|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20247Q7371989-07-28028 July 1989 Order Authorizing Dismantling of Facility & Disposition of Component Parts ML20211Q3021986-07-14014 July 1986 Order Authorizing Dismantling of Facility & Disposition of Components in Accordance W/Phase I of Dismantling Plan & NRC Rules & Regulations,Per 851029 Application ML20205G6071985-11-0808 November 1985 Order Terminating Proceeding Since Committee to Bridge the Gap Withdrew Petition for Leave to Intervene.No Other Petitions Remain.Served on 851112 ML20205G6551985-11-0808 November 1985 Memorandum & Order Approving Parties 851010 Stipulation to Dismantle & Dispose of All Reactor Components & Equipment Except for Biological Shield & Components Described in Stipulation.Served on 851112 ML20133Q2781985-10-30030 October 1985 Response to ASLB 851016 Memorandum & Order Re Settlement Agreement & Proposed Order on Matters in Dispute Concerning Proposed License Renewal & Dismantlement Proceedings. Paragraph 6 of Proposed Order Should Be Revised ML20133Q2941985-10-30030 October 1985 Affidavit of Dj Kasun Re Question 3 in ASLB 851016 Memorandum & Order Concerning Effect of Release of UCLA Security Plan to Public on Security of Other Nonpower Reactors W/Similar Plans.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20133J0691985-10-16016 October 1985 Memorandum & Order Requesting Parties to Respond by 851030 to Listed Questions Re 851010 Settlement Agreement & Proposed Order Terminating Proceeding.Served on 851017 ML20108A9601984-11-13013 November 1984 Answer Opposing Committee to Bridge the Gap 841024 Petition for Hearing & Leave to Intervene.Petition Fails to Satisfy Requirements & No Good Cause Exists for Deferment of Ruling on Petition.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20094A4741984-10-24024 October 1984 Petition of Committee to Bridge the Gap for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing Re Proposed Issuance of Orders Authorizing Disposition of Component Parts & Termination of License R-71.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20097A1271984-09-0707 September 1984 Response to ASLB 840806 Order Part B.Prompt Shipment of SNM, Removal of Metallic Core Components & Prompt Dissolution of Protective Order Required by Order,Regulations & Public Policy.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20097A0181984-09-0707 September 1984 Reply to Committee to Bridge the Gap 840801 Response Re Request to Withdraw Application.Aslb Should Approve Withdrawal of Application & Terminate Adjudicatory Proceedings.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20096G8791984-09-0707 September 1984 Response to ASLB 840806 Order Re Other Parties Responses to UCLA Motion for Withdrawal of Renewal Application. Clarification of Ambiguities in Proposals Progressing.W/Svc List ML20094C1371984-08-0101 August 1984 Response Opposing Staff Proposed Conditions for UCLA Withdrawal of License Renewal Application.Aslb Should Follow Required Practice Consistent W/Nrc Case Law.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20093H9281984-07-20020 July 1984 Reply Opposing Committee to Bridge the Gap (Cbg) 840703 Response to Univ Request to Withdraw Application.Cbg Not Established as Participant in License Termination Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20093G1541984-07-20020 July 1984 Withdrawal of 840622 Emergency Petition for off-shipment of Reactor Fuel Prior to Arrival of Olympic Athletes.Petition Moot.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20090C7851984-07-11011 July 1984 Response Opposing Committee to Bridge the Gap 840622 Petition for Commission Order to Remove SNM Prior to Olympics.Motion Lacks Factual Basis & Does Not Conform to Procedure.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20092P2431984-07-0303 July 1984 Response Supporting Univ 840614 Request to Withdraw Application for License Renewal.Proposed ASLB Order Accepting Withdrawal Request Encl.W/Certificate of Svc ML20151J9891984-06-25025 June 1984 Memorandum Explaining Reason Underlying 840622 Telegraphic Memorandum & Order Suspending All Further Proceeding. Licensee Has Shown No Desire to Retain Fuel Longer than Necessary.Served on 840626 ML20092G2821984-06-22022 June 1984 Emergency Petition for off-shipment of SNM from Site Before Olympics,Due to Withdrawal of Renewal Application & Security Risk Associated W/Olympics.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20140C6651984-06-18018 June 1984 Order Canceling Contention Xx Evidentiary Hearings Due to Licensee 840614 Request to Withdraw License Renewal Application & to Decommission Reactor.Served on 840619 ML20197H3831984-06-14014 June 1984 Request to Withdraw License Renewal Application on Condition That Application Be Made to Decommission ML20197H4051984-06-14014 June 1984 Motion to Suspend Proceedings Pending ASLB Action on Request to Withdraw Application.Hearing on Security Contention Should Be Canceled Immediately to Avoid Unnecessary Expense.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20197G7651984-06-11011 June 1984 Motion to Compel Further Written Response of B Ramberg or for Alternative Relief & Costs.Committee to Bridge the Gap Has Not Revealed Documents Per Interrogatory Requests. W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20091Q6071984-06-11011 June 1984 Objection to ASLB 840606 Notice of Evidentiary Hearing Specifying That Portions of Contention Xx Evidentiary Hearing Will Be Closed to Public.Only Portions Dealing W/Protected Info Should Be Closed.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20091M8351984-06-0707 June 1984 Motion to Compel Committee to Bridge the Gap to Provide Further Written Answers to Questions 6 & 7 of Univ 840525 Interrogatories Re Security Contentions.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20091G8411984-05-30030 May 1984 Notice of T Taylor & D Hafemeister Depositions on 840604 & 05,respectively.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20091B3371984-05-25025 May 1984 Interrogatories Re Security Contention.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20090J6721984-05-0909 May 1984 Response to Applicant Request for Reversal of ASLB 840413 Finding of Matl False Statements.Requests Hearing in Which Questions Unanswered by Two UCLA Responses Can Be Thoroughly Explored.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20084H1991984-05-0404 May 1984 Notice of Disposition of Plotkin & Gt Cornwall on 840510 Re Physical Security & Request for Production of Documents. Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20084F7061984-05-0101 May 1984 Estimate of Level of Threat Facing UCLA Reactor in Response to ASLB 840420 pre-hearing Conference Order.Facility Attractive Theft & Sabotage Target.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20084F1971984-05-0101 May 1984 Declaration of Wh Cormier in Response to ASLB 840413 Memorandum & Order Re Questions About Apparent Misrepresentations Made by Univ & NRC ML20084F1641984-05-0101 May 1984 Response to ASLB 840413 Order Directing Univ to Indicate Whether Any Representatives Had Reviewed Cormier 830825 Statements.No Representative of Regents Reviewed Statements Before or After Submittal ML20084F1881984-04-27027 April 1984 Declaration of Nc Ostrander Re Review of Cormier 830825 Statements.No Member of Staff Requested to Review Documents Before or After Submittal ML20084E7271984-04-27027 April 1984 Notice of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20084D0711984-04-25025 April 1984 Motion for Reconsideration & Clarification of Portions of ASLB 840420 Prehearing Conference Order Re Contention Xx. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20084C4001984-04-24024 April 1984 Reply Opposing Applicant Motion for Reconsideration of ASLB 840322 Order & Further Suppl to Rebuttal.Source Term Issue Under Investigation Should Not Be Litigated in Individual License Proceeding ML20084C4151984-04-23023 April 1984 Response to Committee to Bridge the Gap (Cbg) 840406 Motions for Reconsideration of ASLB 840322 Memorandum & Order Ruling on Cbg Objections to Rebuttal Testimony.Motions Should Be Denied.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20088A0551984-04-0606 April 1984 Motion to Reconsider Portions of ASLB 840322 Memorandum & Order,Overruling Objections to Untimely Filed Rebuttal Testimony.Aslb Has Placed Interest in Complete Record Above Statutory Interests of Proceedings.W/Certificate of Svc ML20088A1611984-04-0606 April 1984 Motion for Reconsideration of Certain Portions of ASLB 840322 Order.Only Penalty for Violation of ASLB Orders Is Further Delay & Continued License Possession,Precisely What Licensee Desires.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20088A2011984-04-0606 April 1984 Response to Applicant 840330 Rept Re Reactor Shutdown, Repair & Testing Schedule.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20088A6911984-04-0606 April 1984 Petition Per Reconsideration of ASLB Order Ruling on Committee to Bridge the Gap Objections to Rebuttal Testimony.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20087D7111984-03-0909 March 1984 Response to ASLB 840224 Order Indicating Concerns on Security Plan & Security Insp Repts Re Sabotage Matters Raised by Contention Xx & Directing Univ & Staff to Respond by 840309.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20235Z3661984-03-0606 March 1984 Affidavit of MD Schuster in Response to Question Raised by Aslp in UCLA Proceeding in Aslp 840224 Order Re Physical Security Insp Repts to UCLA & Every Licensee Inspected ML20080N2431984-02-16016 February 1984 Motion Denying Committee to Bridge the Gap 740109 Motion for Reactor Curtailment.No Factual or Legal Basis Exists to Support Extreme Remedy Sought.W/Certificate of Svc ML20080B7491984-02-0101 February 1984 Response Objecting to Applicant/Nrc Proposed Witnesses & Proposed Mod to Protected Order.Witnesses Do Not Qualify as Experts.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20080B6871984-01-31031 January 1984 Response Objecting to Release of Certain Protected Info. Proposed Sanitized Portions of Security Plan Should Be Released Only to Qualified Witnesses.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20079H8501984-01-20020 January 1984 Reply Opposing Applicant 840117 Request for 24-day Extension to Respond to Committee to Bridge the Gap 840109 Motion for Curtailment.Reasonable Extension Not Opposed.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20079H4011984-01-17017 January 1984 Application for Extension of Time Until 840216 to Respond to Committee to Bridge the Gap 840109 Motion for Curtailment III (Irreparable Injury Associated W/Any Further Delay). Extension Will Not Delay Matters.W/Certificate of Svc ML20079H3751984-01-17017 January 1984 Response to Committee to Bridge the Gap Memorandum Clarifying Contention Xx,Paragraphs 1,2 & 3.Committee Should Be Made to Respond to NRC Motion Re 10CFR73.67. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20079J1881984-01-16016 January 1984 Review of UCLA Analysis of Facility Shutdown Mechanism. Postulated Power Excursion Will Not self-terminate as Assumed by Expulsion of Water Out Top of Fuel Box Region Through Surrounding Brick Walls 1989-07-28
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20133Q2781985-10-30030 October 1985 Response to ASLB 851016 Memorandum & Order Re Settlement Agreement & Proposed Order on Matters in Dispute Concerning Proposed License Renewal & Dismantlement Proceedings. Paragraph 6 of Proposed Order Should Be Revised ML20097A0181984-09-0707 September 1984 Reply to Committee to Bridge the Gap 840801 Response Re Request to Withdraw Application.Aslb Should Approve Withdrawal of Application & Terminate Adjudicatory Proceedings.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20094C1371984-08-0101 August 1984 Response Opposing Staff Proposed Conditions for UCLA Withdrawal of License Renewal Application.Aslb Should Follow Required Practice Consistent W/Nrc Case Law.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20093H9281984-07-20020 July 1984 Reply Opposing Committee to Bridge the Gap (Cbg) 840703 Response to Univ Request to Withdraw Application.Cbg Not Established as Participant in License Termination Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20090C7851984-07-11011 July 1984 Response Opposing Committee to Bridge the Gap 840622 Petition for Commission Order to Remove SNM Prior to Olympics.Motion Lacks Factual Basis & Does Not Conform to Procedure.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20092P2431984-07-0303 July 1984 Response Supporting Univ 840614 Request to Withdraw Application for License Renewal.Proposed ASLB Order Accepting Withdrawal Request Encl.W/Certificate of Svc ML20092G2821984-06-22022 June 1984 Emergency Petition for off-shipment of SNM from Site Before Olympics,Due to Withdrawal of Renewal Application & Security Risk Associated W/Olympics.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20197H4051984-06-14014 June 1984 Motion to Suspend Proceedings Pending ASLB Action on Request to Withdraw Application.Hearing on Security Contention Should Be Canceled Immediately to Avoid Unnecessary Expense.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20197G7651984-06-11011 June 1984 Motion to Compel Further Written Response of B Ramberg or for Alternative Relief & Costs.Committee to Bridge the Gap Has Not Revealed Documents Per Interrogatory Requests. W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20090J6721984-05-0909 May 1984 Response to Applicant Request for Reversal of ASLB 840413 Finding of Matl False Statements.Requests Hearing in Which Questions Unanswered by Two UCLA Responses Can Be Thoroughly Explored.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20087D7111984-03-0909 March 1984 Response to ASLB 840224 Order Indicating Concerns on Security Plan & Security Insp Repts Re Sabotage Matters Raised by Contention Xx & Directing Univ & Staff to Respond by 840309.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20080N2431984-02-16016 February 1984 Motion Denying Committee to Bridge the Gap 740109 Motion for Reactor Curtailment.No Factual or Legal Basis Exists to Support Extreme Remedy Sought.W/Certificate of Svc ML20080B7491984-02-0101 February 1984 Response Objecting to Applicant/Nrc Proposed Witnesses & Proposed Mod to Protected Order.Witnesses Do Not Qualify as Experts.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20080B6871984-01-31031 January 1984 Response Objecting to Release of Certain Protected Info. Proposed Sanitized Portions of Security Plan Should Be Released Only to Qualified Witnesses.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20079H8501984-01-20020 January 1984 Reply Opposing Applicant 840117 Request for 24-day Extension to Respond to Committee to Bridge the Gap 840109 Motion for Curtailment.Reasonable Extension Not Opposed.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20079H4011984-01-17017 January 1984 Application for Extension of Time Until 840216 to Respond to Committee to Bridge the Gap 840109 Motion for Curtailment III (Irreparable Injury Associated W/Any Further Delay). Extension Will Not Delay Matters.W/Certificate of Svc ML20079H3751984-01-17017 January 1984 Response to Committee to Bridge the Gap Memorandum Clarifying Contention Xx,Paragraphs 1,2 & 3.Committee Should Be Made to Respond to NRC Motion Re 10CFR73.67. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20079H9711984-01-16016 January 1984 Reply to NRC & Applicant 831230 Pleadings Re Contention Ii.Ucla Ceased Using Reactor in Fashion for Which License Granted & Therefore,Should Not Be Permitted to Receive License.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20079E4461984-01-11011 January 1984 Response to Committee to Bridge the Gap 831227 Second Motion to Curtail Activities.Motion Deficient in Form,Based on Factual Misrepresentations & Lacks Merit & Therefore Should Be Denied.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20083H3291984-01-0909 January 1984 Motion for Curtailment of Reactor Operation Pending Final Determination of Safety Concern.Irreparable Injury Associated W/Any Further Delay of Proceeding.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20083J4331983-12-30030 December 1983 Response to ASLB 831130 Memorandum & Order Requesting Further Views on Whether Use of Reactor Disposative of Contention Ii.Renewal of Class 104 License Respectfully Requested.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20083J3831983-12-30030 December 1983 Response Opposing Citizens to Bridge the Gap Motion for Curtailment of Activities.Motion Premature & Based on Misrepresentation of Factual Record.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20083J3541983-12-30030 December 1983 Response to ASLB 831130 Memorandum & Order Directing Parties to Address Question Re Whether Sale of Irradiation Svcs by UCLA to U West Constitutes Research Activities.Sale Constitutes Commercial Activity.W/Declaration Svc ML20083F5921983-12-27027 December 1983 Corrected Version of 831214 Motion for Curtailment of Activities Re Sabotage Protection Plan ML20083F5861983-12-27027 December 1983 Motion Requesting Evidentiary Hearings Be Scheduled No Later than 840215 Re Issue of Adequacy of Reactor Security So That Issue Can Be Resolved Well in Advance of 1984 Olympic Games. Declaration of Svc Encl ML20083A6201983-12-14014 December 1983 Motion for Curtailment of Activities Due to Lack of Plan for Adequate Protection Against Sabotage (Contention Xx). Facility No Longer Has Authority to Possess or Utilize SNM W/O Plan.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20082M3011983-12-0202 December 1983 Response Requesting That ASLB Overrule Committee to Bridge the Gap 831117 Objections to Rebuttal Testimony.Committee, Not Univ,Delaying Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20082D6671983-11-16016 November 1983 Motion to Strike Proposed Rebuttal Testimony by Util & Nrc. Only Small Portion of Proposed Testimony Qualifies as Genuine,Legitimate Rebuttal.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20078B8551983-09-21021 September 1983 Answer to NRC Petition for Reconsideration of ASLB Rulings on Contention 11 Re Commercial Use of Reactor.Aslb Should Uphold Rule That Bars Commercial Use of Reactors Covered by Class 104 Licenses.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20077Q3111983-09-13013 September 1983 Consolidated Response Opposing UCLA & NRC 830829 Motion to Strike & Objections to Committee to Bridge the Gap Testimony & Exhibits.Objections Lack Merit.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20077Q3181983-09-12012 September 1983 Response Opposing NRC 830815 Motion for Reconsideration of ASLB 830511 Denial of NRC Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention Xx Re Radiological Sabotage.Pu/Be Sources Not Exempt from SNM Count.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20024F2681983-09-0606 September 1983 Exceptions to Alternate ASLB Member Ja Laurenson Recommended Decision Re Contention Ii.Reactor Primary Use Is No Longer Research & Educ.Licensee Cannot Be Entrusted W/Class 104 License.W/Declaration of Svc ML20077S6391983-09-0606 September 1983 Response Supporting NRC 830502 Petition for Reconsideration of ASLB 830422 Order Denying Licensee & NRC Motions for Summary Disposition of Contention Ii.Aslb Misinterpreted 10CFR50.22.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20077S4201983-09-0606 September 1983 Response Opposing Alternate ASLB Member 830712 Recommended Decision That Class 104 License Be Granted Upon Condition That Less than 50% of Use of Reactor Be Dedicated to Commercial Purposes.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20080D2021983-08-26026 August 1983 Motion to Strike H Pearlman Testimony Re 15 C Graphite Temp Due to Wigner Release.New Conclusion Inserted Into Evidence W/O Supporting Basis.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20080D3121983-08-25025 August 1983 Response Supporting NRC 830815 Petition for Reconsideration of ASLB 830511 Memorandum & Order.Aslb Should Reverse Ruling Denying NRC Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention Xx. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20076G8951983-08-20020 August 1983 Motion Opposing Admission of Portions of Committee to Bridge the Gap Testimony.Testimony Is Beyond Scope of Matters ASLB Directed to Be Considered or Otherwise Inadmissible.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20024C3621983-07-0606 July 1983 Reply Opposing Util 830630 Motion to Reopen Contention II Proceedings.Motion Untimely,W/O Proper Foundation & Unnecessary.Proferred Matter Irrelevant.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20072K7851983-06-30030 June 1983 Motion to Reopen Special Proceedings on Contention Ii,To Take Official Notice of Commission Licensing Records Re Ga Technologies,Inc License Class ML20024A0751983-06-0909 June 1983 Response Opposing Ucla 830602 Motion,Requesting Leave to Introduce Testimony on Seismic Matters at Safety Hearings, Deferred by ASLB in 830513 Memorandum & Order Re Contention Xvii.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20071P3151983-06-0202 June 1983 Requests for Clarification of ASLB 830513 Order Scope of Upcoming Hearing.Ucla Must Be Allowed to Present Testimony on Seismic Questions to Answer Issue of Worst Case Accident. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20023C0001983-05-0404 May 1983 Motion for Reconsideration of ASLB 830422 Memorandum & Order to Clarify Scope of Contention II Proceedings.Certificate of Svc Encl.Accounting Based on Actual Use of Reactor Demonstrates That Costs Attributed to Noncommercial Use ML20073R2241983-04-29029 April 1983 Response to Committee to Bridge the Gap (Cbg) 830414 Motion to Strike Portions of UCLA Response to Cbg Request for Expedited Ruling on Contention Xiii.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20073R1571983-04-29029 April 1983 Response to Committee to Bridge the Gap 830414 Motion Opposing Scheduling Earlier Date for Filing of Written Testimony.Ucla Wishes to Reserve Right to Modify Witness List If New Date Set for Hearing.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20073G0131983-04-15015 April 1983 Final Supplemental Response in Opposition to Applicant 830316 & NRC 830323 Responses to Issue of Quantity of SNM Currently Possessed by Applicant.No Reliance Can Be Placed on Applicant & NRC Estimates ML20073J1521983-04-14014 April 1983 Motion to Strike Portions of NRC & Util 830404 Responses to Committee to Bridge the Gap 830315 Request for Expedited Ruling on Contention Xiii.Responses Not Responsive to Motion Before ASLB & Are Motions in Incorrect Format ML20073J0721983-04-14014 April 1983 Motion for Reconsideration of Certain Hearing Scheduling Matters in ASLB 830407 Order.Deadline of 830715 to Prefile Testimony Should Be Reset to 830515.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20073G8231983-04-12012 April 1983 Reply Opposing Committee to Bridge the Gap 830404 Response to ASLB 830322 Memorandum & Order,Taking Exception to ASLB Stated Concerns on Potential Sabotage as Part of Accident Analysis.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20072T5771983-04-0101 April 1983 Response to Committee to Bridge the Gap & City of Santa Monica 830315 Filings Re Scheduling.Opposes Change to 830615 Filing Date for Testimony.Dates Should Not Be Set for Hearings on Contentions I,Ii,Vi or Xv.W/Certificate of Svc ML20072R5751983-03-30030 March 1983 Response in Opposition to Committee to Bridge the Gap 830315 Request for Partial Summary Disposition of Contention Xvii Re Site Seismicity.Univ Will Stipulate to Facts Appended to Gap Request.Certificate of Svc Encl 1985-10-30
[Table view] |
Text
'
y 1
,1 -
COMMITTEE TO BRIDGE TIE GAP July 6, 1983 -g 7 )x 1637 Butler Avenue, Suite 203 Los Angeles, Californornia 90025 (
(213) 478-0829 y gjp -
97 2 JUL i 11983 >
9 ettice ct eek I ,
! UNITED STAIES & AKERICA U@EA*
, NUCLEAR REGUIATORY COMMISSION 4
Cu 7 i BEFORE TliE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of Docket No. 50-142 TliE REGENIS T THE UNIVERSITY
& CALIFORhIA (Proposed Renewal of
,i Facility License)
(UCLAResearchReactor)
- f ; CBG'S REPLY TO APPLICANT'S MOTION TO RE&EN TlE CON 7ENTION II' PROCEEDINGS 1
I. INTRODUCTION 1
F On June 30, 1983, concurrent with 6hbmitting its rosponse to CBG's 1 ,
~
proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law in the special proceeding
]
on Contention II, Applicant moved the presiding officer _to reopen those
~.
y '
proceedings. CBG opposes the motion as untimely, without proper foundation,
.f 1 d and most importantly, unnecessary.
i
- +
1 l
'1
)
i
'l 8307120555 830706
): PDR ADOCK 05000142 AM g G l
l
,e?
i:.
l'. f i
II. DISCUSSION 1 ,
.- As is well settled, the proponent of a motion to reopen the record 3
has a heavy burden to bear. Kansas Gas & Electric Connany et al (W61f Cenerating 4
Station, Unit 1), ALAB-462, 7 NRC 320, 338 (1978): Duke Power Co. (Catawba Nucle ar Station, Units 1 & 2), AMB-359, 4 NEC -619, 620 (1976).
The action will be denied if it is untimely and the matter raised is
- e t insignificant. The motion may be denied, even if timely, if the matter raised y
is not grave or significant. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Statien), AMB-138, 6 AEC 520, 523 (1973): Vermont Yankee,ALAB-126,6AEC393.(1973): Vermont Yankee, AIAB-124, _6 AEC 365 (1973).
- v In the case of the instant motion, the Applicant has not born its D
burden, and the* matter raised is both untimely and withoutfsignificance.
Fuithermore, to reopen the record at this point, which r:ust of right afford
!! all parties an opportunity to test the proferred new' evidence '(Florida Power and Light Company, St. Lucie Plant, Unit 2, ALAB-355, 3 NRC 830,1976), would pose a significant burden on all parties as well as unnecessary delay in a l matter ripe for decision. Lastly, the proferred matter is irrelevant to the proceeding at hand.- For these reasons the motion must be denied.
There is some irony that the matter which Applicant now wishes to introduce new evidence regarding is on a subject raised first by Applicant at hearing (its assertion that it was University policy not to offer services
~
to outside users if those services were available elsewhere) and to counter
~
i1 assertions raised first at hearing by Applicant's own witness (Dr. Kalil,
,l ,
t;'
who testified before any mention of the matter by CBG that the services he purchased from UCIA _were services available elsewhere, including commercially,
^
with special reference by Dr. Kalil to General Activation Analysis as a
' commercial firm in competition with him). Further it was only through
- r.
4 e
i.
_3-i
~
insistence of counsel for Applicant that the letter from General Activation that Applicant now finds of concern was introduced in evidence.
The primary reason for discussion at hearing as to whether the, activation analysis services, and delayed neutr'an counting services, sold by UCLA were available elsewhere was because of UCM's insistence that such services were not available elsewhere. UCLA raised the matter, asserting a University policy to that effect, and said further that the $65/ hour fee was so taxpayers don't subsidize a commercial activity. TR 46,145,159, 75 Commercial activity in these contexts was already referred to as a " profit-making" activity. See TR 170, for example. There was considerable discussion that the rate UCLA charged was not based on an assessment of what it cost UCM to provide the service (estimated by UCLA as 20% of what it charges),
but on what the mark'et will bear. TR 46,139.
Applicant's own witness, however, contradicted the assertion that the services he obtained from UCIA vere not available elsewhere, and raised
, the issue that in fact these services were available " commercially."
Dr. Kalil testified that most of his samples come in by mail or UPS,: and that one of his competitors is Atomic Energy.of Canada, which he said
.i offerred the same service to people in this country " commercially." TR 239.
Dr. Kalil me- the one who brought up General Activation, saying that many of the services offered by UCLA to customers such as himself or Dr.
Wasson were also offerred commercially by General Activation. Dr. Kalil
, ' was the one wh'o first indicated it is a for-profit, private firm, which
, of course it is, and that it is one of his competitors, although 100 times more expensive, in part because of UCIA's very low charge for reactor rental.
TR 241-2.
G
. - _ - - ~ -
e s
l The issue of whether GA did offer delayed neutron counting was pushed by counsel for- Applicant, who insisted no other facility other than UCLA's had a pneumtic tube " rabbit system" necessary for delayed neutron counting. The letter from GA was introduced into evidence, at Mr. Cormier's insistence, in part as proof that Mr. Cormier's assertions a
that the services offerred by UCLA were unavailable elsewhere and thus consonant with UCLA policies in the matter of sale of services was not Correct.
Applicant attempted to demonstrate thL t the service provided
. Dr. Kalil was unavailable elsewhere their om witness made clear that the unavailability was a relative matter related to the low price UCLA charged. Kalil said the service he provides his customers they "cannot get it any place else at a competitive price we offer." TR 276.
There never was an assertion by Applicant's witness Dr. Kalil, nor by CBG witnesses, as to what class of license General Activation holds, properly or not. The issue had to do with UCLA's assertion that it, UCLA, was not involved in a sale of service when it sold to Dr. Kalil because it was merely following a University policy of providing services not
, available elsewhere. That assertion was, of course, disproven by the evidence about GA and other outfits. Furthermore, UCLA claimed it was UCIA policy to not have taxpayers subsidize outside activities (TR 145, 159),
yet probative evidence was introduced that it cost over $700 per hour to operate the reactor, yet UCLA only recovered $65 per hour when it sold to commercial firms (Peterson and Baefsky testimony)." Applicant's witness Kalil and CBG witnesses Hirsch and Aftergood, as well as the GA letter introduced into evidence, demonstrated that such taxpayer subsidy created l
l unfair competition with commercial (i.e., for-profit) firms unable to offer i
the same service at such a low price because they did not have the taxpayer l
l subsidy, being private, for-profit firms.
L
ie*
s k
t
. Applicant, five weeks after close of hearing, now wishes to re-open the proceeding on a matter not' addressed at hearing (the class of license of UCIf!s?6ompetitors). If the matter was relevant to the other issues j on the subjects raised at hearin6 h Applicant--and it does not appear to i
- be so--then Applicant should have raised the matter at hearing. It had the opportun! ty, for example, to re-cross its witness Kalil as to his i
j statements about General Activation, but chose not to do so.
i Applicant desires now, weeks after findings have been submitted and
{
after even the replies to. findings have been served, to reopen the record l
on this . insubstantial and irrelevant point, a point which it could have f addressed at hearing had it chosen to do so. The burden of a reopened i
I proceeding, with all it entails, should not be borne merely because counsel 1
for Applicant forgot to ask its own witness a' question on recross.
l Furthermore, Applicant has failed to even demonstrate the existence of the supposed evidence it wishes to have introduced. There is no #Lffidavit i .,
lV.-7 - nor any document attached to Applicant's motion' demonstrating the existence of the supposed fact. Even were it not untimely and irrelevant, it is I .~4 p" , not probative. There is no evidence being offered, and thus nothing for opposing parties to scrutinize and respond to. (Therequestthat" official notice".be taken might well be proper if UCIA proferred an NRC reco$1 of which it requested official notice and provided parties an opportunity to review'it and ze spond thereto. But no official records are offered, and thus no foundation whatsoever for UCIA's motion has been demonstrated, i
[
. particularly important in light of the heavy burden for reopening of records.
i ~
! Parties are guaranteed an opportunity to respond to evidence offerred without o - sponsorship /authenticationonthebasisof"officialnotice";thereis no evidence here to -even review for its truthfulness).
[
f O >
lastly, the mtter is irrelevant to the issue at hand and outside l the scope of the proceeding ordered by the ASLB. Whatever class of license l GA may currently be operating under--and no evidence has been introduced on that mtter one way or the other--is not an issue here, which solely deals with what class of license UCIA is entitled to under the regulations.
Whether GA, if it currently has a Class 104 license, which has not been ~
demonstrated, is appropriately so classed is clearly outside the scope of the proceeding, although this proceeding may affect the classification of other licensees as precedent because this issue has never before been litigated. Furthermore, the percent of use of GA's raactor that is for 4
commere$al sales versus licensed research and development is also outside the scope.
It is true that CBG has said that among the reasons Con 6ress insisted on Class 104 licensees not being usod substantially for commercial purposes was to prevent unfair competition. However, the Congressional mandate has never before been enforced, and should it now be'done so, other reactors too say be reclassified. However, this is all irrelevant to what Class of license UCIA is entitled to. GA'sproperlicense,orwhetherthe5eis s
a need for the statute or regulation, are all outside the scope of this ,
proceeding, which must enforce the statute and regulation without regard to p.orsonal views'about whether one likes the statute or not and to other licensees not a party to the proceeding.
In sum, the issue raised by CA's availability for delayed neutron counting and neutron activation analysis is independent of its class of license. GA is clearly a private, for-profit firm offering commercially the same services UCIA is offering, yet being undercut by the substantial taxpayer subsidy at UCIA. Applicant had an opportunity to pursue these matters at hearing and did not do so: it is not raising the matter in a timely fashioni it has not put forward any evidence that it profers for
reopening, just the unsupported assertions of counsel; and the issue :
i I
, of GA's class of license is outside the scope of this proceeding, which is restricted to determining whether UCLA has been properly classified in the past and 'ihether it is entitled in the future to a Class 104 license, a
The icotion for a reopened proceeding, burdensome to all, should bc denied.
i RespNtfullysubmitted,
, i d r-Daniel Hir ~ h President COMMITTEE TO BRIDGE ThT CAP dated at Ben lomond, CA this 6th day of July,1983 Note: If it assists in avoiding the burdens of a reopened proceeding, CBG will stipulate that when it has referred to commercial firms offering for sale the same. services sold by UCIA, it means private, for-profit companies while making no statement about the Class of License such firms may hold or ray be entitled to. CBG, however, will not concede that any particular firm holds, or is entitled to, a specific. class of license, a matter which, as indicated atove, is largely irrelevant to the matter at hand, without nn opportunity to review evidence to that effect and test it, as through cross-examination. As indicated above, such reopening of proceedings for that purpose seems uncalled for.
l
9'
=
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA N' NUCLEAR REGUIATORY CCMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD M,;f
- -1;
~
2 In the Matter of l Docket No. 50-142 \
i;\ 6 JC.hi
Q..
-F' TIE RECENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY 3
& CALIFORNIA (Proposed Renewal 'of/
Facility License)
(UCLA Research Reactor)
I DECIARATION OF SERVICE I hereby declare that copies of the attached: CBG'S REPLY TO APPIJCANT'S VOTION TO REOPEN THE CCETENTICli II PROCEEDINGS in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the 'following by deposit in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid, addressed as indicated, on this dates 6th day of July, 1983 .
I John H. Frye, III. Chairman Christine Helwick Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Glenn R. Woods U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of General Counsel 590 University Hall
' Dr. Ea=sth A. Imebke 2200 University Avenue Adminiatrative Judge Berkeley, CA 94720 Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. John Bay l Washington, D.C. 20555 3755 Divisadero #203 San Francisco, CA 94123 Dr. Glenn O. Bright Mainistrative Judge Ms. Lynn Naliboff Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Deputy City Attorney City Hall vashingtas, D.C. 20555 1685 Main Street -
Chief Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary . Dorothy Thompson U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Iaw Center .
Washington, D.C. 20555 6300 Wilshire Blvd., #1200 Ios' Angeles, CA 90048 Counsel for NRC Staff Vs on DC 55 7 mi et a ensing B ard Panel attention: Ms. Colleen Woodhead U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555
, William H. Cormier Ms. Carole Kagan, Esq.
Office of Administ2a tive Vice Chancellor Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
! University of California U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 405 Hilgard Avenue
,f* /,
- by express krinu'{ 4xl Daniel Hirsch President CCMKITTEE TO BRIDGE THE CAP
. _ _ . .. .. -.