ML20041F893

Affidavit of D Thompson Re Events of 820129 & Commissioner Roberts Alleged Ex Parte Comments

ML20041F893
Person / Time
Site:	05000142
Issue date:	03/02/1982
From:	Thompson D COMMITTEE TO BRIDGE THE GAP
To:
Shared Package
ML20041F882	List: ML20041F886 ML20041F893 ML20041F899 ML20041F908
References
NUDOCS 8203170518
Download: ML20041F893 (6)

Text

.

1 ,

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE COMMISSION 10 11 In the Matter of ) pn

) Docket No. 50-lM 12 THE REGENTS OF THE ) (Proposed Renewal UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ) of Facility License 13 ) Number R-71)

(UCLA Research Reactor) )

14 )

15 16 AFFIDAVIT OF DOROTHY THOMPSON 17 .

18 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

) ss.

19 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )

(

20 21 I, DOROTHY THOMPSON, being duly sworn, depose and 22 state as follows:

l 23 1

24 1. I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice 25 in the State of California. I am a member of the Nuclear Law -

l l

26 Center, a non-profit California corporation, providing legal i l'

27 assistance to the Committee to Bridge the Gap (CBG),

28 Intervenor in the relicensing proceedings regarding the UCLA ,

l 8203170518 820312 i PDR ADOCK 05000142  !

O PDR '

1 Research Reactor.

2 3 2. A few days prior to January 26, 1982, I received 4 a call from Daniel Hirsch, whom I know to be the president of 5 CBG, who stated that he had just learned that newly appointed 6 NRC Commissioner Thomas Roberts would be taking a tour of the 7 UCLA Reactor facility on January 29, 1982 and requested that 8 I attend as a representative of CBG. Mr. Hirsch stated that 9 he had been informed the tour was to being promptly at 9:30 10 a.m. on January 29.

11 12 3. On. January.29, 1982 at 8:50 a.m., I arrived at the site 13 of the Nuclear Energy Lab and met with a gentleman who introduced 14 himself to me as Neil Ostrander, Manager of the Lab.

15 Mr. Ostrander and I were conversing at his desk when, at 16 approximately 9:00 a.m. Mr. William Cormier whom I knew to 17 be the attorney for the applicant (UCLA) came into the office.

18 He asked Mr. Ostrander if he was going upstairs, to which 19 Mr. Ostrander replied in the negative. Mr. Cormier chen 20 stated that he had another matter to look after and would 21 return later for the tour. Mr. Cormier then left 22 Mr. Ostrander's office.

23 24 4. After talking with Mr. Ostrander for a short 25 period of time, Mr. Hirsch arrived and I went outside and 26 talked with him and Amory Lovins, a physicist who was to 27 joi: our party. We remained waiting outside of the NEL l

28 in anticipation of the tour beginning at 9:30.

2

1 5. At approximately 10:00 a.m., Mr. Cormier and 2 a woman, whom he introduced to me as Jessica Laverty, 3 staff attorney for Commissioner Roberts, came out of the 4 NEL, apparently having entered through a rear door, and 5 informed us that Commissioner Roberts was inside the Lab 6 and that the tour was ready to begin. By this time, we had 7 learned from two separate observers, Andrew Basiago, a 8 reporter for the UCLA Daily Bruin, and Steve Aftergood, 9 a member of CBG, that they had observed a meeting taking place 10 in Dean O'Neill's office between a person whom they believed 11 to be Commissioner Roberts, Mr. Cormier, Ms. Laverty, and 12 other University officials. Mr. Hirsch inquired as to 13 whether such a meeting had taken place and Mr. Cormier 14 responded no that it had not. After Mr. Hirsch stated .

15 that we had received information to the contrary, Mr. Cormier 16 then admitted that Commissioner Roberts and his party had 17 met with University officials in Dean O'Neill's , office, but ,

18 that it was merely a " greeting" and not a meeting and that 19 it had lasted only ten minutes.

20 21 6. We inquired of Ms. Laverty as to whether 22 such a meeting had taken place and she responded that 23 Commissioner Roberts had to catch a plane and that if we were 24 not prepared to commence the tour immediately, that we would 25 not be permitted to attend on the tour at all. Ms. Laverty l

26 refused to state whether a meeting had previously taken place  ;

27 I upstairs in Dean O'Neill's office. I informed both ,

t l

28 l Mr. Cormier and Ms. Laverty that the intervenor strongly objected j i

t I i

1 to the meeting which had occurred in Dean O'Neill's office and 2 that intervenor was preserving its objections, without waiver 3 to be raised at the appropriate time befor e the Commission.

4 Mr. Cormier acknowledged our objections, but stated that 5 they were not prepared to discuss the objections at that 6 time.

7 8 7. I was then requested, alo'ng with other representatives 9 of CBG, to register as a visitor to the NEL. Mr. Cormier and 10 Ms. Laverty then instructed the representatives of Bridge.

11 the Gap that we were there solely as observers and would not be 12 permitted to make any comments to Commissioner Roberts during 13 the tour. Both Mr Hirsch and I vehemently objected to these 14 " ground rules" being dictated by the attorneys for the 15 University and the Commission. Despite our objections, 16 Mr. Cormier stated that no matters in contention would be 17 raised, that Commissioner Roberts merely wanted to view the 18 Reactor and further, that he had a plane to catch in a very 19 short time and the tour would have to be expedited, and, 20 further, that if we did not accede to the " ground rules" that 21 we would be precluded from attending the tour at all.

22 Again, we preserved our objections for the record and 23 entered the Laboratory.

l 24 25 8. Commissioner Roberts was already in the 26 Laboratory, talking with several persons from NEL, 27 including Ivan Catton , NEL Director. During the tour, 28 Commissioner Roberts was constantly surrounded on all sides 4

1 1 by either University representatives or his own party and 2 none of the representatives from Bridge the Gap was able at 3 any time to walk alongside the Commissioner or to get into 4 a position where a conversation could be had with the 5 Commissioner, although the University representatives 6 constantly conversed with him. During periods when the group 7 was stopped to view a particular piece of equipment or listen 8 to comments from the Reactor personnel, who were conducting 9 the tour, Mr. Cormier constantly intervened and responded to 10 any questions that CBG representatives attempted to direct 11 to Commissioner Roberts. Commissioner Roberts did not say 12 anything during the tour to CBG representatives.

13 14 9. At the end of the tour, Mr. Cormier and Ms. Laverty 15 informed the CBG party that Commissioner Roberts wanted to see 16 the security area and that none of the CBG representatives 17 would be permitted to attend that part of the tour. Again, 18 Mr. Hirsch and I vehemently objected, however we were escorted 19 to the exit to the Laboratory and informed that we did not have 20 the " proper security clearances." At no time prior to the 21 commencement of the tour, had CBG representatives been informed 22 that any such security clearances would be necessary in order 23 to participate in the entire tour. Following our exit, 24 Commissioner Roberts and the University personnel and his 25 staff conducted the so-called " security" part of the tour l 26 without any representatives of CBG being present.

27  !

28 ///// l 5

1 10. It was assumed that Commissioner Roberts and/or 2 his staff would file the reports required by 10CFR 2.780(c) 3 summari::ing the contents of the ex carte communications which 4 took place between the Commissioner, his staff, and the 5 University representatives on January 26, 1982. However, 6 affiant is informed and believes and based therson states 7 that no such reports have been filed by either the Commissioner, 8 his staff, or the University representatives.

9 10 ExecutedthisdbddayofMarch1982atLosAngeles, 11 California.

12 (,

13 hA7 uor6tny Tho upson\\

14 4

15 Sworn and subscribed to before me this M day of March 1982.

16 17 d ( ), g Notar blic 18 19 20 i OFFICIAL SEAL J EUZABETH A HUNT J P40TARY PUBUC CAUFORNIA 21 1 LOS ANGELES CCUNTY

) My comm. expires AUG 22, 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 i 6