ML20030B889
| ML20030B889 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 08/20/1981 |
| From: | Swanson D NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8108250114 | |
| Download: ML20030B889 (7) | |
Text
_ _ _.
STAFF 08/20/81 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0'tMISSION PEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of METROPOLITANEDIS0NCOMPANY, ETA 1.)
Docket No. 50-289 (Restart) s '4, t @ / N (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Q4 N/
y hv & '/ @
Unit 1) f.
q(Dc >m w
u
~
A C ' f, 3
NRC STAFF RESPONSE TO AAMODT MOTION REGARDING EXAMINATION OR SIMULATOR j
- 49 I.
INTRODUCTION cn On August 4,1981, Mrs. Aamodt filed " Motion for NRC Oral Licensing Examination of TMI-1 Operators to be Given at the B&W Simulator as Required October, 1981 Forward" (Motion).
In the Motion, Mrs. Aamodt requests the Board to require tnat the NRC's oral licensing c.:aminations of TMI-1 operators and senior operators be administered at a simulator as will be required after October, 1981.
The Staff opposes the motion. The basis for the Staff post-tion is set forth below.
II.
DISCUSSION In her motion, Mrs. Aamodt requests the Board to require the NRC Staff to administer its oru' examinations to operator license candidates for TMI-1 at a simulatoc. The reason given ty Mrs. Aamodt for this request is that it is preferable for such candidates to be testeil at a simulator. Motion For Examination at 1.
Mrs. Aamodt is repeating essentially the sama argument she made during the course of the hearing (Tr. 22,187-95). However, she 33o7 s,/
8108250114 810820 f/
PDR ADOCK 05000289 D3cY) l
' failed to move the Board at the time of the hearing to take the action that she now requests, and should not be permitted to make her motion now after the record is closed.
In any event, the Board would have been correct to deny the request for lack of jurisdiction. These factors are considered below.
First, the Staff submits that the Board lacks authority to order the Staff to conduct its examinations of license candidates in any particular manner. A licensing board has only that jursidiction which the Commission has delegated to it.
Public Service _Co._of Indiana (Marble Hill Nuclear Genecting Station, Units 1 and 2), ALAB-316, 3 NRC 167,179 (1976); New England fower Co., et al. (NEP, Units 1 and 2), LPB-78-9, 7 NRC 271, 279 (1978).
Section 2.718 of the Commission's regulations delineates the power that the presiding officer of a hearing board has in conducting the hearing.
Missing from that regulation is any reference to a power to instruct the Staff as to how it should conduct its examination of reactor operator license candidates. This is consistent with the regulatory scheme contemplated by the Commission as expressed in its Shearon Harris decision, wherein the Commission declared that boards do not possess the authority to direct the Staff in the performance of the Staff's administrative functions.
Carolina Power and Light Co. (Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1, 2, 3, and 4), CLI-80-12, 11 NRC 514, 416 (1980).
Even a liberal reading of the Commission's August 9,1979 and March 6, 1980 Orders indicates that it has not delegated to the TMI-1 restart pro-ceeding Board the authority to direct the Staff as to how it administers its operator license examinations.
Indeed, the manner in which the NRC conducts its operator license examinations is not even an issue in this proceeding.
_ I
l The August 9,1979 and ftarch 6,1980 Commission Orders raise as an issue the qualifications of the operational staff of TMI-1, and ordered the operators to be retrained and tested by the Licensee. Contrary to the assertion of Mrs. Aamodt, however, the August 9,1979 Order did not require " testing" on the simulator, but merely " training" at the B&W simulator. The operators were required to be retested by the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR QQ 55.20-23.
The referenced regulations do not require that the test be conducted at a simulator. Rather, the operating portion of the test (the oral exam),
described in 10 CFR 9 55.23, requies a demonstration of understanding of the facility, and not a simulator which may be different from the facility for which the candidates are seeking to be licensed to operate. To be sure, the Staff has been delegated the authority by the Commission to conduct the examiantions as it determines is necessary. This would include the authority to administer an additional portion of the exam at a simulator above and beyond the minimum requirements specified in 10 CFR 5 55.20, such as is provided by 5 55.10(b). However, as stated above, the Board was not authorized to direct the Staff as to how it conducted the required examina-tion.
Not only does the Board lack jurisdiction to order the Staff to take the action requested by Mrs. Aamodt, but it would also be improper for the Board, even if it possessed such authority, to honor Mrs. Aamodt's late-filed request. As indicated previosuly, Mrs. Aamodt is merely repeating her con-cerns that she discussed at the hearing some time ago.
See, Tr. 22,187-95.
Mrs. Aamodt questioned respective counsel for the Licensee and Staff at the hearing regarding the Licensee's commitment to have those operator license candidates who had not previously held an NRC license to be tested at the 1
1
. B&W simulator, in addition to the normal written and oral examinations given by the NRC.
Lic. Ex. 56, para. 2A.
At that time, it was explained to Mrs. Aamodt that the examination at the simulator would be scheduled prior to the October 1,1981 implementation date of Item I. A. 3.1 of NUREG 0737.
Tr. 22, 190-91 (Swanson); Tr. 22, 194 (Blake). After that date, applicants for operator licenses fo.r facilities which do not possess exact replica simulators would have to take an NRC exam on a simulator, such as the B&W simulator, in addition to other NRC written and oral examinations. Tr. 22,194 (Bla ke).
Mrs. Aamodt did not move the Board during the course of the hearing to require examination of all TMI-1 operators at the B&W simulator. This is despite the fact that she was aware that these individuals would not fall within the s u pe of the referenced provision of NUREG 0737, and thus would not be required to be examined at the B&W simulator unless they fell within the class of individuals who are covered by the Licensee's commitment.
Nor did she raise this matter in her reply findings of July 6,1981 which she was t
j specially permitted to file in response to the Licensee commitments contained in Licensee Exhibit 56. Mrs. Aamodt has not advanced any reason for har late-filed motion which is relevant to the subject matter of her request, the admini-stration of exaninations for all Till-1 operators at the B&W simulator.
Accordingly, she should not be permitted to come forth a month later and for the first time move the Board to direct the Staff as to how it should conduct l
its operator license examinations.
t III. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, the Staff urges that the Board deny Mrs. Aamodt's Motion.
Respectfully submitted,
//
/
Daniel T. Swanson Counsel fo NRC Staff Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 20th day of August,1981
UNITED STATES OF A!! ERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of METROPOLITAN EDIS0N COMPANv. ET AL.
Docket No. 50-289 (Restart)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear Station,
)
Unit 1)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF RESPONSE TO AAMODT MOTION REGAlkDING EXAMIHATION ON SIMULATOR" in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by deposit in the United States tr.sil, first class, or as indi-cated by a single asterisk, through deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system, this 21st day of August,1981, or, as indicated by double asterisk for Chaiman Smith, for whom 5 copies were hand-delivered on August 20, 1981:
Ivan W. Smith, Esq., Chairman (2)**
Walter W. Cohen, Consumer Advocate Administrative Judge Department of Justice Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Strawberry Square,14th Floor U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Harrisburg, PA 17127 Washington, DC 20555 Mr. Steven C. Sholly Dr. Walter H. Jordan Union of Concerned Scientists Ad.ainistrative Judge.
1725 I Street, N.W., Suite 601 881 W. Outer Drive Washington, DC 20006 Dak Ridge, TN 37830 Mr. Thomas Gerusky Dr. Linda U. Little Bureau of Radiation Protection Administrative Judge Department of Environmental 5000 Hermitage Drive Resottrces Raleigh, NC 27612 P.O. Box 2063 Harrisburg, PA 17120 George F. Trowbridge, Esq.
Shaw, Pittnan, Potts & Trowbridge Mr. Marvin I. Lewis 1800 M Street, N.W.
6504 Bradford Terrace Washington, DC 20006 Philadephia, PA 19149 Robert Adler Esq.
Metropolitan Edison Company 505 Executive, House ATTH:
J.G. Herbein Vice P.O. Box 2357 President Harrisburg,- PA 17120 P.O. Box 542
~
Reading, PA 19603 Honorable Mark Cohen 512 E-3 Main Capital Building Harrisburg, PA. 17120 l
Ms. Jane Lee John Levin Esq.
R.D. f3, Box 3521 PA Public Utilitics Commission Etters, PA 17319 Box 3265 liarrisburg, PA 17120 Ms. Gail P. Dradford ANGRY Jordan D. Cunningham, Esq.
245 West Philadelphia Street Fox, rarr and Cunningham York, PA 17404 2320 North 2nd Street ilarrisburg, PA 17110 John E. Minnich, Chairman Dauphin Co. Board of Commissioners Ms. Louise Bradford Dauphin County Courthouse 1MI ALLRT Front and Market Streets 1011 Green Street Harrisburg, PA 17101' llarrisburg, PA 17102 Robert Q. Pollard Ms. Ellyn R. Weiss 609 Montpelier Street William S. Jordan, III Baltinore, MD 21218 Sheldon, Harman & Weiss 1725 1 Street, N.W.
Chauncey Kepford Suite 506 Judith H. Johnsrud Washington, DC 20006 Environmental Coalition on Nuclear Power Thomas J. Germine, Deputy 433 Orlando Avenue Attorney General State College, PA 16801
Division of Law - Room 316 100 Raymond Boulevard
!!s. Frieda Berryhill, Chairman Newark, N.J.
07102 Coalition for Nuclear Power Plant Postponenent Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 2610 Grendon Drive Panel
- Wilmington, DE 19808 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Ms. Marjorie it. Aamodt R.D. #5 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Coatesville, PA 19320 Panel (5)*
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Senator Allen R. Carter, Chairman Washington, DC 20555 Joint Legislative Cc=ittee on Docketing and Service Section (1)*
Energy Office of the Secretary Post Office Box 142 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Suite 513 Senate Gressette Bldg.
Washington, DC 20555 Columbia, SC 29202 hY Daniel T. Swanson Counsel for NRC Staff
!