ML20039E575
| ML20039E575 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 01/06/1982 |
| From: | Trowbridge G METROPOLITAN EDISON CO., SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE |
| To: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8201110041 | |
| Download: ML20039E575 (6) | |
Text
Licanzsa 1/6/82 g.
e e
D:ME,T,E r i?-
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
'82 JM -6 P2 59 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION crr: - :....
i:;; ;c :]. Sf.-
. :;a..A BEFORE THE COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
}
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY Docket No. 50-289 (Resta,r4)[~ ~/, t.,
}
"V (Three Mile Island Nuclear N!'
\\
}
\\
Station, Unit No. 1) g tcc 3
m 53 JAN YlE02 >
LICENSEE'S REPLY TO AAMODT MOTION g nu TO EXTEND DEADLINE.FOR.
'S
< );
IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVENESS COMMENTS _
'?
^
/ /3, af "C j By motion dated January 3, 1982, the Aamodts request an extension of time for filing comments with the Commission on whether the Licensing Board's decision of December 14, 1981, should become immediately effective and whether the Commission's restart decision should be deferred until the Board issues a decision in the reopened hearing on cheating incidents.
The Commission has already on its own motion extended the comment l
period to January 13, 1982.
The Aamodts seek a further exten-sion of the time for filing of comments to February 15, 1982.1/
For the reasons set forth below, Licensee opposes the Aamodts' l
request.
-1/ The Aamodts, in addressing the issue of whether the Com-mission should decide on the restart of TMI-l before the lI Licensing Board's decision on the cheating incidents, take
,the position that even comments on this question should be deferred until some time after the Special Master has 8201110041 820106
{DRADOCK 05000289 PDR
a The Aamodts do not complain that time allowed by the Commission is insufficient to prepare comments on immediate effectiveness / but base their request on interference during 2
the comment period of the Aamodts' other involvem'nts in'the e
TMI-l proceeding, Licensee addresses below each of the grounds asserted by the Aamodts for their request.
1.
Aamodts' Participation in Reopened Hearing on Cheating Incidents.
The Aamodts' principal basis 'for request-ing an extension of time for comments on immediate' effective-ness appears to be their involvement in the reopened hearin~g on the impact of cheating incidents in the NRC operator license examinations in April, 1981, particularly the preparation of proposed findings.
The schedule for proposed findings in'the (Footnote continued) issued his report on the reopened hearing.
If the Aamodts were to prevail in this position, the practical effect would be to postpone resolution of the issue until it no longer matters and without any discussion of its merits.
The'Special Master will not issue his report until after the filing of all findings and reply findings.
Assuming that comments on the issue of waiting for the Board's de-cision were filed promptly thereafter, additional time would be required for reply comments and for Commission deliberation.
The Commission's decision on restart could thus not be made until close to the date when the Licensing Board's decision is expected to be available.
The Aamodts should be recuired to address now on its merits the ques-tion put to the parties by the Commission, i.e. whether the Commission should or should not wait on the Licensing Board's decision on the cheating incidents before making its deci-sion on restart.
They have been invited by the Commission l
to do so by January 13, 1981.
2/ The Aamodts' participation in the hearing was essentially confined to some of the management and emergency planning issues.
9 reopened proceeding was established by stipulation of the par-ties, including the Aamodts, on December 8, 1981, at a time when the Aamodts knew that the Licensing Board's second partial initial decision was imminent and that comments on its immediate effectiveness would be due 20 days (subsequently extended by the Commission to 30 days) thereafter.
The reopened hearing on the cheating incidents was adjourned 3/ on December 10, 1981.
The Aamodts' proposed findings are not due until January 15, 1982.
Thus more than 35 days have been allowed for the Aamodts' findings, which in view of the public interests at stake in the restart of TMI-l should be sufficient time to accommodate as well the submission of comments on immediate effectiveness.
Licensee notes also that the tiine for filing exceptions to the Board's decision has already been extended to February 1, 1982.
If the Aamodts draw a proper distinction between those of their objections which warrant review as exceptions through the appellate process and those which they claim rise to the level of a basis for continuing the suspension of TMI-l's operating authority (a distinction not apparent in their earlier comments on the Board's decision on management issues), the preparation of their comments on immediate effectiveness on the schedule already set by the Commission should be entirely manageable.
3/ The Special Master did not formally close the record of the reopened hearing, allowing for the possibility that the Special Master or Licensing Board might wish to receive additional evidence, but the finding schedule was geared to the close of the hearing by December 10, 1981..
e 2.
Commission Meeting of December 21, 1981.
The Aamodts erroneously assert that by Memorandum dated December 23, 1981, from the Secretary of the Commission, the Commission has called for comments on the meeting concerned with staffing TMI-l with licensed operators.
The Secretary's Memorandum dealt only with the first Commission meeting on December 21, 1981, which was concerned solely alth the matter of information flow following the TMI-2 accident.
The Commis'sion's second meeting involved only a status report on plant readiness, in-cluding the results of the October operator examinations and therefore did not call for comments by the parties, much less the two week extension requested by the Aamodts for such com-ments.A!
Respectfully submitted, 2
SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE N //* /> &
J
- ,y!
[GeorgeF.Trowbri$ge Dated: January 6, 1982 i
i
-4/ Licensee further notes that the Commission meeting was open for attendance (but not participation) by all parties to the TMI-1 proceeding and all parties were so notified'in ad-vance.
I P,{
e UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-289
)
(Restart)
(Three Mile Island Nuii' ear
)
Station, Unit No. 1)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copics of " Licensee's Reply to Aamodt Motion to Extend Deadline for Immediate Effectiveness s
Comments," dated January 6, 1982, were served upon those persons on the attached Service List by deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, or as indicated by an asterisk, by hand delivery, this 6th day of January, 1982.
/aAZ m
[eorge F7k'rowbridge[
i l
l Dated: January 6, 1982 e
n
5
.,7 9 ~.
UNTIED STTM:S OF ANCA NUCLEAR REGULA20RY CCM4ISSION
'82 JAN -6 P2:59 BENRE THE O2HISSION (A3 OFr.5. H Ud-CG';in.i(NG & EErA BRANCH In the Matter of
)
)
M ;m3POLITAN EDISON CCMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-289
)
(Bestart)
('Ihree Mile Island Nuclear Station,
)
Unit No. 1)
)
t
_ SERVICE LIST
- Nunzio J. Pall = Aim, Chaiman
- Administrative Judge Ivan W. Smith, Gaiman U.S. Nuclear Pegulatory h iasion Atmic Safety & Licensing Board Washington, D.C.
20555 U.S. Nuclear Pegulatory cmmiesion Washington, D.C.
20555
- Victor 141#nsky, Camissioner U.S. Nuclear Pegulatory Cm mission Administrative Judge Walter H. Jordan Washington, D.C.
20555 Atmic Safety & Licensing Board Carib Terrace Fotel
- Peter A. Bradford, Ca missioner 552 North Ocean Plvd.
U.S. Nuclear Pegulatory c - iasion Pmpano Beach, Florida 33062 Washington, D.C.
20555 Administrative Judge Linda W. Little
- John F. Ahearne, c-iasioner Atcmic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Begulatory Ommission 5000 Hemitace. Drive Washington, D.C.
20555 Raleigh, North Carolina 27612 6 Ihmas M. Poberts, Camissioner Administrative Judge Gary L. Milhollin U.S. Nuclear Begulatory Camission c/o Ivan W. Scith, Chaiman, Atcmic Safety Washington, D.C.
20555 and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Pegulatory Ommission Administrative Judge Gary J. Edles, Gaiman Washington, D.C.
20555 Atomic Safety & Licensing Appeal Board i
U.S. Nuclear Pegulatory Ca mission
- Office of the Executive legal Director-(4) l Washington, D.C.
20555 U.S. Nuclear Pegulatory Ca mission Washington, D.C.
20555 Admin 2.strative Judge John H. Buck Atcmic Safety & Licensing Appeal Board Docketing & Service Seden (3)
U.S. Nuclear Pegulatory Ca mission Office of the Secretary Washington, D.C.
20555 U.S. Nuclear Pegulatory Ca mission Washingt~m, D.C.
20555 Administrative Judge Gristine N. Kohl Atcmic Safety & Licensing Appeal Board Atcmic Safety & Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear.Pegulatory Camission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Camission -
Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 l
Administrative Judge Peginald L. Gotchy Atcmic Safety & Licensing Appeal Board Panel l
- Atmic Safety & Licensing Appeal Ibard U.S. Nuclear Pegulatory ommission o...dc<4aa