ML20042C563
| ML20042C563 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000142 |
| Issue date: | 03/23/1982 |
| From: | Cormier W CALIFORNIA, UNIV. OF, LOS ANGELES, CA |
| To: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8203310527 | |
| Download: ML20042C563 (5) | |
Text
,
4 l
I[DONALDL.
REIDHAAR f
h GLENN R. WOODS 2'ICHRISTINE HELWICK
' 590 University Hall
'82 ICP 29 #0:21 3
2200 University Avenue Berkeley, California 94720 W
A 4] Telephone:
(415) 642-2822 p
5! Attorneys for Applicant IVlC2il/2D 9
!n
'M/iR 8 01982* T 6"! THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY
~
'( UQg OF CALIFORNIA 7
8f UNITED STATES OF AMERICA N
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
f BEFORE THE COMMISSION 10 In the Matter of
)
3)
)
Docket No. 50-142 THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY
)
(Proposed Renewal of Facility 12 1
i OF CALIFORNIA
)
License Number R-71)
)
13 ' (UCLA Research Reactor) 14 hl
)
March 23, 1982 I!
15F i
APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO INTERVENOR'S MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF COMMISSIONER ROBERTS 17 i
18 The submission by Intervenor of its motion seeking the disqualification of Commissioner Roberts is completely contrary 20 !to the Commission's rules of practice and the motion itself is 21 totally without merit.
22 23l At best, the disqualification motion is premature.
The h
24 Commission has not taken jurisdiction over any part of the above-25 l captioned proceeding, nor has Commissioner Roberts been 26 designated presiding officer for any matter at issue in this 27 license renewal action.
In fact, it would be highly unusual if 28 the Commission or any of its Commissioners became involved at h
82033105 7 820323 PDR ADOCK 05000142 #
0 PDR y
i f
i 1panytimeinanyoftheevidentiaryaspectsofthislicensing g
+
2 proceeding.
By implying that Commissioner Roberts may or will 3' have occasion to decide any disputed factual matter in this 4
proceeding, Intervenor's motion is entirely speculative and does 5
warrant consideration by the Commission.
6 9 7
Though speculative and underserving of Commission 8
consideration, Applicant must also point out that Intervenor's 9
disqualification motion is totally without merit.
The motion 10 fails to address the Commission's disqualification provisions and 11 i the case law relating to disqualification.
The motion misapplies 12 ' the Commission's ex parte rules.
The motion confuses the public 13' policy responsibilities of Commissioners with the purely 14 iadjudicatory responsibilities of Presiding Officers and Board i
15 iMembers.
And, most unseemly because of its suggestions of
' impropriety, the motion contains a wholly fictitious account of 16 17 what transpired during the Commissioner's routine tour of 18 Applicant's facility.
19 20 At all times during the Commissioner's visit to UCLA 21 and tour of the research reactor facility, the ex parte rules of 22 the Commission were strictly observed by Applicant's staff, the 23 Commissioner and his staff.
A private greeting for the
)
24 Commissioner was held by Applicant in the office of the Dean of 25 the School of Engineering as a simple courtesy and as a way of 26 avoiding the " media event" that was being staged at the facility 27 by Intervenor.
At no time during the greeting or the tour did 28 l there occur any discussion of matters substantive to the 1
1 I
h,1 t
[
h 1[ licensing proceedings.
However, as conceded by Intervenor in its 2 motion. Intervenor's representatives and attorney did make 3 J attempts during the tour to discuss with the Commissioner the 4 substance of various of the contentions it had introduced to the t
5 proceedings.
Applicant's attorney and the Commissioner's legal 6 l. assistant were forced to intervene at several points to ensure L
7 that the ex parte rules were not compromised.
Intervenor had 8 hoped, no doubt, to be able to debate its claims with the b
9 h Commissioner in the presence of the numerous network and other 4
10h media representatives that Intervenor has specially summoned to 4
11 Applicant's facility for the occasion.
i 12-Because it fully expects that the Commission will dispose of this matter summarily, Applicant declines here to fcommentfurtheronthedeficienciesofIntervenor'smotion.
In 15.
h the event that the Commission requests our submissions, Applicant 16uh will introduce affidavits disproving all material factual 17 h
! allegations made by Intervenor in its motion.
Applicant submits ifh that Intervenor's motion for disqualification of Commissioner 19 g improper, insubstantial and without merit.
20
.i 21 0 Dated:
March 23, 1982.
DONALD L. REIDHAAR i
23[
GLENN R. WOODS CHRISTINE HELWICK 24 h 25 By i
William H. Cormier 26 UCLA Representative THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 28.
e
I 1
UNITE') STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEM( REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
BEFORE THE COMMISSION 3
In the Matter of
)
4
-)
Docket No. 50-142 THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY )
(Proposed Renewal of Facility 5
OF CALIFORNIA
')
License Number R-71)
)
6 (UCLA Research Reactor)
)
)
7 8
CETTIFICATE OF SERVICE 9
I hereby certify that copies of the attached:
APPLICANT'S 10 RESPONSE TO INTERVENOR'S MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF COMMISSIONER 11 ROBERTS 12 in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following 13 bydepositintheUngted'Statesmail, first cidss, postage prepaid, 14 addressed'as indicated, on this date:
thrda 2403, 1982 15 C mmissi n r.Nunzi Palladino John H.
Frye, III, Chairman 16 Chairman -
Administrative Judge U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING J
17 Washington, D.C.
20555 BOARD l
U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory 18 Commissioner John Ahearne Commission U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
205E' 79 washington, D.C.
20555 20 Commissioner Peter Bradford Dr. Emmeth A.
Luebke U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Administrative Judge 21 Washington, D.C.
20555 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Commissioner Victor Gilinsky U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory U.S.
Nu lear Regulatory Commission Commission 23 Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 24 Commissioner Thomas Roberts Dr. Oscar H.
Paris U'8*
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Administrative Judge 25 Washington, D.C.
20555 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING 26 BOARD General Council Washington, D.C.
20555 Office of General Counsel U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 l
r N
Mr. Daniel llirsch
]
Counsel for the NRC Staff Ctc. to Bridge the Gap OFFICE OF Ti!E EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR 1637 Butler Avenue, #203 2
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Los Angeles, Calfiornia 90025 3
Chief, Docketing and Service Section Mr. John Bay, Esq.
4 OFFICE OF Tile SECREATARY 2261 Columbia Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Palo Alto, California 94306 5
Washington, D.C.
20555 6
Ms. Jessica Laverty Legal Assistant to Commissioner Roberts 7
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 8
0" 9
/'
10 WILLI AY 11. CORMIER UCLA Representative 11 Tile REGENTS OF TIIE UNIVERSITY 12 OF CALIFORNIA 13 3
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
- 24 25 26
$