ML20054H590
| ML20054H590 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 06/16/1982 |
| From: | Blum J, Potterfield, Potterfield A NEW YORK UNIV., NEW YORK, NY, POTTERFIELD, A., PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP, NEW YORK, UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-SP, NUDOCS 8206240239 | |
| Download: ML20054H590 (6) | |
Text
r Y
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COM11SSION 1 :y; BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
CONSOLIDATED EDIS0N COMPANY OF NEW YORK
)
Docket Nos. 50-247 SP (Indian Point Unit 2)
)
50-286 SP
)
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
)
June 16, 1982 (Indian Point Unit 3)
)
UCS/NYPIRG PRE-HEARING MOTION ON PROCEDURAL MATTERS The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) and the New York Public Interest Research Group, Inc. (NYPIRG) request the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Board) to order:
- 1) That a free daily transcript of the evidentiary hearing be provided to the intervenors to be kept for the use of intervenors and their witnesses in a room accessible to the proceedings;
- 2) That intervenors be permitted to make opening statements to the Board at the commencement of the intervenors' direct case on emergency planning;
- 3) That the intervenors be permitted to present their direct case on emergency planning after the NRC Staff has presented its witnesses and before the Licensees have presented their witnesses; and
-4) That cross-examination of all witnesees be limited to a reasonable period of time.
2~)so3 8206240239 820616 PDR ADOCK 05000247 O
PDR c
O The presiding officer of the Board has full authorization to grant each of the procedural requests listed above, pursuant to his powers to " conduct a fair and impartial hearing according to law, to take appropriate action to avoid delay, and to maintain order".
The authorization to allow free daily transcripts is specifically contained in the attached opinion of the Comptroller General dated May 21, 1982.
However, if the Board denies the request for a free daily transcript for the intervenors, UCS and NYPIRG respectfully request that the issue be certified i
1 to the Commission pursuant to 10 CFR 2.718 (i), in light of the decision of the Comptroller General.
Service of this motion will be made by hand on the morning of June 17, 1982 at the pre-hearing conference, when UCS and NYPIRG will request permission to orally argue the separate points contained herein.
Dated:
New York, New York June 16, 982
/
AMANDA POTTERFIELD, ESQ.
JBFfEEY M/ BLUM, ESQ.
/
Counsel for New York 06unsel for the Union of Concerned Public Interest Research Scientists Group, Inc.
New York University Law School Box 384 Village Station 423 Vanderbilt Hall New York, New York 10014 40 Washington Square South 212-227-0265 New York, New York 10012 212-598-3452 -
[
%, THE COMPT AOLLEA DENE A AL bECISION 1. P'.W'.Q. OF THE U N ITE O OTATES i
D.C.
- 20540,
( [
fWAOHINGTON.
s,. no DATE:
May 11, 1981 FILE:
B-200585 MATTER OF:
Free transcripts of adjudicatory proceedings-Nuclear Regulatory Comission NESW Nuclear Regulatory Comission may use furds,
appropriated by Energy and Water Developnent Appropriation Act,1981, to implement proposal to provide free hearing transcripts to all parties to Comission proceedings. Proposal is designed to increase efficiency of Comis-sion aM expedite handling of license appli-cations. Appropriation Act prohibition en using appropriated furds to pay expenses of intervenors was not intended to prohibit expenditure, no matter how necessary or desir-able to Comission, si::: ply because it inciden-a tally benefits intervenors.
@e General Counsel of the Uuclear Regulatory Comission has asked for our decision on the legality of a proposed Comission plan to provide free transcripts of hearings to all parties toIn Comission adjudicatory proceedings, including intervenors.
his letter, the General Counsel refers to our letter dated to the former chairman, Subcomittee December 3,1980 (B-200585),
on Energy Research and Production, Comittee on Science and Tech-nology, House of Representatives, in which we concluded that the' Comission could not lawfully use its fiscal year 1981 appropria-tion to provide free transcripts and other services to intervenors in 'its proceedings. ne General counsel asserts that the purpose of the new Carinission proposal is to make the hearing process as efficient and timely as possible and thus eliminate unnecessary delays in the Comission's issuance of licenses.
For the reasons indicated below, we conclude that the Nuclear Regulatory Comission may lawfully implement its proposal to provide free transcripts to all participts in its proceedings even though the proposal may incidentally benefit intervenors'.
THE STA'IUTE Furds for the Comission's operations for this fiscal year were appropriated by the Energy and Water D2velopment Appropriation Act, 1981, Pub. L. No.96-367, 94 Stat 1331. Section 502 of the Act provides:
/
l
- Is
/
B-200585
/
/
/
"None of the funds in this Act shall be used to pay the expenses of, or otherwise compensate, parties intervening in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this Act."
94 Stat 1345.
TEE DECEMBER OPINION he subject of our December 3 letter was the Comission's announced 4
his program was designed to ease procedural cost reduction program.the economic burden on intervenors i free transcripts and by copying and serving at no cost certain documents In our letter we concluded that, because the pro-filed by intervenors.
gram was intended to provide assistance to interveno not use its fiscal year 1981 appropriation to implement the program with-out violating the statutory prohibition quoted above.
THE CCK4ISSION PBOPOSAL ne Comission now proposes to provide free transcripts of hearings The General Counsel indicates that the to any party that requests them.
purpose of the proposal is to expedite Comission proceedings and the is-suance of licenses by the Comission. In the words of the General Counsel,
"***After examining the issue, the Commission is convinced that its interest and that of the public would be best served by providing transcripts to all participants in our licensing proceedings; and that such a program is needed to make the process function effectively.***",
4 With his letter, the General Counsel enclosed a memorandum from the Chairman of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel which conducts In the memoran-hearings on utilities' applications for nuclear licenses.dem, i
transcripts and other documents to any party is to expedite licensing pro-In the Chairman's opinion, denying transcripts to any party ceedings."
can only result in delays both in the hearing itself and in the licensing Providing transcripts to all board's preparation of its initial decision.
parties is thus " essential to expediting licensing proceedings and insurin h e Chairman concludes, complete Initial Decisions."
~
2 j
I
O
- j I
y i
I B-200585 i,
"In sum, the Licensing Panel feels strongly that copies of transcripts and other evidence of record to intervenor ard other parties have the following benefits:
They expedite hearings thus saving much more money than the cost of the tran-
"1.
scripts; "2. They aid in establishing a complete and accurate record by supporting cross-examination and identifying the need for, and extent of, rebuttal evidence; They aid in prompt initial decisions f
following the hearing because unless the "3.
parties can cite the record, the board must search the record, a time constrning, and inefficient expenditure of board time; and W e nee'd for transcripts is so intertwined with the statutorily mandated "4.
opportunity for proposed findings and con-clusions that the denial of transcriptscould res complex tmC proceeding on due process @ c cost to t grounds.try if this should happen is obviously enormous.
"In short, what is at issue here is not a cost reduction program, but rather a program to i
aid licensing boards in their mission of insur ng that their initial decision adequately protects the public health, safety, and environment.
(Dephasis in original.)
Chairman's me:torandum, h
. Based on the General Counsel's letter and t e sal to provide it is our opinion that the purpose of the Comission's propo the nuclear free transcripts to all parties is to expMite arx! improve Any benefit which will accrue to intervenors licensing procedure.
of the implementation of the proposal will beva al.
3
/
a B-200585
~
- C CONCLUSICX1
[
We Comission's fiscal year 1981 appropriation act, quoted above, bars the expenditure of funds appropriated by the act "to pay the ex-penses of, or otherwise compensate" intervenors in the Comission's proceedings.
In our opinion, the intent of this provision was to pre-clude the Comission from implementing any program which was intended to and had the principal effect of paying the adjudicatory expanses of intervenors as a special class. We Comission's procedural cost reduction program which we found unlawful in our December opinion in fact benefited intervenors to the exclusion of others.
We Comission's new proposal is designed to increase the efficiency of its own operations and to expedite the handling of license applications.
It will provide free transcripts not only to intervenors but to all par-ties to Comission proceedings. Tne Comission has decided that the imple-mentation of this proposal will facilitate its operations, and we find no basis upon which to object to the Comission's determination that funds We cannot made available to it are reasonably necessary for such purpose.
conclude that this proposal will violate the statutory prohibition simply because it, incidentally, eases the cost burden on intervenors. Cf.
B-92288, February ^ 19, 1976. Werefore, in our opinion, the Comisilon may lawfully use its fiscal year 1981 funds to implement the proposal.
l f5.
For the Acting Comptroller General of the United States o
9 4
_