory staff evaluation of the application: (1) g installed a chemical addition iodine removal system to the con-g_3 .e.., iv! g [tainment sprays to assure that any offsito radiation exposure l1 i i h F

g d ~ ty 9 19 { i docs not cxeced 10 CFR 100 limits, (2) added an onsite pond of' 2 water to provide a backup source of emergency cooling water. - [ s (y t u. s The applicant has also agreed to (1) replace 1200 feet of an 4 ( existing gas line which traverses the site with piping which 5i meets the current A,SA code and to isolate the gas line so that~ .r.- o i in the event of a break the gas lino can be shut off, and (2). - i 7 to Perform tests on the containment structure's liner and tend'n o x y a anchorages to. confirm the adequacy of their d'esign. No find' ff theaboveadditionsanddesignchangestobeacceptablean n m. o, g .m .g compatible with the Commission's General Design Criteria. C -{ .u

q.,

. -The nuclear steam supply system design and the 4 3 A .- y-. ? ', M C A ~u ' oveiall contai'nment design of the Russe 11villo plant are v 12 y y 13{ similar to those of the threo Oconee plants currently under. i " ' ' ' N s , e $'. h, -1 i< 'd construc' tion byIthe Duke Power Company. '. ;, lc? 95 $- r.~ m 34 ~

.u m.;

+ ~ 8 ~- .m M, g! The.Regu1ntory Staff, its site and environment ~ con f l g i sultants, and the Advisory Committoc on Roactor SafeguardA. ~ have reviewed th'c various site-related factors and have V. 0 3. 7E 37 ,y. i ascertained that the site is suitable for the proposed ' (..,. ~ T .y ^

1. c : -
.1 e

.In this regard, the Environmental Scienco Service g % 4 v'?" reactor.- y g. s . a. Administrationhascommentedfavorablyonthemeteorologyjf'. - 20 l the proposed site. The U. S. Geological Survey commented ' .,~, Y ...J 22 [ favorably on the hydrological and geological aspects 'of the' Proposed site. The Fish and Wildlife Service roccanonded 23 o l that the applicant cooperate with appropriate Federal and _~ 2 (3 sj h State agencies in planning the proposed enrironnental monitoring. .3 a x

20 - w;:{ 1 program, end that the results of the program bo prcvided to thes 2 agencies for review and' reference. 17e have also reviewed the,m'. _u 7-( ) a design of.the proposed plant as related to natural phenomena "q. v .) 4 l and have found the design to be acceptabic in this respect.. .g ,s Our seismic design consultant, Nathan M. Newmark, gl h. Consulting Engineering Services has deteruined that the design bascs and the design criteria can provide an adequate targin y

a..

y' a;ofsafetyforsei0micresistancetothoseseismicacceleratibns-e' which have been estimated by the applicant and found acceptabl ,.../. by the U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey. ~ '.y _f p ;. g- ~ , [ <? We have evaluated the consequences of potentici 11 g Laccidents~which. .4> ,,., m.. a, 'could involve the release of radi oactivity from the Russellville Nuc1 car Unit and have concluded,that-in'.'7 wg A ' the unlikely event' of any of these~ accidents, the pote

n. m to

~ ~ lf p a r dosesfromJthereleaseofradioactivitywouldnotexceedtho( ..cp. 3 7 g s \\ mf Zuidelines' set forth in ~ 10CFR Part 100 of the Commission's '. ' t 37[' regulations. .x ~ y 4 g !! Theapplicanthasidentifiedfurtherdevelopmentwork c. 2 on a number of items which will be performed daring tho . a:3: r, te, .,7...,. .4 -t 4 , detailed design of the p,lant. Each of those items has-been .g identified in the application and in our public safety gg g evaluation. He believe that this development work will be ~ !! completed for incornoration in the final design of the ,'3 g!Russellville Nuclear Unit. 4 I In our opinion, these development p programs will provide-the data necessary to construct the I 3 LJ .t hl' I h s

.t. .<.-, e., ty 11 21 - _ g, 3 7 3 m.v ~ facility in accordance with the criteria and specification,s 1: e; ..W ,..w ., v. 2 set forth in the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report. ~ ' "i Y s

w.

c 4::s The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, in its,. W a-s,w 3.. g .s I letter of Spetember 12, 1968 to the Chairnan regarding the . [- M.? y 5, APGL application, nade severci comments and reconmendations. p, s. We have considered cach of these and will be guided by all of~ k. ~ .g 7 them in our continuing review of the Russellville Nuclear i $z.c w,

a. ;

w&J Unit.* The ACRS letter concludes that with due consideration. s. $. e ,. -; g. rg 9. a. - o to the var.ious items menti'oned'therein "... the proposed plane, ME .~. .a l s ~ 3 1 'f..: ~ ~ . w. , :a ,4,, ~ ~ to-can be constructed at the Russellville site with reasenable .':d W 7 ;; ?.:.5. 11 assurance that.it can be operated without undue risk.to the "'t.' us A m l health and safety .q.e i of the public." 2m W .,~> - n i, iWe have concluded, as a result of our review and' N., M - 1 13 j 2 ....3 >g y, 1r w.pm.y w .. / evaluatio. - n of the AP4L1 application for the Russellvillec,[d. gla,lg @?, g . u7,, a,1. 3. 7,..:,. ',, .t u. n.g: n. ,\\ ,that the a'ppropriate findings can be made'on[eac@a g? s tr ' Nuclear' Unit, f , 3 y M[ 4.c : to of the issues set forth in the Notice of Hearing for this .A.d n... Kw ;g End i2 proceeding. . %,4. :.p~

7. < (

37 '.. w. y :, .-1 l'%n s - s 'fG . - % ff U. -. v -- 13 .u-per rv '

i., - J ':
g...%,W.hef
  • i
  • 7., '
  • s

,y f ~ M,, ' i,' f f

    • % pf vp

, ~ g? 4 g .I '9 yi E, (b. -(' ',s-

  • }

~, 4 s. go (

g

.( p -. .J, ?* ZI ,r l e O L 23 ' i + 47 J } a

== r., I w

u '22 -l 'HAIRMAN WELLS: I suppose overy Board gives 'i C r^T this caveat, but I hope that the parties will understand ( ) 3 that our questions or the lines of questions which we will h identify this afternoon are simply that. Uc may have 0 U additional ones by the 30th, but I think the kinds of questions that we will identify this af terncon will be those whic51 we 'think G 7 you might want to have some time in preparation. If bet',Leen '[ t O now and the hearing other questions como to our mind in our '"' l- < ~ - O view that night require information that your witnesses s s., g y. to 1 wouldn't have readily available, we will try to get them to ~ gi:. v. 11 .you in a suitable form.. W '1 ~. ib' 12 I think also I might add that it will not be 3 c,; p 13 our intention,to phraso the questions jist as precisely as 1' i :M y y ~ m.,.: s u. 0 \\~' 14 we may wish to 'during the hearingI ' Again, lit 'will be foe ';;, M. ~. ,;. s g-* V, 13 the purpose of giving you the idea of the kinds of things we 10 are interested in. But I think it goes without saying, and ~I a 17 will certainly repeat this at the hearing, some of theca c. Is ' questions will be designed not so much to inform ourselves, ~ rg.4 ,v .,s A 3

- s is although at least one-third of the Board, namely its' Chairman,

~ s 20 needs to be widely informad, but some of the questic.ns we will 21 ask will be designed to inform the public, because if there 22 should be members of the public at the public hearing, and I 23 9 don't know whether there will be or not, I think it would be 24 desirable for them to get some general idea of the kinds of (- } ,d 23 I questions that one thinks about and talks about when he is

a.. 23 j I* f 1 2. considering the safety of a plant of this kind. Also because p) wehavNasmallgroupthisaftarnoon,wecanmakethisquiteaa 3 s* ~ 3 informal session and we would be very glad to have the - J-h applicant or the staff to ask us to elaborata on our questions, D try to clarify them if they are not clear to you, and generally. O try to make this a useful session for you in preparation for. 7l the hearing. e ~ .K b, ;. 3' i V, 0 .' I wonder,,Dr. Quarles, if you would be villing 4 4@ g

a..y;G.

to begin with your questions. .. :,. ?g 7, J.jpp

.d!Y gn DR. QUARLES

Yes. As the Chairman-hac caid, I u.m[ A3 f %+. II am not trying to make these specific, but rather to alert the..,JQ n 12 applicant and the staff ito areas in which there will be .L m n. 1 .f Q g;y,y 18 ) specif,1c questions later on. On page 17 and.18 of the g 31 staff's analysis;,you' speak'of a five-year period before 2,5 }$s},l 17' 7 y IU radiation offects become critical in the pressure vessel, "j IG and then indicate that thero are means to mitigate the

  • N.
\\i e

y 17 concequtnces of cuch' failure if it chould occur.- I would ,R '9.'4. 10 like some discussion. of what means are available, hcw they[ N +; %:;.. .:5., ~ , would 'be' applied 'after"five years and why they cannot be Eaken ^<' 19 n_:;:rs, .O ~ . r' to into consideration initially. .Why wait five years? A ( 4 21 general, discussion of this whole aspect of it. .s 22 I can't help but comment that the staff's file on r.e O u 23 seems to be quito up to date, my tornado question is already t N E'3 'in the staff analysic but I would like to know what criteria {G 3 3 will be used to determine if it is necessary to add protection I l [

2-24 y y to the fuel storage pool and other critical aspects of tho' I (~') whole plant, This may be-directed towards the staff of the.) ~ a V applicant and concerns off-sito power abilability. I would 2 h 4 like some discussion of just how independent the sources of ~ 5 off-sit power may be, if they are subject to any accident v. G that could cause failure of all sources, a single accident ]( u 7 .that could cause failure of all off-site power. O h;. m .xnw gb ~ I beliche criterion 39 talks about failure o5 'k ( 9G;l. 0 .L x x,. :. 9 one componen't. In a recent caso, a distinction was.made j:. g,/f. ~ -3_. m 'V[$S to between an active component and.a passive. component. I y- ^i . would like soms elaboration of why there needs to be any _.M;..pQ 11

  • y,~

12 distinction between active and pascive components. And in ', 4 9 connection with thib, the same question, how reliable is' the. J;;?' 13 m, 5.f -.y.3 , g .)g [ e 14 I automatic selection of'off-sito power,~is there. adequate ' k a: ~15

. *::;;y~:

~..p.. 15 rodundancy to be sure it will operate and if it vill not y gg 13 porato under all conditions, what does tho operator himscif; a 't . ;S,Q-s w' m 3 17 do to take care of a failure of this automatic system? We are. .~ l ' - to concerned about quality control as most board seem to be and~ ? x-y arecontnewsitemhascausedevenmoreconcernandwe[ wonder . f* to

y'

. _3 ~ 9 s i,..L ~ 20 what offect eported delays.may have on quality control. We 21 would like some additional informaticn on the qualifications m 22 of the key quality control personnel. And particularly to O ga the applicant, who and his qualifications in the applicant's f (,) .ac I -organization will hava the compednca, has or will have the ID competence to pass en the performance of. contractors. The 1 4k .g = en

c

,p,

.~, 25 %a ~ I applicant may dalegate certain things, but he cannot Ielegate 4,;,.v) responsibility and therefore somebcdy in the applicant's" ~ a 1 , ~.. 3 organization should be qualis.ica in this area and we would. 'u' i h 4 like information on who this is and whct his qualifications g

z..

3 are. ^ f Q., a We also era concerned about this gas pipeline

q 4"'

g 7 that goes by the site and we would like a discussion of 's. h ' 'd, ! %g ' possibleruptureofthisgaslineandtheconsequencesio~ 8 e ~. a. ' :%K~ I v;. D plant. To give you an idea of what sort of thing we are Tje 7tG ~ .ya ~ ~ .ww to getting at here, if the gas line ruptures, it will ccme out of, fy. a, -, :WW the ground and whip around and undoubtedly thero will be.'aj '..$.o' ~ .it . \\ A 1 12 fire. Suppose this whipped arcund so that the jet flamas ' ? . n, la directed against the side of the recctor containme.nt. .What_m'...',M, v. : g -..~ ygg -- s.:q q s. 1 14 then?.Another possibility that we would like' discus' sed ',3$.! 2/31 't .m ..r w 13 is suppose unignited gas gets into the vantilating system, Y ,5 to what is the relation of the ventilating system of the entire '. j.% s f p:., v 17 plant to thia gas lino, both in its present position and ja in any possible position the ends of the pipe may go when Ka ..{. s . f.., C thsy break. Unignithd gas ' going into the ventilating system ., {, ? 33 ~ ~ J.3 go ; could blew up the whole outfit. So I would like some , ;; 7 .) aj assurance on the review of this particular type of hazard. y': y - 22 Mr. Chairman, I believe that covers the notes I 33 have now, but I reserve the right to ask any further ones at b(x any time bsfore this hearing is finally adjourned in 2.3 23 i Russellville. 8 = \\ + W

Ti. p. 26 ~ s 1 Sht CHAIRMAN WELLS: Your reservation is duly noted. '~ ,m 2 (v) l .y i Mr. Briggs? MR. BRIGGS: I have several questions here that O 'i. 5' are of intereet to me one, 1 wou1d 11ke to eieborete a little core on the gas line problem. It uould ba interesting 0 to me to know what accident was evaluated, what conditioris 7 were concidered in the evaluation by the ctaff and its _ l--[;a .b.,.. O Ma consultants and also by the applicant. This possibly will. a 4.; 7 o be the accident that Dr. Quarles has talked abou,t, it might

,w,

L~ to be a different one. IwouldliketohaveinformationabobtN - )- ~ ~ Nd-s.. 11 the present, state of' knowledge of the background radiationY; '# h" ~.. 12 at the site, how much thic background can ba cxpected to be. ~ 'I3 'n increase 6 by normal operation of the plant, and how these ,i k, - 3 .a. n.f. 14 ,J. .,.w s estimates of increace in background correspond to experience E j f 10 in existing nuclear power plants. I would like to know' I5 10 g something about the expsrienco that the designer and con, 17 structor, if a constructor has yet been selected, what their ~ s, 10 , experience has been with prestrasced concrete vessels and"I'. E g x;., 7 ~ 3 L would like to kn'w in more detail about the prcgram that is T,e ID o .w 10 to be undertaken or is being undertaken to qualify the 21 anchors for the tensioning members, and to qualify the anchors ~ 22 for the liners. I would ba interested in knowing about the I ~ 23 i, schedule for completing this work. .i M ,o On page 45 of the applicant's summary there is \\") EU discussion.of the training program and of course further i I 1 r v

O Y g discussion in the application. In here in one phase of 6ht O ') the training it is mantioned that there will be three to ( c 8 five months training in an existing plant or on a simulator. 'N 4 Q I would like to have soma discussion of the Equivalence of ~ s 3 training in operating plants and cimulator training, the G relative merits'.of the two, and uhat basis'will be decided for-q- 7 which kind of training will be given, I mean what basis i. c ~ will be used' for deciding which kind of trainign Nill be ( 'l [g., e ,. t O given. And what the staff. considers to be adequate train'ing ', .g 10 on simulators as opposed to training in an'r.nisting operating m: -: .v Il plant. -y 12 On page 29 of the staff analysis they discus's the 13 containment cpray system for removing iodine. I would,like,. g,, .9 8

- ~,

. gy w. 14 to have additional discussion by 1.he staff and by, the' applicant. Y 15 In particular, I would'like to have discussion in some detail 10 of the staff' evaluation of the iodinc removal factors for - b! 17 the Russellvillo containment spray system, what removal To factor is required, the staff's estimate of the degree'of .si y.- .\\f M 19 conservatism in~the iodine reduction factor that it calculate ~ 20

  • and I would like to have the applicant's opinion of the degree of

~ 21 conservatism involvad, or that is cbtained in these calculations.

22. t I would like to kncu in some detail the additional R&D has 23 required, who specifically will do the work, and the schedule 23 for accomplishing this work, what the critical problems are 27 that could cause the spray systen to prove inadequate and

.l

~ w:.

7-s JG?

28 1 7ht I whether there is really serious consideration being r. 2 ) given to substituting charcoal absorbe.rs for the spray 4; system, and if so, what R&D is required for the charcoal N i.' 8 .h absorption system or what evidence we hava that a design ( h. can be provided with demonstrated certainty of meeting the .], E ,.n 6 requirements for reducing the iodine concentration in the .,.Q7 7 Russellville plant. I believe that is all the.t I have now. . T X/3 ,,'m. 8 CHAIRMAN WELLS: Thank you, Mr. Briggs. ,~ j

4Le D

I had ona quantion, I am sure it will be a fairly. M5 . a: e,.s - s n._, 10 easy one, but it is related somewhat to the.quastions on

f,,.[)

.;AJ quality assurance, at least-[n an indirect way. My memory % ) 55!. 11 .;, gy 12 is that the proposed construction permit provides that tho' .g - reactor will be built some time in early '72, maybe Februar.y}x. O,(3T ~ 7 y v. 13 s v ~.,, hT~ r, E - 3 'y {; q, qv;_ e e y. s 14 as the earliest da. te _'and the latest date July 1,1972. First'.7 6 ~ .a w.7 1 2 ~ y., p 7 2 15 of all,,~I wondered, was that by any chence a mistehe? Thi's.. p. g e ;.; " : :l ( lC I five months difference bstween the earliest and the latest' date. . n. Ly'4,. ~- 17 ' .s Mr. Jewoll, do you happen to knew on that? i .MR. JEWELL: That was not a mistake. . ;.,':',; w ^ 18 ~ / ;,f. 7. ,1 CHAIRMAN WELLS: That.is not a mistake. The 5;' 10 p ~ '4 m question that I had in mind about this is are these dates x ~ 21 j. realistic in light of possible dclivery of precsure vacuel and l. o 22 1, the supply of components and that kind of thing? As I h 23 i indicated, this is informal, but I think this has an indirect (~N rA relationship to the quality assurnnce question. I don't knew ( ) 25 how badly you are going to need the electricity in early f 4

1 29 -;;u y, g Bht 1972, but if you wer,e going to need it very, very badly,..

  • p.,

j g \\ ) this raises the question.of how fast you and your contractors v 3 7., o are going to have to work to.get it done and does the quality 7 g h assurance program take into account de strain tha might thereby be placed? I would be~ vary grcteful for any general %C 6 .e exposition you might be abic to make on that at the hearing. ~'" y M Mr. Engelhardt, I believa I am correct, am I not,,,t -i i ..r.co 3 LO and if noti I would appreciate your correcting me, that whereas 6 the construction ' permit provides that the plant must be p(, g, m ~ 7,1 c to -, -. m completed by an outside date, in this case it vould bc July, .h! II .;p '1972, it has been customary in cases where good reason could re.. _ w,. IE be shown for the Commission '~to c:: tend that tine? i'Y - ~2' ,\\ p* . tr, ; 1g (J .c ge, ~ MR. ENGELHARDT: That is correct.. If the applicanti 4, 4 x ~ ' z.. a.=...'. ,3. m,- s K ting .d , is unable to complete ithe' construction of the plant by' the dat< @pw v q 13[ specified in the construction permit, the applicant woulck N;, v .O i normally request the Costmission for an c:: tension of that date. 4 17 ~ uponashowingofthereasonuhythatdatewasnottobemet] i and the COLT.ission' td$tild, all things being equal, and the ).O IG ~ - w.. i.a /s... ?. ..i, 10 proper cause being fhown,fwould provide for an extonsion of l?f 9 + ): 20 that construction permit by order of the Commission. This is the ~ a-21 customery procedure that is followed. ~ l 22 C11 AIRMAN WELLS: I think perhapc related ta this. ~ F 20 y alco -- and this question parhaps chould b2 directed to the C') staff at the hearing -- sinco as of new at least this ;s an M v l uncontested proceeding, this Board will be required only to EU g

' ', d ~ _.,.: 30 I ascertain that the manufacturer supports the application and y 2 ~ (v) the review of th'e applicdion has been adequate -- it might be l s useful if'the staff would give the

Deard,

if it continuas to b b-Q an uncontested case, some general idans of how they evaluated' ~4 5, the quality assurance pregram in terms of the ability of tha. ,.n G contractors to meet their obligations on a tircely basis. '.I.s.', - ' f.. ' y,. q.

t. ~. ;.

- l es. 7 that reasonably clear? - r,; 3 M. 1: .^$ % ,[ 0 MR. LONG: Yes, it is. 71[? %* , Cl*$

n,t.

D [ CIIAIRMAN WELLS: The Board recogniscs that th'ese", .,Y ,s ( >.c %y m.m, . 3 s. 10 are vo j nebulous matters to say the least, and yet when a f,e if, 4 3,.c + r 11 judgment is reached, there ic always, some general basis forg gg( a 12 that judgment. I think one of the questions that Fa. Briggs' ^ [ 13 suggested'was broad enough to cover two or three things thdtT., @[ .a._--. .. u

g..y w

~ Q

g. *f, gg 14

'I' had in' mind.. 'But let ma state it my way and then we' will' ' u%) -= e, ..a -: y.., * - 3;4. t Jf-A..:g a, ;t. 15 be sure that it is generally covered. One of the things'thatl Ei IG concerns me is, as a Esmber of the Ecard, and I think it does

,3 17 '

my colleagues, is at the construction permit ctage much of thh ' ~ g 2 IC design is yet to be completed, thera is still research and _ l ah =..:q a~ w.,,y: v. . ~, ~:.. ,.1 'Is development tolbe done. That is normal 'and we accept that.' 7 17 20 But that d'oos mean' that we hava to come to somo kind of, -1, -~

m. ~

s s

~

I conclusions as to whether there is reasonabla assurance that it 23 1s 22 will be dono. Now again va may have a comparatively easy task 23 here, because it apponrc it ic uncontested. But noting in p N both the applicant's sunsry description and, the staff l \\ J \\ I 20 evaluation there are identification of additional research an6 l +

.l 31 i.. a development to be done and also further design to be y n (s/ completed -- incidentally, I think this was a very useful 'T h h P and clear presentation -- but at the hearing I think it would

}'

h be useful if you could to update these things to the extent [ O that you can. Now if it is nacecsc y, I can go through hero, s 0 I have a number of them marked, but I would prefer not to.havc[,t6 .i do that, so we wouldn't. prolong this meeting. But for exerplc' :.; 7 ^ 1,,,, #1.;., c e there are certain instances particularly in the applicant's',.2 M ..g. 3 w% f;? x D summary description ~where cartain. things are 'to b'e complete'dy: [ y,y ?> 10 by January 1969'. Now it will'be 'the end of October when ^ 0,;2.h ~ ~ 'X, x II we have' the hearing, so precumably you will be pretty close 4 d '. m o ,c ~. u to completion of those. Perhaps this wac wru ten say two oi'~ 12 thre[ months' or five or six months back, so you may be# able 13 c ;. . y:4

  • w.!

.ye3 -y MDS$ft ?d ' I'3 bring us up to'dste onthese items. ~ gff Siy i [ 13 Does the applicant understand what we have in ,m , +/ OSb I J 16 mind? .-,pc 1 5 +. 3 f 3 s b. 17 MR. JEWELL: Yes, sir. . -1 c. ) 3 10 f cHAIRMAIT WELLS: One of the favorite questions 1, = q'. o

  • y.,

that I have with refsrenca to.those kinds of application's# - e1 ~ -19 m ~ g. 3 20 is whether or not the~ materials that will bo produced or the 21 materials that vill be used for fuel will be adequataly safe-m 22 l guarded aga5.nst diversion for unauthorized uses. I noticed O l j tha applie nt hac ctated it will abide by the regulations of 23 i 3 the commission. I am not informed cs to what the status of p/ L l 25 the commission's regulctions on this particular point is. l l i ~ ~ 3

p l} ~ ~. r ~ 3 2' ' I know in the Diablo case the Board was informed thatthey; I 11ht 2 [A) were in preparation. -Perhaps the staff at the hearing O would be good enough to bring us up to date on the status of %e h the regulations. 4 l2 5 MR. ENGELHARDT: Mr. Chairman, would it be sufficic ht i - :q j ~+ 3_ 0 in response to that last goustion if the staff counsel were,;. 4 ( 7 to provide, call it a status rcport if you like, of the ?N + .s g ~ w s. s.,. 8 - current' regulations in this area? Or would this be a ma,tter.,. ?. (; a y, % e. ax w 0 that yoti require a witness for? .;j.Dj 113., x m,. e x U.WQ .y ;j), to CHAIRMAN VTELLS: No -- TJ " P i' 3 an . x q. ?/3 11 -i MR. ENGELHARDT:.Decause neither Mr. Long and i g q, ;Vf{j g 12 Mr. Schwencer are conversnnt in this arca, this are of ~, :.9 -.y El J.S. ?. c.: + . :.6 g: 13 . safeguarding the material is a responcibility of.a newly.,p 3:: _. _y; .. 4 y 14 ~ formed Division of Nuclear' Materials Safeguards, and normally d - i. v. m. 15 'their-testimony is not required iri hearings of this nature,' 5' 10 but I_would be happy to provida a responce to your question,' T4 + as ,ff _2 ll;; 17 if that would bo satisfactory. 4 a. Is CHAIRMAN WELL:S That would be satisfc.ctory for' my [ '; i 19 purposes. I.' don't think"we would want 'to go ' any further -a u...,% 1: -a' v ,4 '/'. i i i s

g r

than that.' It is really simply the question that we know, at y ;l 20 21 least I think I am correct, that as a matter of law the H 22 ! applicant must abide by the Co.udccion's regulaticna on Then if the regulations are pronulgated, ipso -..c 23 this subject. n

4 facto the applicant will have donc uhat is required to be

(# \\ i l 23 1 done. But.the missing link in our minds now is the status of I

,, y e-3;; 12ht 33 1 those regulations. ,] ('T 2 ( I would like to add one general cusstion on the w-y 3 general subject of iodine removal which Mr. Briggs referred .h to. Since this question has aricon in several cases in the 3 last six or sovan months, I don't know how many, but it seems G to me practically every transcript 'i read a fairly 7 sizeabic portion of the transcript is devoted to this question.,-

9. w 2.

O this Board would be particularly grateful if Mr. Briggs' I$ '? y~. s.i 9 question could be answered in a way that perhaps would not requ.i.ra much dh.scussion at the hearing and-might evo_2 d;, _ h 10 he 7-*, .11 useful to subsequent board to which this question arises. _ pl x e. 12 MR. JEUELL: Mr. Chairman, the applicant did not C la quite understand th'at laut question. * ~.,... >:.r El e ,3 n p - Q. .. &- r.,,. ~ v c 9

%x1 CHAIbWi[WELL:

Mr. Briggs asked a serios of ~; ? C; 14

.w 15 questions concering-the plans for r?moval of iodino. AsIundb~I

,4l 10 standitingeneral[certainchemicaladditivesareexpected a 17 to do this. Rescarch or experdrcentation is being done to 13 ascortain if they will. If they don't, then the alternative ' 1,,

.u

~ [ -10 'is to have charecel' filters. This general subject, I said, ~' 20 has been the subject of considerablo discussion in many of s. the hetrings. I confess I am not quite sure why it has tLkon 21 22 so much time in each hocring, but it han. So I expressed the O 23 hops that the Board and the cppliccct and the staff, with a /] '24 reciprocal cympathy in asking end answering the questions, ~ \\> 23 ; might be abic, one, to minimise the time that is requirod to l aw

W,- s 1

?. x

.. ~,. * ~'l5 -34 1 .,n 13ht be spent on this subject, and two, perhaps get it answered m 2 (V) in a sufficiently definitive way that it would be acceptable ( D to this Board and perhaps to later boards. h 4 MR. JEWELL: Thank you, sir. + - 5 CHAIRMAN WELLS: I wonder, Dr. Geyer, do you have 0 any questions you would like to add to these? _s a. 7 DR. GEYER: One thing th'at it casted I would like.' -4 ~ to have a little' additional-informa?.ign on is the~wh'olo' ~.. O J'M 0 ~ ,(. M i ? :a ?h s question of protection against floods. It seems.a_ bit i 4.?e to w ~ n unusual that a plant be designed to have eight feet of wdter. II aroundit under the extreme conditions -- I realize thesc C" * ?9 ,',a-12 ~ conditions are exceedingly remote. But then the question' q , n:o j. a 10 comes up what constitutes protection provided by. Class 1 l% w k ~ ce v %2 . ', - - - u., 14 structures _and problems'of floating' tanks, anything floatikgM ' di _Qw,.:. 15 away in the vicinity of the plant, any drains that might 'p f U. e c, 13 admit water inadvertently ba'ch into places where.it wasn't har ted. 17 CHAIRMAN WELI.S : Any other questions? 'k 10 DR GEYER: No. 1 3 9 y. 4 t ( .1,. CHAIRMAN WELLS: Mr. Bond, do you have any ~ 'Q'- 10 ', A _ ,_ N 20 questions or any elaboration on the ones the Board has 7 21 already posod? 9 22 MR. BOND: I will spare the record and audience O i 23 j claboration, Mr. Chcirman. But I would like to mention one M )l. ,X matter which night be of concern to me in the remotely (s ) / 25[ credible circumstance that I might be participating in tho, i. l l

  • "r L

a

M 9:+ g= 35 L. ..e. 1 activities of this Board. If so, I would want the record + 14ht

  • y g

(, I - I to have a bit of clarification or explanatian or justificatior j u .a s-, for the pocition the Board might find itself in in undertakin9 - h to approve a proposed finding by the Director of Regulation ~ D that the applicant is technically qualified, when thus far m O examining the papers, including the staff's proposed evidence y . ~ ..n 7 it appears that the finding there reposed and the con-1; , e. _- .J ' ~ 0 Dr.. - clusion there reached is that the. applicant and the i ': ' p$d 8 g.y contractors 'are technically qualified.- There is a possiblef-M ~ ,.:j,p y inconsistency between the published stated issue and the dd .i m Il conclusion thus far, reached. ' ~"" 7* ~ ' 12 mz CHAIPJ1AN WELLS: Yes. I wonder if the question 13 ; ulk might not be' posed this'way -- and I think it is a useful one,"$ e'C f-I '," xis,,, - a g si. m y, ) -e. -,%d .s to uhoever is~ participating on the' Board -- what does thel ',: jg;/s ~... U ] , word "applic nt" imply in the proposed finding that the-N> applicant is qualified? Does it ipso factor include.its _ ) U f contractors, or is it just the applicant alone? The stafft to might wish to advise the Board on;that. Isn't that essential:.y r the problem', K.' Bond?, ~, p:. w.- 10 lQ F F 7 MR. BCND: That cartainly poses the problem of-1 21 j uho is the licensec, who must ba found qualified and must be i W I 22 responsible to such limitations e.s the cow csion in the O 23 licensa and onsuing liconces may impose on it. Does that or 2G p does it nof include anyone other than the applicant? Maybe L) 25 I am asking a binsodquestion. l / l t } N t - ~

Q ~ 13 6 A.g -~ - t 15ht 1 CHAIRMAN WELLS: Well, I think for the benefit (9) of the applicant and the staff you are probably aware of ..a 8 ~ it, but in ene of the recent cases, the Rancho Seco case, I h '4 have read the decision hurriedly, and I believe this was a '2 U matter of concern to the Bocrd,'and this Socrd would proposc j O to read the decision more carofully and perhaps you would 5+. 7 want to too, but I have an idea that that decision expressels, 7r ~ + ?- _7 0 .the concern that Mr. Bond is expressing v.! whether or n6tcthit. fh.. -m ,.e - 8 particular Board will be equally concerned I am not quite sure.;yet . 7;.. gg":. s.; 10 until we read it. But I do think that the one question thatl -m t' 6,, : 11 would be useful for-the staff to reply to is when the. A rA.gh 12 proposed finding refers to 'the technical qualification of., the [ 13 applicant, does that include the utility whose nama ' appears [ @[ , u.49 fQ; 14 .on the application, or does that include his principal' $?? d$$L .g 15 contractors, his servants, employees, and what not. An'd 1,;, IG therein I think probably lies the answer to this question. f, I .c 17,l But in connection with this, one of the things I noticed in ~ ,s 13 this application and I meant to mantion it and I forgot it, s.. ~ ID and I am grateful to'vou, JD,.for reminding me, the' 3; 20 i contractor to do the construction work apparently has not i h 22 Il been selected yet. Is that correct, Mr. Jewell? l c MR. JEiELL : That is correct, sir. 22 i O TA CHAIRMMi IlELLS : I don't know whether this is ^ ( T 24 customary or not, but whether it is or not, I suppose that L) FZ might have soma bearing on the question, if the applicant i

n,, : r$

~p.

~

is c.y,

'37 Y

  • I

' ;% 9l.? 16ht includes its principal contractors, and if the contractor 3 '{,-) 2

  • h: =':?

bj ~

  • ?z n:

\\ j to do the egnstruction wo2.k is one of the principal T, j4 3 C Mi, contractors, that might have some bearing on the finding. ^ (a.7 ^ b.: O,~., Mr'. Bond, did you have any further questions? .',g: y, m.

c S

- Thank you, no, Mr. Chairman. MR. BOND: > ~~ ,, + ~.e -q. Q 6 CHAIlkMAN WELLS: I think it might be useful if we?.. >.c ?:O' 7 gave the cpplicant and the staff an opportunity.to ask us it.h.' s t 'V n-1& O c.>. any questions ~about the question'swehavaaskedyoujustto[ Jk e, ,s; w. .;- V % make sure tliat you have understood generally what we vere I9 Q;9 e

t-N n;3 talking'about.

M

[cQ ll

' - ## ^ Id.;ENGELHARDT: IthinkMr.Longhasa~ question'[ [;rp-w 3.. 12 unless you want to defer to the applicant. [ 3% y- ~ _s ~ a eCHAIRMAN WELLS: Why don' t we wait until they '- ft.i A M .. x,,.. w nw ,.; m ' p ~. ~ , wg V I*. confer.. I think'se have plenty of time,'so take your' tiae f*' M (-r-e 57 r s 13 Mr. Jewell? '. [ i 7M a: _ MR.fJEWELL: Mr. Chairman, the applicant's staff 3 m,c"f. s II w.. has no. questions co'acerning the questions. ,' d 10 .'k j'g.' i _, s . CHAIRMAN. WELLS: Well, the Board has been unusually .. s J f 't - 7 ~ a;@ fg [,py %9 - 19 clear. Thank you very much. '.; M,a. ;, U fir. Long?. [ 21 MR. LONG: - I -lust, Dr. Quarles, I would like to

g -

h inquire, you mentioned activa versus passive with relation to ~ 22 23 off-site power. 4 !I [%s) 8* 'I DR. QUARLES: Yes. GI l EI MR. LONG: Are you referring mainly to suitching T p," am

,-m ~ rs .h j ' :.) - 77 38 { 4?; l y m equipment versus transponders? w e> 17ht W (3) DR. QUARLES: I would like a definition of that[ y-2 w/

g. :.

jj 3 I am referring to the' Maine Yankee case specifica'ly. 'I just .'f g read it this morning. .I was alternate on that Board, and 4 x 5 didn't get the transcript until this morning. But one of the -(; g + G questions I posed in that case was the redundancy of off-.;.b.1

  • f y f

4. s ue power. I don't know whether you are familiar with ituin hes 7 ~ 1: detail or not, but there'are two 161 kv' lines, so thef shid,lk a a i _ll{rN; ~ Si;g D ' t turns out both of them are~on the same tio line for.two g-g, .,, lf.,L D r 77 l w-10 miles, one runs down one side and.one the other, and in my ]!,, +w A. ,.. x.. n s 11 . terminology, that is one 'line, but. they. called it t'do'_~ andu y;.Q.L s 4 , -n;: r. ~ y g t p ~-9 12 they hedged on the answer to the question by saying the ACRS t' j'N } which referred to redundancy. of, off-site power, had meantm:: ?, M, 13 .g g;u a.u.. - 4 'f' t h i: efg ; 't. 14 activo components, 'a:idlif I recall the wording correctly [thM dh] ' _a&2 m-10 i personansueringthats"aidbyactivecompone'ntstheymeanth [ l e,f r .c 13 moving things like generators. To me switch gear would,b..E e

g

.i. .,m. . u. '.. 5, c 17 an active component. J 1 _q n.. 10 _ Dut my question really goes to the point thati _m?sec iio. I . ~-. ~~ n j m,,

nsp'.

to ' dif ference in the".'tiltimate result, whether you' call [a ecmpo:ict EQ active or passive, provided that component's failure causes.lc[gy sg s a. 'ss: 20 21 of power. I couldn't care less whether it rotates or stands m on its head if it fails. 1?. c ~" Q E i I MR. LONG: 'That is th'e reason I asked the question. 23 24 ! DR. QUARLES: I can't refer you to the pago,"but (O / w/ 15,1 I think you will get it if you look at the Maine Yankeo caso, about the middle of it. a

, y 'l :f

  1. 5 el

', 39 g. 3 .t -. + MR. LONG: Fine, thank you. /N 2 j) I have one othsr question 'in general to the Board, ss

.g as far as the iodine removal, the expression 'has iaeen made thitti'
_

g_". h we be direct and I guess chort in our responce. We feel that l.a U in order to adaquately cover tha subject, particularly in ~ i ~ ^ a t_ ~ -a O light of Mr. Briggs' questioning, it might be more adequate - 77 c.g 7 if the staff were able to prepare -- and I am not saying dow d ,yk y G I am, -- put able to prepara an exhibit thich va could~sub-; I 77 ,,e

g., 4. _-

2 / 9 r mit to the' Board and then summarize afd the hearing to,indi-~"i MN t,, 10 cate what we have done, but the exhibit itsel'f would -set forth d- ' - g 11 the details. nA +s.- +-A n b *6

y s,.

v 12 Would this ha acceptable to the Board if we are able , t ~ ,,,, fe +,. 10 to do it. betwe'en 'now and the hearing on the 30th? ZM .a

4 e

- i :46,,-- #g* <:1 nFJt. BRIGGS: I think that could be acceptable. IT. I OM,. 14 + q., 15 believe the problem Mr. Wolls was concerned 61th is our spend- 'T 13 ing three or four hours on one day and three or four hours, . [J . a "l. on the next day asking questiene and gatting answere and than ? .g it 1sking cluestions again. One would like to. clear it up uith,c %y ~ (;~ 4.: .,3 r 10 the cta'ff telling what the status is, and what, work needs to ',J. e 20 be done and what they went through in making the evaluation, what the concervatism is, and thor $ the Board having to ash 21 22 !. mayba only a very fau questions to clear the whole mett2r up. h h 23 N MR. LOHG: That ic Uhat I was driving at. I have 24 suffered through one like that. v \\ EU CIIAIIGIAN WELLS: Uell, if there are no other questions, I 8

f -f 4x-s :, - 40 ' '? cb2 1 I think we come to the item on the agenda marked post- .h - (] 2 hearing procedurec. Before we get to that, however, and per-v 3 haps it can be related to questions, I might mention to the g 4 applicant that the Board would like an opportunity to visit S the site on Tuesday afternoon, October 29th, come time after a three o'cloch. We will be coming from various directions and [

  1. .,e y..

7 I can't.be sure exactly when we will arrive, but hopefully no 4: ~ later than four and as shortly after three as possible. ,, ; 'l a f@i i ~ 1-9 Would that'be possible, Mr. Jewell? y J. f. ' ', ^ . - ;,./: w,r .s.<,, ~.N MR. JEWEIN': It will be.pocaibic.and-, vill be ar # I[. to 9 .,,.} 11 _ ranged. p. ,pe m# a:.. 12 CHAIRIG.N WELLS : Thank you. I think actually the" ' 13 guard at the gate might -just be clerted we will be coming. ,. e 1

7..-1.

W

c.pg #.g:7 e.

t m y u ,g.o ,[;N$[{@ht

4 will~probably ha've our.own transportation.

"3 ' q .i p ~. 33 MR. JEWELL: ~ There is no gate, no guard, and there, g ~ is really nothing to identify the spwific sit'e of the reactor. W; 37 You are going to need a little guidance, and we'will provide "D* b' 10 .c ~[D ~ M i .g .' ' CHAIRMAN WELLS:~.Thank you very much.

M~ i to

-s y y With respect'to the post-haaring procedures, the  ; ~ g transcript corrections, what would you suggest with respect ~ un to the transcript corrections, tir. Engelhardt? ~ g MR. ENGELHARDT: Well, Mr. Chaiman, I think the 23 g h transcript corrections could be made eithcr simultaneously I. ') s ..'o< 7,3 uith the filing of the proposed findings, or depending on how [ i. t

,~ .' ;A e - :J 7_ - 41 ni eb3 1 we-establish the proposed findings schedule, the transcript ['; - (N 2 corrections 'could be made within one week of the conclusion $v v) 1-s 3 of the hearing. , c. ,.y Q 4 ~ CHAIRMAN WELLS: I wonder if it wouldn't be useful + 5 for us to decide this on the 30th. .} G MR. ENGELHARDT: I think it would be very appropriate ~ ~' R, yc m 7 to decide tha't on the 30th.

v..a,

v1 r t .% I f * *. ?* 6 [ CHAIRMAN WELLS: It might happen we could complete i yy 8 <x JJ %;g allofthi,s, fairly,quicklyanditmaybecertain'questionsare.f((l 0 ~

(

gcy to raised that'we.would want a little more tima. But why don't h 1 3 V Udf 9 4 ' '. w w..? m' we delay these thi'ngs.until the 30th. ~ 11 l y ....e .n 12 . MR. ENGELHARDT: Are you talking about transcript e 4.+. l w is corrections, or all of the poct-hearing procedural matters. {.j. g.L';g 4-s m: - %. ~;_ c-Yes, I was including all of them.]4 f}.;}.j ez.q 14 _l / CHAIRMAN TELLS:- . 7 : f.- ';.+ ; gg MR. ENGELHARDT: I think one point, with regard tot [u IG Proposed findings, is would this Board accept propoced find- 'g) .H. ( 17, ings at the conclusion of 'the hearing, assuming this proceed- ] \\ r: - .a ing rema. ins an'unc'n'tected proceeding, would it be acceptable' o 3 v., p g. .c x__ _m ~ x.. _ ;.-. v .for 'this Board to receive ~ proposed findings without refer '/ 'Jl[' Q ,9 1 x <;c. - Wr ..' ~

s. %

once to the transcript pages? Or let ne say without reference i s,.f.. y to specific additional matter that might be discussed during. ,,1 ~ ) the course of the hearing, other thcn that matter which is "l ii g O 3 already covered in the summary s':stement and the staff's .e,. Safoty Evaluation? p t\\ '> 3 CHAIRMAN UELLS: I haven't had an opportunity to l l I '+,'

[ i .i - s 3, ..m u 31 Q t.f ^ t 7,s g w !b4 1 discuss this with my colleagues and I will do so before the 'ik-[' M O2 30th. ., ~ J \\ b-L) w 3 My view on thic, Mr. Engelhardt, is that if there 4 has been substantially no new material developed during the W

s 5

course of t' e hearing on the 30th, ue would be sympathetic o 6 to rec 3iving the proposed findings and conclusions of law at Ob 7 the conclusion of the hearing, without references to the ,~ J:: u h ~ ' [ih a transcript. If, however, we' feel that either as a result of' 90(- jy -t _p x 9 our questions or volunteered infornation, that thero has been

4N

,#4s , y ~ A.' ~.w~ to substantially additional inform. tion' presented, it would be' - T, G@[ ~ mv =, gj. helpful to us 'in writing our decision if we had that' keyed to 'e s's 4," 4 _ y n. gy the transcript. 12 [. ~ n,?,E ~ .~ m3 ' So I think it would be useful just to play thic by%e t 4% = 4 s. r, %.. ~ ,a [1 _i i f ~#' Ij a ' ^~ ear, = depending on how the hearing goes' on the 30th'. ' '; *' ? h .f, f,L 8v f' / 14 v~

(

~ 2.@n , yvg 4c r. .a gg Now this would suggestI to mai and I don't want to ' *;[ ' { ,1 zu s M to be presumptious, but that you may want to prepare your. propcsed Rf x ~- w a v.. m, 37 findings and conclusions' of law and I assuma if you prepared 2, ye g. 18 them and had them ready for submission, you would not have lost [

+_
m

'S-E a fx w _-q' -fa ~_ anything, even though you might bel given a few more days"to ;4! Td 'y 4 g g hoy them to.the tranceript. ~ Q

r..

f .s 33 Would tihat be acceptable to you? d MR. JEWELL: ihat would be ccceptable to the appli-22 y cent. { (~'y* MR. EUGEL'HARDT: It would cortainlv be acceptable to (.y). the staff. 1, i* l .}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML19326B360&oldid=4761325"