ML20033A169
| ML20033A169 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | West Valley Demonstration Project |
| Issue date: | 11/05/1981 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8111240245 | |
| Download: ML20033A169 (19) | |
Text
.-
1(i
((
l
(
.S /f 1,
3 5'
,ls'Oyn maANsMITTAL To:
~ 3-Document Centrol Desk A
^
C g u,,k7
-6 7 016 Phillips
/
6
- .DVANCED Co?Y To
O The Public Document Roo:iak e
h; DATE:
cs November 6, 1981 P
1 Attached are e
the PDR copies of a Commission meeting b"
anscript/s/ and related meeting document /s/.
p are beine forwarded for entry en the Daily AccessionThey
~is" and T
l 5 acement in the Public Document Room.
g No h - dis *ibution is requested or required.
D s identliication numbers are listed on the individual Existing pp documents wherever Possible.
g 75 = _
1.
Transcript of:
P November 5, 1981. Affirmation / Discussion Session, (1 copy)
-M F
h g"
jake own g
d Offic 4
.of the Secretary p
r<==
h d.h M
D.
i e2g E
Y R
s i
cs j
8, 8111240245 Siia-PDR 10CFR PDR b_ -
NUC*J.AR REG 7dTORY COMPCSSICN O
CO2DiISSION MEETING
(
P
- n " *.% & " cf:
AFFITd!ATION/ DISCUSSION SESSION l
l l
l l
C "A":r: November 5, 1981 PAGzg:
1 - 16 AO:
Weshincton, D.
C.
l l
l
.-l.L D R % X NXG f-k 4 0 0 71_7 d a Ave., S. ~4.
~4' *h ' c cs, C.
C.
20024 3
-s Ta.'.aphc=e : (202) 554-2245 l
l
AR 1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
r 4
e 5
6 3
6 e
g AFFIRMATION / DISCUSSION SESSION E
7 s
8 8
e dd 9
io 10 Room 1130, E
1717 H Street Northwest,
{
11 Washington, D.C.
S j
12 Thursday, November 5, 1981 E
13 E
14 !
The Commission met at 3:03 p.m.,
pursuant to 2
15 notice.
g 16 BEFORE:
d I
y.
17 NUNZIO PALLADINO, Chairman.
y JOHN AHEARNE, Commissioner.
18 VICTOR GILINSKY, Commissioner.
5 PETER BRADFORD, Commissioner.
[
19 THOMAS ROBERTS, Commissioner.
M 20 ALSO PRESENT:
21 Sanuel Chilk Lconard Bickwit 22 Marshall Miller 23 l 24 i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
n5r- 'm s*<
1s a=, ~ sca-a,s v n -*;= ci s, se& ~? ci ~h G-'
=d Sca:az N" t==- Zap.La==ry C.
<=d~. hali c~
November 5, 1981 i=. :ha C==cissim's add 1=ms a: 1717 T Sc= zee, 3. 7., 74si:d =g =zr, G. C.
h -==* r was cpe= c:: p+t e - 4 :ws-- -- 1 4 cbserra:1 =.
' ".is.
- E=3QC ':ES :::t beer 2371Ssresh, C.-
.,. 7.=ad.,. er edi:1ci, a=d'..
L: =xT c--
' ="
' = ' '.
M N @l f.3. i=~"# "d_ SC1A17 far g*"**
- * #::=a** ~~~' '
m' m.
3.s j.. dad. *.7 10 m 9.102, 1-is=== par: ci :he fe==aT== ' '
L :sc=ri ed 4
' * =. ed :ha =a: a=s disc =ssed.
I=== = =d -- - ci epd-d -- i=.==1s :=s=s - M c dc =c= cac- ---"'r
- 7
-. "'-=' dae=-
-d - m " e.s er := 7 ' = 3 *.
Yc p'==dd ? cr c-h p e==
- g y *:q, 34'.A g' 4
==g C
' e n d ~~_ L, L7 y=czad'~*s 11.~' e
- S'"*
- cd ca" &cda"33 sed. 33 4f
$~S*S"*"r Cr A,
c:n~"*d haged-q q 1g -he, t"'-
' esd =, =g 7 w 5. J 3.
f e
o a',**~~O"~"*~~~~'~~
'~
.--v--ve~--wwwww+-
2 1
_P _R _O _C _E _E _D _I _N _G _S 2
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
The meeting will please come 3
to order.
4 This is an affirmation / discussion session.
The items e
5 up for consideration were listed on the agenda, and I will ask 9
j 6
the Secretary to walk us through.
R 7
MR. CHILK:. The first item I would like to take up E
j 8
is the NSF recuest for a stay of and a hearing on the license d
- i 9
amendment to the West Valley license, where you have before you i
Og 10 a proposed order pertaining to a request by NFS for a stay on E
g 11 their license anendment.
3 y
12 A majority of the Commission, the Chairman,
,=
g 13 Commissioners Gilinsky, Bradford and Roberts have approved
=
l 14 the order, which denies the motion for stay and instructs the 9
15 Board to initiate a proceeding on request for hearing.
g 16 Commissioner Ahearne dissents, and his dissent will
- r5 6
17 be attached to the order.
18 Hould you affirm?
5
{
19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Could I ask a question, two n
20 questions?
21 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Sure.
22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
At least my copy of the order 23 '
didn ' t have a page 7.
I 24 j MR. CHILK:
I will make sure page 7 is in there.
I 25 j COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
That kind of thing happens
!i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
I 3
1 when you dissent, John.
2 (Laughter.)
3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I would like to ask about 4
the current status of this case; in particular some negotiations 5
that I understood were going on.
O{
6 MR. BICKNIT:
I gather negotiations are going on.
I R
7 don't know much about them.
I know *he state is a party to the s]
8 negotiations, and NFS is a party to'them, and that's about all I d:i 9
could tell you about them.
Y 10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
What will the effect of this El 11 order have on the negotiations?
3 y
12 MR. BICKWIT:
I would not be able to say.
5 y
13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Do you think it's germane?
=
l 14 MR. BICKWIT:
I think it could have an effect.
{
15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
And we do have, I believe, a
=
g 16 section in Part 2 that speaks that when negotiations are underway, A
i 17 we ought to try to encourage that.
5 18 MR. BICKWIT:
I'll take you at your word.
I don't e-[
19 know the section.
5 20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
.275 and.212.
I'n just 21 pointing out that I think the Conmission minht have waited.
22 MR. CHILK:
Is the Cornission ready to affirm its 23
. votes?
24 {
(A chorus of ayes. )
1 25 MR. CHILK:
Thank you.
l t
i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
4 1
The next item.is SECY 81 --
2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Of course, John, you have 3
expanded hearing rights substantially, but --
1 (Laughter. )
5 COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
I want to change my vote.
I
=
E 4
j 6
abstain.
R -
7--
MR. CHILK:
You wish to abstain?
~
j 8
The vote is then the Chairman, Commissioners Gilinsky d
- i 9
and. Roberts would approve the order -- Commissioner Roberts i
o!:
10 abstains.
E=
{
11 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
It's just one vote, but you 3
y 12 move fast.
=
h 13
(. Laughter. )
=
14 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Would you repeat it?
!-=
2 15 MR. CHILK:
The majority of the Commission, the
=
g 16 Chairman, Commissioner Gilinsky and Commissioner Bradford
- ri
!;[
17 j approved the vote; Commissioner Roberts abstains; and Commissioner
- s=
5 18 Ahearne dissents.
=
l i-E 19 (A chorus of ayes.)
S 20 MR. CHILK:
The next item is 31-245A, interim i
21 amendments to 10 CFR Part 50, related to hydrogen control.
22 This is a paper that was held over from the preceding week 23 in which. the Commission is being asked to approve a final rule 24l to require inerted atmospheres in Mark I and II containments i
25 !
and hydrogen recombiner capability for LURs and not rely on i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
5 1
purge and repressurization systems as the primary means of 2
hydrogen control.
3 The Commission has unanimously approved the order 4
or the rule, rather, that was circulated to you earlier.
Would g
5 you please affirm your votes?
8 6
(A chorus of ayes.)
R S
7 MR. CHILK:
The third item is the draft order for j
8 the oral presentation in the Waste Confidence Proceeding, in d
ci 9
which the Commission has before it a memorandum and order i
Og 10 specifying procedures for oral presentations to the Commission 35l 11 in that proceeding.
3 y
12 The Commission has considered the order and have
=
f 13 talked about it, and it is my understanding that all of you have
=
l 14 agreed to the order that was circulated to you, with the E
2 15 exception of a decision has not been made on a paragraph item 3
- a=
g 16 on page 13 in which I believe the Commission may want to discuss M
g 17 whether that 1 tem is included or is not included in the order.
5 5
18 I understand two Commissioners have gone on record l
P l
}
19 as Commissioner Ahearne desiring it be deleted and Commissioner 5
20 Bradford desiring it be retained.
21 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I wonder if we could hear 22 from Mr. Miller.
23 MR. CHILK:
Do we have Mr. Miller here?
24 l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
On why he thought it was 25,
useful to include it.
l i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
6 1
MR. MILLER:
17hich item is this?
2 CHAIRMAM PALLADINO:
Page 13.
3 MR. MILLER:
As I told Commissioner Ahearne, it's 4
really his fault, in a way.
5 (Laughter.)
=;
a j
6 Let me give you just a --
~n 7
MR. BICIMIT:
You can usually trace it back.
2 8
8 (Laughter.)
n do 9
MR. MILLER:
In the only preh' earing conference we've 2i h
10 had, I issued an order as the presiding officer liniting the E
E 11 scope to the spent fuel from nuclear reactors for two reasons:
<3 d
12 First, because that's what the court said'to do; and 3=j 13 secondly, because DOE, which has the lead responsibility, told me
=j 14 at that hearing that it would take another year or two even to go 2
15 into the matter, tha - they had no studies made.
But if we g
16 wanted to proceed, they did have and would go forward as lead e
g 17 agency on the spent fuel in the commercial reactors.
E E
18 The next thing I knew, there came a memorandum E
{
19 l February the 9th, 1981, from Commissioner Ahearne, regarding M
20 reprocessed fuel, and there were recommendations made, I believe, 21 from the working group and myself as presiding officer.
22 But then that sane month, February of '81, we had a 23!
motion from some of the intervenors who sought to make the TMI-24 type wastes part of this proceeding within the scope of it, 25,
and they cited the letter that' Chairman Ahearne is familiar with, c
I i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
7 1
which he had written, I think it was on Jetober 20, 1980.
2 COMMISSIOUER AHEARNE:
But at least for the clarifica-3 tion of two of the Commissioners who weren't familiar with it, 4
the letter was to try to prod the DOE to take some action with e
5 respect to get moving on the efforts to clean up TMI.
That 6
was the purpose of the letter, and it was not in any way R
{
7 addressing the waste confidence proceeding, either explicitly j
8 or, to the best of my knowledge, implicitly, d
=
9 MR. MILLER:
It was picked up by the intervenors who i
Oy 10 got a copy through, I think, Freedom of Information.
But, anyway, E
E 11 they got a copy --
S d
12 l COMMISSIONER AREARNE:
Hell, actually we did not z
=
i 13 l try to keep the letter very quiet, because we were trying to get E
E 14 DOE to cove.
i'!
i::
}
15 MR. MILLER:
No question of it, it's just as you say,
=
g 16 sir,except it has gone in many respects for that purpose, I'm N
I g
17 !
sure.
So the differences between the high specific activity
- si:
E 18 waste there and the usual spent fuel such as the kind you get
=
19 l from a reactor was then seized upon for the motion, and I as l
20l presiding officer had to rule on the motion.
I adhered to what i
i 21 I I understood the Commission's original memos had told me and l
22 l what the court had said we should do.
But I did indicate several 23 !
times in the order that the scope would be the subject of 24 recommendations by the working group and the presiding officer 25 would be determined ultimately in this proceeding by the t
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
8 1
Commissioners themselves, because the Commissioners have always 2
reserved full power to make these decisions and have carefully 3
told the working group, myself and everybody else, that those 4
matters are to be determined solely by the Commission,. and we 3
5 always respected that.
N 6
So that's the reason it's in there, and I ask you to R
7 keep me honest, because I had said the Commissioners would dispose Kl 8
of that question and other questions of scope, suc.h as now dd 9
the reprocessing, since that's come to the fore.
And then one 10 other reason.
The issues that I described in the recommendations
!!!j 11 that I made to the Commissioners as presiding officer of 26 3
g 12 issues, and then they were framed as questions by the working 5l 13 group.
m
,E 14 In No. 1 and No.
2, it says that the scope, whether i::
2 15 or not it should be limited to the spent fuel that comes from l
g 16 the facilities or the commercial reactors or anything else, is
-s j
17 listed as an issue.
I could not, at least, tell people it was N
l 5
18 going to be determined by the Commission, by the working group, i:
r" E
19 as an issue for consideration with 25 others, and then tell 20 anybody that we couldn't take it up and talk about it.
l 21 How that's the whole reason -- I'm sorry I've taken 22 so long.
The reason is there, which otherwise one could wonder 23,
why it's contained in the recommendations.
I 24f CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
If this were deleted, would it 25 '
prevent people from bringing it up?
i l
ALDERSCN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
.9 1
MR. MILLER:
Well, they'd be puzzled, I think, sir, 2
because we've got the 26 issues and the questions upon which 3
they are based would say in part that the scope of the issues 4
relating to what kind of radioactive materials are going to be e
5 considered is one of the issues.
N j
6 Then I think it was probably intended to refer to R
7 such things as reprocessiuJ, for example.
Not the legal issue, 7.
j 8
but the scope, and so far we in an administerial capacity have d
=}
9 been limiting scope to what the courts said and what we understood
?
10 the Commissioners ' desires when they originally exchanged E
h 11 memoranda.
is j
12 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
As I read the heading, it says
=
i h
13 participants were requested to address in the written statements,
=
- ng 14 as well as their oral presentations, the significance of the 2
15 recent developments listed below for the Commission's decisions a=
g 16 on the proceeding.
W j
i d
17 l So this specifically recuests those comments, and now a
=
i 18 my thinking was if we deleted it, we would not be requesting j
r
["
19 ll their comments, but that we would not preclude them.
Is that M
I 20 l a reasonable interpretation?
21 MR. MILLER:
Well, we wouldn't be precluding them, 22 but when you've got 26, I suspect that you can't tell the l
23 player without looking at the program.
It's going to be a very i
24 tough question, in trying to respond to the Commission's 25 i directives in a reasonably short period of time, as well as ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
1 early under pressure, to know what's in anu what's.out.
I don't 2
know.
I think it would leave it ambiguous.
3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
But, Marshall, that first 4
question involved in the major issues you referred to says, s
5 should the waste confidence proceeding address waste disposal 3
6 issues other than storage and disposal of power reactor spent R
{
7 fuel.
And in looking back through my files of information, s
j 8
which is working group comments and your questions to the d
ci 9
working group, for excmple, I don't believe that this issue Y
10 labeled 1 is -- now we're back in the situation of you wrote El 11 that one and I wrote the previous letter.
I know what I meant, 3
y 12 and maybe you meant in this one when you wrote it, should E
y 13 accident generated waste be there.
=
14 Certainly when I read what you wrote, I concluded u
h:
E 15 you were raising the question of should reprocessing be included 5
y 16 or should this be restricted to spent fuel.
us d
17 i MR. MILLER:
I didn't mean it because I had nothing h
3 18 to do with reprocessing.
That, fortunately, was solely,
~
C i
19 l purely, historically only yours, the Commissioners'.
I had 5
i 20 l nothing to do with it.
I did get into the other because of the 21 motion, but I am not involved, other than the original prehearing i
22 i order, where the question came up of reprocessing, and there t
23 f the prehearing conference order said no.
24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Right.
25 MR. MILLER:
Sticking strictly to what the courts said i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
11 1
the Commissioners should do, and what my understanding of the 2
correspondence was involving yourself and some other Commissioners 3
at the time told me, as an administerial matter, as the presiding 4
officer.
e 5
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
This is spent fuel of a sort.
[
6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
At least my view is that R
R 7
where ie talks about the recent developments in the proposed 8
8 order, and it specifically addresses there are several major n
d d
9 recent developments, and to me the question of the reprocessing, Y
10 the question of waste from reactor storage, those are quite E
5 11 central tc the underlying question that had originally been
<3 6
12 asked of the Commission or redirected back to the Commission, E=
s 13 and the Commission then set up this proceeding.
And the TMI E
j 14 waste seems to me to not be in that same category of the central 2
15 issue, and I would guess that if we get off into the area of 5
g 16 TMI waste, that it brings up entirely different character issue, e
g 17 very large, nongeneric, but potentially one that will take us a 5
l 5
18 great deal of time to sort through, and detract from trying to f
19 address fundamental issues that were raised in this proceeding.
1 a
l 20 CHAIRFAN PALLADINO:
Again, can I ask the question, 21 what's the consequences of keeping it out?
Would it not be 22 addressed?
l 23!
MR. MILLER:
What page is that, Mr. Chairman?
l 24 l CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Page 13.
l 25 l MR. MILLER:
Uhen I inquired whether the subject of i
i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
L
12 1
reprocessing and another and different kind of radioactive 2
waste is within the realn of potential issues the Commission 3
would desire to consider?
4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
That's number one..
Page 10, 5
it's asking that question.
e j
6 MR. MILLER:
Yes, but I don' t know what the R
7 Commission is going to do about it.
If it's in, then it's a M
j 8
very different form than that which was originally handed down d=
9 by the court, and in response to your question, Mr. Chairman, I io g
10 don't know.
I suspect the people who made the motion and who z
=
!E 11 were told by the presiding officer that it was a natter that S
d 12 was potentially in issue, but that it was a matter that that E=
5 13 and other issues of scope would be decided solely by the Ej 14 Commission, they may or they may not renenber, or they may or
$j 15 they may not want to talk to you.about it at a hearing.
=
g 16 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
My reading of it is if we us p
17 leave this out, we would not be inviting them to give their 5
I 5
18 comments.
But I also concluded it would not preclude them.
=H[
19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Well, as a practical matter, n
20 it might well have, for the reason Marshall just gave, which is l
21 they've got a linited amount of time to focus on a lot of things, 22 and if we tell them that doesn't seem to be of much interest, i
i i
23 they aren't going to focus on it.
I 24 ;
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
You mean if we don't put it in, 25 what it will tell them is that at least from the Commission's vies P
i i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
i
13 1-that is not one of the questions they. should put their time on, 2
to focus on.
3 If we do put it in, I think you're telling them just 4
the opposite.
It is one of the key questions.
I would agree g
5 with Joe'in that if itbs out, it doesn't preclude them.
If they 6
6 think. that is really a big:. issue, they could still address it.
R R
7 But it doesn't say that we think it's a big issue, which is where s
j 8
I came out.
a d
9 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
And that's about where I come io 10 out.
El 11 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
But it is not, as I understand B
y 12 it, the way you feel the matter now lies in the understanding
=
3 13 of the participants.
E h
14 MR. MILLER:
I suppose it's just a matter that I want f
15 to be intellectually honest.
I told them in good faith in an g
16 order that they would have an opportunity -- that the s
d 17 Commission itself would determine it.
So long as the Commission E
}
18 determines it, I think I've satisfied my obligations, and I
{
19 ;l don't really care to urge anything beyond that.
n 20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
So that it is in front of us, 21 i and if we vote to delete it as an explicit item, we have so i
22 determined.
23,
MR. MILLER:
Yes.
You've determined in advance of 24 l the Itearing.
25,
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I was just going to say, they ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
14 I
certainly haven't had much of an opportunity to address this.
2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
On the other hand, I think 3
that you have characterized earlier in this that we shall --
4 the Commission shall decide what goes in, and we would be s
5 deciding that.
We would be saying that in our focus on this, N
j 6
that it does not rise to that level.
R 7
MR. MILLER:
I merely say you will then be in the j
8 posture, with TV cameras and everything on the hearing, if d
=
9 there is one, in the posture of not having mentioned it after, i
O 10 and people are --
E h
11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Saying that we would decide it, 3
y 12 and it was considered.
3 g
13 MR. MILLER:
So long as the Commission is now making
=
14 decisions, I am only going to -- I don' t tell you what to do.
5[
15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Come on, Marshall, you clearly
=
g 16 are arguing very strongly for its inclusion.
M y'
17,
MR. MILLER:
Am I?
I guess I just want you to put 18 l 5
in a footnote to get me off the hook.
If somebody says you 5
3 19 told us they were going to' do it, you at least made a M
20 recommendation, you bum, and look, I'm the presiding officer, 21 and I'm the only one probably you've seen all day.
You were 22 talking this norning about what presiding officers do and don't 23 '
do.
I'm the only live one.
24 (Laughter.)
25 If I write down somebody's a bum, they zoom in with l
1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
15 1
those cameras and --
2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
We also have that situation 3
quite frequently.
4 MR. MILLER:
I know.
e 5
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
And I know what the letter M
ei 6
that we sent to DOE said, and I have read what Judith Johnsrud R
R 7
said it meant.
I happen to disagree with that.
And at least j
8 for me, putting it in here, items 1, 2,
3 elev ites it far beyond d
=i 9
the level that I thought it deserved.
- io 10 MR. MILLER: That may well be.
I'm willing to settle E
5 11 for a small, tiny footnote.
<it
{
12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
We aren't saying they can't E
d 13 raise it.
I think a footnote would say -- there are many items, Ej 14 Marshall, that we aren ' t s'aying that they can 't keep out.
If 2
15 this order goes, we give them time to say that you are being E
g 16 given time to address the_ issues that basically we think are us p
17 -
important, and as you well know, because as the presiding officer l
N l
5 18 '
you've been in many such situations, they will then address
=
E-C 19 what they think is most important.
A 20 l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, let me say after listenir g i
21 to Commissioner Ahearne, I have decided to leave the order as it i
l 22 is.
l i
23 (Laughter.)
24 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
So as I understand it, we have 25 three votes to delete and two votes to retain, and so that would i
i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
16 1
indicate that we delete that.
2 MR. MILLER:
Mr. Chairman, I just want you to know 3
they devoted a whole issue of South Carolina Law Review to this 4
proceeding.
I want you to know that they have heard of this
=
5 3
down as far as South Carolina.
b 6
(Laughtdr.)
n R
7
,~
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Marshall, I'd have to say N
8 8
for my good friend, Richard Riley, I would not say as far that d
9 g
down as South Carolina.
cH 10 MR. MILLER:
Uell, it depends on your point of view,
=
E 11 g
where your center of the universe is.
d 12 y
(Laughter.)
~
13 5
Thank you.
E 14 2
MR. CHILK:
Mr. Chairman, that concludes the
'=
9 15 g
affirmation on this presentation on this particularly.
You
?
16 l
have three deleting the paragraph, two retaining it, and i
17 y
the Commission previously voted unanimously in favor of the Cm 18 g
order itself, less paragraph -- split on paragraph 13.
19 l
GAIRIM PALLADINO:
All right.
20 ;
CA chorus of ayes.)
21 MR. CHILK:
That concludes the affirmation.
22 (Uhereupon, at 3:25 p.m.,
the meeting was 23!
adjourned.)
24l 25 I
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
)
NUC2AR REGUIATORT CO!'MISSICN This is Oc certify that the attached prcceedings before the
)
COMMISSION 21EETING in the =atte." cf:. Affirmation / Discussion Session
- Date ':f Freceeding:
November 5, 1981 Dccket Nu=ber:
Placer of Frcceeding:
Washington, D.
C.
were-held as herein appears, and. Chac this is the-criginai.
rscsc:-ip%
Oherec f fer-the-fila ci che Cccmissicc.,
Ann Rilev Official ?leger ar (Typed)
$s>J Official ?.eper:er (3ignature)
/
e e
=
h sN