ML20004D956
| ML20004D956 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/26/1981 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20004D957 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8106100406 | |
| Download: ML20004D956 (95) | |
Text
Ill (((
L3 J_
(!(
(
(
l 1((
( (f(f h(h(f(h(h Jh T_h(h
/
g.
e TRANSMITTAL TO:
Document Control Desk, 016 Phillips A
ADVANCED COPY TO:
O The Public Document Room F
cj=.-
DATE:
J mn 2.
1991 N
Attached are the PDR copies of a Commission meeting P
transcript /s/ and related meeting document /s/.
They are being forwarded for entry on the Daily Accession g
List and placement in the Public Document Room.
No p
other distribution is requested or required.
Existing Q
DCS identification numbers are listed on the individual g
documents wherever possible.
o i
1.
Transcript of:
Discussion of Revised Licensing Procedures May 26, 1981.
a.
Memo from Paul Cotter to the Commissioners dated May 21, 1981, Subj:
Proposed Sua Sponte Rule.
b.
Memo from Paul Cotter to the Commissioners dated May 26, 1981, Subj:
ASLBP Model Hearing -
Schedule.
c.
Commissioner Ahearne's additional views on SECY-81-311 (to be printed in the Federal Register),
dated May 26, 1981.
jake brown 41410 2B
=e THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS FOOR QUAUTY PAGES gr JV7FPJ737DTJ W Vf M W V M M M 7 W M M W VVF)V M 8106100406
/?
(///O NCCI2AR REGUI.ATORY COMMISSICN 4'
- Y'f li dj COMMISSION MEETING In de. Mat:ts cf:
PUBLIC MEETING DISCUSSION OF REVISED LICENSING PROCEDUPIS I
CArr:
May 26, 1981 pAczg:
1 - 81 A7 Washington, D.
C.
i ALDERSON REPDRT1XG f-400 virginia Ave.,
S.W. Washi.g en, D.
C.
20024 Ta1.achc=e: (200) 554-2245
).-
9 1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2
NUCLEAR REGULATORY C05 MISSION 3
4 PUBLIC MEETING 5
DISCUSSION OF REVISED LICENSING PROCEDURES 6
7 Room 1130 8
1717 H Street, N.W.
9 Washington, D.C.
10 Tuesday, May 26, 1981 11 The Commission met at 2407 p.m.,
pursuant to 12 notice.
13 BEFORE 14 JOSEPH HENDRIE, Chairman 15 VICTOR GILINSKY, Commissioner 16 PETER A.
BRADFORD, Commissioner 17 JOHN F. AHEARNE, Commissioner 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, as:idgg11MD /XILJim., M/.%TmKitSC6m RA FMR4 f 275 GPS-24Q
,.0 2
1 ALSO 'BESENT:
2 Samuel J.
Chilk, Secretary 3
Leonard Bickwit, Esq., General Counsel 4
A. Rosenthal 5
H. Shapar 6
A. Cotter 7
D. Rathbun 8
H. Denton 9
M. M alsch 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2346
c _5 1 ~m l
~= tsa= =cee'-d'
=2=s-
- = es 2. =an s ci ca. c-+
.s_
Sca:as 7""'==- Zag =1acn7 C,.
' es:..~. he.Ld c=.
May 26, 1981 i=. de C-
" =st=='s cist:ss a: L71.7 E 5 c=sec, 5. n., was+
p..2, D. C.
"a = net:1=g ua.s open; ::2 pts ' '
a==ad="ra a=d c' sarracie=.
e "is ='-* *--d7: has =nc beer rriawed, c==:se:ad, := adi.ad, a=i ic =xr d-d-=-
-s=.
"a==zusc=1;= is. i=== d-d sola17 #:= s-- =-' ' ' #:==a:1 =s.L
,.cses.
A.s p..r dad. hy 10 C22. 9.103, is is== pa== ci da "c==aI.crd '
L :scori cf d= ' *1 n. ed da =a :ars d' =c=ssad.
Izp==s=" ~~ ed cud-d ~ i=. -"' + =x=sc= ige d=,
== cacassar17
=
rad 2,4c
'd-= ' da* =---d -= -d es or i= 1 ' = '=.
Ne p'==dd
! c ct er page= =ar be. filad, vid. Am C-
' si:=. '.= a=7 p=caed1=g as ha.
- ssul= cf c= add =assed..m a=7 s-s==--
c a..
c==-ed--A_
'* = "u d -*
42339: a s d e, (*
- *sica =a:f" a==hc ~~=
I 4
..,,,.-,,,-----,---.,,--ew-*--r-~-.-wm,-
s---mm-m,e ww-. - - -
r.---n---~-~,=~-~--~~~--ww-
- w w e-~-.~we-~--
- ------~*r--
- - - * - + -
3 1
P_ _ P OC EE D ING S 2
(2:07 p.m.)
3 CHAI3 MAN HENDRIE:
If we can come to order, the 4 Commission meets this afternoon for yet another in its 5 series of meetings on revised licensing procedures.
The 6 last time we met we put out a policy statement and Appendix 7 B to Part 2, and had embarked on a discussion of sua sponte 8 powers of the Boards in licensing proceedings.
That 9 discussion seemed to be running longer than I had 10 anticipated at the time and I cut it off.
We will take it 11 up again today.
12 We also have today before us two rule changes in 13 Part 2.
The first batch of Part 2 rule changes are in the 14 form of a proposed final rule on certain changes we had 15 agreed to a couple of weeks ago.
The second batch of 16 changes would be for a propos^d rule for comment carrying on 17 with certain other items.
18 Len, are you in a position to remind us a few l
19 things about the saa sconte discussion and frame our getting 20 started on that matter?
21 MR. BICKWIT:
I will try.
There were a couple of l
22 issues raised at the last meeting and I think the fix is 1
23 ra ther easy:
One, that " certification" be changed to 24 "no tificatio" 's two, t hat it te understood that the--
l 25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
This is with regard to a l
l ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 4o0 vinciNix ave s.w WASHINGTCN. D.C. 200 24 (202) 554 2345
?
u 1 proposition in SECY B1-304--
2 MR. BICKWIT:
Right.
3 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs that tr.e Boards get ready to 4 exarcise the power, let the Commission know, and the 5 Commission would have some number of days to either say 6 something or remain silent.
If th ey remained silent, the 7 Board would go ahead.
8 MR. BICKWIT:
That's correct.
9 We modified the proposition to.make clear that to it's 15 days from the receipt of notification.
We also, in 11 response to John's question, stated that what we had in mind 12 in draf ting this was that the Commission could say not only 13 "no, " b u t co uld sa y we are not yet ready to decide the 14 matter and therefore toll the running of the clock.
15 We considered a point raised by Alan that you may 16 wan t to differentiate to the extent possible between items 17 which are in f act sua sconte, and actions which are within 18 the scope of issues that are in fact in controversy.
We 19 ven t back to the drawing board to try to provide some 20 sdditional guidance on that matter, and what we have does 21 not provide much in addition but could be added rather 22 easily.
23 We simply would include in the rule language that 24 would read as follows:
"The Commission recognizes that it 25 is common for Boards to raise questions about the subject ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC,
/fMHfddP110 NfL EtM. OC@HINGToN, D.C. 20024 (2021 $54 2345
i 5
1 matter of the proceedings before them, so'long as such 2 questions are reasonably within the scope of the ma tters in 3 controversy.
They do not constitute the raising of an 4 issues gua scente.
The Commission recognizes further that 5 there may be close questions in some cases as to whether an 6 issue is or is nor within the scope of ma tters already in 7 controversy.
The Commission has confidence in the ability 8 of the Boards to make those decisions which will be 9 reversible only for a demonstrated abuse of discretion."
to So that is an issue that we propose to resolve 11 that way.
But we acknowledge that it is not clear guidance 12 to the Boards and we came up short in our efforts to draft 13 anything that was clearer.
14 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Len, is there a revised 304 or 15 a 304a that I should have and don't seem to have?
16 3R. BICKWII:
No, there is not.
These are just 17 some proposals.
A suggestion, I think, is that maybe there 18 should have been, and I take that as perhaps correct.
19 (Laughter.)
20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
No, I just wondered if I had
~
21 gotten something and didn't have it in hand.
22 MR. SICKWIT:
All right.
Then there was also a 23 suggestion in the original paper that we would extend this 24 to CP and OL amendments, and we have drafted language which 25 would allow that to be done.
Now those are the --
ALCERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
092 VIRFRIA AML EiW., WASHINGT5N. D$. $0024 (202) 554 2345
O s
6 i
1 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Wait, wait.
I don't 2 understand how you could extend it to CP.
3 MR. BICKWIT:
4 COMMISSIONEE AHEARNE:
Oh.
Okay.
5 MR. BICKWIT:
Those are the "small" questions that 6 we've attempted to address over the last week.
7 Ihe larger question is whether there are three s
8 voter for this concept, and tha t was unresolved at the 9 conclusion of the last session.
10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs There is a comment in Tony 's 11 memorandum on the 304 paper down at the end where, after 12 making a basic arcuaent tha t he doesn't think these changes 13 are necessarily a very good thing, that if the Commission 14 felt inclined to go ahead with something along this line,
~
15 tha t the EMa E2ontg issues to be referred to the Commission i
16 or the Commission notified the Board was about to take them t
17 up be limited to those of a generic character.
Or at least 18 that's the way I read your III, Tony.
19 MR. COTTER:
I think that is a fair way 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Thus attempting to separate 21 possible matters that the Scard would take up on its C;n 22 into those unique to the case in hand, where you would 23 pro po se th a t there be no ch ange in the present regulations 24 o n Ela EE2alg p o w e rs, a s co n t ra s te d with those matters which 25 could be f airly considered generic -- that is, applying to a ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC,
&jLV! A$NIA AQ @.W, WC@HINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
e l
7 1 number of casas -- and in those, the Commission would be 2 notified.
3 KR. COTTER:
That's correct.
The Panel felt and 4 does feel very strongly about the pursuit of the 23d 222a12 5 authority in connection with site-specific and 6 plant-specific questions.
7 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
What's the rationale for 8 this distinction?
9 MR. COTTER:
Well, that it 10 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
You would in both cases be 11 dealing with a specific plant.
It's just that in some cases 12 the problem would have implications for other reactors and 13 for others it wouldn't.
14 MR. COTTER:
That's right.
15 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Now why would you treat 18 them differently?
17 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I guess you could argue that 18 where an issue ran beyond the immediate case at hand and was 19 of interest for other cases, that the Commission's interest 20 in knowing the Board was going to take the matter unto 21 itself might be higher and the Commission might choose, for
(
22 instance, to say, wait a minute, that's a good question, we l
l 23 oug ht to deal with that on a generic basis and we propose to i
24 do so.
25 MR. COTTER:
That's a fair statement.
From my own l
i l
i i
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC,
_ _ 400 VIAGINIA AVE., S.W.. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 _
8 1 standpoint, I have a hard time envisioning what in effect is 2 in the nature of an appellate review of an immediate 3 question within an administrative hearing which relates 4 solely to the plant in question.
5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Would it necessarily be 6 clear to the Board whether a problem was a generic problem 7 or not?
It would see it in the context of that particular 8 case.
Sometimes it would certainly be clear, but I would 9 think other times it wouldn't be clear.
10 MR. SHAPAS:
I think it would be very difficult to 11 discern, certainly whether or not it's generic or 12 site-specific or plant-specific in many cases.
13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Only the staff that 14 reviews a large number of applications 15 MR. COTTER:
Why do you say that?
I don't see 16 t h a t.
17 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
-- would I think be in a 18 position to compare th em.
Not necessarily only the Staff, 19 b u t at least the Staff would be in a better position.
20 MR. COTTER:
I don't see that it would be that 21 difficult.
I don't know why you say that, Howard.
22 MR. SHAPAR:
Experience.
23 MR. COTTER.
Well, is th e re a specific instance in 24 your experience that you could cite?
1 25 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY Tell us, Howard.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
9 1
MR. SHAPAR:
Well, let's take a look at an issue 2 like -- I'm not talking about any specific case -- whether 3 or not you need to apply an energency plan to low power 4 operation.
Is that generic or is it specific?
5 MR. ROSENTHAL:
I t's generic.
6 MR. COTTER It's generic.
7 MR. ROSENTHAL:
I've never had any difficulty 8 differentiating between site-or reactor-specific questions 1
9 and questions that had decided generic implications.
10 Sometimes you wouldn 't know whether the issue would arise in l
11 the context of other plants, and if so, how many.
But you 12 would know at least that it was an issue that had that 13 potential and it wasn' t one that was confined to the site or 14 reactor involved.
15 MR. SHAPAR:
What about the Board decision on tha t i
16 Florida case?
Was that specific or generic?
i 17 MR. ROSENTHAL:
Which one are you talking about?
l 18 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
St. Lucie, I take it.
19 MR. ROSENTHAL:
St. Lucie?
20 MR. SHAPAR:
Yes.
21 MR. ROSENTHAL:
Well, that was in the context of 22 the St. Lucie plan t.
That certainly had possible generic l
23 implications.
24 MR. SHAPARs Was it clearly specific or generic?
I l
25 MR. ROSENTHAL:
I t was clearly -- It clearly had l
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 1'
_,. 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASH!NGToN. 0.C. 20024J202) 554 2345
10 1 the potential of involving other plants.
Now if you've got 2 an issue as to whr.c is the seismicity of the Diablo Canyon 3 site, that is clearly a site-specific issue and it does not 4 have that potential.
But I think you can draw a clear 5 dichotomy between questions that are perforce reactor or 6 site-specific and questions which have a potential for 7 generic implications, even though you may not be able to 8 determine, as you couldn't determine at St. lucie, how many 9 plants that might affect.
I think that dichotomy is 10 possible.
11
.1 R. S H A P AR :
Of course, since the rule is only 12 directed at notification and the Board is f ree to go ahead 13 and consider it unless the Commission says otherwise, I 14 really don 't see any justification for trying to distinguish 15 between generic matters and specific matters.
16 ha. COTTE3:
Well, if you're sitting at a hearing 17 tha t you think has maybe one issue in it and you think it's l
18 going to last two or three days, and then the question 19 arises and you have to notify the Commission, then you start 20 the 15 days running and you have to presumably recess the 21 hearing, indicate you can 't complete the hearing at that 22 tim e.
And you also, if I understand the amendment 1
23 correctly, may run into a situation where the Commission 24 finds that it cannot act, but it wants to take an active 25 review of the subject, and you would have to toll the l
l ALCERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
l
11 1 running of the 15 days, which could then ex tend it out fCr 2 an indeterminate period of time.
3 MR. SHAPAR:
But why shouldn't the Commission have 4 the flexibility, if the issue is indeed 121 EE2nig and is 5 not raised by any party, to refer the matter to the ACRS, to 6 call in an cutside group; or if it's basically a legal 7,,uestion, to decide the matter themsel es?
'4 h y shouldn't 8 they have that flexibility?
9 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
But Howard, don't we -- I 10 ask this with some trepidation as one of the creators of 11 this scheme originally 12 MR. SHAPAR:
I'm trying to support you, 13 Commissiona r.
14 (Laughter.)
15 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
'J e ll, I've become a moving 18 target.
17 (Laughter.)
18 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Don't we in fact have that 19 option under the present scheme as well, simply by telling 20 OGC in the course of its monitoring of proceedings that 21 ve're especially concerned about Eg1 gronte matters and we 22 would like them to call them to our attention on a more 23 accelerated scale than even the normal monthly reports?
24 MR. SHAPAR:
I think tha t's a fair point.
I think 25 the candid a nswer to it would be that by ha ving a ESA 222A12 ALDERSON REPCRTING COMPANY. INC, ai?LU&fN:A AV1 M.W. WC@HIN@ TON D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
12 1 rule it does as a practical matter cause the Boards to 2 exercise some self-discipline that might othorvise not be 3 applied.
4 MR. ROSENTHAL:
It seems to m.-
that the response 5 to Tony might be this.
Tha t is, that if this is truly a 121 6 Igogig issue, one which is not within the scope of the 7 matters put in controversy, it oughtn't to be raised for the
~ ?irst time at the hearing.
If the Board is going to raise 9 that, they ought to raise it well before th e hearing starts, 10 because it seems to me quite unfair to the parties to be 11 asked to address at a hearing an issue which is beyond the 12 pale of the -- beyond the scope of the issues that were 13 placed in controversy, without reasonable advance notice.
14 So I would ask you as a practical matter --
15 MR. COTIER:
~4 ell, the hearing is the exception to 16 the rule.
17 MR. ROSENTHAL:
I would ask as a practical matter, 18 how of ten is it going to happen, or should it happen that in 19 the middle of a hearing a Board raises an issue that is not 20 interwoven with the matters in controversy, with the result 21 that the Board can, under the 15-day requirement, have to 22 adjourn?
I don't thiak that should happen very frequently, 23 if at all.
24 MR. COTIER :
I don't know that it has, but 25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Tony, don't most of these 221 ALCERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIAGINTA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
13 4
1 sconte --
in the 12 cases in the last 6 2
MR. COTTERa 3 years, so f ar as I know, they have all been before 4 h ea ring s.
5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Typically they come up when 6 people are arguing about conten tions, don 't they?
7 MR. COTTER:
Yes.
8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs The Board gets interested in --
9 MR. COTTERa Sometimes they arise in 10 connection--
11 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEa
-- some question which for one 12 reason or another is not accepted as a contention on behalf 13 of one of the parties.
14 MB. ROSENTHAL:
It comes up that way, Mr.
15 Chairman, or it can come up during the course of the 16 examination prior to the hearing by the Board members of the 17 SER or some other document.
18 My point simply is that it ought to come up 19 considerably before the hearing, so that if the Board really 20 vants that issue explored the parties have appreciable 21 advance notice of the fact that they're going to be called 22 upon to address the question.
23 MR. SHAPARa And I think that is when in fact when 24 they have arisen, early on in the proceedings when the gua 25122 Rig authority has been used.
As a matter of fact, the ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, TRN, @.@. M4 (FFfe 554 2345
Tu 1 only place they come in at the end of the hearing is when 2 the Appeal Board uses its ggi gganig authority.
3 MR. ROSENTHAL:
I might say, we don't have any 4 problem.
I'm now just speaking in the context of the Appeal 5 Boards and their raising of sua gagnie issues.
Of course 6 they're in a difference context, but we have no problem with 7 15 days' notice.
8 COMHISSIONER GILINSKYs Why do we need the 15-day 9 period?
10 MR. ROSENTHAL:
You're asking me?
11 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY Yes.
12 MR. ROSENTHAL:
I don't think -- If you recall, my 13 view of it is that there is no necessity for it.
But there 14 was some concern expressed that this SRA 222nts authority 15 has been or might be abused by the Boards.
My feeling about 16 tha t was tha t if there is that fee!',ng and there is also the 17 f eeling that, to avoid abuse, the Commission should have an 18 opportunity to look at what the Board proposes to do, that 19 this is a mechanism for accomplishing that purpose.
~ 20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, no, there is the 21 notification, and there is the 15-day waiting period.
22 MR. ROSENTHAL:
Well, the Commission obviously 23 needs time -- I assume what will happen is:
The 24 notification will go in the first' instance to the General 25 Coonsel as a practical matter, and the General Counsel I ALDERSCN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
_400 VIRGINIA AVE.. S.W., WASHINGTON. O.C. 20024(202) 554 2345
t 15 1 take it needs some period of time in which to provide its 2 advice to the Commissioners; and then I ta e it the 3 Commissioners need some time in which to decide whether to 4 step in or whethat to extend the period for stepping in or G whatever.
That's what I understood the 15-day period was 6 for.
7 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYs Well, but it isn't as if a 8 lot is going to happen in 15 da ys.
9 WB. SHAPAR:
Well, I would answer your question 10 dif feren tly.
11 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs The 15 days is primarily to 12 provide some time af ter which the Board is free to go ahead 13 if it hasn't heard from the Commission.
It's a compelling 14 mechanism on the Commission to -- so that the Board simply 15 doesn 't refer an issue up here or notify the Commission and 16 then it doesn ' t hear a nything and two weeks go by, and three 17 and four, and the Board doesn 't know whethe r it can get on 18 with the hearing, or whether it's going to be told to treat 19 tha t issue or not, and --
20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
We can always step in, l
21 even after the 15 days.
22 MR. SHAPAR:
But resources may have been expended 23 on defining th e issue --
24 ER. COTTER:
Well, the 15 days are not really 25 compelling, because they can be suspended.
So that it is ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, a6LUCIFYrmo NT6m f%g,JKfs4 6ra Eft-FEnci
16 1 not a meaningful compulsion.
2 MR. ROSENTHAl: 'Well you can do that, but I would 3 certainly hope that the Commission would be able, either in 4 the 15 dayr. or in whatever period it chose to extend tha t 15 5 days by, to make its determination; because it seems to me 6 it is very disorderly, if I may use that term --
7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Disruptive to the hearing.
8 MR. BOSEKTHAL:
-- for the Board, 15 days go by, 9 there's nothing happened, the Board goes forward, the to parties prepare testimony, the Board is out there conducting 11 a hearing, and all of a sudden the word comes out that the 12 Commission has decided, for whatever reason, that it doesn ' t 13 wish the Board to explore that.
14 It seems to me that if the Board is going to move 15 forward and we're going to have a system where the 16 Commission is exercising this oversight, that the Board is 17 entitled to know within a particular period of -time -- the 18 Commission again can extend it -- whether or not the 19 Commission is going to step in or not.
I mean, the Board 20 and the parties should not be walkine on eggshells, 1
21 wondering f rom day to day whether suddenly the plug is going 22 to be pulled.
23 HR. BICKWIT:
I think the difference in part is l
24 psychologiral, that if you have a 15-day period then the 25 Commission I think is more likely to step in on day 15 than ALDER $CN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., 'VASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
17 1 it would if you didn't, and the matter were being in fact 2 pursued.
I think it is always easier to prevent the train 3 f rom sta rting than to stop it once it is in metion.
4 In addition, there is -- as Howard pointed out, 5 there is the resource consequence associated with what 6 happens during tha t 15 days if the Commission ultimatelv 7 decides that it's not a good idea to go forward.
8 On the other side is the interest involved in 9 allowing the Board to pursue in a free-flowing way the 10 matters that it considers ought to be raised.
And I think 11 if there is one proposition you can agree on, the 12 Commission-- there will be fewer actual exercises of the gna 13 gg2alg authority if you 've got a 15-day period than if you 14 don't.
15 I think it really ought to turn on how much you 16 want that power to be exercised, and how much in the way of 17 restraint you want to put on them.
18 3R. RCSENTHAL:
Are you suggesting th a t the Boards 19 are going to be less prone to resort to that authority if 20 they have to give 15 days' notice?
21 MR. BICTWITs Yes.
22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I'm not sure that that's 23 rig ht.
I can tell you th at 's not likely 25 to be the ra; e i ',
the Appeal Boards.
I can't speak for ALDERSoi4.YEPoRTING COMPANY. INC.
l 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
18 1 the Licensing Boards.
2 MR. BICKWIT That would be part of my response.
3 The other part would be that the Commission would be more 4 likely to step in if it's got 15 days.
5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I'm not sure.
6 MR. SHAPAR:
I think Len is right, because I think 7 ve've had some experience where the Boards are actually 8 making the finding that it is a serious matter before they 9 raise the issue.
Now if the rules require that there be 10 notification when indeed they are purporting to use their 11 gga sconte suthority, I think the fairness dictates the 12 answer that Yes, there is at least a chance that th e g33 13 goonte authority will be used less f requently.
14 COMMISSICNER GILINSKY:
Well, there is certainly a 15 ch ance.
16 MR. SHAPAR:
Well, I think it's human nature.
17 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY.i Human nature also, it 18 seems to me, suggests that with this 15-day system, once the 19 Board has thrown it up here and the Commission hasn't acted, 20 in effect the Commission has approved that contention, and 21 the Board can then go and exercise it to the full, knowing 22 it's acting with complete Commission approval.
So it's'not 23 clear to me which way this would go.
24 MR. BICKVIT Well, if you accept that the 25 Commission is more likely to come in --
ALDERSON REPORTING CCMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON 0.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
19 1
COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
Oh, I don't know.
2 MR. BICKWITs
-- if there is a 15 -d a y period, and 3 I think you would procsbly accept that, then I think it 4 follows that a Bosrd is a little less likely to subject 5 itself to that if there is a 15-day period.
6 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Well, except when this 7 proposition came up about six weeks ago for the first time, 8 it seems to me that the meeting closed with someone-- I 9 think perhaps Victor-- having said. that if all that was s
10 involved was sending a note to the Commission, the Board was 11 in fact more likely to raise issues on its own than it was 12 if they had actually to take them up and pursue them on 13 their own hook; that we were likely to be deluged in fact 14 with memos sayings Wouldn't you like us to look into these 15 items?
Whereupon at least some Commissioners were 16 sufficiently chilled by tha t idea th a t you will remember 17 that we went a month-and-a-half without discussing the Egg 18 goonte rule.
19 (laughter.)
20 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
And it's only lately that 21 it has wormed its way back, and now we are treating with 22 equal seriousness the proposition that in fact there will be 23 far fewer EEa E22alg issues laid before us; and the fact is, 24 I guess, we just don 't know.
25 MR. SHAPAR I think we know.
ALCERSoN AEPoRTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
20 1
MR. ROSENTHAL:
We don ' t know, but I would again 2 scy that where the Appeal Boards are concerned it's going to 3 be a totally neutral factor.
It's neither going to increase 4 them nor decrease them, and I could also tell you --
S COMMISSIONEB GILINSKYs It's quite an onous to 6 have on us.
7 (Laughter.)
8 MR. ROSENTHAL:
-- that I would be extraordinarily 9 unhappy if it came to my attention that one of my Boards 10 decided not to explore an issue that they otherwise would 11 have explored simply because they have to put it up to the 12 Commission.
I think indeed that that would be a derogation 13 of their responsibilities.
I don't think it should have any 14 effect one way or the other, and I don't think in the case 15 of the Appeal Boards it will.
16 17 18 19 20 t
21 22 23 24 25 i
I ALDEASON AEPORT1NG COMPANY, INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202):554 2345
21 1
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
If I could speak in favor 2 of the proposal, let me just sa y this --
3 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
If you could just get e 4 that sta tem e n t 5
CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs Another case where what we do 6 makes no difference.
7 (Laughter.)
8 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKYa Another chapter of 9 "Nothing Matters."
10 (Laughter.)
1; COMMISSIONER AHEARNE.
Well, I am not sure if it 12 is necessarily going to be a chapter of "Nothing Matters."
13 The Boards obviously can and will speak for themselves.
14 The purpose of my original memo months ago which 15 a t least did discuss this particular issue was that I still 16 believe that the fundamental purpose of the operating 17 license hearing is, one, to resolve issues raised in dispute 18 b y the parties to the hearing.
Therefore, I do believe that 19 a Board raising an issue on a gua gronte is a sufficiently 20 unique situation that the Commission should be notified.
It 21 sho uld have, that op portunity.
And that is the main purpose 22 o f m y being interested in any of these approaches, including 23 this one.
24 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY4 From what Tony says, we 25 are notified.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. NC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE.,9.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
22 1
COMMISSIONER AHEAPNE:
Vic, the notification that 2 occurs sort of, that by keeping track and such -- you have 3 been here longer than any of us; you know there is a 4 blizzard of paper.
That just is not the same.
The reason--
5 you can see the Licensing Board is very disturbed by this 6 proposal, very disturbed by it.
Whether it is a good or bad 7 proposal, it is obviously a significantly different 8 proposal.
9 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
What I am,saying is if the to Commission is interested, then the General Counsel's office 11 will collect those pieces of paper and put them in front of 12 you.
And the only thing at issue here is whether you want 13 to formalize it further and introduce a 15-day delay.
14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Or notification.
15 MR. SHAPAR:
The General Counsel's office may have 16 difficulty in spotting when that authority is exercised if 17 the Board doesn 't make the finding that is in the 18 regulations.
And I am saying that the Boards are not in all 19 cases making that finding.
20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, maybe the Board 21 ought to mak e the finding.
Well, Tony said they did.
And 22 if they do not, I assume they will.
23
.4R. BICKWIT:
I think something can be done about 24 it short of going 25 MR. CCITER :
It could be a statement of an ALOCRSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) $54-2345
23 1 adve,ca te 's position and tha t would be one party to the 2 proceeding.
3 MR. SHAPAR:
No nore of an advocate than you, 4 Tony.
5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I thought you said that is 6 your current practice to issue an order.
7 MR. COTTER:
Yes.
8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
So there will be an 9 order.
And if the Commission is interested -- and I think 10 they should be interested -- that order is going to appear 11 on your desk.
12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE.
And I believe that that 13 order, in ef fect, ought to be an order or a request to issue 14 an order, whichever it is, that there ought to be a period 15 of time bef ore it takes effect.
16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, the rea son I raised 17 the question about that is, I vondered if you were not 18 introducing a cumbersome element that complicates things, 19 rather than 20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
It does.
It does 21 complicate it.
A b so lu t ely.
22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
But not necessarily one 23 f rom your point of view that is going to work to reduce the 24 number of these issues.
I think it'is just going to 25 complicate.
I am not sure, but at least I think it has the ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W WASHINGTON D.C. 20024f202) 554 2345,
24 1 potential for just complicating things procedurally.
2 COMMISSIONES AHEARNE:
Vic, you are right.
It may 3 increase the number of issues.
But whichever way it cuts, 4 it will de2initely mean that the Commission has formally--
5 because I am sure the General Counsel vill, if there is a 6 15-day in there, make sure that we get that in front of us 7 within those 15 days -- we will have formally have had an 8 opportunity to look at it, which cuts in my direction that I 9 am interested in in saying that a Soard raising gn EE.gn.t,g 10 is an unusual situation.
11 MR. ROSENTHAL:
You also ought to remember that 12 f requently the Board will identify the issue it is raising 13 on its own in the midst of a long prehearing conference 14 order, which is essentially addressed to other matters.
It 15 may be an page 18 that the Board notes that it has called 16 upon the parties to address this issue.
And I think it is 17 putting a substantial burden on the General Counsel's 18 office-- although Len can speak for himself -- to have the l
19 monitors responsible for reading those things with such care 20 and so rapidly tha t they pick up those things.
At least, if 21 it is a separate piece of paper, then the focus is right on 22 i t.
23 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
All right.
I thought it 24 was.
I didn't realize it could be part of --
25 MR. ROSENTHAL:
That is not necessarily the case, l
ALDERScN REPcRTING COMPANY. INC.
, 400 vtRGINy AVE S.W., WASHINGTcN. 0.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
i 25 1 because I just saw one in the two couple of days.
2 COMMISSIONE3 GILINSKY:
Ckay.
Suppose we have a 3 separate piece of paper which then appears here; and the 4 Commission, if it is interested, will deal with it.
I 5 wonder whether the 15-day or wh atever-day period it is, is 6 something --
7 MR. ROSENTHAL:
But if the Commission does not 8 deal with it p ro m p tl y -- I mean, my concern about the 15 9 days, or the reason that if there is going to be specific to notification when the Commission has the opportunity to 11 ' again pull the plug, I am very anxious to have there a set 12 period, because I do not want, frankl, the Commission to 13 have a blank check in that regard.
I do not think it is 14 fair to the Board.
15 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
The Commission always has 16 a blank check.
17 MR. 3GSENTHAL:
'd ell, not as a practical matter 18 because if --
19 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY Well, but this is going to 20 depend on how many of these issues the Commission decides to 21 knock out of the hearing.
If the Commission seldom does 22 this, then people are not going to be on tenterhooks if the 23 Commission is not going to do it.
l 24 MR. ROSENTHALs We are always on tenderhooks.
If l
l 25 the Commission is constantly doing it, well, then, I suppose ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, l
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
26 1 ve 2
MR. ROSENTHAL:
Well, we are always on 3 tenderhooks, because you never know when is the first time 4 it is going to happen.
I would be very hopeful-- I want to 5 be perfectly candid about this --
6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa I know what you are 7 saying.
8 MR. ROSENTHAL4
-- th a t the Commission not 9 exercise the clear authority it has to do this at any time to down the road.
I think that this Commission owes it to the 11 Boards, if it is going to reserve this right, to exercise it 12 within a prescribed period, whether it be 15 days or 20 days 13 or whatever; and that it be an extraordinarily rare _ instance 14 that the period has gone by without there being an extension 15 when the Commission pulls that plug.
16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY But we are going from 17 questioning these issues to giving them the stamp of 18 approval in a way that cannot be undone --
19 MR. COTIER:
That is the major question I have.
which seens to be going 20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa j
I 21 to the opposite extreme.
i 22 MR. ROSENTHAL I do not think it is necessarily a 23 sta tement of approval.
You do not have to regard it as l
24 affirmativa approval.
It is just that you are not going to 25 step in.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
27 1
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
It's not disapproval.
2 MR. ROSENTHAL:
That does not mean that you are 3 affirmatively endorsing wha t the Boa rd has done.
There 4 seems to me to be a middle range.
On the one hand 5
MR. COTTER 4 But does it not open up the 6 Commission to the charge that they have prejudged the 7 issue?
8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
No, it does not.
The 9 Boards, as Vic has pointed out many times, the Boards are 10 the agents of the Commission.
If they are out thtre to 11 resolve these issues in dispute, here comes a tim" when the 12 Board decides:
In addition to the issues in dispute among 13 the parties, they want to raise something.
They are out 14 there as the agents of the Commission.
But by this process i
l 15 that has been proposed, it does not say the Commission is 16 stamping it with approval; it is just that there is a formal 17 mechanism f or the Commission to note that the Board is now 18 taking that step and i's not disapproving it.
19 dR. COTTER:
If you could keep it that simple.
20 COMMISSIO.NER GILINSKY:
It seems to me there vill 21 be a tendency tc regard this as a Commission approval, l
22 because just as Alan says, he wants to have some confidence 23 that the Commission is not going to step in after that 24 point.
So the Commission after 15 days is saying, " 'J ai t a 25 minute, let's not give them tha t approval.
So-and-so is out ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400_ VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. 0.0. 20024 (202) 554-2345
29 1 regard to the basic proposition of Commission notification 2 when the Boards intend to take an issue up on their own?
I 3 it a majority that leans in that direction?
4 COMMISSIONER GILI'NSKY:
(Nodding affirmatively.)
5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
(Nodding affirmatively.)
6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Peter, I have read a " nod" on 7 aither side of me.
What is your feeling?
8 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I am all for having the 9 Commission notified.
I think after all I have heard about 10 the tangles and signals and tealeaf-reading that would go on 11 in the Boards, I would just as soon for the time being task 12 OGC to be the one who notifies us.
If we want the Boards to 13 say they will use red-lined paper when the decision contains 14 a Egg sponta concern to make it easier for CGC to pick it 15 up, all rir,h t.
16 But for me, it would be enough just to have OGC 17 let us know on an expedited basis which of the cases that 18 they are now looking at pick up gua sconte issues, and then 19 we can decide whether we want to do anything about it.
20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Would I read that to say you 21 would not be in favor of a rule change which would say the 22 Boards notify us?
23 COMMISSICNER BRADFORD:
Right.
24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
You would say that?
25 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Let's see.
Is it ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC,
_. 003 VIR@ INIA AVL S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C..20024 (202) 554 2345 _, _.,
30 1 necessarily a rule change?
2 MR. BICKWIT:
Not necessarily.
3 COMMISSIONER GILINS.TY :
I would just think as a 4 matter of practice there is a rule, and with a standard fo r 5 the Boards taking up these issues.
Now, if they have not 6 been making a finding according to that rule, perha ps they 7 ought to.
It seems to me that does not requirc a rule 8 change.
9 COMMISSIONER BR ADFORD:
Joe, is this before us at 10 the moment in sort of a rule-change or no-rule-change 11 posture?
Or is it potentially part of whatever the 311 12 package is that is going out for comment?
13 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I have toen regarding it _as a--
14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Proposed rule change.
15 CHAIRMAN FENDRIE:
-- as a potential rule change, 16 which, if it gained a majority in some form or another, 17 would be added to the items for that--
l 18 CCMMISSIONER B'RADFORD:
For the 311 package?
19 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
-- for the proposed rule for 20 comment thin g.
That was the way we framed it originally.
i 21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
It was a proposed rule l
22 change or rule practice.
23 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I sur'ose, depending on the 24 formality with which one wanted to note notification 25 requirements, it could be a less formal direction to the ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
31 1
1 Boards.
I guess f or myself if we are going to do it, I 2 would prefer to sae it in a rule.
3 MR. SHAPAP There is a certain advantage in 4 having it in the rule to know that the internal practices of 5 the Commission would mean that if it is raised sua sponte 6 that the rule will say that the Commission may elect to take 7 it out of the hearing.
8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Since the proposed approach 9 was weaker than I had originally hoped for and I compromised 10 myself down to this stage, I would see no real value in 11 doing less than the one we have here proposed.
12 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE Than the 304 proposal?
13 COFMISSIONER AHEARNE:
As len had modified it.
14 CHAIEMAN HENDRIE:
Perhaps with Len's 15 modifica tions.
10 COMMISSION AHEARNE:
So I would not be in favor of 17 having just added another monitoring burden to CGC.
And I 18 just do not believe that saying we have the inherent 19 authority to step in any time; while I certainly. agree with 20 that, I do not think that accomplishes as much as I had 21 hoped to accomplish.
22 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
But nothing good will 23 happen unless we step in explicitly.
That is, one of the 24 worst things that could happen would be for the Boards--
25 Ala n 's poin t to the contrary notwithstanding -- not be to ALCERSoN REPCRDNG COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
32 1 flag an issue.
Because, as I understood it, the point of 2 the rule that we are considering is to give the Commission a 3 chance to say, " Wait a minute (a) we do not think you ought 4 to raise it," or, (b) we thint ACRS or the staff ought to be 5 taking it up, or (:) go ahead and do it.
6 But you lose the opportunity to follow step (b) 7 entirely if the eoard is simply deterred from raising the 8 issue at all.
So I think whatever option one follows, one 9 still wants the Commission to be aware that the Board has a 10 concern and not simply have the Board be deterred from a 11 general rumbling from above from raising issues'at all.
12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNEs I am certainly confident 13 for myself that the appoach tha t was proposed would not 14 deter any Board that really had a concern.
15 COMMISSIONER BR ADFORD:
Let's see.
Of course, 16 tha t is the one we have been going back and forth on 17 intermittently.
Len's point was that it would.
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I think it would deter 19 Boa rds f rom raising-issues that did not in their mind rise 20-to one of really a serious concern.
21 MR. COTTER:
I think the Boards would clearly take 22 it as a slap in the face, and there is a good chance that 23 they would simply abandon the authority entirely.
So you 24 could accomplish that.
25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNF:
Tony, you have now cut it
~
I ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
f 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. Op. 20024 (202) 554-2345
i 33 1 both ways.
You have said just now, you said they would take 2 it as a slap in the face and abandon the authority.
And 3 then previously here you 'said that you felt that some of the 4 members would perha ps not even be able to sign off on the 5 license.
6 MR. COTTER:
Well, I think those who felt that way 7 would quit.
8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Well, if telling the agents 9 of the Commission that if they go beyond the issues of a to fact rai sed by the parties means that they pick up their 11 narbles ani go home, I guess it might be best that those who 12 really feel that way should.
13 MR. COTTER:
I would think so.
14 COMMISSIONER SILINSKY:
I d.idn't follow this 15 closely.
Who stays and who goes?
16 (Laughter.)
17 MR. ROSENTHAL:
The thick ones.
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
The soreheads.
19 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Do we get to stay?
20 (Laughter.)
21 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
No, Vic, you're out.
I'm 22 sorry.
23 (laughter.)
24 COMMISSIGNER AHEARNE:
Unfortunately, our rules 25 and edicts don 't apply to us.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
di$ VIR@lNio AVL @.W., WMHINGToN, O C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
34 1
(Laughter.)
2 CHAIEMAN HENDRIE:
It seems to me that where a 3 Board has an issue which is not raised by cne of the parties 4 which they think is significant to the case and meets the 5 test under the ERE EE2Elg rule as it now stands, that they 6 raise it.
And if they are asked to notify the Commission, 7 then at some period or not in which the Commission is 8 expected,to act, I do not see that the Boards will not raise 9 issues on the one hand where they would previously.
10 If that is the case, then they have been raising 11 issues on an improper basis, and I do not think the Board 12 members who have raised it would buy that.
Nor do I expect 13 to see a great rush of issues filed.
14 I do think if we are -- I guess, on balance, I 15 think there is some merit to the notification process.
My 16 own view is that if there is a notifira tion requiremen t, 17 then indeed there ought to some limited time within which 18 the Commission _ expects to act, and failing any action within 19 tha t time, then the Board simply goes ahead as it chooses.
20 I totally agree with Alan that I think it would 21 not be helpful to simply drift along not knowing whether the 22 Commission is going to do anything or is not going to do 23 any thing on an issue, so that notification period, no-24 further specification of what happened, I think leaves the 25 system uncertain as to where it goes after tha ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC,
. _ $j), VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (202) $$4 2345
(
35 1 notification.
I think you want to leave the system so that 2 after a brief time for the Commission to consider what it 3 sight want to do it the Commission, that either the machine 4 goes ahead and works as it would have anyway or the 5 Commission takes a positive action.
6 Now the " positive action" can be an extension of 7 the 15 days, but that requires a majority of the Commission 8 to agree to extend it.
That is a positive action.
Or it i
9 can lay down some opinion on how or why or whatever it wants to the Board to do about the issue.
11 But I think that configuration where notification 12 and then if nothing has happened up here in some not too 13 long a period of time, that the Board simply goes ahead is 14 the right configuration to leave it.
It clears the air with 15 regard to tne Boa rd 's plan and the hearing on the issue.
16 You need some days, I guess.
It is a pity it has to be a 17 15-day delay, but that is perhaps not unrea so na ble.
18 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
That may be right if the 19 Commission is going to adopt the habit of f requently 20 knocking issues out,.if that is the way it turns out; then 21 you have a pretty uncertain situation when one of these 22 issues is raised.
And unless that uncertainty is relievad 23 by the expiration of the time period of a sort, you are, 24 still up in the air.
25 But I guess I do not view things operating that ALDERSoN REPoADNG COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
36 1 way.
The Commission can give guidance on what constitutes a 2 serious safety issue in dealing with opinions after the 3 fact.
In other words, we can deal with things on appeal and 4 speak to these issues.
5 Now the reason there is interest in being able to 6 deal with them more quickly is a feeling that somehow some 7 of these hearings may get out of hand, get off the track on 8 issues that ought not to be in there, or whatever.
So you 9 have this opportunity to step in and do something else about 10 it if you want to.
And it seems to me that being notified 11 presents you with that opportunity, but I would not think 12 that it is something that would be exercised frequently.
13 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE4 But even if it is not, unless 14 you have, in effect, a cutoff period for Commission action, 15 why you leave things very uncertain amongst the parties and 16 the Board members as to what in f act is going to happen with 17 regard to that issue.
They are going to be very hard put to 18 go confidently ahead on the assumption that in only one out IJ of four cases does the Commission say anything.
This may be 20 the fourth case.
21 It creates then an uncertainty in the proceedino, 22 which I think is not in the least helpful.
In fact, I can.
23 see Boards trying to take up other matters and this one is 24 still laying around and finally th ey get other matters 25 pretty well taken up, I can see Boards coming back a second ALDERSoN REPoATING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20014 (202) 554-2345
37 1 time, saying, "Well, are you going to do anything about this 2 or not?
We tre getting ready to close down th e record and 3 go off and write a decision."
4 COMMISSIONER GIIINSFY4 Well, the uncertainty 5 comes from the fact that the Commissioners have expressed an 6 interest in these issues that they didn 't express earlier.
7 Now the whole thing has gotten turned around.
I mean, from 8 questioning these issues, we are now getting in a position 9 of needing to somehow give them some degree of approval so 10 that everybody can go on and do their job, because "Although 11 the Commission has expressed interest in gn sponte issues, 12 that one is okay, you can go on."
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
l 38 1
COMMISSION 2R AHEARNE:
I still differ with that 2 interpretation of what it would lead to.
But I believe the 3 interpretation still would be that the Commission has said i
4 that if a Board is raising an issue sgg spontg, that is an 5 unusual event.
j 6
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY.
Well, that is in the 7 rules.
There's a finding that needs to be made, and you can 8 ask the Board to make the findings explicitly.
That's 9 perfectly reasonable.
10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I don't think that the rule 11 really is that clear or that good.
If we want the operating 12 license to be a complete review like the CD, then we ought 13 not to worry about contentions and all of those to start 14 with.
It isn't.
The primary purpose, at least in my view, 15 is to resolve the issues raised by the parties.
16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Look, it's an important 17 part of the review process, as Peter just mentioned.
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I didn't hear that.
19 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
You may not have.
The 20 record may not have caught it.
Sut the fact is that, you 21 know, given the practice of building plants and reviewing l
22 t h e m, that is the first time you get to see the full plant l
23 and the full design.
And it isn't as if you're just l
l 24 crossing a few "t"s and dotting some "i"s.
Now it is true l
25 that under the law you don't have a hearing unless someone l
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
39 1 asks for a hearing, which puts the operating license hearing 2 on a different footing than the construction permit hearing.
3 But there may well be issues, or the Board may 4 come across matters that have safety importance, and it 5 would be very odd to tell them that they just ought to look 6 the other wa y.
7 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I am not saying that, 8 Victor.
9 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I know you are not saying 10 that.,Right.
11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
You know very well I'm not 12 saying they ought to look the o th e r wa y.
'Jhat I am saying 13 is that in those issues that are brought up by the Board 14 itself, I do not see anything wrong -- and in fact, I think to first have to 15 there is a very dafinite positive side 16 come back to the Commission and notify us.
17 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I don't think there 's any 18 dif ference about notification.
The reason I brought it up, 19 even though I don't think that is what you're saying, is 20 that these tilts are important.
You are pushing things in 21 one direction or ancther.
You are telling them, you know, 22 less issues, less concerns and so on.
23 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
No.
24 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
'4 ell, tha t 's the practical 25 ef f ect.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASH NGToN. O.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
40 i
1 COMMISSIONEP AHEARNE:
The practical effect, I 2 hope is to try to get across -- at least the primary 3 purpose, is to resolve those issues raised by the parties.
4 And if they see something that is important, it 's not that S they should submerge it, but that should be sufficiently out 6 of the norm that they've raised it to us.
7 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
Well, first of all, there 8 is a rule with a standard.
If that standard isn't clear, 9 then we can give instructions as to how that standard is to 10 be applied and we can give examples.
11 If that isn't enough, we can certainly make sure 12 that unen such issues are raised we will be aware of it in 13 time to head off any long-term investigation, certainly 14 because --
15 COMMISSICNEE AHEARNE:
That's what this does 16 exactly.
It lets us become aware of it when they are 17 raised, and it puts in place a system in which if we want to 18 head it off we would have to take action in a fixed period 19 of time.
20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, look, the only 21 difference is this fifteen-day business. which I think 22 introduces complications of both kinds.
It's just not clear 23 what that does.
Frankly, I'm uncomf ortable with it.
It may 24 just encumber the process.
It may pet a stamp of approval 25 on issues that I am not sure I want to give at that point.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 1
400 VIRGINI A AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. O.C. 20024(202) 554-2345 1J
41 1 It's that part of it that I must say I'm not in favor of, 2 and I am not sure which way it cuts to be absolutely frank.
3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
I can see the point.
4 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
And I don't think, even if 5 it would have the effect that you think it will have, which 6 is unclear, I don't think very much is lost by dropping it.
7 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Without asking anybody to 8 name specific cases, most of which are after all still 9 likely to come before us, could someone review the bidding 10 f or me as to just how many gut soonte contentions they have 11 in mind when you, John or Howard, that they feel that this 12 is a matter of submergence?
I know of a couple, but 13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Peter, I have been trying 14 to say here for months:
I'm not raising this because of a 15 specific case or cases.
16 CCMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Okay.
17 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I have been trying to get 18 across the poin't that I have been myself working through 19 what I believe --
COMMISSIONER BRADFOPD:
No, no, I understand the 20 l
21 concept.
to be a rational 22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
23 f ramework for the hearing process.
24 COM"ISSIONER BRADFORD:
I understand that.
25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE4 And in going th ro ugh that, l
r i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTCN. O.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
42 1 I finally reached the conclusion for the operating license 2 that the rational f ramework was for the Boards to be 3 deciding the disputes, et cetera, et cetera, between the 4
parties and so forth.
So I can't give you examples, because 5 it wasn't generated by an example.
6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
It was pure logic.
7 00MMISSIONER AHEARNE:
An attempt.
8 COMMISSIONER BRADFORDs I must say that when I 9 originally signed on to this vessel it was from a very 10 similar analytical process.
As I have seen the troubles and 11 agony that it seems to be causing, I have come to the 12 conclusion that the demands of logic alone would be 13 satisfied by a less formal treatment of it, which is why I 14 find myself coming down on the side of having the Commission l
15 take a harder look at sul sconta concerns, but not doing it l
16 through a formal process.
17 CHAIBMAN HENDRIE:
I tell you wha t, wi th the 13 superior perceptive abilities that the possession of the 19 gavel gives me --
Oh, my God.
21 (Laughter.)
22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I pronounce that there is no 23 clearcut majority one way or another on this issue, and we 24 will therefore turn to the proposed final rule on certain 25 changes to Part 2 that we agreed to some time ago.
'41 t h ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC,
--- ~--
43 1 regard to Egg goonte matters, I don't know.
I think I'll 2 leave it standing.
3 MR. BICKWIT:
Mr. Chairman, let me just go to the 4 well one more time, I'm sure unsuccessfully.
Would there be 5 a majority in favor of putting out an option A-option B type 6 of rule?
7 COMMISSIONER AdEARNE:
Would you care to specify 8 what A and B would be?
9 MR. BICKWIT:
Yes.
"A" would be what's proposed to in the SECY papers "B"
would be notification with no 11 fifteen-day period.
12 MR. SHAPAR:
And get comments on both.
13 COMMISSICNER AHEARNE:
Always in favor of 14 receiving public comment.
15 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I want to think about that.
16 (Laughter.)
i 17 CHAIRMAN HEN DRIE:
We will mull it further, then.
l 18 We might see what the language would look like.
You seem to 19 have some language anyway which could form a 304a.
If you 20 f eel this prospect worthy of the staff work, why do a 3 0 4a 21 with the options appended.
~
22 MR. BICKWIT:
Can I feel out whether I think it's 23 worthy?
24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I will leave it to you as to 25 whether you think it worthwhile to advance a 304a.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W., WASHINGTON. O.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
l 44 1
.Y R. BICKWIT:
That's the way I like to proceed.
2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
All right, good.
3 Now somewhere down in here I have other matters.
4 I think it is 310 isn't it?
5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY Could I just ask Tony 7 something?
8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE Pray do.
9 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Is your practice modified 10 by any of this discussion?
In other words, will you put out Let me ask you this.
What do you think of 11 an order on 12 the idea of putting out a separate order when you do take up 13 an issue of this sort and send us --
14 dR. COTTER:
I can, as a matter of practice send 15 copies of any sua s20 Ele questions that we ha ve raised.
16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, you said earlier 17 that you always issue an order when you take up such an 18 issue, but Alan points out this may be buried in another 19 ord er.
Is there any difficulty about separating that out 20 with a separate order?
21 MR. COTTER:
No.
22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY In effect, when you have 23 an order, the Board wo uld then be making the finding 24 required by the rule?
Is that right?
25 MR. COTTER:
( Nod s in the af firma tive. )
i ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC, f
400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024(202) 554-2345
45 1
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
The board would be saying, 2'"We find this to be a" -- !s that what you do, Alan?
3 MR. ROSENTHAL:
Well, implicitly, but I don't 4 think we've ever felt it necessary to parrot that language.
5 I mean, we understand what the standard is, and if we raise 6 an issue 33, sconte we have made the implicit, if not 7 explicit, determination th a t this is a serious safety 8
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Do you refer to the rule 9 at all ?
to TR. ROSENTHAL:
We may or may not.
We never felt 11 under --
12 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Do you sa y,
" Hear ye, hear 13 y e, this is a gn gggaj;g issue"?
14 MR. R3SENTHAL:
W ell, usually we do in some form 15 acknowledge the fact that we are going beyond the matters in 16 con troversy, but we don't necessarily cite the rule, let 17 along quote it.
18 MR. COTTER:
No.
It would be added' as a Board 19 question.
So it is separately and clearly identified as a 20 s ep arate --
c.1 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Is the Board in its mind a aware that it's a --
23 MR. SHAPAR:
Sometimes the Eoards make the 24 findings that it's a serious matter, and sometimes they 25 don ' t.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
4 46 1
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE E x plici tl y.
2 MR. SHAPARs That's right.
3 MR. ROSENTHAL:
We've never alt obligated to make 4 an explicit finding.
5
'MR. COTTER:
It's a little like gilding the lilly 6 if you are raising a separa te question.
To my mind, it is a 7 redundancy.
That is a standard that you raise in the 8 question.
9 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, only if it's clear 10 to everyone that it is a separate question.
11 MR. COTTER:
It is, because the parties have been 12 told to address it.
13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY And it's not one tha t they 14 had raised.
I see.
15 MR. SOSENTHAL:
Whereas, again, still there's room 16 f or question as to whethe r it is in fact a ggg goonte 17 question or merely an adjunct of some matter aleaady in 18 con troversy.
19 COMMISSIONER GIIINSK?:
I was wrong.
20 (Laughter.)
21 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKT:
I even spilled ny water.
22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEa
! thought if I gave you enough 23 rop e there, why you would eventually get it tangled arcund I
l 24 your feet.
l l
25 (Laughter.)
i I
t i
i A;DERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 gGmlA AVE., S. A., WASHINGTON. 0;C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
4 47 1
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Don't you feel better about 15 2 days now?
3 (laughter.)
4 CHAIPMAN HENDRIE:
Okay, on to 81-310.
We have i
5 here language prepared by the General Counsel which purports 9 to reflect our agreements and conclusions of a week or two 7 ago on certain, I would say, not very earthshaking changes 8 to Part 2.
This now would be the final rule following on a 9 splendidly successful publication for comment of proposed 10 changes.
I say that because it had probably as good a 11 response as anything we have done around here in some 12 years.
13 COMMISSIONE3 AHEARNE:
The one was using the media 14 for scrap.
15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
So I take it the Commissioners 16 have studied this document for a fare thee well, and that we 17 are practically prepared for a final vote.
18 Questions?
Comments?
19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Yes, at the bottom of page 20 nine, why are we writing in an " unusual circumstance," a 21 standard tha t doesn ' t appea r in the rule itself -- the 22 cection beginnin;;r, " AlthougL Boards are authorized..."?
23 MR. BICKWIT:
That appeared to us to be the cense 24 of the Commission, that this schedule would be adhered to 25 unless there were unusual circumstances.
ALDERSoM REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIAGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (202 554 2045
48 1
COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa What's the standa rd in the 2 rule.
3 COMMISSIONER BR AD FORDa Well, the rule itself 4 gives a certain namber of days.
5 MR. BICKWITs "Except as otherwise afforded by the 6 presiding officer."
There is no standard in the rule.
7 COMMISSIONER BRADF0dDa I guess I would drop those 8 two sentences.
We have set forth the number of days in the 9 rule itself.
It 's self-explana tory.
If we want to put in 10 language about more compressed liling schedules arad unusual 11 circumstances, it ought to go in the rule, but I personally 12 wouldn ' t.
13 MR. BICKWITa It's just a question of how the 14 Commission wants to express itself.
15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEa The page 9 section in question 16 has to do with the Commission's discussion of these 17 cha nges--
18 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD Right.
19 CHAIRMAN HTNDRIEa rather than the rule, and it 20 would seem to me a useful expression of opinion.
21 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa What about dropping this 22 "a bsent unusual circumstances" and saying something about 23 the Boards making an effort to meet that schedule?
24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
You could, but they're 25 going to do it anyway.
The Commission has just put in a ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
49 1 rule now which gives a particular number of days for parties 2 to file, and it said f or all pa rties to file and that seems 3 to me to be enough.
4 (Pause.)
5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE4 John?
6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I'm waiting.
Vic seems to 7 be trying to work out some modified language.
8 COMMISSIONER BR ADFORD:
There's something about 9 putting in a particular number of days and then going into to some detail about that the Board is only, in unusual 11 circumstances, to go beyond it, but should not hesitate to 12 squeeze it down.
That seems to me to give a sort of 13 one-sided tilt to the way we expect the Board to approach 14 the schedule.
15 I mean, I suppose that we could expand it and say 16 it seems like if these schedules were worked on in fairness 17 to the parties, then they could be expanded and if there 18 were no unfairness, they could be contracted.
19 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
But since we've expanded the 20 schedule on the one hand and unless you propose that simply 21 protraction of coming to a decision in these cases has 22 intrinsic in it some merit that I just don't perceive, I 23 think the whole thrust of the enter?tise is to say:
let us, 24 compatible with fairness to th e parties' positions and so 25 on, get on to decision in these cases.
And, having extended ALDERSoN REPCRTING COMPANY,INC, "a?"'^ ^$ 5 * * ^5"'"" "- : : 2co2u202ts. 224s
50 1 the time for these filings --
2 COMMISSIONER BRADF0EDs Fair enough, Joe.
you know, because people 3
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
4 weren't meeting them, then I think it is not unreasonable to 5 says We think this is good enough.
If there are unusual 6 circumstances, okay, you can deviate.
7 On the other hand, if it is a simple caso, 8 everybody can file and the Board can act more quickly, why 9 good.
Do it.
You know, I don't see a why it is prejudicial 10 in any sense.
11 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Well, except the phrase 12 tha t you put in isn't in here.
That is -- I've forgotten 13 already exactly what it was, but the phrasing in which you 14 worked in the word " fairness" doesn't appear in those two 15 sentences at all.
It's just essentially a further 16 instruction to err on the side of shoving things along 17 unless one balancas it off by saying that we expect the 18 whole scheduling process to be used in a way that first l
19 contributes to fairness.
You know, one can go into the 20 littny again about " fairness," " predictability," and 21 " expedition" --
22 23 24 25 l
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. O.C. 20024(202) 554 2345
51 1
CHA!EMAN HENDRIEa But at the head of this page we 2 say the reason we're doing this is that experience 3 indicates, and so on and so on, the applicant f requently is 4 unable to file its proposed findings within a prescribed 5 20-day period," and the Board has to establish another 8 schedule anyway; we are modifying it to make it more 7 t ealistic.
Okay?
So we shove out the applicant's time 8 another ten days.
Everyone else gets the same delta off of 9 that point tha', they had before and -- I guess that's to right.
11 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Yes.
I mean, I agree with 12 what we've done.
I'm not trying to back off of that.
I 13 just think that there is a little bit of a twist being given 14 in the last two sentences and am proposing that they be 15 stricken.
18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I guess I prefer to retain 17 them.
John?
l 18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Vic was trying 19 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Let's see if we can work 20 some thing out.
Let's see if we can work this thing out.
21 CHAIRMAN HEIIDRIE:
What sort of " working out" did 22 you have in mind?
23 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, either sticking in 24 your phrase or changing the " unusual circumstances" or doing 25 something that will --
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 w,
e,,-
-,-v y
-w w
ww wr w
y-,
w-,-
,w
52 1
COMMISSIONEP AHEARNE:
I think I'll probably buy 2 what Vic will come up with in some modifica tion.
I'll 3 scrept it.
4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
All Light.
Let's pass on to 5 other points.
6 COMMISSION ER BR ADFORD :
I have only one other, 7 which I think is probably less difficult.
That's in the 8 middle of page 12.
There is a sentence about establishing 9 time limits for responses on a case-by-case basis not being to a profitable use of. the Boa rd 's time.
It's probably true, 11 at least in this case, but I think I would still drop it, 12 just because thera are a number of cases in which we do in 13 fact let the Board establish limits for responses and I 14 don't think we lose a thing by taking that sentence out.
15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I don't have a problem with 16 tha t.
17 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Everybody seems to be for 18 dropping it.
19 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Other?
20 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
No.
1 l
21 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Let's see.
There is an amended 22 page 14 and 15 which came around --
23 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Last week.
a bit later.
I taka it that 24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
25 the amended pages are the operative ones, Len?
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C: 20024 (202) 554 2345
53 1
MB. BICKWIT Yes.
2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs Anything else?
3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Nothing.
4 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD No.
5 CHAIRMAN HEhDRIE:
All right.
We will put this 6 matter off and see what Vic produces for page 9 and come 7 back to it next time.
8 SECY B1-311.
We had asked Len to prepare, back to 9 back in the middle of the month, the 12th I think, we had to asked Len to prepare proposed rule f or comment draf ts for 11 three items:
a limit on interratories, some requirements on 12 contentions, and some requirements on occasion for fast 13 transmission of filings, briefs and so on.
14 So ve have that now in the paper labeled 81-311, 15 I guess as a piece of material to go out for comment, a 16 proposed rule to go out for comment.
I don't have any 17 objections to it that I recall.
Other comments?
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Len, I think I've asked 19 this question many times, but let me just ask it again.
On 20 page 10, number 3, you are firm in your position that i
21 currently the Commission's regulations permit the parties to l
22 file responses to motions to compel.
It's not a matter of l
23 discretion with the hearing officer?
24 MR. BICKWIT:
That's right.
Written responses.
25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I guess my only other ALDERSoN REPCRTING COMPANY. !NC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
i 54 1
l 1
1 comment is that if the Commission goes and puts that out I 2 will have additional comments that I would like attached to 3 it.
4 CdAIRMAN HENDRIE:
On this number three?
5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
No, no.
On this proposed 6 rule.
7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE Oh, good.
8 COMP.ISSIONER AHEARNE I just happen to have it.
9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
He happens to have a copy with 10 him.
11 (Mr. Chilk distributes the document.)
12 (Pause.)
13 3R. C3 TIER:
Is that a typo in item 3, line 2, 14 "mambers" instead of " numbers"?
15 COMMISSIONER AREARNE:
Yes.
16 MR. COTTERa It's not a Freudian slip, is it?
17 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
It's that DOD sort of personnel 18 language.
19 (Laughter.)
20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE4 Other comments?
21 COMMISSIONER BR ADFORD:
Let's see.
This opens up 22 an intriguing field of endeavor.
I hadn't thought about 23 other areas in which I might comment, but I think I'll l
24 forego that.
25 CHAIRMAN HEhDRIE If he gets comments and then ALCERSoN REP 0RTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGIN!A AVE S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
55 9
1 goes final --
2 (Laughter.)
3 COMMISSIONER BRADFOPD:
I think he has a problem 4 at that point.
5 CHAIRMAN HEN DRIE s Then what do we do?
6 (Lauchtar.)
7 MR. BICKWIT:
I think he will be very happy in his 8 own little world.
9 COMMISSIONER AREARNE:
Steadily shrinking.
10 (Laughter.)
11 COMMISSIONER BR ADFORD :
Actually, let's see.
That 12 may be an interesting question.
Supposing one Commissioner 13 requests comments as a general matter in a request for 14 comments and gets them.
Can those conments then be a valid 15 basis for a Commission action?
That is, is the public on 16 notice through this ?
17 MR. BICKWIT:
I would say not.
18 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD4 The way we've handled that 19 in other situations -- and let me just ask you if you wanted 20 to think about tryin g to pose it differently -- is of course 21 you remember in the emergency planning rule we actually went 22 with alternative f ormulations.
23 COMMISSIONER AREARNE:
I tried that earlier.
24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD4 Did you try that with 25 these?
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W., WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
56 1
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
I'd be delighted if 2 we could do it that way, but there was not 3
COMMISSIONER BRADFORDa I'm not wild about your 4 provisions here.
But on the other hand, I think it is not 5 in my self-interest, looking at other ma tters in our f uture, 6 to say that a particular Commissioner's preferred way of 7 going about solving a problem ought to be denied the ability 8 to seek comments simply because --
9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNEa I would be delighted to 10 endorse that as an operating principle.
11 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I'd be glad to stick it in as 12 an alternate.
13 COMMISSIONER BRADFORDa Can you think of a way to 14 write a reciprocity rule into the procedural --
15 (Laughter.)
16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I think I would prefer to 17 d o tha t.
It just doesn't seem to be the right thing to do 18 to send it out in a form that will attract comments from 19 people who don't understand tha t the comments can be the 20 basis for action.
But at the same time, I would like to 21 hold out for the principle that if a Commissioner wants to 22 get comraents he ought to be able to in a way that can be 23 used to urge Commission action in the future.
24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNEa Yes.
That would be fine.
25 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Good.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
57 i
1 CHAIRMAN HENDRII:
Write it in as an alternative.
2 MR. BICKWIT:
All right.
3 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
As a result of that, it's 4 going to be another day or two.
let me just circulate.
I 5 have a number of scribbled one or two word changes through 6 here.
They don't amount to a whole lot.
We could take th em 7 up right now, but since we are not going to take action 8 today on this anyway, why dont I circulate these.
Or would 9 you rather take them now?
It will probably take ten 10 minutes.
11 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Why don't we thumb through and 12 take the ones you have at hand, Peter.
13 COMMISSIONER BBADFORD:
Okay.
They're all at 14 h and.
15 CHAIRMAN HENDEIEs If it looks like it is going to 16 run -- We are not going beyond 4:00 in any case, and mayba 17 something like quarter or ten to is my break point, but 18 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Page 3, in the lower 19 middle, "This requirement would help deter intervenors".
20 Supposing one changes "intervenors" to " parties."
21 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
Why don't we drop it all 22 and just gas "This requirement would give other parties 23 early notire of an intervenor's case"?
24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORDs Okay.
25 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
What do you think of ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
58 1 that?
2 COMMISSIGNER BRADFORD That's fine, too.
T:
3 would seem to me that there are more fish in this section 4 than just intervenors.
5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
"This requirement," say it?
6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
"Would give other parties 7 early notice of an intervenor's" -- You just skip to the 8 next line.
9 COMMISSIONER BR AD FORD :
What I was really after 10 wa s, do we mean it to apply only to intervonors?
Or does it 11 apply, for example, to states?
12 MR. BICKWIT:
Well, the contention rule a pplies 13 only to intervanors.
14 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
It doesn't apply to 15 sta tes?
Do we ever get intervenm:s who are essentially in 16 support of the f acility ?
I guess there are still --
17 MR. ROSENTHAL:
Very rarely, but occasionally.
18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
But it's not out of the 19 question.
20 MR. MALSCH:
They have a hard time establishing 21 standing.
That's why typic-3.lly you don't often have 22 intervenors come in in f avor of the application.
23 COMMISSIONER BR ADFORD:
Well, Vic's change is fine 24 with me.
25 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I would change the "could I
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHihGToN. 0.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
~.
59 1 be determined" at the bottom of the pa ra g ra ph, "or a 2 contentior. that is found not to satisfy the requirement."
3 CO'JMISSIONER AEEARNE4 Say tha t again, Vic?
4 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Change "could be 5 determined" to "is found."
6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE-
"That is found not to satisfy 7 requirements."
"This is found not to, " is th a t okay, Len?
8 MR. BICKWIT:
Yes, that's fine.
9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs "Not to satisfy the 10 requirements."
All rignt.
Next?
11 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD I don't have anything more 12 until page 6.
13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa Let's see.
You do have a 14 change on page 6?
15 COMMISSIONER BRncFORD:
Yes.
16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I do too.
17 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
All right, let's bid for 18 earliest enance on page 6.
Line 1?
19 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Reference to general 20 cities --
21 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
It's a tie.
22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY4 I would just drop tho se 23 two pages.
24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Two pages?
25 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
These two sentences, as ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,:NC, 400 VIRGINTA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
60 1 being unnecessary.
Actually, that isn' t that far wrong, but 2 in this case I would just drop the two sentences.
3 COMMISSION ER AHEARNE Well, are you saying that 4 you would allow then just reference to a "repert"?
5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYs It depends.
6 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I could live with dropping 7 it if in fact the intent is to work a substantive change in 8 with what this says.
It seems to me, though, that if 9 reference to a report isn't good enough then we ought to say 10 s o, so that no one comes in and refers to a report.
11 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs Yes.
The intention clearly was 12 to say, you know, if your reference is WASH-1u00, what in 13 God 's name is anybody going to do that?
14 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Yes, yoc've got to state 15 i t.
16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs If you can't do better than 17 that, why never mind trying to improve the specificity here 18 of the citations for contentions.
I think the sentence -- I 19 think the thought behind the sentences needs to be 20 expressed.
21 COMMISSICNER GILINSKY:
Well, the though' behind 22 the sentences is what we are about here.
Ent when you start 23 talking about specific pages, that might not be the right 24 thing.
25 COMMISSIONER 3RADFCRD:
I was going to delete both ALDE8kSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
61 1 "psges" and " sections" and just say " specific portions of 2 the documents must be referencet."
3 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
But on the other hand, 4 there are other documents which are not lengthy and where 5 reference to the document may be appropriate.
6 COMMISSIONER BRADFORDs Well, I was also coing to 7 take out " lengthy".
,8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY And we are talking about 9 whether the documents are lengthy or not.
10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
But then these two sentences 11 which talk about " lengthy" or " general studies and reports" 12 doesn't apply.
I think you really need to keep the flavor 13 of this, because I think this was part of the intent, was to 14 try to clarify what you've got to do.
15 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
What about " References by 16 title to lengthy studies and reports would not suffice"?
17 COMMISSIONER AREARNE:
That's fine.
But are you 18 sa,ying that you would then drop the "for example" l
19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
No, I would leave that in 20 except for the words "pages, sections or".
21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Wha t substantive change do 22 you see that making?
23 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
None, in fact.
24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
That is how it sounded.
25 And so then I would have no problem with it.
l l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
l 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
62 1
COMMISSIGNER GILINSKY:
In some cases some of 2 these may not be yet available.
These happen to be 3 documents that are available.
4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
But if the document is not 5 available --
6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
If it is not available, it's 7 not very clear to me how a contention can be based on it.
8 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
That is a trickier point.
9 Supposing you intend through interrogatories and 10 cross-examination to show that the containmen t is 11 inadequate.
Uhat you state as a contention is that the 12 con tainmen t is inadequa te.
The facts I suppose would be 13 that experience at TMI showed that pressures up to whatever 14 numbers you wanted to put in -- and then it would suffice, 15 would it, it that point, to say that you intended to prove 16 that fact through the discovery and cross-examination 17 process?
18 MR.-BICKWIT:
It would if you could demonstrate 19 tha t you had any basis for thinking you could.
I mean, it 20 would not be enough to say on eacn and every occasion, we 21 intend to develop through interrogatories this contention, 22 period.
23 COENISSIONER BRADFORD:
That's what I'm after.
24 What kind of a threshold do you have to get over at that 25 point?
If you just came in and said, "The pressure vessel ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
63 1 in this reactor will fail, I'm going to show that on 4
2 cross-examination," the Board sayss
" Wait a minute, what 3 makes you think the pressure vessel would fail?"
4 MB. BICKWIT:
I think you have to survive this 5 threshold of vagueness:
You have to provide some reason for 6 the BCard to believe that there are f acts in your mind that 7 you intend to try to prove.
The Board will not look at the 8 legal sufficiency of those facts to prove your case, but you 9 must demonstrate that there are some facts in your mind.
10 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I'm sorry, Joe.
I waded 11 in in the middle of.something you were saying.
12 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
No, that's all right.
I think 13 that was usef ul.
14 At the moment, I've got, " references by title to 15 lengthier general studies and reports would not suffice.
16 I f, for example, the BEIR report or the Reactor Safety Study 17 is relied upon, specific portions of the document must be 18 ref erenced. "
19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
(Nodding in the 20 af firma tive. )
21 COMMISSIONER GIliNSKY:
(Nodding in the 22 af firmative. )
23 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
(Nodding in the 24 affirmative.)
25 CHA!BMAN HENDRIE:
I count three nods.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
64 1
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I can live with that.
But 2 Vic, do you still feel 3
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY I would want to strike th e 4 two sentences, but 5
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Next?
Page 6?
Page 7?
6 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I would drop the "under 7 such circumstances" sentence at the bottom of the second 8 paragraph on 7, the reason being that since this document is 9 going out for comment, it.is the kind of sentence I would 10 put in.
11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I think you ' re righ t.
12 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
In the statement of 13 considerations of the final rule, if warranted.
14 COMMISSIGNER BRADFORD:
Exactly.
15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Struck.
Got it, Len?
17 MR. RICKWIT:
Yes.
18 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY Where was this?
19 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
On page 7.
I i
20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I would drop that entire 21 paragraph just as an unnecessary legalism, and in fact the 22 nex t paragraph too, listing all the cases.
23 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I wouldn't object to doing 24 that.
I wound up starting to do it and then not doing it l
25 because I thought it gave a potential commenter a target in l
l l
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, l
400 VIRGIMA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) $54-2345
\\
65 1 terms of a legal reasoning if they wanted to sa y --
the basis for it is not 2
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
3 solid?
4 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
-- that we were wrong.
At 5 least this showed how we got there and they could point out 6 why in fact we misread the cases.
7 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa Not how "we" go t there.
8 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Sorry, how "ther" got 9 there, how the agency got there.
10 (Laughter.)
11 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD And they could therefore 12 try to talk "them, their, those," out of it.
13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
It's not any part of my 14 reasoning.
15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
It seems to me tha t it is 16 usef ul, as Peter says, to have some description of where we 17 think these provisions fit in the Commission's regulatory 18 structure and in the U.S. Code and the statutory structure.
19 COM!ISSIONER BRADFORD:
What I think is it's kind 20 of the equivalent of stomping good and hard on a hornet's 21 nest.
If they want to do that, far be it from us to stay 22 h er e pu t.
23 (Laughter.)
24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I don't know.
Len ?
25 MR. BICKWIT:
I don't think that's a bad ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGIN!A AVE S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20C24 (202) 554-2345
66 1 description of it.
It was designed to solicit comment on 2 our legal basic-for this.
It's certainly not going to hurt 3 the Commission's legal posture to take it out.
4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
But do you think it will 5 help your analysis --
6 MR. BICKWIT:
It won't necessarily help.
7 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
No, help your analysis of 8 the comments?
You expect to get better comments --
9 MR. BICKWIT:
That's right.
Yes.
10 COMEISSION.ER AHEARNE:
-- if you do this.
If so, 11 then I think you should.
12 MP. SHAPAR:
You're going to undoubtedly get a 13 comment on the legelity of the rule somewhere along the 14 lines of what this was designed to answer.
So that I think 15 the question really in front of you is whether or not you 16 think you're going to get better comments by exposing your 17 rationale.
And theoretically your answer to that question 18 is yes.
19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
20 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I would drop this 21 parenthetical at the end of it.
I think you really either 22 have to sa y more or say less.
23 MR. BICKWIT Which?
24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
" Statutory words," sort of 25 a West's keynote heading.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W.. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
67 1
MR. BICKWIT I have no problem with that.
2 COMMISSIONER BRADFOPD:
It just repeats the 3 "furthermore" sentence from up above.
4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs Strike the parens.
John would 5 leave it ins I would leave it in.
Deter, are you still on 6 balance 7
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD The rest of its yes.
8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Sam renumbered it down, 9 but I would have left it out.
10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
You would leave it in?
11 COMMISSIONER BR A DFOR D :
Not the parens.
12 MR. BICKWITs Not the sentence "Under such 13 circumstances"?
14 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Righ t.
Yes, that sentence 15 and the parenthetical thing I think everyone has agreed to 16 take out.
17 MR. BICKWIT:
Okay.
I 18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE4 7?
8, page 8?
The bottom of 19 8 ?
I 20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY Just a minor point.
I 21 would say, "may file an unlimited number of 22 interrogatories," rather than "without any specific limit."
23 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
"May file an unlimited number 25 of"; delete "without any specific limit," okay.
l ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON. O.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
68 1
MR. COTTER:
That 's not entirely correct, is it?
2 "An unlimited number"?
You can't file an unlimited number 3 if it is burdensome, without any consequent benefit.
There 4 are limitations within the rule.
5 MR. BICKWIT:
Yes, tha t's righ t.
I think you 6 ought to say " subject to limita tions spelled out in the 7 tule," " substantive limitations spelled out in the rule."
8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
It sounds like "without any 9 spacific" --
10 MR. COTTER:
Yes, wha t is wrong with that?
It 11 seems to me that "without specific limits" gives you --
12 COMMISSIGNER GILINSKY Yes, put it back.
13 MR. ROSENTHAL Precisely the right 14 CHAIRMAY HENDRIE:
Vic retreats on that one.
15 Page 9.
Peter?
16 (No response.)
17 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE.
Vic, I see red marks.
18 COM' SSIONER GILINSKY:
I would say down here that 19 "The Board may grant," and so on and so forth, "as set forth 20 in the rule if it determines ths t."
21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
22 COMMISSIONER BR ADFORD:
Fine.
23 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
And I would drop this 24 business about "inp ro vid e nce. "
25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
That is key.
l ALDERSCN AEPoRTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGIMA AVE S.W WASHINGTCN. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
~ _. - - -. -, -...
69 1
COMMISSIONER GILINSKYa I would still drop it.
2 (Laughter.)
3 MR. PICKWITs It is designed to deal with the 4 situation where the pa rty stores up its best case for an 5 interrogatory until interrogatory 51 and it has a very 6 marginal case with respect to its first 50 interrogatories.
7 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY4 It seems to me that there 8 are cases, if dif f erent f rom the ones that we heard about in 9 the courts, where documents come out along the way, and it's 10 a little harder to judge how many you're going to need 11 further down the road.
And so I would, for that reason I 12 would take it out.
l 13 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
One in, one out.
Peter?
14 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Let's see.
Does B give 15 you the power to give the Board the power to take that 16 consideration into account?
Ihat is, could the Board under 17 B, if it seemed that the party had been especially 18 improvident, say that the information had been reasonably 19 available through the first 50 interrogatories?
l 20 MR. BICKWITs I think it would be stretching the 21 language.
22 MR. SHAPAR C is really directed at another 23 pro blem.
24 MR. BICKWITs I think the Board would look at this 25 standard and say, is that information contained in that one l
ALDERSoN AEPoRTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 55 & 2345
70 1 interrogatory reasonably available?
2 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I mean, are parties going 3 to squander their interrogatories just in order to pounce on 4 the Board with one good question?
That would not make 5 sense.
6 MR. SHAPAR:
Lawyers have been known to engage in 7 tactics like this.
8 (Laughter.)
9 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
But it sounds quite dumb.
10 MR. COTTER:
Are you speaking from experience, 11 Howard?
12 MR. SHAPAR:
It's a fact of life which Tony can 13 subscribe to.
14 (Laughter.)
15 IOMMISSIONER BR ADFORD:
I --
10 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY4 To vaste your 17 interrogatories?
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
They're no t wasted.
19 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I only used two 20 Encyclopedia Britannica's today.
21 (Laughter.)
l 22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I didn 't use any.
l 23 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Clearly made to be 24 regulators.
25 (Laughter.)
l ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTCN. 0.C 20024 (202) 554-2345
71 1
MR. ROSENTHAL That just shows the lack of a 2 legal education.
3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Or the benefits of a lack 4 of a legal education.
5 ER. SHAPAR Alan was the author of that C and I 6 think may be he ought to describe the basis on which he 7 advanced it.
He convinced me.
4 8
MR. R3SENTHALs I think it's important that there 9 be safeguards against the promiscuous use of 10 interrogatories.
I am not suggesting at all that a party is 11 going to sit back there and saya
'J ell n o w, what are the 50 12 most frivolous interrogatories I can come up with, and put 13 them in, just so they can pounce on the licensing Board with 14 51.
15 At the same time, I think that you will find that 16 there are people who, for whatever reason, do use their 17 interrogatories promiscuously.
And it does seem to me that 18 if you have someone coming before the Licensing 3 card and 19 asking f or, in ef f ect, additional interrogatories, that it 20 is a fair inquiry as to how you used your first 50.
21 It's no different than the way that I would treat l
22 my children in terms of their allowance.
They come and seek j
23 monies above and beyond their allowance, and I want to knov 24 how they spent the amount that they had to use without any 25 restriction or supervision.
And if they use their allowance l
I l
{
l l
l ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRG!NIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
72 1 promiscuously, then I take a very dim view about giving them 2 more.
Now, I hate to analogize lawyers with children, 3 but--
4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Go ahead, go ahead.
5 (Laughter.)
6
- 49. ROSENTHAL:
But I think in the real world you 7 are going to find that 8
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY I'll tell you what.
I'll 9 go along with this if you'll change " improvident" to 10 " promiscuous."
11 (Laughtar.)
12 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Let me suggest a middle 13 gro und.
Supposing you just make as part A, to add it at the 14 end of the phrase, "after staff / applicant documents" "and 15 the party's use of its first 50 in te rroga to ries. " -- I 'm 16 sorry, "the party's use of its first 50 interrogatories was 17 not unreasonable."
18 What you're than doing is throwing that in as one 19 of several things to be balanced together with the 20 d esi- ' ' lity of the info rma tion, rather than making it a 21 separate hurdle which if you fail you are out.
That is, if I
22 it looks as though the 51st question is a really important 23 one, even if you have some doubts about the wisdom of the 24 first 10 interrogatories, you can still allow it.
- Whereas, 25 the way it is formulated now, no matter how attracted the l
l l
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
I 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
73 1 Board is to,the first 51st question, if it feels it was 2 improvident, it's actually somewhat closer to the process I 3 go through on my children's allowance, also.
4 MR. ROSENTHAL:
You're more lenient than I am.
5 COMMISSIONER BR ADFORD:
Yes, that may be true.
6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
You may have more 7 interrogatories to spend.
8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Why' don't we throw it in 9 that way.
10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I would prefer to keep it 11 separate, but let me ask a question.
12 Len, do you read the 3 the way it's written that 13 if the fifty-first was really very clearly an important 14 issue, and the Board concluded that the party had been 15 improvident in the sense that they had wasted, had put in 16 four or five that really were frivolous, that no matte'r how 17 important the fifty-first was they would not accept it?
l i
18 MR. BICKWIT:
Yes, that's the way I would cead it.
19 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, let me ask you 20 this.
You are getting specific.
" Improvident" is wasting 21 four out of fifty?
22 COMMISSIONER AREARNE:
Well, I asked --
r l
MR. COTTER:
That doesn't make any sense, I'm l
23 24 sorry.
25 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
They are the ones who l
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W WASHINGTON. 0.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
74 1 decide it.
2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I was asking Len, who wrote 3 this, what his --
4 COMYISSIONER GILINSKY:
Oh.
Okay.
5 COMMISSIONER AREARNEs You see, I had sort of 6 expected him to ssy that fcur or five -- va stin g four or 7 five isn't improvident, but that is not what he said.
8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
That's what I would have 9 thought.
10 MR. SHAPAR:
But of course the Board in tha t 11 circumstance could ask the question itself.
12 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
You mean the question that 13 is asked --
14 MR. SHAPAR:
If that was a good question but the 15 party had exhausted his 50 interrogatories.
16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Sut that's if they retain 17 their gua goonte powers.
(
18 COMMISSIONER AHEAFNE:
But that is an 19 interrogatory on an accepted contention, isn't it?
20 MR. ROSENTHAL:
In the real world, the Board is 21 not going to go down each of those 50 interrogatories and 22 pass an individual judgment as to whether on a scale of one l
l l
23 to ten this is one to ten.
What the Eoard is going to do is 24 to look at the 50 collectively and come to an overall 25 conclusion as to whether this person was improvident, l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON. O C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
75 1 promiscuous or whatever the term might be.
I think tha t 's 2 the reality of it.
3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Sure.
Right.
4 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I think if there is one 5 extreme, if 50 questions have been wasted and they are all 6 dumb, or useless, or beside the point, or whatever, then 7 you're not dealing with a serious participant.
But if you 8 start talking about four or five out of the 50, it's a 9 different story.
10 MR. BICKWIT:
How about ten?
11 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, that's why, you 12 k no w, I was inclined to leave it to the Board.
And if you 13 vant to throw it into A, go ahead and throw it in.
14 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
How do you feel after that last 15 exchange?
16 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Well, I'm a lot more 17 comfortable with Alan's response.
18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
How do we phrase it?
19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
But let's ask Tony how he 20 would view it?
MB. COTIER:
I don't.
I don't have any feelings 21 22 about this one or any other.
The only thing I see of any 23 significance in here is if you are going to try and impose i
24 some sort of quantitative limit across the Board, regardless 25 of what the case is, that you pick some reasonable number.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 23 0
76 1 Off the top of my head, 100 would be nore reasonable than 2 50.
3 What you do af ter that doesn ' t make any 4 dif ference, because essentially again you are talking about 5 the responsibilities of running a hearing.
6 MR. BICKWIT:
if you put the words after "not" "a s 7 a general proposition" then I think Alan's interpretation is 8 sade clear and aine is rejected.
9 COMMISSIONEh AHEARNE:
In other words, "was not 10 improvident as a general proposition"?
11 MR. BICKWIT:
Yes.
12 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
What does that mean?
13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
These are now lawyers 14 talking to each other other.
15 MR. BICKWIT:
No.
It is then clear that what the 16 Boa rd is directed to do is just look at the. general tenor of 17 the interrogatories and --
l 18 COMMISSIONER AREARNE:
One by one.
19 COMMISSIONER 3RADFORD:
The way I think I would do 20 i t is p u t --
21 MR. BICKWIT:
-- it would not leave room for my 22 interpre tation.
I would put "overall" 23 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
24 in front of "use."
25 MR. BICKWIT:
All right.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W V'ASHINGToN. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
77 1
COMMISSIGNER AHEARNE:
"In its overall use."
2 MR. BICKWIT:
Yes.
3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE4 That would be fine.
4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
That sounds better.
5 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I'm still happier putting 6 it in.A.
But if it were left to C, I would put "overall 7 use."
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 23 l
l 21 l
22 i
23 24 25 l
ALDEASON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
79 1
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
You would feel, Len, that 2 would move it absolutly into Alan 's general balance ?
3 YR. BICKWIT:
Yes.
4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE That is more comfortable to 5 me.
6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs With that change, I think as an 7 Item C it would stand, particularly for a comment stage.
8 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Okay.
9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I think it would be more useful 10 as a C at the comment stage, and certainly bring people's 11 attention to it more.
12 Pace 9, going once.
13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Let's see.
I say, "This 14 rule is designed to allevia te" just drop this "if adopted 15 would be designed" -- just "This rule is designed to 16 alleviate strains."
17 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Len, do you have that?
l l
18 MR. 3ICKWIT:
No.
19 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Fourth from the bottom line.
l 20 "This rule is designed to curtail," et cete ra, et cetera.
21 COMMISSIGNER GILINSKY:
"To alleviate," did it not 22 say?
23 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I am sorry.
"To alleviate."
24 "This rule is designed to curtail the abuse of the discovery 25 p rocess" --
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, DC 20024 (202) $54-2345
79 1
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
No.
I think Vic is 2 proposing --
3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I an proposing "to 4 alleviate" 5
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
-- for dropping th e 6 " curtail the abuse of the discovery process".
In my mind, 7 it could be " designed to curtail abuses of the discovery 8 process," but that is more based upon the Law Journal 9 articles on the general cases.
I have no problen dropping 10 it.
11 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Peter?
12 COMMISSIGNER BRADFORD:
That is fine.
13 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
"Is designed to alleviate 14 str ains. "
15 Page 10?
The clock is running Cut here.
16 Page 11?
17 (No response.)
18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Page 12.
19 (No response.)
20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Page 13, 14 21 MR. 3ICKWIT:
I have one on 13.
It is a question 22 tha t I think you have to face.
We have dra f ted this so as l
i 23 to leave intact the standard for interrogatories against the 24 staff for the first 50 interrogatories.
l 25 CH AIEJ AN HENDRIE:
Yes.
ALDERSoM REPORTING CCMDANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. O.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
60 1
MR. BICKWIT.
I must say, as I read through it 2 just before this meeting, my impression was the Commission 3 wanted to do otherwise; it wanted to have a lax standard for 4 the first 50 and to apply a very stiff standard when you 5 went above 50.
6 But you ought to face that question.
And I guess 7 part of the reason I assumed the Commission wanted to do 8 otherwise is that it is a little bit illogical to say we 9 have got a real tough standard under 50 and a real tough 10 standard over 50 and have the two standards be pretty much 11 comparable.
12 So that it strikes me that a more logical approach 13 is to have standards that cle rly differentiate, that can be 14 clearly dif f erentia ted below and above 50 interrogatories.
15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
You are talking about with 16 respect to interrogato ries on the staf f ?
17 MR. BICKWIT:
Against the staff, yes.
18 CO MMISSIO N EP AHEABNE4 So I guess you are also l
19 proposing to eliminate the standard, the differential l
20 standa rd against the staf f f or below 50?
21 MR. BICKWIT:
Ih,at is right.
Or to propose some 22 alternativa standsrd but one that wa s clea rly more la x tL '.
23 the standard to be applied above 50.
24 CHAIBMAN HENDRIE4 Tell you what4 You have just i
25 run flat out of my understanding, and willingness to l
l ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W., WASHlNGToN. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345 7
81 1 understand.
Why don't we pick up next time your page 9 2 language [Ccmmissioner Gilinskyl and see how we like it, 3 this point which Len can explain to us, and I will be more 4 amenable to being educatad.
And then we will look and see 5 if there is anything on page 14 G
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
But you have to conform 7 the standard on 14 to the change we already made in the 8 text.
9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs Yes.
That, at least.
10 MR. BICKWIT:
I hope we are up to that.
11 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
- Okay, 9,
13, a nd 14, for next 12 tim e.
13 What did you say about a different document?
14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Nine is in one document; 15 13 and 14 are in another document.
16 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
But the pages are right.
17 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I think we better adjourn.
18 (Laughter.)
19 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Hey, that's right.
In some 20 document someplace.
Yes.
9 in the other one, 13 and 14 21 here.
Right?
22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Yes.
23 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okay.
Thank you very much.
24 (Whereupon, at 4: 00 p.m.,
the meeting of the 25 Commissione rs was adjourned. )
l l
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE.. S.W.. WASHINGTCN D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
s MUCLEAR REGULATORY CO'O!ISSION This is to certify that the attached prcceedings before the COMMISSION MEETING i:'. the matter of:
Public' Meeting
- Discussion of Revised Licensing
' Procedures Date cf Proceeding: May 26, 1981 1
Occket flu =ber:
,3_1 = c e o ' P. c c a a.d, n,.
Washington, D. C.
u e.
were held as herein appears, and that this is the cr'iginal transcript thereof for the file of the Cocsission.
Jane W.
Beach l
Official Reporter (Typed)
{<
bA i
~
I Of-ficial Repcrter (Signature)
[
l l
l l
a O
_