ML20054J777
| ML20054J777 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/28/1982 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-0750, NUREG-0750-01, NUREG-0750-V14-I01, NUREG-750, NUREG-750-1, NUREG-750-V14-I1, NUDOCS 8206290546 | |
| Download: ML20054J777 (70) | |
Text
. - - _
i e
O 6
I NUREG 0750 Vol.14 Index 1 8 !
s r
-,1 i, [ _.
1 n
.,N 3
8 w.
1 1
t U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.h i
B B206290546 820628 PDR NUREG 0750 R PDR
O NUREG4750 E
Vol.14 Index 1 INDEXES TO NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ISSUANCES July - September 1981 U S NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,,-____y-
-o-
.~.
O Foreword Digests and indexes for issuances of the Commission (CLI), the Atomic Safety and ucensing Appeal Panel (ALAB), the Atomic Safety and ucensing Board Panel (LBP), the Administrative law Judge (AU),the Directors' Decisions (DD), and the Denials of Petitions of Rulemaking are presented in this document.
Rese digests and indexes are intended to serve as a guide to the issuances.
Information elements common to the cases heard and ruled upon are:
Case name (owners of facility)
Full text reference (volume and pagination)
Issuance number Issues raised by appellents legal citations (cases,.egulations, and ststutes)
Name of facility, Dor it: number Subject matter ofissas and/or rulings Type of hearing (for construction permit, operating license,etc.)
Type ofissuance (memorandum, order, decision,etc.).
These information elements are displayed in one or more of five separate formats arranged as follows:
- 1. Case Name Index ne case name index is an alphabetical arrangement of the case names of the issuances. Each case name is followed by the type of hearing, the type ofissuance, docket number, issuance number, and full text reference.
- 2. Digests and Henders ne headers and digests are presented in issuance number order as follows:
the Commission (CLI), the Atomic Safety and ucensing Appeal Panel (ALAB),
the Atomic Safety and ucensing Board Panel (LBP), the Administrative law Judge (AU), the Directors' Decisions (DD), and the Denials of Petitions for Rulemaking.
,Re header identifies the issuance by issuance number, case name, facility l
name, docket number, type of hearing, date ofissuance, and type ofissuance.
l The digest is a brief narrative of an issue followed by the resolution of the issue and any legal references used in resolving the issue. If a given issuance covers more than one issue, then separate digests are used for each issue and are designated alphabetically.
S iii
O
- 3. Lap! Citations ladex his index is divided into four parts and consists of alphabetical or alphanumerical arrangements of Cases, Regulations, Statutes, and Others. Dese citations are listed as given in the issuances. Changes in regulations and Statutes may have occurred to cause changes in the number or name and/or applicability
~~
of the citation. It is therefore important to consider the date of the issuance.
De references to cases, regulations, statutes, and others are generally followed by phrases that show the application of the citation in the particular issuance. Rese phrases are followed by the issuance number and the full text reference.
- 4. Subject Index Subject words and/or phrases, arranged alphabetically, indicate the issues and subjects covered in the issuances. De subject headings are followed by phrases that give specific information about the subject, as discussed in the issuances being indexed. Rese phrases are followed by the issuance number and the full text reference.
- 5. Facility Index Dis index consists of an alphabetical arrangement of facility names from the issuance. De name is followed by docket number, type of hearing, date, type of issuance issuance number and full text reference.
l d
e * *tne.
iv
y n ~~ -
l_ll",
J ll +<
(
ew.-
CASE NAME INDEX CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMIN ATING COMPANY. et at I
OPERATING LICENSE, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Dockets 50-440-OL,50-441 OL; Append to LEP 5124.14 NRC 235 (1981) t:
OPE R ATING LICENSE. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Dockrt: 50-4440L. 54441-OL; LBP 8135.14 NRC 682 (1981)
OPERATING LICENSE;SPECIAL PREHEARING CONFERENCE MEMORANDUM AND
_ [
ORDER CONCERNING PARTY STATUS. MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND TO STAY THE P
ADMISSIBILITY OF CONTENTIONS. AND THE ADOPTION OF SPECIAL DISCOVERY PROCEDUR ES; Dockets 50 444OL. 50-441-OL; LBP-88 24.14 NRC 175 (1981)
COMMON %EALTH EDISON COMPANY OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Dockets STN 3
54454-OLA. 50 455-OLA: LBP-8130 A.14 NRC 364 (1981)
OPER ATING LICENSL AMENDMENT; PARTIAL INITIAL DECISION; Dockets 54237-OLA.
542494LA (Spent Fuel Pool Maddication). LBP 8137.14 NRC 708 (1981)
SHOW CAUSE; DIRECTORS DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206; Dockets 54295,50-304 (10 CFR Wf~
2 206). DD'81 16.14 NRC 781 (1981)
SPECIAL PROCEEDING: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Docket 5010; CLI 8125.14 NRC 616 m CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK
-'(
(1981)
- (
SPECIAL PROCEEDING; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Dockets $4247,50 286; CLI-8123,14 m-NRC 610 (1981) h:., -
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY SPECIAL PROCEEDING; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Docket 54255-CO LBP-8126.14 NRC ' ' " '
247 (1981)
N DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE gT OPER ATING LICENSE. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Dockets 50 409-OL 50 409 SC
's (Proviseonal Operatin8 License DPR 45); LBP-81-31,14 NRC 375 (1981)
DUKE POWER COMPANY OPERATING LICENSE; MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER; Dockets 50-369. 54370; ALAB-647,14
-o.
NRC 27 (1981)
D SPECIAL PROCEEDING; ORDER; Dockets 54369. 54370; CLI 81 15.14 NRC i (1981) i*I SPECI AL PROCEEDING; DECISION; Docket 70 2623; ALAB-651.14 NRC 307 (1981) 2 ECKERT. SEAM ANS.CHERIN & MELLOTT V
SPECIAL PROCEEDING; DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF PETITION 4
FOR RULEM AKING; Docket PRM 2 6; DPRM-85 2.14 NRC 289 (1981)
FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY ANTITRUST PROCEEDING; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Docket 54389A; LBP 8119.14 h
NRC 87 (1981) l ANTITRUST PROCEEDING; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Docket 54389A; LBP-8128.14 NRC 333 (1981) g?.
ANTFTRUST PROCEEDING; DIRECTORS DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206; Docket 54389A (10 CFR 2.206); DD 81 15.14 NRC 589 (1981)
E SPECIAL PROCEEDING; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Dockets50-254SP 54251 SP (Proposed -
Amendments to facility Operatin8 Licenses to Permit Steam Generator Repairs); LBP-81-30.14 NRC '
357 (1981)
~
GEORGIA POWER COMPANY h,
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT; DIRECTORS DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2 206; Dockets 50-424 L~-
50-425; DD 81 12.14 NRC 265 (1981)
's HOUSTON LIC* TING AND POWER COMPANY J'-
CONSTRUC TION PERMIT; SECOND ORDER; Docket 50-466-CP; LBP-8134.14 NRC 637 (1981) i (m
?"
ry
O
- j...
j CASE NAME INDEX
}
i LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY 1
OPER ATING LICENSE; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Docket S322 OL; LBP 8118,14 NRC I
i 71 (1981) h-- -
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY l
RESTART PROCEEDING. ORDER; Docket S239, CLI-8119, le NRC 304 (1981)
{
SPECIAL PROCEEDING; PARTIAL INITIAL DECISION; Docket S289-SP (Restart); LBP 5132, 14 NRC 381 (1981)
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY.et al.
I OPai UING LICENSE, ORDER; Docket S289 (Restart); CLI-81 17,14 NRC 299 (1984) l SPECIAL PROCEEDING; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Docket 2320; ALAB-654,14 NRC 632 (1981)
SPECI AL PROCEEDING; ORDER: Docket S289 (Restart); CLI-88 20,14 NRC 593 (1981)
NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY SHOW CAUSE; DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206; Dockets S245 S286 (10 CFR 2.206). DD-81 17,14 NRC 784 (1981)
{
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY OPER ATING LICENSE; DECISION; Dockets 2275 OL, S323 OL; ALAB453,14 NRC 629 l
(1981)
OPERATING LICENSE; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Dockets S275 OL,50 323 OL;
}
CLI 8122,14 NRC 598 (1981)
OPERATING LICENSE, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Dockets S275 OL,50 323 OL:
OPERATING LICENSE; ORDER; Dockets 50 275 OL. 50 323 OL (Secenty); CLI-8121,14 NRC 595 (1981)
OPERATING LICENSE; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Dockets S275 OL, S323 OL (Secenty Proceedm8), ALAB449,14 NRC 40 (1981)
OPERATING LICENSE: PARTIAL INITIAL DECISION; Dockets 50 2754L, S3234L (l.aw Power Test Proceedmg); LBP-8121,14 NRC 107 (1981)
OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Docket Sl33 OLA:
PHILADELPHI A ELECTRIC COMPANY. et al.
SPECIAL PROCEEDING; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Dockets 50 277,4278, ALAB454,14 NRC 632 (1981)
PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY. et al SPECIAL PROCEEDING; DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206; Docket S344 (10 i
j CFR 2.206h DD-8113,14 NRC 275 (1981)
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK SPECI AL PROCEEDING; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Dockets S247. S286, CLI-85 23,14 NRC 610 (1981) l PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY SPECIAL PROCEEDING; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Dockets S454, s355; ALAB-654,14 r
NRC 632 (1981) l PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE,et al.
SPECIAL PROCEEDING; DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206; Dockets 50-443,50 444 (10 CFR 2.206h DD 81 14,14 NRC 279 (1981)
PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY.es al.
OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; DECISION; Docket S272 OLA: ALAS 450,14 NRC 43 (1981) 1 PUERTO RICO ELECTRIC POWER AUTHORITY SPECIAL PROCEEDING; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Docket S376; ALAB444,14 NRC 34 (1981)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY.et at OPERATING LICENSE; ORDER; Dockets 50 3614L, S3424L; LBP 8136,14 NRC 691 (1981)
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY. et at OPERATING LICENSE; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Dockets 50 445 OL S446 OL i Appication for Operating Licenes); LBP 88-22,14 NRC 150 (1981) f OPERATING LICENSE; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Dockets 50-445-OL,50 446 OL
( Appication for Operating Licanach LBP-88 23,14 NRC 159 (1981) j OPERATING LICENSE; ORDER; Dockets 50 445,50-446 (Application for Operating License);
OPERATING LICENSE; ORDER CONCERNING SUA SPONTE ISSUES, SCHEDULING 1
ORDER. NOTICE OF EVIDENTIARY HEARING AND PREHEARING CONFERENCE;
(
Dockets S445-OL. 50 444 OL (Application for Operatics Licsame; LBP-8138.14 NRC 767 (1981)
I i
g i
2 s
I t
f a
f
O CASE NAME INDEX SPECIAL PROCEEDING; ORDER; Dockets $4445,54446, CLI-88 24,14 NRC 614 (1981)
'P THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAllFORNIA OPERATING LICENSE; ORDER RELATIVE TO PARTICIPATION OF DANIEL O. HlRSCH UNDER 10 CFR 2.733, Docket 54I42 OL (Proposed Renewal of Facihty License); LBP-8129,14 NRC 353 (1981)
THE TOLEDO EDISON COPfPANY, et al.
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT; ORDER; Dockets 54504CP,54501 CP; LBP-8133,14 NRC 586 (1981)
SPECIAL PROCEEDING MEMORANDUM, Dockets 54500,54501; ALAIM52,14 NRC 627 (1981)
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP.
SPECIAL PROCE.iDING, ORDER; Docket 11000495 Applicaten No. XSNM-1471; CLI-81 18,14
!%RC 301 (1981)
A 3
p1
$^
p;-
Y i
,1.
F P
g 1;
r h.
sammo -
F a
I:
DIGESTS V?
ISSUANCES OF THE NUCLEAR REGURATORY EUMMISSION i
CLI-81 15 DUKE POWER COMPANY (WILLIAM B. MCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS I r,
AND 2) Docket Nos 54369,50 370, SPECIAL PROCEEDING. June 29,1981; ORDER F
A Following the issuance of a Licensing Boar (s decision (LBP-81 13) authorizing the Director of 4'~
Nuclear Reactor Regulation to issue a full-power, full-term hcense for the operation of Units I and 2 of the McGuire facihty, and upon the completion of its " effectiveness review" of that decision as it relates to full power operation of Unit 1, the Commission authorizes the Director to inue the full-po=ct, full-term license for the operation of Unit 1. The Comminion takes this action without [f prejudice to its
- effectiveness revie=* for Umt 2 the normal appellate review of the Licensing Board's decision (as it pertains to both Units I and 2) by the Appeal Board and by the Commission, and the
[
n otion to stay the effectiveness of the Licensing Boar (s decuion now before the Appeal Board.
b' CLI-81 16 STATEMENT OF POLICY: FURTHER COMMISSION GUIDANCE FOR POWER REACTOR OPERATING LICENSES; SPECIAL PROCEEDING; November 3,1980; ORDER H
A The Commisuon (by equally dmded vote) denies a requested stay of the Commission's f
" Statement of Policy: Further Commisuon Guidance for Power Operating Licenses.* pubbshed in 45 Fed Reg 41738 (Jone 20,1980).
('
CLt 81 17 METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, et al. fTHREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR -%
STATION, UNIT I) Docket No. 50w289 (Restart); OPERATING LICENSE; August 13, 1981; M ORDER 1-A The Commission revised its July 2,1979 order by entending its provision that Metropohtan
( L'*.
Edison Company keep Unit I in cold shutdown condition until further Commusion order to GPU q*
Nuclear Corporation. The Commission also revises its August 19.1979 (CLI-79-8) and March,6.1980 p
(CLI-80-5) orders to provide that the Licensing Board consider GPU Nuclear's management competence, rather than Metropohtan Edison's. during the restart proceedings for Unit I. The Commission further authorizes the NRC staff to issue an amendment to the operating hcense for Unit Z 1 I which will transfer operstmg authonty for the unit to GPU Nuclear.
CLI-81 18 WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP. (EXPORT OF LEU TO THE PHILIPPINES).
y[.'
Docket No. 11000495. Apphcation No. XSNM 1471; SPECIAL PROCEEDING; August 20. 1981; ;,
ORDER F
A The Commession denies petitioners' request for leave to intervene and for a heanns on M
apphcant's request for authorization to export special nuclear material to the Phihppines, finding that k petitioners failed so assert the requisite "affected interest
- or " injury in-fact
- to entitle them to a heanns as a matter of right and that since the Commission has decided in earher proceedings ;"
(CLI.8015.11 NRC 672, and CLI-76-6. 3 NRC 563) not to consider health, safety and 41 r
[
environmental impacts in evaluating fuel caport apphcations, there is no basis for holding further I
pubhc proceedings on the request.
,,p CLl-81 19 METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY (THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, f l
UNil NO.1). Docket No. 50 289; RESTART PROCEEDING; August 20.1981; ORDER P^
A, The Comm mion issues an order in this Restart proceeding stating its intention to begin its b, immediate effectiveness review of the Licensing Boar (s first partial initial decision (on management Z competence) soon after its espected issuance later in the month, if the Board resolves the management M competence issues in a manner favorsble to the eventual operation of Unit 1. The Commission requests p' the views of the parties on the immediate effectrveness of the Boar (s decision The Commission also i modifies its Order of August 9,1979. CLI 79-8.10 NRC 141 (which provided that the record in the 6
proceeding be certified by the Licensing Board directly to the Commission for final decision), to
[.
l provide that an Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board be estabbshed to hear initial appeals in g-this proceedmg. subject to possible Commission review in response to petitions for review filed pursuant tj to 10 CFR 2.786 or on the Commission's own motion.
E'
@A a
\\
s gj CF
\\
l i
l l
i t
f DIGESTS ISSUANCTS OF THE NUCHAR REGULATORY COMMISSION r
?
1 1
1 CLI-8120 METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, et al. (THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT I). Docket No. 54289 (Restart); SPECIAL PROCEEDIN0; September 17,1981; ORDER A
On reconsideration of a quesuon on which a four member Commission had dwided equally before, the result of which was ac esclude considerauon of psychological stress contentions from this l
restart proceed ng, a full Commission, by masonty vote, decides to adhere to the previous resu!t.
)
CLI-8121 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY (DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS I AND 2), Docket Nos. 54275 OL, 54323 OL (Secenty); OPERATING s
I LICENSE September 17,1981; ORDER A
In response to an intervenor's request for clanficauon on the procedure for seeking review of l
the Appeal Board's September 9,1981 physical necenty decisaan (ALAB-653 and ALAB-653 RESTRICTED), the Commissaan: (1) directs that review of the decision be sought by the fihng of a petition for review pursuant to 10 CFR 2.786; (2) entends the ume for ning such peuuons; and (3) instructs the partes to follow the Ghng and service procedures used in the Appeal Board secunty proceeding B
The Commission's normal nractice for review of Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board k
decisions apphes even when an Appeal Board has conducted evidentiary heanngs. Pacinc Gas and Electnc Power Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units I and 2), ALAB-644,13 NRC 903 (June 16,1981); Virgmia Electnc and Power Co. (North Anna Power Stanon, Units I and 2),
ALAB-578, il NRC 189 (1980); Northern States Power Co. (Praine Island Nuclear Genersung i
i Stauon. Units I and 2L ALAB-343,4 NRC 169 (1976),
CLI-81-22 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY (DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS I AND 2), Docket Nos. 54275 O L., 54323 0.L.; OPERATING LICENSE; September 21,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A
Pursuant to its immediate Effectneness review under 10 CFR 2.764(f), the Commission, inter alia,(1) decides that the Licensing Board's July 17,1981 Partial Inibal Decision, LBP-81-21,14 NRC 107, authoneng issuance of a fuel-loadmg and low-power tesung hcense should become effectne with respect to Unit I, subject to documentauan by the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation on the basis of findings to be niade by him regarding certain matters speci6ed by the Appeal Board in ALAB-653,14 NRC 629, (2) directs that two contenuons escluded by the Licensmg Board from the low-power proceed ng be included in the full-power promedmg (without prejadsce to the Appeal Board review (and later Commission review) to the esclusion of these and other contentens in both the low and full-power proceedmss);(3) denies the requests of the Governor of Cahfarnia and intervenors for a waiver of the immediate Effectneness rule for the Licensing Board's decision and certain other requests relating to the procedure for review of that decision, including stay requests; and (4) asks for i
the current views of FEM A regarding tin adequacy of emergency planning for purposes of low-power testing at Diablo Canyon.
B That one party or an interested State may differ sharply with the Licensing Board's resoluuon
(
of contested issues in an operating hcense case is not a "special circumstance" that could justify waiver of the immediate effectiveness rule,10 CFR 2.764, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.758. This is because the immediate effectiveness rule 10 CFR 2.764, itself deals with operating hcense cases only if they are contested.
C Nothing in Section 2741. of the Atomic Energy Act grants to an interested State any right to bypass normal appeal and stay redew procedures and to bnns matters directly before the Commission prmr to hcense issuance.
L CLI-8123 CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK (INDIAN POINT, UNIT 2);
{
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,(INDIAN POINT, UNIT 3), Docket 1
Nos. 50 247, 50-286; SPECIAL PROCEEDING; September 18, 1981; MEMORANDUM AND I
ORDER A
The Commission clanfies its previous Memorandum and Order, CLI 811,13 NRC i (1981) which inter alia, directed the holding of a heanns to consider certain long-term safety issues relating to Units 2 and 3 of the Indian Point facihty, and appoints an Atomic Safety and Licensars Board to preside over the proceedmg CL1-8124 TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY, et al (COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNITS I AND 2), Docket Nos. 50-445,50 446. SPECIAL PROCEEDING; i
September 22,1981; ORDER
+
A The ^
" requests the Licensing Board to desenbe the particular factors that constituted the basis for 'he Board's adoption sua sponte of certain of a dismissed intervenor's contentions.
I B
in operating License proceedings, a licensing board may esercise its sua sponte authonty to esamine matters not put into controversy by the parties only if it " determines that a menous safety, environmental, or common defense and secanty matter exists. 10 CFR 2.760s.
6 1
I
O
.m.
DIGESTS ISSO4% CTS OF THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY CT)%t%ftSSION h
C in operating hcense proceedings, a Irensing board's determination to raise a ma'ter sua sponte pursuant to 10 CF R 2.760s should be set forth in a separate order which makes the requisite findings and bneny states the reasons for raising the issue.
j CL1 ti-25 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (DRESDEN NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT I). Ducket No. 5010, SPECIAL PROCEEDING, September 28, 1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A
The Commission directs the appointment of an Atomic Safety and Licensics Board to rule on petitions for heanngs with regard to hcensce's proposal to chemically decontaminate Unit I of the Dresden facihty, and provides guidance on the conduct of a hearms should the Board decide one is required B
Section 189a of the Atomic Energy Act, as amended, provides that the Commission shall conduct a heanns at the request of persons whose interest may be affected. Petitioners satisfy the Commission's enteria for intervention if they are found to have standing and come forward with at least one htigable contention.
C Neither pnor notice nor a prior hearing is required under Section Ig9a of the Atomic Energy Act, as amended, for Commission approval of a incense amendment in situations ehere the NRC staff makes a "no significant hazards consideration" finding D
Each person seeking intervention in a Commission hcensing proceeding must separately estabhsh standing.10 CFR 2.714.
E Intervention in a Commission heensing proceeding may be granted as a matter of discretion accordmg to specific cntena Portland General Electnc Co. et al. (Pebble Spnngs Nuclear Plant, Unita I and 2), CL176-27,4 NRC 610,616 (1976).
F Participation in a Commission hcensmg proceeding by a person who is not a party is at the discretion of the presiding officer and can only take the form of a hmited argearance.10 CFR 2.715.
G Only parties to a Commission hcensing proceeding may be consolidated. Petitioners who are not admitted as parties may not be consohdated for the purpanes of partwipation as a single party.10 CFR 2.715a.
'H Neither the Atomic Energy Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, nor the Commission's regulations require that there be a heanns on an environmental impact statement. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRC,433 US. $19, $43 (1973). Public heanngs are held on an EIS only if the Comminion finds such hearings are required in the pubhc interest.10 CFR 2.104.
o k
7
E e
1 l
l O
q.
tp-f h
b V
DIGESIS
[
ISSUANCE OF THE ATOMIC SAITTY AND UMNSING APPEAL 90ABDS O
ALAB-647 DUKE POWER COMPANY (WILLIAM B. MCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION UNITS I L
AND 2). Docket Nos. 50 169, 54 370; OPERATING LICENSE; July I,1981. MEMORANDUM :'
AND ORDER f'
A The Appeal Board denvis a motion requesting a stay pendente hte of the Licensing Boar (s f initial (LBP 79-13, 9 NRC 489) and supplemental mitial (LBP 8113,13 NRC 652) deciser.1{n authorizing the Director of Nucicar Reactor Regulation to issue full-term operating hcenses for Units I and 2 of the McGuire facihty upon the Directcr's making the findings required by 10 CFR 50 57(a) Y.f on those matters not considered in the adjudsstory proceedmg.
jb B
Under new subsection (f)(2) of 10 Cf R 2.764. upon its receipt of a licensms board decision authorirms the issuance of an operstmg license the Comm umn will undertake to determit.e on its J
own initiative whether to stay the effectiveness of the de ision. That deterir,inaten is to be based on a D consideration of the gravity of the substaNive issue, the.skehhand that it has been resolved mcorrectly below, the degree to =hsch correct resolution of the inue would be prejudiced by operaten pendmg b review, and other relevant public interest factors. Such Commusmn review is without prejudice to ?.!:,)
Appeal Board or other Commission decisions, mcluding de.imons on stay requen.s filed under 10 CFR Q 2.788.
p C
Requests for stays of Licensing Board deciticca will be judged by s wancmg of the int t factors specified in 10 CF R 2.788(e).
. /,y.
ALAB-648 PUERTO RICO ELECTRIC POWER AUTHOPITY (NORTH COAST NUCLEAR 3zb
? ;,j -
PL ANT, UNIT I) Docket No. 50 376; CONSTRL'CTION PER MIT; July 2,1981;
[C* f MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A
The Appeal Board deniet intervenors' motmi to supplement the record.
F 8
An Appeal Board ordmanly will noe entertain an inue raiacd for the first time on appeal. its O dismchnation to do no will be particularly st ong in circumstances where the issue and the factual.'
averments undertyms it could have been but were not, timely put before the IJcensmg Board.
p C
lt is unfair for e party to seek rehef from 6 inal inbunal on one theorv sad. if unsucceuful, then to mount an appeal on a dis: ete theory founded on additional assert $l facts whica. although p avadable at the time, had not been given to that inbunal; requests to supplement the record wdl mA beU entertained by en appeal board in and of such an appeal.
y3 AI.AS449 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY (DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER p
PLANT. UNITS 1 AND 2), Ducket Nos. 54275 OL, 54323 OL (Fecurity Proceeding); SPECI AL ;.
PROCEEDING, July 15. 1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER b' ;
A The Appeal Board dentes a motson for an oral bnefing of an allegd mcident of sabetage occurrms recently at another facihty, which was submitted eithout explan6 ten of the incide'at's i-connecten with this proceedmg or accompanymg uformation escept for a cory of a rr;ert of the I incident taken from a trade journal.
?-
ALAB-650 PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTitic AND GAS COMPANY. et al. (SALEM NUCLEAR 5 GENER ATING STATION. UNIT I). Docket No. 54272 OLA (Spent Fuel Pool Espensent OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT July 17,1981; DECISION q-A The Appeal Board affirms the Licensing Board's decision (LBP 50 27, 12 NRC 435) :
authoriemg the issuance of an amend nent to the facihty's operatmg bcense permittmg the installatson o e
cf an Wege racks, designed to inc ease the capacity of Salem's spent fuel pool.
[*:
B A carty's bnef on appeal must be ccSfined to a consideratnon of the esceptions previessly filed t ++ pw.y and should soecify. inter sha, the precise portiera of the record rehed upon in support of N'
~ A mert e of error.10 CFR 2.762(a).
Im M
A grty's esceptions, which are to spr.cify errors in the decmon below, must relate to matters i,. J in the party's proposed findmgs of fact a.sd amclusions of law; absent a senous substantive E
, areal boards will not entertam arguraents that a hcensmg board had no opportumty to addresa )
is G ai are raised for Ine first time on appeal Tennence Valley Authonty (Hartsvdle Plant.L' nits e A.4 IB, and 28), ALAB-463,7 NRC 341,348 (1978).
d '. _
p
- a. -.
g e
p L.
' (
R
O i
I mcisis t
I v
thSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND IJCENSING APPEAL BOABDS 6
I i.
l D
A party's proposed Gadings and conclusions must be conGned to the materM! issues of fact and law presented on the record.10 CFR 2.754(c).
I
{
E Bnefs are necessary not only to give appeal boards sufncient information to evaluate the basis of objections to the decision below, but also to provide an opponent with a fair opportunity to come to gnpa with the appellant's arguments and attempt to rebut them. The absence of a bnef virtually I
precludes an intelhgent response by appellees; accordingly, unbnefed eaceptions will generally be i
regarded as maived. PuNic Service Co. of Indiana (MarNe Hill Station, Units I and 2), ALAB 461,7 i
NRC 313,315 (1978).
I F
lt is incumbent upon interveness who wish to participate in NRC proceedings to structure their participation so that it is meaningful and alerts the agency to the intervenors' position and contentions.
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council. Inc.,435 US. 519,553 (1978).
G Even parties who participate in NRC licensing proceedings pro se have the oWigation to t
familiante themselves with the Commission's Rules of Practics and the proper bnenna format.
l Pennsylvania Power and Light Co. (Susquehanna Steam Electnc Station, Unita I and 2), ALAB-563, 10 NRC 449,450 a.I (1979).
H i% EPA does not require consideration of circumstances that are only
- remote and speculative possibehties? Natural Resources Defense Council, lac. v. Morton,458 F.2d 827,838 (D.C. Cir.1972).
I Generalized asacrtions to the effect that "more evidence is needed* are not enough to warrant reopening a record.
J NEPA requires a consideration of alternstrves only when the proposed actson is a " major
- one "sigmGcantly affecting the quahty of the human ennronment," or
- involves unresolved connicts concerning alternative uses of available resources? 42 US C. ll 4332(2)(C) (E).
K Error in a licensing board finding that does not affect or impair the board's ultimate conclusion is harmless and gives no cause for reversal.
L More than the size and duration of a f aject must be evaluated whea determining whether its
, faderal approvsl constitutes a major action with a sigmGcant environmental impact; in order to make tant evaluation, the precias federal action involved must be defined. See Aberdeen & Rocknsh R.R. v.
SCRAP,422 US. 289,322 (1975).
M in a spent fuel pool espansion proposal, the proper focus of the environmental inquiry is the incremental effect on the environment occasioned by the proposed hcense amendswent. Portland i
General Electnc Co. (Trojan Plant) ALAB 53I,9 NRC 263,266 a 6 (1979).
N After faihns to raise and htigate matters properly before the licensing board, a party may not t
then seek reversal of the board on the ground that the board denied it due process and did not consider matters " forcefully presented? Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense r
l Council, Inc.,435 US. $19,553 554 (1978).
t O
Techmcal issues discussed included. Criticality: Boral integrity, corrosion, awelling; Spent fuel i
pool LOCA, spent fuel candation.
l ALAB-651 DUKE POWER COMPANY (AMENDM9fT TO MATERIALS LICENSE SNM.1773 -
TRANSPORTATICN OF SPENT FUEL FROM OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION FOR g
STORAGE Al MCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION), Docket No. 70-2623; SPECIAL y
PROCEEDING; August 10,1981; DECI3 ION 1
A The Appeal Board reverses the Licensing Board's initial decision (LBP.80 28,12 NRC 459) and authorizes the issuance of an amendment to apphcant's matenals hcense, allowing, subject to one l
condition, the highway transportation of 300 spent fuel assemNies from the apphcant's Oconee l
Nuclear Station to the McGuire Nuclear Station for stornac.
B NLPA requires the preparation of an environmental impact statement only in connection eith l
major federal actions which can be espected to have a significant impact on the quahty of the human environment.
l C
Where federal approval is sought of a portion of a private plan, developed without federal j
involvement, an agency may conSne its scrutity under NEPA to the portson of the plan for which g
approval is sought so long as (1) that portion has independent utihty; and (2) as a result, the approval does not foreclose the agency fror,i later withholding approval of subsequent portions of the overall pla n.
i D
An environmental impact appraisal mast supply " convincing reasons
- why cn action with arguaNy potentially significant environmental impacts does not require a detailed impact statement; the appraisal should (1) reflect that a hard look was taken at the problem; (2) identify the relevant l
areas of concern; and (3) make a convincing case that the impact as significant. Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Comm'n v. US. Postal Service,447 F.2d 1029,1039 40 (D C. Cir.1973).
5
(
l l
10
O e -
DIGESTS ISSUANC13 OF THE ATO4IIC SAITTY AND LKENSING APPEAI. BOARDS E
An environmental impact statement need not consider remote and highly speculative consequences; neither do they tngser the obhgation to prepare a detailed environmental impact statement.
F Neither Section 102(2)(C) nor Section 102(2)(E) of NEPA obhgates the federal agency "to search out possible alternatives to a course which itself will not either harm the environment or bring into senous questen the manner in which this country's resources are being espended? Portland General Electnc Co. (Trojan Nuclear Plant) ALAB-531,9 NRC 263,266 (1979).
ALAB-652 THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY, et al. (DAVIS BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3), Docket Nos. 54 500, 50 501: SPECIAL PROCEEDING; September 3,1981; MEMORANDUM A
The Appeal Panel Chairman decides against the need to convene an Appal Board to esamine condihons impmed by the Licensing Board in connection with the withdrawal of a construction pernut apphcation and termination of this hcensing proceeding, and esplains the reasons for his action.
B Appeal board revice will be routinely undertaken of any final disposition of a licensing proceeding that either was or had to be founded upon substantive determinatens of significant safety or environmental issues Washington Pubhc Power Supply System (WPPSS Nuclear Project No. 2),
ALAB-571,10 NRC 637,692 (1979).
ALAB-653 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY (DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS I AND 2), Docket Nos. 50 275 OL, 50 323 OL; OPERATING LICENSE; September 9.1981. DECISION A
Based upon its review of the entire record on the physical secunty plan issued in this operating license procreding for the Diablo Canyon facihty, the Appeal Board concludes that the apphcant's secunty plan, sebyect to certain conditions and restnctions, conforms to all apphcable provisions of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's secunty regulations. The Board set out its findings of fact and conclusions of law in a sealed separate opinion (ALAB-653 RESTRICTED) because of the sensitive character of the numerous details of the facahty secunty plan which the opinion discusses.
A1.AB-654 PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY, et al. (PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3), Docket Nos. 50-277, 54 278; METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, et al. (THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT NO. 2) Docket No.
50 320 PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY (HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION, UNITS I AND 2) Dockets Nos. 50-654,50 355; SPECIAL PROCEEDING; September II,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A
The Appeal Board orders intervenors in this cxmsolidated proceeding, as cowhtson precedent to a further evidentiary heanns on the environmental effects of radon releases associated with the uranium fuel cycle, to make a pretinunary showing that a genuine issue of a matenal fact esists by the documented opinion of one or more quahfied authorities to the effect that the incremental fuel cycle-related redon emissions on the amount found by the Appeal Board in ALAB-640,13 NRC 487, will have a significant environmental effect in terms of human health.
6Ys iNd u
11
i l
i 1
moy - #s 1
V F
E',
V'h^
h h
.e
{
DIGESTS b
V, ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND IJCENSING BOARDS h
LBP 81 18 LONO ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY (SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION, 1;;?.' <j UNIT I), Docket No. 50-322 OL; OPERATING LICENSE, July 7,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A
The Licensms Board rules on the admissibihty of a contention submitted by an intervenor in this operstmg hcense proceedms, accepting the contention in part and rejecting it in part.
B A proponent of a motion does not have the right to reply to an answer to the motion; parties who do not seek leave to file a reply are espressly demed the opportunity to do so.10 CFR %
2.730(c)
C Contentions in NRC adjudicatory proceedings are like federal court complaints; before any suggestion that a contention should not be entertamed can be acted upon favorably, the proponent of the contention must be given some chance to be heard in response. Houston Lightmg and Power Co
'?
( Allens Creek Nuclear Generstmg Station, Unit 1), ALAB 565,10 CFR 521 (1979).
LBP 81 19 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY (ST, LUCIE PLANT, UNIT No 2), Docket No 50 389A; ANTITRUST PROCEEDING; July 7,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDEP, I
A The Licensing Board in this antitrust proceedmg permits the resumption of discovery, estabhshes a schedule for the submisemn of bnefs on various questions and matters identified by the 3
- Board, and schedules two preheanns conferences to consider those questions and matters.
LBP-8120 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY (HUMBOLDT BAY POWER PLANT l%
h.-
UNIT NO. 3 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE). Docket No.
50133-OLA; OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; July 14, 1981; MEMORANDUM AND h ORDER A
Upon consideration of Licensee's motion to withdraw, without prejudice, its apphca: ion for an a amendment to its operating hcense for the facihty designed to allow the Licensee to resume its h[
operation upon satisfactory completion of certain modifications to the facshty (it has been in shut down state since 1976), the Licensing Board defers ruhng on the motion and directs Licensee to provide it with additmal information regardmg the modifications.
h LBP 8121 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY (DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR PLANT, S UNITS I AND 2) Docket Nos. 50L275-OL,50 323-OL (Iow Power Test Proceedms); OPERATING ';.
- LICENSE; July 17,1981; PARTIAL INITI AL DECISION U
A The Licensing Board issues a partial initial decision (subject to review by the Commission 7
pursuant to 10 CFR 2.764) authorizing the issuance of a hcense for fuel loadmg and low-power testing 9 f
up to 5% of rated power at the Diablo Canyon facihty The Board notes for Commission attention that issues relating to the necenty of the plant are still before the Appeal Board and that the partialimtial decision wih not be complete without their resolution.
f, B
Full compliance with the Commission's emergency planning standards in NUREG-0654 and c.
Appendis E to 10 CFR Part 50 is not required pnar to fuel loadmg and lowoower testmg; however, p emergency planning for fuel loading and low-power testmg must be sufrecient to confer the same level (
of protection to the pubhc as afforded by full comphance with the regulations at full power operation.
p C
Techmcal issues dicussed included: Release of radioactive radon gas from uramum mming and (
fulhng for reactor fuel, Quahty assurance; Unresolved genene safety issues Emergency planning p requirements for fuel loading and low power testmg; Risks of low power operation; Radiation espceures y at the site boundary and low population zone (LPZ); Risk of accidents dunns testmg; Emergency plannmg zones; Radiogical monitonng; County emergency plans; Rehef, safety, and block valves h.
LBP-88 22 TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY, et al. (COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNITS I AND 2), Docket Non. 50-445 OL, 50 446 OL (Apphcation for IC Operstmg License); OPERATING LICENSE; July 23,1981; MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER
' C A
The Licensms Board grants in part and denies in part apphcants' moten to strike three [
contentsons propounded by an intervenor in this proceedmg, demes the intervenors' requests for a ea protective order and oral argument, and issues instructions to the parties concerning the future conduct N
of discovery.
i pn 13 r
Qx Ell A..
i
t O
DIGESTS
,w 3
ISSUANGS OF THE ATOMIC SAETY AND UCENSING BOARDS t
.. - s>
LBP-8123 TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY. et at (COMANCHE PEAK STEAM J
ELECTRIC STATION, UNITS I AND 2) Docket Nos. 50-445-OL, 50 446-OL (Appication for s'
Operating License), OPERATING LICENSE; July 24,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A
The Licensing Board (I) grants an intervenor's motion that it be permitted to withdraw from
{
the proceeding; (2) dismisses as moot all pending motions by or against the intervenor; (3) designates new lead intervenors for those joently-sponsored contentions of wash the withdra wing intervenor was a
previously no designated, (4) esplains the basis for its raising of those questions sua sponte (in comphance with the Commission's June 2,1981 directions relating to issues raised sua sponte by Licensing and Appeal Boards); and (5) rules on the admissibihty of those contentsons solely sponsored by the eithdrawing intervenor, dismissing certain of the Contentions and adopting others as Board questions.
8 in an operating Isense hearing, matters not put into controversy by the parties will be j
esamined and decided by the presiding ofrecer only where he or she determines that a serious safety, environmental, or common defense and security matter esists.10 CFR 2.760(a).
r C
The Commassen has directed that eben a Licensing Board or an Appeal Board raises an issue j
sua sponte in an operating Isense proceeding, it shall issue a separate order making the requisite findings, bnefly state its reasons for raising the issue, and forward a copy of that order to the Office of i
the General Counsel and to the Commassen.
D la an operating hcense proceeding, the power of the staff alone to decide whether any other matSrs (beyond those contested assues admitted by the Licensing Board) need to be considered prior to the issuance of an operating Isense anses only after the Board has resolved the question of potential sua sponte issues.
L B P.81 24 CLE% ELAND ELEC1RIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY. et at (PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS I & 2), Docket Nos. 50 444GL,50-441-OL; OPERATING LICENSE; July 28. 1981; SPECIAL PREHEARING CONFERENCE MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CONCERNING PARTY STATUS. MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND TO STAY, THE ADMISSIBILITY OF CONTENTIONS, AND THE ADOPTION OF SPECIAL DISCOYERY PROCEDURES A
The Licensing Board issues a special prehearing conference order concerning the admission of parties, motons to damisa and to stay, admissibihty of contentions, and the adoption of special discovery procedures.
B The Commission has junsdiction to license nuclear facihties located within the United States.
The fact that some emergency planning activities required for hcensing may take place is Canada does I
not deprive the Commimon of jurudiction.
C An organuation whose claim to have standing to intervene is based on residence of members 125 miles from the reactor site is not entitled to standing as a matter of right.
D W hen the board has required apphcant and staff to file briefs concerning the admissibihty of j
contentions, intervenor must give reasons or authority for rejecting arguments presented in the required l
bnefs.
E in ruhng on the admissibihty of a contention, licensing boards should not reach the ments and should not require the introduction of underlying evidence, prended that the base for the contenten is edentified eith reasonable specificity.
e F
The degree of specificity required of a consention depends on many factors. One is the nature of the challenge to ns admissibihty. Another is ehether intervenor has provided bases for a claim for 1
which rehef can be granted.
G The doctnne of collateral estoppel tradetsonally apphes only when the parties in the case were
{
also parties (or their privies) in the previous case. A hnuted estension of that doctnne permits I
- offensive" collateral estoppel;i.e., the claim by a person not a party to previous htigsten that an issue had already been fully htigated against the defendant and that the defendant should be held to the l
prewmus decision because he has already had ha day in court. Parkland Hoanery Co., Inc. v. Leo M.
Shore 439 US 322 (1979). In operating hcense proceedings, estoppel may also be apphed defensively, to preclude an intervenor who was not a party from raising issues htigated in the construction permit l
proceeding LBP-8125 TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY, et at (COMANCHE PEAK STEAM f.
ELECTRIC STATION, UNITS I AND 2) Docket Nos. 50 445,50-446 (Apphcation for Operating i
License) OPERATING LICENSE; July 30,1981; ORDER A
The Licensing Board issues a discovery order which inter stia sinkes certain motions and l
answers by the parties relating to discovery and directs them to meet and negotiate in good faith on all
~"
}
of their pending daputes, report to the Board the outcome of their negotiations including a detailed t
descnpton of any remaining deputes and the bases for their respective posnions, on an expedited
)
basis.
I
\\
I 14 y
)
i l
l l
0 M
DIGESTS ISSUANCE OF THE ATOMIC SAITTY AND IJCINSING BOARDS wemme -
B In modern administrative and legal practice, pretrial discovery is liberally granted to enable the parties to ascertain the facts in comptem litigation, refine the issues, and prepart adequatcly for a more expeditious heanns or trial. Pacific Gas and Electric Co. (Stanislaus Nuclear Project, Unit I),
LBP 78-20,7 NRC 1038,1040 (1978).
C Interrogatones must have at least general relevancy, for discovery purposes, to the matter in controversy in the proceedmg.
D Contentions constitute the method by which the parties to a licensing proceeding frame issues under NRC practice, similar to the use of pleadings in their judicial counterparts.
LBP-si 26 CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY (PALISADES NUCLEAR POWER FACILITY),
Docket No. 54255-CO;SPECIAL PROCEEDING; July 31,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A
The Licensing Board denies a petition by labor unions for a heanns on an order of the Director of Inspection and Enforcement imposing inter alia certain restrictions on overtime work by licensed operators.
B In enforcement cases, as in hcensing cases, the Commission applies judicial concepts of standing in determining rights to a hearing under section 189a of the Atomic Energy Act. To have standing one must first allege some injury that has occurred or will probably result from the action involved. In addition, one must allege an interest arguably within the zone of interests protected by the Act. Public Service Co. of Indiana (Marble Hill Nuclear Generating Station, Units I and 2), CLI-8010,11 NRC 438 (1980); Wisconsin Electnc Power Co., (Posnt Beach Unit 1), CL180 38,12 NRC 547 (1980);
Portland General Electric Co. (Pebble Spnngs Nuclear Plant, Units I and 2), CLI 76-27,4 NRC 610, 613 (1976).
C Economic interest, including a labor unica's economic interest in maintaining contractually protected employment rights. is not an interest which is within the " zone of interests' protected by the Atomic Energy Act; such interest cannot serve as a basis to request a hearing as a matter of nght.
The Board also denied standing as a matter of discretion.
LBP-81-27 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY (DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS I AND 2), Docket Nos. 50 275 OL,50 323 OL; OPERATING LICENSE; August 4,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A
The Licensing Board rules on contentions asserted by 3oint latervenors in connection with their petition for reopening the full. power hcensing proceedmg for the plant. The Board admits a contention on emergency planning but denies intervenor's other contentions as not meeting the requirements of the Commission's order of April I,1981 (CLI-815) for reopening a record which has been closed, as not presenting litigable issues, as not present.ng an issue which has already been decided, or as too general to be accepted for purposes of htigation.
LBP-8128 FLORIDA POWER A LIGHT COMPANY (ST. LUCIE PLANT, UNIT NO. 2), Docket No. 50-389A; ANTITRUST PROCEEDING; August 5,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A
The Licensing Board denies an untimely petition for leave to intervene in this antitrust proceedmg upon balancing the factors in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1), the Board denies the petition also for lack of a neues tietween petitioners' allegations and the proceedmg.
I B
W'nere a late petition for intervention is involved, the special factors set forth in 10 CFR 2.71 Ma)(1) must be balanced and apphed before the petition may be granted. These factors are: (1)
Good cause, if any, for failure to apply on time. (2) The availabihty of other means whereby the petitioner's witness will be protected. (3) The extent to which the petitioner's participation may reasonably be expected to assist in developing a sound record. (4) The extent to which the petitioner's interest will be represented by existing parties. V The catent to which the petitioner's participation will broaden the issues or delay the proceeding.
C A late petition for intervention shall a tie granted if a remedy for the alleged harm is available before the Federal Energy Regulating Commission and petitioner has not shoen how that remedy is insufficient.
D Under 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1), the test for intervention becomes incressmgly vigorous as time passes.
E For purposes of intervention in an antitrust proceeding under the Atomic Energy Act, a competitor to an apphcant for a license to construct and operate a nuclear plant normally need only allege the nature of its business and the existence of a situation inconsistent with the satitrust laws to show *nenus" since a nuclear plant would place it at a competitive disadvantage; such allegations by a non-competitor are not sufficient to show a "nesus' to the hcense proceeding.
r t
l l
l 15
O
,-w DIGESTS ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFITY AND LJCENSING BOARDS L BP-81 29 THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA (UCLA R ESE A RCH REACTOR), Docket No. 50-142 OL (Proposed Rene=al of Facihty License). OPERATING LICENSE, August 10, 1981; ORDER RELATIVE TO PARTICIPATION OF DANIEL 0 HIRSCH UNDER 10 CFR 2.733 A
The Board grants an intervenor's motion for the quahfication of an capert interrogator under i
B An empert interrogator under 10 CFR 2.733(a) need not meet the same standard of espertue as an espert witness. The standard for interrogators under 10 CFR 2.733(a) is that the individual
- s quahfied by scientific trainmg or esperience to coninbute to the de=clopment of an adequate decu.onal record in the proceedmg by the conduct of such esammation or cross-enaminaten."
LBP-8 8-30 FLORIDA POW E R AND LIGHT COMPANY (TURKEY POINT NUCLEAk GENERATING, UNITS 3 AND 4) Docket Nos 50 254SP,50 251 SP (Proposed Amendments to facihty Operstmg Licenses to Permit Steam Generator Repairs); SPECIAL PROCEEDING; August 12,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A
The Licensm Board denics an miervenor's apphcaten for a stay pursuant to 10 CFR 2 788 of the Board's Fmal Order (LBP-81-16) cancelhng further heanngs on hcense amendments to perrnit steam generator repairs.
B in decidmg =hether to grant a stay of an order, a Licensms Board is governed by the four factor test of 10 CF R 2.788, whsh essentially codifies the judicial pnnciples apphcable to mouons for prehminary injunctions.
C No smgle factor among the four to be considered for a stay decuson under 10 CFR 2.788 is neceuarily dispositive. Rather, the " strength or ocakness of the showing by the rruwset on a particular factor innuences principally how strong his showing on the other factors must be in order to justify the sought rehef" Pubhc Service Company of New Hampshire (Seabrook Station, Umts I and 2).
ALAB-338,4 NRC 10.14 (1976)
LBP-8130A COMMON % EALTH EDISON COMPANY (BYRON STATION, UNITS I AND 2)
Du6ket Nos. STN 54454-OLA. 50-455-OLA; OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; August 18, 1981, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A
The intervention board was only attempting to determine whether there was at least une viable contention in order to ingger an evidentiary hearms in an operstmg hcense proceedmg It is sufficient for an intervenor at the pleading stage merely to state his reasons (i e., the bass) for the contentions, and he is not required to plead evidence or to estabinh that the assertions are nell-founded in fact B
- Petiten" or " intervention" board does not rule on adminibility of all contentons, but et only determines standmg and at least one viable contenten in operstmg hcense proceedags.
C A peut:en for interventon is not required to plead evidence or to estabinh that the auertions are well-founded in fact, but at the pleading stage it es sufficient to state the reasons (i e., the bass) for contentens.
D Apphcants are entitled to prompt dacovery concerning the bases of contentions, as much information is already available from the f3AR and other documents, whwh should be supplemented by later information.
E The involvement of a party's lawyers in other htigation or professional business does not encase noncomphance with nor entend deadhnes for comphance with discovery requests or other rules of practice L BP-81-31 DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE (LA CROSSE BOILING WATER REACTOR, OPERATING LICENSE AND SHOW CAUSEl, Docket Nus. 50-409-OL, 54409-SC (Prownsonal Operstmg License DPR-45), OPERATING LICENSE; August 19, 1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A
The Board orders the connohdaten of an operating hcense proceeding (to convert a provisional operating hcense to a full-term hcense) with another proceeding resultmg from a Commnsion show cause order.
B Under 10 CFR 2.716, consohdaten is permitted if found to be conducive to the proper depatch of the Board's busmess and to the ends of ustice J
L B P-81 32 METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY (THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1), Ducket No 50 289-SP (Restart); SPECIAL PROCEEDING, August 27, 1981; PARTIAL INITI AL DECISION A
In this proceedmg to determine whether and the conditions under ehrh Unit I of the facihty should be allowed to resume operaten, the Licensing Board usues a partial initial decision on the matter of the hcensee's management capabihty to operate the Unit, reservmg for later decasion inues on plant design and procNures, separation of the facihty's too units, and emergency plannmg With the excepoon of an issue relating to operator crammaton over whsh it is retaming junsdicuon, the Board finds that the hcensee has demonstrated the managenal capabihty and technical resources to 16
O n.
DIGESIS ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND IJCENSING SOARDS operate Unit I while maintaining Unit 2 in a safe configuration and carrying out planned decontammation and restoration activities for that Unit; that the licensee has comphed with the Commission's short term recommendations related to management competence specified in NUREG-0578; and that it has made reasonable progress toward completion of long-term recommendations related to management mmpetence spectfied in NUREG-0578.
8 A Licensmg Board's partial initial decision upholding the appisant's selection of a site is immediately appealable notwithstanding the fact that it does not authorize any construction activity where there would be a long hiatus before further findings. Houston Power and Lighting Company (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Units I and 2), ALAB 301,2 NRC 853,854 (1975).
C A partial initial decision favorable to the applzant on the issue of alternate construction sites is immediately appealable notwithstanding the fact that it neither authorizes any construction activity nor contemplates a long hiatus before further findings. Duke Power Company (Perkins Nuclear Station, Units I,2 and 3), ALAB-597,11 NRC 370 (1980).
LBP-81-33 THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY et al. (DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3. TERMINATION OF PROCEEDINGS), Docket Nos. 54500 CP, 54501-CP, CONSTRUCTION PERMIT; August 28,1981; ORDER A
The Lmensing Board grants apphcant's request to withdraw its appimation for construction pernuts for Units 2 and 3 of the Davts-Besse facihty and orders that appimant take certain steps to redress the site pursuant to 10 CFR 2.107(a); vacates its partial initial decisions, LBP-75 75,2 NRC 993 (1975) and LBP 78-29, 8 NRC 284 (1978), which authorized issuance of two limited work authorizations for those units, and terminates the construction permit proceedings for those units.
LBP.81 34 HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER COMPANY (ALLENS CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STAT;ON, UNIT I) Docket No. 50-466-CP; CONSTRUCTION PERMIT; September 1,1981: SECOND ORDER A
Lwensing Board grants several motions filed by the Appisant and by the NRC Staff for summary disposition of certain health and safety contentions, denies several other such motions, and grants,in part, a motion of the Staff for the summary disposition of an environmental contention.
B A contention will not be summanly disposed of obere the Licensing Board determines that there still esist controverted issues of material fact.
LBP-8135 CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY, et al. (PERRY NUCLEAR POW ER PLANT, UNITS I AND 2), Docket Nos. 50-440-OL, 50-441-OL: OPERATING LICENSE: September 9,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A
Denying objections to its special prehearing conference order, the Licensmg Board clarifies this order and orders the appointment of lead intervenors to mnsohdate and coordinate the actions of party intervenors for purposes of the orderly conduct of the proceeding In addition, the Licensing Board grants the petition of Ashtabula County Comminioners and Ashtsbula County Disaster Services Agency for admission as non-party partripanu under 10 CFR 12.715(c).
B A change in the need for power, at the operating hcense stage, must be sufficiently extensive to offset the environmental and economic costs of constructen before it may be raised as a viable contention.
C If Appleant bears a burden of proof on an issue and moves for summary disposition, intervenors will have the burden of going forward to demonstrate that factual issues esist which require a hearms The apphcant retains, however, the ultimate burden of demonstrating that there is no genuine issue of fact with respect to any issue it seeks to exclude from a hearing.
D Where intervenors have filed consohdated bnefs they may be treated as a conschdated party; one intervenor may be appointed lead intervenor for purposes of coordinatmg responses to discovery, but d scovery requests should be served on each party intervenor. It is not necessary that a contention or contentions be identified to any one of the intervening parties, so long as there is at least one contention admitted per intervenor.
E Non-parties, participat ng under 10 CFR 62.715(c), reed not comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 52.714 that intervenors must either file their contentions in a timely fashion or show cause for
. heir late miervention.
LBF-gi 36 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ED! SON COMPANY, et al. (SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3) Docket Noa. 54361-OL,54362-OL; OPERATING LICENSE; September 14,1981; ORDER p
A The Licensing Board refers to the Appeal Board a Liceahs Board order raising on the Board's own motion the issue of possible effects on emergency plans of an earthquake of a magnitude greater than the Safe Shutdown Earthquake at the facihty. In connection with the issue raised, the Licensing Board directs the parties to address questions of evacuation time in the event of earthquake damage to highways, per effect of structural damage to possible shelters from a radioactive plume or radioactive particulate debns, and radiation done estimates in the event of delayed evacustson.
17 i
O DIGESTS ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND UCENSl%G BOARDS B
in a seismmally active area a Licensang Board Nnald consider the pouible effects of a very larse carthquake on emergency plans. Th.s considen v mid involve an earthquake esceeding the SSE and cauung a release of radiaten while damaging ses. tion routes.
C Very specifs or detailed factual findings are not a prerequis te to sua sponte review of an inue that is a menous safety matter. The Board need only give its reasons for raising the inue.
D A Licenung Board may raise a safety issue sua sponte when suficient evidence of a serious safety matter has been presented that reasonable minds eould inquire further. Very specific findings are not required since they could cause prejudgement problems.
E The size of the EPZ has been decided generically and is inappropriate for site specifs analysis.
F Size of the EPZ ts a genene issue, but other aspects of emergency plans, particularly evacuation routes, are site specifs.
G A finding of reasonable anurance that adequate protective measures can and mill be taken in the event of a radaalogical emergency goes beyond a checklist determinaten ehether a plan meets the standards at 10 CFR $50.47(b).
H Referral of the carthquake issue in this case is based upon its possible significant ramifications for other cases.
I Referral directly to the Comminion by the Licensing Board will not be granted absent a strong re.-
. for bypassing the Appeal Board J
Technmal luucs discuued included. Emergency plan; Multiple disasters.
LBP-81-31 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (DRESDEN STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3),
Ducket Nos. S237-OLA, S249-OLA (Spent Fuel Pool Modification); OPERATING LICENSE AM EN DMENT; September 24,1981; PARTIAL INITIAL DECISION A
Acting upon the motmn of Apphcant, the Licenung Board issues a Partial Initial Decision modifying the operating hccme of Dresden Unit 3 to permit the installation of five high-density spent fuel s:orage racks and the withdrawal of thirteen of the present spent fuel racks. The modifmation to permit the use of five high-density spent fuel pool racks in connection eith the required January 1, 1982 fuel outage will be less risky and less costly than any of the posuble alternatne methods available to meet the requirement.
LifP-81 38 TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY, et al. (COMANCHE PEAN STEAM ELECTRIC STATION. UNITS I AND 2), Docket Nos. 2460L S446-OL (Apphcaten for Operating License); OPERATING LICENSE; September 25. 1981; ORDER CONCFRNING SUA SPONTE ISSUES. SCHEDULING ORDER, NOTICE OF EVIDENTIARY IEARING AND PREHEARING CONFERENCE A
Acting pursuant to an order of the Commission, the Licensing Board issues sa order desenbing those factors "beyond the mere pendency of staff revie=* mhxh formed the baus for its determination to adopt eight of a former Intervenor's eleven admitted contentens sua sponte, after the voluntary disminal for financial reasons of the party which had originally pleaded the contentens.
B A Licensing Board should not automatsally reject otherwise viable contentens involving significant health and safety consequences following the voluntary dismissal for financial reasons of the party which pleaded these issues, unless these content'ons may be disposed of on their merits. It would be a dereheten of duty for a Lirensing Board to dismiu an accepted contention absent some threshold level of informationd justifica ' t, and the Board should retain such issues at least untd the Staff adopts some paitson as to them.
And%dE._
18 4
Y G
E>CW w
h
.s F. a DIGESTS
%'L lt DIRECTORS' DECISIONS
(;
DD 81-12 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY (ALVIN W. YOGTLE NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS I & N *-
2), Docket Nos. S424, 50-425; CONSTRUCTION PERMIT; July 2,1981; DIRECTOR'S (
DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206 h
A The Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation denies a petition filed under 10 CFR 2.206 of the p Commission's regulations to require the reopenmg of the record upon which construction permits were C, issued in order to assess the need for the power to be produced by the facihties s
B An apphcant may demonstrate that there is a need for the power to be produced by a i
particular facihty by showing (1) that the dema'id for electricity withm the facihty's service area is increasing;(2) that the facihty may be needed as a substitute for power currently produced by burning L short-supply fossil fuels; (3) that the facihty may be needed to meet the reserve margm requirements,
of power pools in which the facihty is a participant; or (4) that the apphcant is capable of selhng i
power outside its immediate service area to meet the demand for power in other areas.
E C
Every forecast of need or demand for power carries an associated uncertamty and, thus, the most that can be required is that the forecast be a reasonable one in hght of what is ascertainable at L the time it is made.
D NEPA does not require that decisions bard on environmental impact statements be g3 reconsidered whenever information developed subsequer M the action becomes available, unless that p new information would clearly mandate a change in rewit.
f; DD-8 8-13 Portland General Electric Company, et al. (TROJAN NUCLEAR PLANT), Docket No.
4<
S344 (10 CFR 2.206); SPECIAL PROCEEDING, July 13, 1981; DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206 A
The Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation denies a petition under 10 CFR 2.206 which 1
requested suspension of operation of the Trojan Plant on the basis of matters related to fire protection and environmental quahfication of electric equipment.
DD'81 14 PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, et al. (SEABROOK STATION, UNITS I AND 2? Docket Nos. S443. S444 (10 CFR 2.206). SPECIAL PROCEEDING; July 15, 1981; DIRECTOR 3 DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206 u
A The Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation denies a petition under 10 CFR 2.206 that i requested institution of proceedmgs to suspend or revoke the Seabrook construction permits on the basis of evacuation considerations at the site.
(
B Matters bearing on acceptabihty of emergency plans for the facility did not indicate p.
entraordmary circumstances such that the institution of proceedings was marranted to take up these C
(
matters before the operating hcense review.
1 DD-81 15 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY (ST. LUCIE PLANT, UNIT NO. 2). Dwket i
No. 50 389A (10 CFR 2 206). ANTITRUST PROCEEDING, August 7,1981; DWtECTOR'S
[
DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206 2
l A
The Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation denies a petition under 10 CFR 2.206 which p
l requested institution of enforcement action agamst the hcensee for its asserted failure to abide by an e.
antitrust condition of its hcense.
F-B The Director will not institute a requested proceeding where the petitioner's basis for reher rests
.h.
on resolution of an issue that is pendmg before another agency and that is peculiarly withm the h.
comptence of th>.t agency to decide
{-
DD-si 16 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (ZION NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS I AND y
2 ). Docket Nos 50-295, 50-304 (10 CFR 2.206). SHOW CAUSE; Seriember 29, 1981:
o l
DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206 A
The Director of the Office of Inspection and Enforcement denies a petition under 10 CFR hs j
2 206 that requested institution of a proceedmg to show cause why operation of the Zion Station Ueits f
I and 2 should not be suspended pending the licensee's full comphance with emergency planning it $ l( -
requirements pertaming to installation of a prompt notification system.
y-w x-
.s j
h*V 19 l
vn:
pw
&f$
O i
..i r
acrsts I
DIRECTORS
- DEGSIONS i.
DD-81 17 NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY (MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER e-STATION, UNITS I AND 2). Docket Nos. S245. S286 (10 CFR 2.206). SHOW CAUSE;
^
September 29.1981; DIRECTORS DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206 A
The Director of the Office of Inspecten and Enforcement denws a petition onder 10 CFR 2.206 that requested institution of a proceeding to show cause aby operation of two units of the Millstone Staten shceld not be suspended or revoked for failure to cornply with emergency planning requirements pertais ng to installaten of a prompt notifsation system.
9 t
l f.
l 1
l i
i 8 A s
20
!yrt :
5[
y 2
~
I:
N -:p.
p M..
p f._
y
.k~
DIGESTS DENIA13 OF PETITIONS FOR RUI1 MAKING 4
W' DPRM 81-2 ECKERT. SEAM ANS. CHERIN & MELLOTT. Docket No. PRM 2-6; SPECI AL PROCEEDING; July B. 1981; DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF y,:
s PETITION FOR RULEMAKING a'-
A The Commission denies a request for reconuderation of its earher denial of the petition for 7 rulemaking (PRM-2-6) submitted by Eckert. Seamans. Cherin & Mellott. The petitioner on behalf of t; the %estinghouse Electric Corpntion. had requested the Comminion to amend its regulations to l',L prescnbe fixed time penods for the completion of hcensing reviews by the Commission's regulatory staff and Atomic Safety and Licentmg Boards.
I-B While the Commission is r.sponsible for and macerned with efficiency in its licensing process and beheves that unnecessary or inappropnate delays should be avoided whenever possible, of overnding importance is the Commission's statutory responsibihty to ensure that issuance of a hcense ;-
to an apphcant will not be inimical to the health and safety of the pubhc and will satisfy the requirements of apphcable environmental laws.
C The impsition of fined time penods for the completion of hcensing reviews would unduly
[i '
restnct the necessary ducreten of the Comminion's regulatory staff and licensing boards.
~
.(
A'1 ta:f;;,
W n
r.
.r f
b y
LZ C.-
.(.
6 t
i
.{
e g.,,
j sw a
fg.
!-j :
h "' %
^ip'
.4 e
Ya 4
21 d,e.<
i s
1 6
9 '
- u
?.
O L
+
l
.. p -
i i
LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX CASES I
Aberdeen & Rockfish R.R. v. SCRAP. 422 US. 289,322 (1975) def' mg precise federal action involved m spent fuel pool expansion; ALAB-650,14 NRC 66 (1981) m Alabama Power Co. ( Alan R. Barton Nuclear Plant. Units 1-4, and Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant Units I and 2). CL175-12,2 NRC 373,374 (1975)
?
delay in one proceedmg taken into account in determinmg appropnateness of consohdation of two proceedings; LBP-81-31,14 NRC 378 (1981)
Alabama Power Co. (Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units I and 2). CLI 74-12. 7 AEC 203 (1974) effect of failure to consohdate operating trense and show cause proceedings on htigation of safe shutdown t
carthquake issue; LBP-8131.14 NRC 377 (1981) t Alabama Power Company (Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant. Units I and 2). ALAB-182. 7 AEC 210 (1974) l collateral estoppel applied to issue already hingsted at construction permst stage. LBP 81-24,14 NRC 198 (1981)
Amencan Bus Ass'n v. US 627 F.2d $25 at 529 (D.C. Cir.1980) non-tnndmg nature of agency pohey statement; CLI-81 16,14 NRC 18 (1981)
Atlanta Coahtion v. Atlanta Regional Commission 599 F.2d 1333 (5th Cir.1979) segmentation of EIS. shipment of spent fuel assembhes; ALAB-651.14 NRC 313 (1981)
Atlantic Research Corp., ALAB-594, il NRC 441. 846 (1980) ie Commissioner's addinonal views empressed to avoid imphcations of silence. CLt-81 15.14 NRC 13 (1981) t Board of Regents v. Roth 408 US. 564,377 (1972) s legal entitlements as sources of property interests. LBP-8126.14 NRC 256-258 (1981, Calvert Chffs Coordmatmg Committee v. AFC. 449 F.2d 1109,1189 (D C Cir.1971)
[
nght of Board to raise issues sua sponte; LBP 8123,14 NRC 168 (1981)
Carolma Poect and Light Co. (Shearon Harns Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I - 4). CL179 5. 9 NRC 609,
's 610 (1979) margm of error imphcit in need for power forecasts; DD-81 12,14 NRC 273 (1981) b uncertainty in need for power predictions; DD 81 I2.14 NRC 269 (1981) l Carohna Power and Light Company (Shearon Harns Nuclear Power Plant. Units 1. 2. 3, and 4). CL1-79-5.
t 9 NRC 607. 609 (1979) g reopenmg record to consider changes in electnc power demand forecasts; DD-81 12.14 NRC 272 (1981)
Cleveland Flectnc illuminatmg Company (Perry Nuclear Power Plant. Units I & 2). ALAB-443. 6 NRC t
741, 750 (1977) y denial of monon to reopen record on need for power issue; DD 81 12.14 NRC 271 (1981)
Commonocalth Fdison Co. (Zeon Station. Units I and 2). ALAB-516.12 NRC 419. 426 (1980) scope of decontamination heanns to include proposed hcense amendments, CLI-8125,14 NRC 624 (1981)
Commonweshh FAson Company (Zson Station, Units I and 2). LBP-80 7.11 NRC 245. 269,273. 279-80, 295 (1980). affirmed ALAB-616.12 NRC 419 (October 2.1980) cnticahty analyses compenson of U-235 content requirements in fuel assembhes at Zion and Dresden; LBP-8137.14 NRC 720 (1981)
Concerned About Tndent v. Rumsfeld. 555 F.2d 817,825 (D C. Cir.1977) wasideration of alternat' to completed projects. LBP-81-24.14 NRC 202 (1981)
Connecticut v. Massachur w 282 US. 660,674 (1931) requirements for showing of irreparable injury; LBP-8130.14 N RC 360 (1981)
Conwhdated Edison Co. of New York (Indian Point Nuclear Generating Station. Units I,2 & 3).
ALAB-319,3 NRC 188.190 (1976)
W Staff puution on solely sponsored contention of voluntanly dismissed intervenor; LBP-8123,14 NRC 165-166 (1981)
W Consohdated Ldison Co. of New York (Indian Point Station. Umts 1. 2 and 3). CLt 77-2,5 NRC 13.15 s
(1977)
NRC staff obhged to lay matenals relevant to pendmg cases before Board. ALAB-649.14 NRC 42 (1981) 23 k
O y
LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX CASES 4
i e
k Conehdated Edison Co. of Nc= York (Indian Point Unit No. 2), CL172 29,5 AEC 20 (1972) l special circumstances required for admission of preuure vessel crackmg contentions; LBP-88 24,14 NRC 227 (1981)
Consohdated Edison Company of New York (Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit 3), CLI-74-28,8 AEC 7, 9 (1974) provision for making findings of fact and conclusions of law in operating license proceedings; LBP-8123, 14 NRC 162 (1981) sua sponte authonty of board regarding earthquake haue; LBP-81-36,14 NRC 707 (1981)
Consohdated Edison Company of New York (Indian Point. Unit Nos. I,2,3), CLI-75-8,2 NRC 173.176 (1975) 2.206 procedure not a vehicle for reconsideration of issue previously decided in Commission proceedmgs; DD-8112,14 NRC 278 (1981)
Consumers Power Co. (Midland Plant, Units I and 2), Preheanns Conference Order Ruling on Contentions i
and on Consohdation of Proceedings (unpublished), shp op pp. :)-14 (October 24,19801 consohdation of Commission enforcement and licensms proceedings; LBP-8131,14 NRC 377 (1981)
Dairyland Poecr Cooperative (Lacrosse Boihng Water Reactor), LBP-80'2, il NRC 44,78 (1980) need for nuclear power to meet reserve maram requirement of power pool, DD 81 12,14 NRC 268 (1981)
Dairpland Power Cooperative (LaCroue Boiling Water Reactor), LBP-80 26,12 NRC 367,373 (1980) standmg to mtervene, physical proximity of petitioner to plant; LBP-8126,14 NRC 254 (1981)
Detroit Edison Company (Ennce Fermi Atomic Plant. Unit 2), ALAB-469,7 NRC 470,471 (1978) rephes to answers to motions; LBP-81 18,14 NRC 72-73 (1981)
Duke Power Co. (Catamba Nuclear Station, Units I and 2), ALAB-355,4 NRC 397,405 (October 29, 1976) emplanation of cost / benefit balance for proposed nuclear power plants; DD-81-12,14 NRC 268 (1981)
Duke Poect Co. (Catamba Station, Units I and 2), ALAB-355,4 Nf:C 397,413 (1976) brief lacking meaningful argument; ALAB-650,14 NRC 50 (1981)
Duke Power Co (McGuire Nuclear Station, Units I and 2), ALAB 143,6 AEC 623,625 (1973) e effects of unexplained NRC Staff shppages compared to changing circumstances, new information during adjudication; LBP-8138,14 NRC 769 (1981)
NRC staff obhged to inform heensing and appeal boards of sigmficant developments in pending cases; ALAB-649,14 NRC 42 (1981)
Duke Power Co. (Perkins Nuclear Station, Units I, e and 3), LBP 78 25,8 NRC 87 (1978), appeal pending i
environmental effects of radon releases from uranium minmg and milhng; ALAB-654,14 NRC 633 (1981)
Duke Power Company (Catamba Nuclear Station Umts 1 & 2), ALAB-359,4 NRC 619,620 (1976) dinatisfied htigant seeking to reopen record has difficult burden; DD-81 12, is NRC 271 (1981) i, Duke Poect Company (Catamba Nuclear Station, Units I and 2), ALAB 355,4 NRC 397 at 406, fn. 26 Board must be mformed of changing circumstances during adjudication; LBP 8138,14 NRC 769 (1991) l f
Duke Power Company (Perkins Nuclear Station, Units I,2 and 3), ALAB-597, il NRC 870 (1980) i e
partial initial decision appealable; LBP-81-32,14 NRC 584 (1981)
I Duke Power Company (William B. M4uire Nuclear Station, Units I and 2), CLI-81-15,14 NRC 1 (June l
l 29, 1981)
Board treatment of hydrogen control contentions; LBP 81-24,14 NRC 208 (1981) l Eastern Greyhound Line v. Fusco 310 F.2d 632,634 (6th Cir. 8%2) i requirements for showing of irreparable injury; LBP 8130,14 NRC 360 (1981)
Ecology Action v. U.S.A E.C.,492 F.2d 998 (2d Cir.1974) statement of pohey alleged harmful to intervenors, stay denied; CLI-81 16,14 NRC 19 (198 8) l Edlow international Co. (SNM Esport), CLI-77-16,5 NRC 1327,1328 (1977) j consohdation of proceedings involving common issues, LBP-8131,14 NRC 377 (1981) t i
I Edlow international Company, CLI-76-6,3 NRC 563 (1976) f hearms as a matter of nght, fuel emport apphcation proceedmg; CLl-81 18,14 NRC 303 (1981)
FJIow International, CLI-76-6,3 NRC 563,584,585 (1976) health, safety and environmental impacts not considered in evaluating fuel export apphcations; CLI-81 18, i
14 NRC 303 (1981)
Environmental Defense Fund v. Frochike,477 F.2d 1033 (8th Cir.1973) ins S r ng showmg to prevail on ments # appeW %%g g
'n8 E
l.
C 59 98l) 8 t
.an,. CPPR I.4. -m..t No.,.,,,,. Se_n m e_e,,,,,,,
gR.,,,,4,.
DDTl ",'n';tC%gt,,'- s" cad-a i-nse con.,nmg t,a.s,
, e,c,,,,;
i I
u l
O M~
LEGAL CTTATIONS INDEX CASES Florida her and Light Company (St. Lucie Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2), ALAB-404,5 NRC 1185,1189 (1977) stay of Final Order, absent irreparable injury, movant must make overwhelming showing of success on merits; LBP-8130,14 NRC 359 (1981)
Fuentes v. Shevin,407 US. 67,80 (1972) procedural due process rights in overtime restrictions case; LBP-81-26,14 NRC 255,257 (1981)
Gainesville Utilities Department v. Horida her & Light Con pany,573 F.2d 292 (5th Cir.), cen denied, 439 US. 966 (1978) motion for summary judgment of antitrust issues; LBP-81 19,14 NRC 88,90 (1981)
General Electric Company, CLI-81-2,13 NRC 67 (1981) petitioner denied hearing on applications for exports to Taiwan and South Korea; CLI-8118,14 NRC 302 (1981)
Georgia Power Company (Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant Unit Nos. I and 2) DD-79-18,10 NRC 617 (1979) attempt to reopen record on need for poner issue; DD-81-12,14 NRC 267 (1981)
Georgia Power Company ( Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Units I and 2), DD-79-4,9 NRC 582 (1979) attempt to reopen record on need for power issue; DD-81-12,14 NRC 267 (1981)
Georgia Power Company (Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Units I and 2), DD-79-4,9 NRC 582,584 (1979) reconsideration of decisions based on EIS not required by NEPA; DD-8112,14 NRC 271 (1981)
Georgia Power Company (Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Units I and 2), DD.8013, il NRC 503 (1980) attempt to reopen record on need for power issue; DD-81 12,14 NRC 267 (1981)
Georgia her Company ( Alvm W Vogtle Nucicar Plant Units I and 2), DD-80-13, IJ NRC 503,505 (1980) need for power must coincide reasonably with operational date of plant; DD-81 12,14 NRC 268 (1981)
Georgia Power Company (Alvin W. Vcgtle Nuclear Plant, Units 1-4) LBP-74-39,7 AEC 895 (1974),
IJIP 77-2,5 NRC 261 (1977); affirmed ALAB-375,5 NRC 423 (1977) need for power found construction permits issued; DD-81 12,14 NRC 267,269 (1981)
Grannis v. Ordean,234 US. 385,394 (1918)
Union claims right to hearing under Due Process Clause of Constitution; LBP-81-26,14 NRC 256 (1981)
Greene County Planning Board v. Federal Power Commission,455 F.2d 412,419 (2nd Cir.1972) right of Board to raise issues sua sponte; LBP-Bl.23,14 NRC 168 (19811 Greene County Plannmg Board v. FPC,559 F.2d 1227 (2nd Cir.1976), cert. denied,434 U.S.1086 (1978) reopening NEPA record; DD 81 12,14 NRC 271 (1981)
Gulf States Utihties Company (River Bend Station, Units I and 2) ALAB-444,6 NRC 760 (1977) guidance for dealmg with unresolved generic safety issues; LBP 81-21,14 NRC 116,118-119 (1981)
Gulf States Utilities Co. v. Federal Power Commission, Dist. Col. 1973,93 S Ct.1870,411 US. 747,36 L.Ed 635, rehearing denied 93 S.Ct. 2767,412 US. 944,37 led.2d 405 intervention in antitrust proceeding denied, other means available to protect petitioner's interests, LBP-81-28,14 NRC 338 (1981) l Gulf States Utihties Company (River Bend Station, Units I & 2), ALAB-444,6 NRC 760,771 et seq l
(1977) reason for requiring greater specificity in contentions; LBP-81-18,14 NRC 75 (1981)
Houston Lighting & Power Company (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Units I and 2),
ALAB-301,2 NRC 853 (1975) partial initial decision immediately appealable; LBP 8132,14 NRC 583 (1981)
Houston Lighting and Power Co. (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Umt 1), ALAB-535,9 NRC 377 (1979) denial of intervention for lack of standing; LBP 81-24,14 NRC 237 (1981)
Houston Lightmg and Power Co. (Allens Creek Station Unit 1), ALAB-590,11 NRC 542,546 (19" standards for intervenors participating pro se; ALAB-650,14 NRC 50 (1981)
Houston Lighting and Power Company (Allens Creek Nuclear Generatmg Station, Unit 1), ALAB-5W,11 NRC 542 (1980) acceptance of contention concernmg ice buildup at service water intake; LBP.8123,14 NRC 373 (1981) at pleadmg stage,intervenor must state reasons for contentions; LBP-8130A,14 NRC 369 (1981) hmitations on poect of hcensing boards to exclude contentions; LBP-8124,14 NRC 181 183, l91 (1981) litigation of contentions based on TMI accident; CLI 81 16,14 NRC 21 (1981) l Houston Lightmg and her Company (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Umt I). ALAB-565,10 NRC 521 (1979) rephes to anseers to motions; LBP-8118,14 NRC 73 (1981) r
O LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX CASES Hausson Li hting and Power Company (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station. Unit I), ALAB-535,9 8
NRC 377,393 (1979) standing to intervene, physical proximity of petitioner to plant; LBP 8126,14 NRC 254 (1981)
Houston Lightmg and Power Company, et al. (South Texas Project Units I and 2), LBP 79-10,9 NRC 439 (1979),445-449, appeal struck, ALAB-545,9 NRC 634 (1979) residence standard used for iniervention in operating license proceeding; LBP 8124,14 NRC 178 (1981)
Houston Lighung and Power Company, et al. (South Texas Project Umts I and 2), LBP-79-87,10 NRC 563 (1979), affd summanly, ALAB-575,11 NRC 14 (1980) pernes hmitation to collateral estoppel doctnne; LBP-8124,14 NRC 199 (1981)
ICC v. Jersey City,322 U.S. 503. 514 (19441 Supreme Court predispised against reopening administrative record. DD-81 12,14 NRC 270 (1981)
Ilhnois v. NRC,591 F.2d 12,14 (7th Cir.1979) hearing to reassess need for power not required by law; DD-81-12,14 NRC 2% (1981)
Indian lookout Alhance v. Volpe,484 F.2d il (8th Cir.1973) segmentauon of EIS, shipment of spent fuel assembhes; ALAB-651,14 NRC 313 (1981)
Jones v. Lynn,477 F.2d 885,890 (1st Cir.1973) reconsideration of need for power issue an attempt to reform past decisionmaking; LBP 51-24,14 NRC 202 (198I)
Kansas Gas and Electric Co. (Wolf Creek Generating Stauon, Unit 1), ALAB-462,7 NRC 320,338 (1978) contnbution of propagation analysis to resoluuon of gross loss of water question, spent fuct pool expsasion proceeding; ALAB-650,14 NRC 63 (1981) untimely monon to supplement record demed, issue raised for first time on appeallacks grave puble health and safety impications; ALAB-648,14 NRC 38-39 (1981)
Kansas Gas and Electric Co. (Wolf Creek Generating Station, Unit No.1), ALAB-279,1 NRC 559 (1975) intervention peuuon in antitrust proceeding must show nexus. LBP 8125,14 NRC 348,349 (1981) untimely intervention in antitrust proceeding, situation inconsistent with antitrust laws not shown; LBP-81-28,14 NRC 348 (1981)
K nsas Gas and Electre Co. (Wolf Creek Generating Stauon, Unit No.1), ALAB-299,2 NRC 740 (1975) funtimely intervention in antitrust proceeding, situation inconsistent with anutrust laws not shown; LBP-8128,14 NRC 348,350 (1981)
Kansas Gas and Electric Company (Wolf Creek Genernung Stauon, Unit No.1), ALAB-462,7 NRC 320, 327 (1978) forecasts of electricity demand used to dernonstrate need for power; DD 81 12,14 NRC 268,266 (1981)
Kansas Gas and Electnc Company and Kansas City Power and Light Company (Wolf Creek Genersung Station Unit No I), ALAB-279. I NRC 559 (1975) intervenor alle8cs issuance of operating hcense maintains situauon inconsistent with antitrust laws; LBP-8119,14 NRC 92 (1981)
Kansas Gas and Electnc Company and Kansas City Power and Light Company (Wolf Creek Generating Station, Unit No.1), LBP 75-13,1 NRC 268 at 271 (1975) unumely intervention in antitrust proceeding demed, nexus not established; LBP 8128,14 NRC 350 (1981)
Klein v. Cahfano,586 F.2d 250,257 (3d. Cir.1978) defimuon of property interesu in overtime restnctions case; LBP-8126,14 NRC 257,258 (1981)
Louisiana Power and Light Co. (Waterford Steam Electnc Generating Station, Unit 3) CLI-73-25,6 AEC 619 (1973) intervention petition in antitrust proceeding must show nexus, LBP-8128,14 NRC 348 (1981)
Mame Yankee Atomic Power Co (Maine Yankee Nuclear Power Plant, Umt 2), ALAB-161,6 AEC 1003 (1973), affirmed 7 AEC 2 (1974), affirmed sub nom. Citizens for Safe Power v. NRC 524 F.2d 1291 (D C. Cir 1975) intervenors' nghts to raise issues;impcastion of requirements beyond agency regulations; CLI-81 16,14 NRC 1618 (1981)
Myne Yankee Atomic Power Company (Maine Yankee), CLI-74-2,7 AEC 2,4 (1974)
NRC pohey for determimag adequacy of protection, pubhc health and safety; CL1-81-16,14 NRC 21 (1981)
Maryland-Nauonal Capital Park and Planmns Comm'a v. US. Postal Service,487 F.2d 1029,1039 (D C.
Cir.1973 Leventhal, J.)
function of EI A, shipment of spent fuel assembhes; ALAB-651,14 NRC 317 (1981)
McVeith v. United States,78 U.S 259,267 (1870) umon claims nght to bearing under Due Process Clause of Constitution; LBP-8126,14 NRC 256 (1981)
Metropohtan Edison Company (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1). LBP-80L8, il NRC 297 (1980) consideration of psychological stresa under NEPA: LBP-81-32,14 NRC 393 (1981) 26
i i
O p.
LEGAL CITA110NS INDEX CASES Metropolitan Edison Company (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit I). LBP-8017. Il NRC 893 (1980) intervenor unctioned for fadure to comply with discovery order; LBP 8132,14 NRC 392 (1981) sanctions for unjusufied failures or refusals to comply with discovery orders; LBP-81-22,14 NRC 154 (1981)
Metropohtan bhson Company (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No.1), CLI-80-16.11 NRC 674 (1980) accident scenario required for hydrogen bubble contentions; LBP-8124,14 NRC 207 (1981)
Metropohtan Fdison Company (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station. Unit No.1), CLI-79-8,10 NRC 141 (1979) basis of NRC concerns about operation of TMI 1; LBP 81-32,14 NRC 387 (1981)
Metropohtan Edison Company (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No.1), CLI-80 20,11 NRC 705 (1980) financial assistance to intervenors addressing psychological stress issue not provided; LBP-8132,14 NRC 397 (1981)
Metropohtan Edison Company (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No.1), CL1-80-19, il NRC 700 (1980) intervenor's request for financial amistance denied; LBP-81-32,14 NRC 397 (1981)
Metropolitan Edison Company (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No.1), Docket No. 50w289, September 26,1980 motion for reconsideration, hydrogen control issues, denied; CLI-81-15,14 NRC 9 (1981)
Metropohtan Edison Company (Three Mde Island Nuclear Station, Unit No.1), LBP-80-23,12 NRC 227 (1980) provisions of procedural assistance rule entended to parties in restart proceeding; LBP 8132,14 NRC 398 (1981)
Mearopohtan Edison Company (Three Mde Island Nuclear Station. Unit No. I), Docket No. 50-289 (Restart), CLI-8016, il NRC 674 May 16.1980, p. 2 maiver of 10 CFR 50.44, CLI.81 15,14 NRC 9 (1981)
Michigan Consohdated Gas Co. v. FPC,283 F.2d 204,226 (D C Cir.1960) right of Board to raise issues sua sponte; LBP 81-23,14 NRC 168 (1981)
Mausssippi Power and Light Company (Grand Gulf Nuclear Stanon, Units I and 2), ALAB-130,6 AEC 423, 424 (1973) appropriate functions of petition or intervention board; LBP-8130A,14 NRC 367 (1981)
Minissippi Power and Light Company (Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Units I and 2. ALAB-130,6 AEC 42)
(1973) at pleading stage,intervenor not required to present evidence concerning contention; LBP 51-30A,14 NRC 369 (1981) hmitations on power of hcensing boards to esclude contentions, LBP-8124,14 NRC 181,183,185,190, 191 (1981)
National Wddhfe Federation v. Appalachian Regional Commission,000 F.2d 000,15 E.R.C.1945 (D C, Cir.1981) reconsideration of need for poner issue an attempt to reform past decisionmaking; LBP-8124,14 NRC 202 (1981)
Natural Resources Defense Council v. NRC,647 F.2d 1345 (1981) decision allommg special nuclear materials esports to Philippines upheld. CLI-81 18,14 NRC 302 (1981)
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Morton,458 F.2d 827,838 (D C. Cir.1972) absence of credibic mechanism for gross loss of mater from spent fuel pool, EIS not required ALAB-650, 14 NRC 63 (1981)
Natyra! Resources Defense Counsel v. Morton,458 F.2d 827,834-36 (D C. Cir.1972) consideration of alternatives to completed projects; LBP-8124,14 NRC 202 (1981)
New England Coahuan on Nuclear Pollution v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission,582 F.2d 87,97 98 (1st Cir.1978) need for nuclear power to replace existing fossil-fuel generated power; DD-81-12,14 NRC 268 (1981)
W Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (Nine Mile Pant Nuclear Power Stanon, Unit 2), ALAB-264, i NRC 347, 353 (1975) need for nuclear power to replace existing fossa fuel-generated power; DD-81 12,14 NRC 268 (1981)
Niagara Mohank Power Corporsuon (Nine Mdc Point Nuclear Station, Unit 2), ALAB-264, i NRC 347, 352-69 (1975) reopenmg record to consider changes in electric guwer demand forecasts; DD 81 12,14 NRC 271 (1981) 4 27
O I.IGAL CITATIONS INDEX CASES Northern Indiana Public Service Co. (Bailly Generating Station, Nuclear 1), ALAB-227,8 AEC 486,418 (1974) untimely motion to surplement record denied; ALAB-648,14 NRC 38 (1981)
Northern Indiana Pubts Service Company (Bailly Generstms Station Nuclear I), CLI 78-7,7 NRC 429, 434 (1978) 2.20e procedure not a vehicle for reconsideration of issue previously decided in Commission proceedings; DD-81-12,14 NRC 271 (1981)
Northern States Power Co. (Prairie Island Plant, Units I and 2), ALAB 284,2 NRC 197 (1975) intervenors ask further analysis, spent fuel omedation; ALAB-650,14 NRC 59,63 (1981)
Northern States Power Co. (Prairw Island Plant, Umts I and 2), ALAB-455,7 NRC 41,45,46 n 4 (1978),
remanded in part on other grounds, Mmnesota v. NRC,602 F.2d 412 (D C. Cir.1979) scope of environrnental analysis, determming whether spent fuel pool esponsion is major federal action, ALAB-650,14 NRC 66. 68-69 (1981)
Northern States Power Co. (Tyrone Energy Park, Unit 1). ALAB-492,8 NRC 251 (1978) statement of pohcy alleged harmful to intervenors, stay demed. CLI-81-16,14 NRC 19 (1981)
Northern States Power Company (Prairw Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units I and 2) Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Station), ALAB-455,7 NRC 41,57 (1978) apphcation of as-low as-reasonably-achievable standard to disposal of spent fuel racks; LBP 8137,14 NRC 743 (1981)
Northern States Power Company (Prairm Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units I and 2), ALAB 455,7 NRC 41, In. 4 at 46 (1978) collateral estoppel apphed although new parties have intervened in later proceeding; LBP-8124,14 NRC 200 (1981)
Northern States Power Company (Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Station, Units I and 2), 4 LAB-343,4 NRC 169 (1976)
NRC practice for review of appellate decision, physical secunty; CLI-8121,14 NRC 5% (1981)
Northern States Power Company, et al. (Tyrone Energy Park, Unit I), LBP 77-37,5 NRC 1101 (1977)
. admission of solely sponsored contentions of voluntanly dismissed intervenor; LBP-8123,14 NRC 165, 167 (1981)
Northern States Power Company, et al. (Tyrone Energy Park, Unit 1), LBP-77-37,5 NRC 1298,1301 (1977) sanctions for unjustified failures or refusals to comply with discovery orders, LBP-8122,14 NRC 154 (19?l)
NRDC v. Callamay,524 F.2d 79 (2nd Cir,1975)
EIS consideration of future waste dispunal; ALAB-651,14 NRC 316 (1981)
Offshore Power Systems (Floatmg Nuclear Power Plants), ALAB-489,8 NRC 194,202,206-07 (1978)
NRC Staff delays in issuance of documents, nature of staff and Board responsibilities noted. LBP-81-38, 14 NRC 769,770 (1981)
Offshore Power Systems (Manufactunns License for Floating Nuclear Power Plants), LBP-75 67,2 NRC 813, 817 (1975) sanctions for unjustified failures or refusals to comply with discovery orders; LBP-BI 22,14 NRC 154 (1981)
Pacific Gas & Electnc Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Umts I and 2),CLI-815,13 NRC 361 (1981) guidance for reopening record on TMI-related issues; CLI-81-22,14 NRC 609 (1981)
Pacific Gas & Electnc Co. v. FPC,506 F.2d 33,38 (D C, Cir.1974) non-bindmg nature of agency pohcy statement; CLI-81 16,14 NRC 18 (1981)
Pacific Gas & Electric Co v. FPC,506 F.2d at 39 (D C Cir.1974) bindmg norm of agency policy statement adversely affecting intervenors; CLl-81 16,14 NRC 18 (1981)
Pacific Gas and Electnc Company (Stanislaus Nuclear Project. Unit I). LBP-78-20,7 NRC 1038,1040 (1978)
, reasons for granting pretrial discc 4ry; LBP 8125,14 NRC 243 (1981)
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (Stanislaus Nuclear Projrct. Umt No.1), ALAB-400,5 NRC 1175,
[
1177 78 (1977) i difference between intervention board and heanns board in NRC proceedings; LBP-8130A,14 NRC 366 (1981)
-"* **mer Pacific Gas and Electric Power Company (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units I and 2), ALAB-644, 13 NRC 903 (June 16,1981)
N RC practice for revww of appellate decision, physical necenty; CLI-8121,14 NRC 596 (1981)
Parklane Hosiery Company, Inc, et al., v. Leo M Shore 439 US 322,58 L Ed. 2d 552,99 S C 645 (1979) use of offensive collateral estoppel, LBP-8124. le NRC 199 (1981)
I N
l i
l
O LEGAL CITA110NS INDEX CASES mw Pennsylvania Power and Light Co. (Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units I and 2), ALAB-563,10 NRC 449,450 n.1 (1979) intervenors obhged to be familiar with Rules of Practice and proper briefing format; ALAB-650,14 NRC 50 (1981)
Pennsylvania Power and Light Company (Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units I and 2), ALAB-613, 12 NRC 331,334 (1980) contentions are method for framing issues under NRC practice; LBP-81-25,14 NRC 243 (1981)
Pennsylvama Poect and Light Company (Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Units I and 2), ALAB-613, 12 NRC 317,322 (1980) reasons for granting pretrial discovery; LBP-81-25,14 NRC 243 (1981)
Pennsylvama Power and Light Company and Allegheny Electnc Coope stive,Inc. (Susquehanna Steam Electnc Station Units I and 2), ALAB-613,12 NRC 337 (1980) numerous motions and disputes relating to interrogatories reflect lack of understanding of discovery; LBP-8122,14 NRC 156 (1981)
Pennsylvama Power and Light Company and Allegheny Electric Cooperative, Inc. (Susquehanna Steam Electnc Station Units I and 2), ALAB-613,12 NRC 317,322,339 (1980) sanctions for unjustified failures or refusals to comply with discovery orders; LBP-81-22,14 NRC 154 (1981)
Pennsylvama Power and Light Compsny, Allegheny Electric Cooperative, Inc. (Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units I and 2) LBP 79-6,9 NRC 291,302 305 (1979) circumstances not sufficiently changed, need for power contentions not admitted at operating license stage; LBP-8124,14 NRC 203-204 (1981)
Pennsylvania Power and Light Company, et al. (Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Units I and 2),
ALAB-613,12 NRC 317,337 (1980) excessive number of motions and disputes relating to discovery; LBP-8130A,14 NRC 371 (1981)
Pgrmian Basin Area Rate Cases,390 U.S. 747,77) (l%8) role of irreparable injury showing in grant of stay of Final Order; LBP 81-30,14 NRC 160 (1981)
Perry v. Sinderman,408 U.S. 593,601 (1972) legal entitlement as source of property interests; LBP 8126,14 NRC 256 (1981)
Philadelphia Electnc Co. (Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3), ALAB-216,8 AEC 13, 20 24 (1974) cntena for rejection of contention asking for documentation of deviations in design, structures, and somponents; LBP-8127,14 NRC 332 (1981)
Porter County Chapter of the Izaak Walton League v. NRC,606 F.2d 1363,1369 (D.C. Cir.1979)
Commission authority to make preliminary inquiries on merits of 2.206 petitioner's claim; DD-81-12,14 NRC 266 (1981)
Porter County Chapter of the Izaak Walton League, Inc. v. NRC,606 F.2d 1363,1167-70 (D C. Cir.1979) sate's selection for examination does not mandate suspension of construction pending completion of enalysis; DD-81 14,14 NRC 281,285 (1981)
Portland General Electric Co. (Pebble Spnngs Nuclear Plant, Units I & 2), CLI-76-27,4 NRC 610,613 (1976) standing to intervene, alleged interest must fall within zone of interests protected by AEA; LBP-81-26,14 NRC 250 (1981)
Portland General Electric Co. (Pebble Springs Nuclear Plant Units I and 2), CLI-76-27,4 NRC 610, 613-14 (Decemixr 13,1979) intervention in operating license proceeding by petitioners outside 50;nule radius of plant; LBP.8124,14' NRC 179 (1981)
Portland General Electnc Co. (Trojan Nuclear Plant), ALAB-181,7 AEC 207,209 n.7 (1974)
NRC staff responsibility on issues to be considered prior to issuance of operating hcense; LBP 81-23,14 NRC 166 (1981) e Portland General Electne Co. (Trojan Nuclear Plant), ALAB-531,9 NRC 263 (1979) consideration of alternatives to transfer of spent fuel assemHies; ALAB-651,14 NRC 321 (1981)
Portland General Electnc Co. (Trojan Nuclear Plant), ALAB-531,9 NRC 263,269-70 (1979) factors used to deterwune whether to allow transfer of spent fuel assembhes; ALAB-651,14 NRC 314 N'
(1981)
Portland General Electnc Co. (Trojan Plant), ALAB 531,9 NRC 263,266 n.6 (1979) scope of environmental analysis, spent fuel pool espansion; ALAB-650,14 NRC 66 (1981)
Portland General Electnc Co. (Trojan Plant) ALAB-531,9 NRC 263,274-275 (1979) reporting and recording of deviations from estabhshed operating procedures for maintaimns and g
monitoring water chemistry, sgnt fuel pool; ALAB-650,14 NRC $4 (1981)
O LEG AL CITATIONS INDEX CASE 5 Portland General Electric Co., et at (Pebble Spnngs Nuclear Plant, Units I and 2), CL1-76-27,4 NRC
-e 610, 616 (1976) discretionary interventen in decontaminaten hearing; CLl-81-25,14 NRC 623 (1981) factors beanns on the granting of discretenary intenenten, LBP 8126,14 NRC 259 (1981)
Poecr Reactor Development Co. v. International Union of Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers,367 US.
396 (1961) risk of lust investment carried by all construction permit holders, DD-81 14,14 NRC 286 (1981)
Pubhc Service Co. of Indiana (Marble Hill Nuclear Generatmg Staten, Units I & 2), CLI-8010, il NRC 438 (1980) standing ta intervene, alleged interests must fall within zone of interests protected by AEA; LBP-8126, 14 NRC 250 (1981)
Pubhc Service Co of Ind,ana (Marble Hill Nuclear Generating Station, Units I and 2), ALAB-437,6 NRC 630, 632, 635 (1977) stay of Final Order, absent irreparable injury, movant must make overebelming showing of success on ments, LBP-8130,14 NRC 359 (1981)
Pubhc Servue Co of Irdiana (Marble Hill Station, Units I and 2), ALAB-461,7 NRC 313,315 (1978) function of bnefs; ALAB-650,14 NRC 49 (1981)
Pubhc Serswe Company of Indiana (Marble Hill Nuclear Generating Station, Units I and 2) CLI-80 to, il NRC 438,442 (1980)
Union claims hearing as a matter of right in overtime restrictens case; LBP-8126,14 NRC 258,259 (1981)
Pubhc Service Co of Indiana (Marble Hill),5 NRC 1190,1192 (1977) reasons for referrals of ruhnss; LBP-8136,14 NRC 700 (1981)
Pubhc Service Co. of Nc= Hampshire (Seabrook Staten, Units 1 & 2), ALAB-422,6 NRC 33,90 (July 26,1977) esplanation of NEPA mandated cost / benefit balance for proposed nuclear peer plants; DD-81 12, 84 NRC 267 (1981)
Pubhc Service Co_ of Sc= Hampshire (Seabrook Station, Units I and 2), ALAB-422,6 NRC 33,41 (1977) foundation not estabhshed for safety findings regardmg proposed spent fuel shipments; ALAB-651,14 NRC 322 (1981)
Pubhc Servwe Co. of New Hampshire (Seabrook Station Units I and 2), CLI-78 I,7 NRC 1,26-27 (1978) effect of failure to consohdate operating hcense and show cause proceedings on htigation of safe shutdown carthquake issue, LBP-88-31,14 NRC 377 (1981)
Pubhc Service Company of New Hampshire (Seabrook Station, Units I & 2), ALAB-623,12 NRC 670, 677 73 (Dec. 9, t980) constructen permit holder's investment not considered in determining plant safety at operating hcense stage DD-8114,14 NRC 286 (1981)
Pubhc Senice Company of New Hampshire (Seabrook Station Units 1 & 2), CLI 77-8,5 NRC 503,526 (1977) rejecemn of proposed site of nuclear power plant to minimite environmental effects, DD-8112,14 NRC 268 (1981)
Pubhc Service Company of Nc= Hampshire (Seabrook Station, Units I & 2), LBP-77-43,6 NRC 134, I37 139 (1977) consideration of alternatrve nuclear power plant sites outside facihty's immediate service area; DD-81 12, I
l 14 NRC 268 (1981) 1 Pubhc Service Company of New Hampshire (Seabrook Station, Units I and 2), ALAB-338,4 NRC 10,14 (1976) no single factor among four considered for stay of Final Order is necessarily dispositive; LBP-8130,14 NRC 358 (1981)
Pubhc Service Co. of Oklahoma (Black Fox Station, Units I and 2) ALAB-573,10 NRC 775,805 (1979) standards for judging esceptions of intervenors represented by counsel; ALAB-650,14 NRC 51 (1981) l Pubhc Servue Company of Oklahoma Associated Llectric Cooperative, Inc. et. al. (Black Fox, Units I and 2), LBP 7717 (March 9,1977) late petiteners granted intervention; LBP-8124,14 NRC 200 (1981) l Pubhc Service Company of Oklahoma Associated Electnc Cooperative (Black Fox Staten. Units I & 2),
LBP-76-38,4 NRC 435,441 (1976) rephes to anseers to motions. LBP 81 18,14 NRC 73 (1981)
Pubhc Service Electnc & Gas Company (Atlantic Nuclear Generstmg Station Units I and 2), LBP 75-62, 2 NRC 702,7054 (1975) sanctions for unjust fied failures or refusals to comply with discovery orders, LBP-8122,14 NRC 154 (1981) e4 m
'E 1
O LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX CASFS Public Service Electnc and Gas Co. (Hope Creek Generating Station, Umts I and 2), ALAB-518. 9 NRC 14, 38 (1979)
EIS consideration of remote and speculative consequences, spent fuel assembhes, ALAB-651,14 NRC 321 (1981)
Pubhc Service Electric and Gas Co. (Salem Nuclear Generating Station Umt I), ALAB-650,14 NRC 43, 65 fn. 33 (July 17,1981) consideration of alternatives to transfer of spent fuel assembbes, ALAB-651,14 NRC 322 (1981)
Pubhc Service Flectnc and Gas Co. (Salem Station. Units I and 2), ALAB 136,6 AEC 487,489 (1973) argumentation and fihng requirements of intervenor without counsel; LBP-8135,14 NRC 686 (1981) standards for intervenors partmpating pro se; ALAB-650,44 NRC 50 (1981)
Regular Common Carner Conference v. U.S,628 F.2d 248 (D C. Cir. June 30, 1980) freedom of agency to esercise discretion under pohey statement. CLI-81-16.14 NRC 18 (1981)
Rochester Gas & Electric Corp. (Sterling Power Project Nuclear Umt No.1), ALAB-502,8 NRC 383,388 (1978) legal obhgation of utihties to meet customer demands relevant to NRC need for power determination.
DD-81 12.14 NRC 273 (1981)
Sampson v. Murray. 415 U.S. 61,90 (1974) statement of pohcy alleged harmful to intervenon. stay demed. CLI 81 16.14 NRC 19 (1981)
Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference v. Federal Power Commission 354 F.2d 608,614,620 (2nd Cir.
1%5) nght of Board to raise issues sua sponte; LBP-81-23,14 NRC 16A (1981)
Scientists' Institute for Pubhc information. Inc. v. Atomic Energy Commission. 481 F.2d 1079,10A5-93 (D C. Cir.1973)
EIS preparation, proposed spent fuel shipments. ALAB-651,14 NRC 312 (1981)
Sholly v. NRC (D C. Cir. Nos. 801691,801783, and 80'1784, filed Nov. 19,1980) imtiation of chemical decontamination prior to end of hearing; CLI-8125,14 NRC 621 (1981)
Sierra Club v. Frechlke,534 F.2d 1289,1297 (8th Cir.1976)
, segmentation of EIS, shiper.ent of spent fuel assembhes: ALAB-651,14 NRC 313 (1961)
State of New York v. NRC 550 F.2d 745,755 (2nd Cir.1977) showing of actual nature of irreparable injury necessary for grant of stay of Final Order; LBP.8130,14 NRC 360 (1981)
Swain v. Brinegar,542 F.2d 364 (7th Cir.1976i segmentation of EIS, shipment of spent fuel assembbes; ALAB-651.14 NRC 313 (1981)
Tennessee Valley Authority (Hartsville Plant. Units I A,2A,18 and 28), ALAB-463,7 NRC 370 (1978) bnef lacking meanmgful argument; ALAB-650,14 NRC 50, $1 (1981)
Tennessee Valley Authority (Hartsville Nuclear Plant, Umts I A 2A. IB and 2B), ALAB-463,7 NRC 341, 348 (1978) exceptions raised for first time on appeal; ALAB-650,14 NRC 49. 69 (1981) monon to supplement record denied, expropriation issue raised for first time on appeal; ALAB-648,14 NRC 37 (1981)
Tennessee Valley Authonty (Hartsville Plant Units I A,2A,18 and 2B) ALAB-367,5 NRC 92,104 n.59 (1977) exceptions not fully bnefed; ALAB-650,14 NRC 49 (1981) j Tennessee Valley Authority (Watts Bar Nuclear Plant. Units I and 2), ALAB-413,5 NRC 1418,1421, 1422 (1977) intervenuon in operating license proceedmg by petitioners outside 50-mi'e radius of plant; LBP-8124,14 i
NRC 179 (1981)
)
Texas Utahties Generating Company, et al. (Comanche Peak Steam Electnc Station Units I and 2),
LBP-8122,14 NRC 150,155 57 i
purposes of and reasonable hmitations on discovery; LBP-8130A,14 NRC 370 (1981)
Toledo Edison Co..et al.(Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Units 1,2 and 3) LBP-77-7. 5 NRC 452, 4p4 affd ALAB-385,5 NRC 621,631 (1977) intervenor has burden of makmg strong shommg to prevail on merits of appeal of Fmal Order; LBF-8130, 14 NRC 359 (1981)
Trout Unlimited v. Morton,509 F.2d 1276 (9th Cir.1974) segmentation of EIS. shipment of spent fuel assemblies: ALAB-651,14 NRC 313 (1981) l Trout Unhmited v. Morton. 509 F.2d 1283 (9th Cir.1974) l EIS consideration of remote and speculative consequences, spent fuel assembhes; ALAB-651,14 NRC 321 (1981)
Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York, ALAB-50. WASH 1218 320 (May 18.1972) eenposiuu,i,@rements beyond agency regulations; CL1-81 16,14 NRC 17 (1981)
A 31
O LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX CASES Union of Concerned Scientists v. Atomic Energy Commission,499 F.2d 1069 (1974)
Umon argues Due Process Clause of Constitution entitles it to hearing in overtime restnctions case; e
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council,435 US. 519,554 (1978) fsetual basis for board's sua sponte consideration of earthquake exceeding SSE; LBP 8136,14 NRC 698 (1981)
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.,435 US. $19 (1978) consideration of alternatives to completed projects; LBP-8124,14 NRC 202 (1981)
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.,435 US. 519,553-554 (1978) responsibilities of intervenors in NRC proceedings; ALAB-650,14 NRC 50,67 (1981)
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Poect Corp. v. NRDC,435 US. 519,548 (1978)
AEA, NEPA, regulatory requirements for heanns on EIS for decontamination of prirr.ary coolant systems; CLi-8125,14 NRC 625 (1981)
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC,435 US $19,550 (1978) legal obligation of utilities to meet custumer demands relevant to NRC need for power determination; DD-81 12,14 NRC 273 (1981)
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Poect Corp.,8 AEC 809,812 (1974) postulation of successively more conservative accident assumptions for different regulatory purposes; LBP-8136,14 NRC 697,706 (1981)
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Poect Corporation v. NRDC,435 US. 519,554 (1978)
Supreme Court predisposed against reopening administrative record; DD 81 12,14 NRC 270 (1981)
Virgima Electric & Power Company (North Anna Nuclear Power Station, Umts I and 2), ALAB-522,9 NRC 54,56 (January 26,1979)
Umon standing to intervene, physical proximity of workers; LBP-8126, i4 NRC 250,254 (1981)
Virginia Electric and Power Co. (North Anna Nuclear Power Station, Units I and 2), ALAB-584, il NRC 451, 457-58 (1980)
' consideration of alternatives to transfer of spent fuel assemblies; ALAB-651,14 NRC 322 (1981)
Virgima Electnc and Power Co. (North Anna Power Station, Umts I and 2), LBP 74-49,7 AEC 1883, 1885 (1974) casolidation of Commission enforcement and licensing proceedings; LBP-8131,14 NRC 377 378 (1981)
Virgima Ekuric and Power Co. (North Anna Station, Umts I and 2), ALAB-584, il NRC 451,462 (1980), petition for review pending sub nom Potomac Alliance v. NRC (No. 80w1862, D.C. Cir, filed July 28,1980) boral corrosion considered in spent fuel pool espansion proceeding; ALAB-650,14 NRC 54 (1981)
Virginia Electne and Power Co. (North Anna Station, Un ts I and 2), ALAB-584, il NRC 463-465 (1980) complaint of long term storage of spent fuel, improper collateral attack on rulemaking; ALAB-650,14 NRC 69 (1981)
Virgima Electnc and Power Co. (North Anna Station Umts I and 2), ALAB-551,9 NRC 704,706 (1979)
NRC staff obliged to lay matenals relevant to pending cases before Board, ALAB-649,14 NRC 42 (1988)
Virginia Electric and Power Company (North Anna Nuclear Power Station, Units I and 2), ALAB-522,9 NRC 54 (1979) at pleading stage, intervenor not required to present evidence concerning contentions; LBP-8130A,14 NRC 369 (1981) residence requirements for intervention in operating license proceedmss; LBP 8124,14 NRC 179 (1981)
Virgima Electnc and Power Company (North Anna Nuclear Power Station, Units I and 2), ALAB-491,8 hRC 245,247,249 (1978)
Board authonty to obtain information on issues raised sua sponte; LBP-8123,14 NRC 168 (1981)
Vi smia Electne and Poect Company (North Anna Nuclear Power Station, Units I and 2), ALAB-491,8 f
NRC 245 (1978) guidance for dealing with unresolved generic safety issues; LBP.81-21,14 NRC 116 (1981)
Virgima Elecinc and Power Company (North Anna Power Station, Units I and 2) ALAB-578, il NRC 189 (1980)
NRC practice for review of appe!! ate decision, physical seenrity; CLI-8121,14 NRC 5% (1981)
Virginia Electne and Power Company (North Anna Power Station, Unas I & 2), ALAB-146,6 AEC 631, 633-34 (1973) residence requirements for imervention in operating license pra-Angs; LBP-8124,14 NRC 179 (1981) u 32
O
'~
IIGAL CITATIONS INDEX CASES h-Virginia Petroleum Jobbers Ass'n. v. FPC,259 F.2d 921,925 (D.C. Car.1958) four factors considered to stay effectiveness of hcensing board decision; ALAB-647,14 NRC 30 (1981) rules governing consideration of a stay also applicable to motions for preliminary injunctions; LBP-8130, 14 NRC 358 (1981)
Virginian Ry. Co. v. United States,272 U.S. 658,672 (1926)
Back of strong showing could cause denial of stay even in case of irreparable injury; LBP-8130,14 NRC 359 (1981)
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission v. Hohday Tours,359 F.2d 841,843-44 (D.C. Cir.
1977) rules governing consideration of a stay also applicable to motions for preliminary injunctior.s; LBP-8130, 14 NRC 358 (1981)
Washington Public Power System (WPPSS Nuclear Project No. 2), ALAB-57I,10 NRC 687,692 (1979) conditions for appellate revww of final dispusation of heensing proceeding; ALAB452,14 NRC 628 (1981)
Westinshouse Electric Company, CLI-80 30,12 NRC 253 (1980) heanns as a matter of right, fuel esport application proceeding: CLI-8118,14 NRC 302 303 (1981)
Westinghouse Electnc Corporation, CLI-8015, il NRC 672 (1980) health, safety and environmental impacts not considered in evaluating fuel esport apphcations; CLI-81 18, le NRC 303 (1981)
Wisconsin Elecinc Power Co. (Point Beach, Unit I), CLI-80 38,12 NRC 547 (1980) standing to intervene, alleged interest must fall within zone of interests protected by AEA; LBP-81-26,14 NRC 250 (1981)
Wisconsin Electnc Poect Company (Point Beach Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2), ALAB 137,6 AEC 491 (1973) special circumstances required Io. admission of pressure vessel cracking contentions; LBP-81-24,14 NRC 227 (1981) a h
M 33
+ - -
t r
a hj.
F W-LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX REGUIATIONS f
C h'D 10 CFR 2 clanication of Memorandum and Order,long term safety issues; BoerJ given discretion on admission and L
presentation order of contentions; CLI-81-23,14 NRC 611 (1981) y 10 CFR 2.104 prerequisite for holding pubhc heanngs on EIS for decontamination of primary coolant systems; CL1-81-25,14 NRC 625 (1981) 10 CFR 2107 b.
motion to withdraw apphcation, without prejudse, for operstmg Iscase amendment; LBP-8120,14 NRC f=
101 (1988)
F/
construction permit appimation withdrawn, conditions imposed on appimant; ALAB-652,14 NRC 628
[
81981) site redreums ordered following withdrawal of construction permits; LBP-8133,14 NRC 586 (1981)
$Z TO CFR 2.107(cl 1;? -
pubication of withdrawal of construction permits; LBP-8133,14 NRC 588 (1981) rj :
10 Cf R 2.202
=
laspection and Enforcement Director requested to institute show cause proceeding; DD-81 16,14 NRC 781 (1981)
V'4
- r' 10 CFR 2.203 NRC pohey favors negotiation and settlement between Pennsylvania and TMI hcensee; LBP 8132,14 "D
NRC 564 (1981)
[**
10 CFR 2.206 denial of petition to suspend or revoke construction permit, deficiencies in emergency plans; DD-81 14.14 b
NRC 279-287 (1981) denial of petition requesting suspension of operation, derwiencies in fire protection and environmental F
qualification of electric equipment; DD 81-13,14 NRC 275 (1981)
V.6 NRR Director denics petition requesting enforcement action for hcensee's failure to abide antitrust M
condition of license; DD 81 15,14 NRC 589 (1981)
I' petition for show cause proceeding, suspension of operations pendmg full comphance, emergency planning, denied, DD-81 16,14 NRC 781-783 (1981) petition for show cause proceeding, suspension of operations pending full comphance, emergency planning,
{c denied; DD-8187,14 NRC 784 786 (1981) petition to reopen record, need for poect issue, denied; DD-81-12,14 NRC 265-274 (1981)
D-request granted for EIS on chemmal decontammation of Unit I; CLI-81-25,14 NRC 619-620 (1981) oc 10 CFR 2.707 Y
motion to strike contentions, imposition of sanctions for default; LBP 8122,14 NRC 151,154 (1981)
I
(( ~
10 CFR 2.711 deadhne for filing amended petition to intervene; LBP-8124,14 NRC 238 (1981) 10 CFR 2.714 7
admissibihty of contentions in operating license proceedings; LBP-8124,14 NRC 181 (1981) contentions adequately picad bases for allegations of unresolved genenc safety issues; LBP-8130A,14 NRC 369 (1981) damissed intervenor's contentions, adopted sua sponte by Board, satisfy threshold pleadmg requirements;
(,.
LBP-8138,14 NRC 778 (1981) m.
matters may be put in antroversy by the parties to a proceeding. LBP-8125,14 NRC 243 (1981) pi parties to decontamination heanns required to estabhsh standmg separately; CLI-8125,14 NRC 623 p
(1981) p.
requirements for timely fahng under; LBP-8135,14 NRC 688 (1981)
G standmg of NRC staff, LBP-8134,14 NRC 658 (1981) g i
rj l
a P1 c
h a
b t'N p
7
O LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX RECT!!ATIONS I
[
Board entends time for particularization of contentions, because of intervenors' inesperience; LBP-8124,
==an I,
14 NRC 185 (1981) i 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)
{
admisa on of TMI related contentions; LBP 88 21,14 NRC 112 (1981) t filing of TMI-related contentions; CL1-8122,14 NRC 609 (1981) i late intervention criteria, entatrust proceeding; LBP-51 19,14 NRC 92 (1981) l reparticularuation of contention subject to five-factor test; LBP-81 18,14 NRC 82 (1981) t special factors apphed to late intervention, antitrust proceeding, LBP 88 28,14 NRC 336 (1981) 10 CFR 2.714(a)(2) labor union requests hearing on overtime restrictions; LBP-8126,14 NRC 248 249 (1981) requirements for petitions for leave to intervene; LBP-SI 24,14 NRC 236 (198 8) requirements for petition to intervene in antatrust proceeding; LBP-8128.14 NRC 335 (1981) 10 CFR 2.714(a)(3) amendment of petition to intervene; LBP 84-24,14 NRC 237 (1981) 10 CFR 2.714(b) amhcant argues need for power contentions et operating license stage lack basis; LBP 8124,14 NRC 202 (1981) time constraints for partwelarization of contentions, operating hcense proceeding; LBP 8124,14 NRC 185 (1981)
TMI-related contentions required to comply with basis and specircity requirements, LBP 8121,14 NRC 112 (1981) 10 CFR 2.714(d) cnteria for intervention, antitrust proceeding; LBP-81 19,14 NRC 92 (1981) requirements for petition to intervene in antitrust proceeding. LBP-8128,14 NRC 335 (1981) factors considered in rulings on petitions to intervene or requests for hearings; LBP-8124,14 NRC 236 (1981) 10 CFR 2.714(d)(2) conclusions about cognizable interest of late intervention petitioner, antitrust proceeding; LBP-81 19,14 NRC 95 (1981) 10 CFR 2.714(f) hmitation on issues, petitions to intervene; LBP-8124,14 NRC 236 (1981) 10 CFR 2.714a(b) deadhne for appeal of order denying petition to intervene; LBP 8124,14 NRC 234 (1981) 10 CFR 2.714a(c) deadlines for appeal of order granting petitions to intervene, request for hearing; LBP-8124,14 NRC 234 (1981) 10 CFR 2.715 l
clarification of status of Lake County Board of Commissioners; LBP-8135,14 NRC 687 (1981)
I nonparty participation in decontamination hearing discretionary: CLI-8125,14 NRC 623 (1981) request for hmited appearance in opersting license proceeding; LBP-8138,14 N RC 779 (1981)
[
10 CFR 2.715(c) nonparty status of Ashtabula County Commissioners estabhshed LBP-8135,14 NRC 688 (1981) participation of Cahfornia as interested state; LBP-88 20.14 NRC 102 (1981) t right of municipality representatives to participate in heensing proceedings; LBP 88 24,14 NRC 236 (1981) timely petition filed by State of Temas for participation as interested state; LBP 8138,14 NRC 777 l
(1981) 10 CFR 2.715a g
consohdation of participation of parties in TMl l restart proceeding-LBP 8132, l4 NRC 396 (1981) f conschdation of parties in decontamination heanns; CL1-8125,14 NRC 623 (1981) i no preheanns order entered to set forth contenteons; LBP 4130A,14 NRC 368 (1981) 10 CFR 2.715a and 2.716
=)
prehearing conference, bnefs shall state coordination or conschdation of petitioners' cases, LBP-8 8 24,14 l
NRC 238 (1981)
}
10 CFR 2.716 consohdation of operatingjcense and show cause proceedings LBP-8131,14 NRC 377,378 (1981) i 10 CFR 2 718 authonty of presiding officer to impose sanctwas, default of discovery; LBP 8122,14 NRC 154 (1981) i Board authoney to obtain indispensable information on the record from esperts LBP-81-23,14 NRC 168 j
(1981)
M l
1
(
1
l O
.m-LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX BEG 8*LATIONS fihng deadhnes, answers to motions for protective orders; LBP-8122,14 NRC 156 (1981) impantion of sanctens for failure to supply requested informaten; LBP-8124,14 NRC 225 (1981) objections to interrogatories or document requests, LBP-8130A,14 NRC 372 (1981) referral of ruhngs to Commiumn, by pauing Appeal Board, LBP-81-36,14 NRC 701 (1981) 10 CF R 2.718(e) conduct of parties so NRC proceeding regarding discovery; LBP-Bi 22 le NRC 154 (1981) 10 CF R 2 718th) conference convened for oral argument on antitrust summary judgment issues. LBP-81 19,14 NRC 91 (1981) 10 CFR 2.718(i) differentiation betmeen certnGcation and referral, LBP-81-36,14 NRC 699 (1981) order subject to discretenary interlocutory review; LBP 8124.14 NRC 234 (1981) 10 Cf R 2.718(l) authonration for Order settmg reudency requirements for intervention; LBP-8124,14 NRC 178 (1981) 10 CFR 2.722 Board authority to obtain indispensable information on the record from esperts; LBP-8123,14 NRC 168 (1981) 10 Cf R 2.730 Ghng deadhnes, anseers to motens for protective orders; LBP-8122,14 NRC 156 (1981)
NRC staff objects to Board decisen that partialinitial decision need not be made, LBP 8137,14 NRC 712 (1981) objections to interrogatories or document requests; LBP-8130A,14 NRC 372 (1981) referral of ruhngs to Commmion. by-passms Appeal Board, LBP 88 36,14 NRC 701 (1981) resolution of antien motions without seruce on parties; LBP-81-24,14 NRC 180 (1981) 10 CF R 2.730(c) leave to reply to anseer to motion; LBP-81-22,14 NRC 157 (1981) r' pt cs to answers oppmmg motions; LBP-8130A,14 NRC 372 (1981) e i rephes to answers to motens.1 BP-81 18,14 NRC 72 (1981) 10 CTR 2.730(f) diffe:r.iton betecen certificatwn and referral LBP-8136.14 NRC 699,700 (1981) unreasonable delays by NRC Staff, ruhngs referred to Appeal Board. LBP-8138,14 NRC 770 (1981) 10 CF R 2.733 intersenor's motion for quahGcaten of empert interrogator granted LBP-8129,14 NRC 353-356 (1981) 10 Cf R 2 733(a) standard of espertue required of espert interrogator; LBP-8129,14 NRC 355 (198!)
10 Cf R 2.733(b) and (c) obhgations required of empert interrogators, LBP-8129,14 NRC 355 (1981) 10 CF R 2.740 fehng deadhnes, answers to motions for protective orders; LBP 8122,14 NRC 156 (1981) matters may be put in controversy by the parties in a proceedms, LBP-8125,14 NRC 243 (1981) objectens to interrogatories or document requests; LBP-81-30A 14 NRC 372 (1981) 10 C F R 2.740 2.742 use of depmitmns for discovery: LBP-81-30A 14 NRC 37)(1981) use of depositions instead of interrogatories; LBP-8122,14 NRC 157 (1981) 10 Cl R 2.740w2 744 commencement of discovery on admitted issues LBP-Wi 24,14 NRC 230 (1981) 10 CF R 2.740(b) objectens to interrogatones or document requesis; LBP-8130A,14 NRC 372 (1981) 10 Cf R 2.740b fibng deadhnen, answers to motions for protective ordert LBP-8122,14 N RC 156 (1981) 10 Cf R 2.740(c)(3) continums nature of interrogatones. LBP-8122,14 N RC 156 (1981) rule reaffirmed regardmg contmums nature ofinterrogatones LBP-8130A,14 NRC 372 (1981) 10 CFR 2.741
-M-fihng deadhnes, ansmers to motens for protective orders; LBP-8122,14 NRC 156 (1981) objectens to interrogatones or document requests LBP-81-30A.14 NRC 372 (1981) 10 CF R 2.749 consideration of contention of dismissed intervenor; LBP-8134,14 NRC 658 (1981) dismissed intervenor's contentens already subjected to discovery; adopted sua sponte by Board.
LBP-8138,14 NRC 771 (1981) 37
l l
LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX REGULATIONS intervenor fails to meet rsquirements for summary disposition of contention deshng with Apphcant's techmcal quahficasens. LBP-81-34.14 NRC 656 (1981) 2 motion for summary disposition of all contentions involving spent fuel pool expansion partially granted.
ALAB-650.14 NRC 47 (1981) right of NRC Staff to file summary disposition motion challenged. LBP-8134,14 NRC 658 (1981) showing of availabihty of resources prmt to summary judgment motion; LBP 8124,14 NRC 197 (1981) unsausfactory response to ansmer to contention on intergranular stress corrosen and cracking; LBP 8134, 14 NRC 642 (1981) 10 CFR 2.749(a) intervenor advised to notify Board if it wishes to respond to Staff response to " latching" phenomenon contenton; LBP-8134.14 NRC 651 (1981) 10 CFR 2.749tb) moten for summary dispositen of antitrust issues properly filed; LBP-81-19,14 NRC 88-89 (11981) 10 CFR 2.711a convening of prehearing conference, operating license proceeding; LBP-81-24,14 NRC 238 (1981) matters may be put in controversy by the parties in a proceeding LBP-8125,14 NRC 243 (1981) prehearing conference asked for, to limit scope of discovery, to establish discovery schedule; LBP-81-19 14 NRC 88 (1981) 10 CFR 2.751a(d) deadlines for fihng objections to order; LBP-81-24.14 NRC 233 (1981) 10 CFR 2.752 final pre-hearing conference schedieled, LBP-8138,14 NRC 776 (1981) 10 Cf R 2.754(a) parties not asked to present findings on seismic considerations of installation of proposed spent fuel storage racks. LBP-88-37,14 NRC 714 (1981) parties to restart proceeding required to file proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law; LBP-81-32, 14 NRC 399 (1981) iO.CFR 2.754(b) default by participant in TMl 1 restart proceeding; LBP-81-32,14 NRC 399 (1981) 10 CFR 2.754(c) parameters for intervenor's proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law; AL4 R-650,14 NRC 49 (1981) 10 CFR 2.758 attack of Commission rules during adjudicatory proceeding; LBP-8136,14 NRC 706 (1981)
Cahfornia Governor requests waiver of immediate effectiveness rule, low-power tesung bcense, citing special circumstances: CLl-8122,14 NRC 600 (1981) direct challenges to NRC regulations; LBP-81-24,14 NRC 227,229 (1981) imposinon of requ:rements, operating licenses, beyond agency regulatons; CL1-81 16,14 NRC 1718 (1981) intervenors' rights to raise issues, pohey statement on new operating licenses; CLI-81 16,14 NRC 17-18 (1981) 10 CFR 2.758(a) intervenor barred from attacking right of staff to file summary disposition monon; LBP-8134,14 NRC 658 (1981) 10 CFR 2.758tb) noncomphance of intervenor, petiuon for maiver or esception to summary disposition rule; LBP-8134,14 NRC 658 (1981) 10 CFR 2.760 effectiveness of partial initial decision, license amendment, to permit installation ci spent fuel racks, LBP-8137,14 NRC 762 (1981) 10 CF R 2.760(c)
>RC staff objects to Board decision that partial iniual decision need not be made; LBP-8137,14 NRC 712 (1981) 10 CFR 2.760s board's sua sponte consideration of muluple disasters as a serious safety matter; LBP-81-36,14 NRC 697, 707 (1981) m matters may be put in controversy sua sponte by the Board. LBP-81-25,14 NRC 243 81981) requirements for Licensing Board's sua sponte adoption of dismissed intervenor's contenuons; CLI 8124, 14 NRC 615 (1981) sua sponte consideraten of contentions and issues in operating license proceedings; LBP-8123,14 NRC 161 162, 165-168 (1981)
.-a
O i
LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX REGURATIONS
-w voluntarily damened intervenor's contentions adopted sua sponte by Board; LBP-81-38,14 NRC 768 (1981) 10 CFR 2.762 Cahforna governor requests clanfication of procedure for fihng exceptions to physical security decision; CLI-8121.14 NRC 596 (1981) effectivenen of partial initial decision, hcense amendment, to permit installation of spent fuel racks; LBP-8137,14 NRC 762 (1981) partial initial decision involving TMI restart appealable; LBP-8132,14 NRC 584 (1981) time hmit for objections to initial decision in operating hcense case; LBP-88-24,14 NRC 178 10 CF R 2.762(a) intervenor seeks stay of effectivenen, full-term operating licenses, pending disposition of esceptions; ALAB 647,14 NPC 30 (1981) precise support c(each exception required in appellate brief. ALAB-650,14 NRC 49 (1981) 10 CF R 2.764 Cahfornia Governor requests waiver of immediate effectiveness rule, low power testmg license; CLI 8122, 14 NRC 600 (1981) effectiveness of partial initial decision, hcense amendment, to permit installation of spent fuel racks; LBP-8137,14 NRC 762 (1981) intervenors ask Comminion to rule on stay motion at completion of effectivenen review; CL18122,14 NRC 601 (1981) 10 CFR 2.764(f) immediate effectiveness review of decision authorizing fuel loading and low-power testing; CLI-81-22, 34 NRC 599 (1981) 10 CFR 2.764(f)(2) bases of determination to stay effectiveness of decision authorizing issuance of full-power licenses; ALAB-647,14 NRC 29-32 (1981) 10 EFR 2.785 effectivenen of partial initial decision, license amendment, to permit installation of spent fuel racks; LBP-8137,14 NRC 762 (1981) motion for review of a portion of full-power effectiveness decision considered impermissible interlocutory review; CLI-81 15,14 NRC 2 (1981) review of proceedmg involving EIS for Unit I decontamination; CLI 8125,14 NRC 625 (1981) 10 CFR 2.785(a)(2) appointment of ALAB for proceeding involving EIS for decontamination of Unit 1;CLI-8125,14 NRC 625 (1981) 10 CT R 2 785(bHI) order subsect to discretionary interlocutory review; LBP-8124,14 NRC 234 (1981) referral of ruhngs to Commission, LBP-81-36,14 NRC 701 (1981) 10 CFR 2.786 ALAB estabhshed to hear initial appeals in restart proceedings, Commission review may be requested, CL1-81 19,14 NRC 304,305 (1981)
Cahfornia governor requests clanfication of procedure for review of physical security decision; time for fihng petitions entended, CLi-8121,14 NRC 596 (1981) effectiveness of partial initial decis%n, license amendment, to permit installation of spent fuel racks; LBP 8137,14 NRC 762 (1981) motion for review of a portion of full-power effectiveness decision considered impermissible interlocutory review; CLI-81 15,14 NRC 2 (1981) 10 CFR 2 786(b)(4Mii) delay in proceedings cause for Commission review; LBP 8138,14 NRC 770 (1981) 10 CJR 2.787 designation of Appeal Board, proceeding involving EIS for Unit I decontamination; CLI-8125,14 NRC 625 (1981) 10 CF R 2.788 four factors considered on request for stay of Final Order; LBP-8130,14 NRC 358 (1981)
- N intervenor requests stay of effectivenen of full-power hcense; CLI-81-15,14 NRC 2 (1981) stay requests not prejudiced by Comminion sua sponte review; ALAB-647,14 NRC 30 (1981) 10 CF R 2.788(a) time constraints governing apphcations for stay of effectiveness of bcensing board decision; ALAB-647,14 NRC 30 (1981)
[
37
O
(
LEGAL CTTATIONS INDEX BEGL'IA110NS
't 80 Cf R 2.788;e) factors governing grant or denial of stay of effectiveness of hcensing board decision. ALA&647,14 NRC 30 (1981) pubhc interest consideration of request for stay of Final Order; LDP-8130,14 NRC 358 (1981) 10 Cf R 2.790 questions concerning relevance of alleged sabotage incident to present case generally ansecrable from materials available to public; ALAB 649,14 NRC 41 (1983) 10 Cf R 2. App. B 2 206 petition for rulemaking, amendment to requirs fiaed intne periods for compleuon of hcensing review; DPRM 812,14 NRC 290,29),294 (198l}
function of, and repeal of. ALAf0647,14 NRC 29 (1981) 10 CF R 19 health physics training program for wo kers entering spent fuel pool area; LBP-8137,14 NRC 745 (1981) overtime restrictions, maintenance of safe conditions eithin nuclear facihty; LBP-88 26 le NRC 251252, 260 (1981) 10 CF R 20 adequacy of monitoring apparatus in containment building to detect hydrogen esplosions; LBP-8134,14 NRC 649 (1981) radiation dones associated with shredding end barrehng spent fuel racks for disposal LDP-8137,14 NRC
- 74) (1981) 10 Cf R 20 l(c) evaluation of radation espusure relating to spent fuel shipenents; ALAB-65!,14 NRC 32)(1981) 10 CF R 20 App B accidental relcane of radiation from steam generator repairs, sato coohng canals, LBP-8130,14 N#C 341 (1981) 10 Cf R 21 Q4 pr<xedure for comphance, spent fuel racks, nos estabimhed. LDP-8137,14 NRC 728 (1981)
IO Cf R 50 revned requirements for emergency preparedness at power reactor sales; DD 81 14,14 NRC 281 (1981) 10 CF R $010teHI) and (3) construction permit appbcation withdramm, LWA's vacated ALAB432,14 NRC 628 (1981) hmited work authorizations revoked following eithdraesi of construction permits; LBP 8133,14 NRC 587 (1981) 10 CIR 50 33(f) financial abihty of Applicant to complete construction errelevant at operating hcense stage; LBP-8124,14 hRC 193,195 (1981) 10 CF R $0 3)(3) contention citmg noncomphance of emergency response plans sufficient to reopen record of full-power hcensing proceeding; LBP-8127,14 NRC 326,332 (1981) 10 CFR 50 34(a) & (b) emergency preparedness requirements to be met before receiving construction permit or operaung license; DD-81-18,14 NRC 281 (1981) 10 Cf R 50 34(b) decommnaionmg plan not required as condition of issuance of operating license; LBP-8124,14 NRC 214 (1981) questions concerning relevance of alleged sabotage incident to pruent case generally answerable from materials available to pubhc; ALAB449,14 NRC 41 (1981) 10 CFR 50 35(a) no unreached generic safety problems found to prevent operation of proposed Diablo Canyon facihty; LBP 8121,14 NRC 119 (1981) 10 CFR 50 36 Licensee's technical quahrecations to operate TMI I questioned in restart proceeding, LBP-8' 32,14 NRC 479 (1981) 10 CF R 50 36(a) questions concerning relevance of alleged sabotage incident to present case generally answerable from
-p * ;+-
materials available to pubhc; ALAB449,14 NRC 41 (1981) 10 CFR 50 36alaH2) contention, noncompliance of meteorological measurement program with Draft Guides, dismissed without prejudice; LBP 81 II,14 NRC 78 (1981)
A
LEGAL C1TATIONS INDEX RI'GL'LATIONS
< m -.
10 Cf R SO 39 questens concerning relevance of alleged sabotage incident to prewnt caw generally answerabis from materials available to pubhc, ALAB 649,14 NRC 41 (1981) 10 Cf R SO 40 Licenwe's technical qualifications to operate 1Mi-1 questioned in restart proceedmg; LBP-8132.14 NRC 479 (1981) 10 Cf R $ 40tc) impimitmn of requirements beyond agency regulatens. CLI-Bi 16.14 NRC 17 (1981?
10 Cf R 50 44 acadent leading to escessive hydrogen generation conudered in effectiveness decisen, full-power hcense.
Unit 1. CLI 81 15.14 NRC 2 (1981)
Commisuon ruhng on encessive hydrogen generation issues. LBP 8127,14 NRC 327 (1981)
Commisuon TMI l Order en Hydrogen Control Rule. CLI-81-15,14 N RC 8-9 (1981) contenimn, noncomphance, proposed pust-accident hydrogen control management, rejected. LBP-81 18,14 NRC 76 (1981) escesuve hydrogen generation, postulated TMI-type accident at McGuire; ALAB-647,14 NRC 29 (1981) esemption from merting requirement CLI Bi IS.14 NRC 8 (1981) hydrogen generaten standards prmr to IMI, CL181 l$,14 NRC 5 (1981) litigsten of hydrogen ges control contentions, LBP 8124.14 NRC 207 (1981) suspenuon of regulation on hydrogen control advocated in separate view; CLI 81 15,14 NRC 11 (1981) 10 Cf R SO 46 Imal safety testing of emergency core coohng systems; LBP-8124, le NRC 215 (1981) 10 CF R $0 47 comphance, apphcant. State and local emergency planning requ.rements denng low po=cr testing.
L SP-8121,14 NRC 119,121 123,131 (1981) emergency preparedness requirements to be met before receiving construction permit or opersimg beenw; D481 14,14 NRC 281 (1981) factorms of effects of earthquakes into emergency plans; LBP-8136,14 NRC 704 (1981) 10 Cf R 50 47(a)
F E M A findings questioned regarding adequacy of emergency planning for purptmes of low-power testms; CLl-8122,14 NRC 601,604 (1981) requirements of hcensms boards regarding findings related to protective measures durms radiological emergencies, L BP-8136,14 NRC 699 (1981) 10 CF R SO 47(b) failure of Board to compare emergency plan with all 16 standards; CL1-s t 22.14 NRC 60$. 607 (1981) generic emergency plan fur evacuation routes not suitable; LbP-8136.14 NRC 699 (1981) 10 CF R 50 47(b)(8) and (9) rules for emergency plannmg generally non-specific; LBP-8136,14 NRC 699 (1981) 10 Cf R 30 47(b)(10) range of protective measures in emergency plan; D&BI 14,14 NRC 283 (1981) 80 Cf R TO 47(c)(1) asussnent of adequacy of emergency planning for low-power hcenses, CLl-8122,14 NRC 605 (1981) contenoon citing emergency planning deficiencies meets enrana for reopening record, full-power hcensmg proceeding; LBP-8127,14 NRC 326 (1981) caemptons from comphance, apphcant, State and local emergency plans during loe power test;ng; LBP-8121,14 NRC 520,122123.129 (1981) separate opinion, low-pomer hcense, failure of Board to comply with pressnbed procedures for evaluating emergency plan, CLI-81-22,14 NRC 605 (1981) 10 CJ R SO 47(c)(2) site specific accident analyses, estabhshmg plume esposure pathway EPZ. LBP-ll 36, i1 NRC 698 (1981) 10 0F R $0 48 issuance of nem fire protection requiremenu. D48113,14 NRC 276 (1981)
^ * ' ' **
10 Cf R 50 54(l) shift mannmg, supervisen of hcensed operator by non hcensed individual. LBP 81-32 % NRC 577 (1981) 10 CFR 50 55a contenten, structures, systems, components not backfitted in comformance with w.fety standards, recent Regulatory Guides, LBP 81 18,14 NRC 76,78,81 (1981)
Ah 1
l 41 l
l
O LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX Rf'GL'LATIONS 10 Cf R 50 55ath) contenten citmg deGciencies in reactor vessel level instrumentaten system denied, LBP-8127,14 NRC 329 (1988) 10 Cf R 50 57 contention, structures, systems, components not backfitted in conformance with safety standards, recent Regulatory Guides. LBP-81 18,14 N RC 76 (1981)
Licensee's te-hnical quahficatens to operate TMI I questioned in restart proceeding; LBP 8132,14 N RC 479 (1988) tandem licensing concern; LBP-8124,14 NRC 209 (1981) 10 Cf R 50 57(a) requisite Gndings made to inue full-term operating licenses for McGuire units; ALAB-647,14 NRC 29 (1981) 10 Cf R 50 57(a)(3) relevant conditmns to plant operaton pending outcome of appeal of decision authortnns full-term license; AL AB-647,14 NRC 32 (1981) 10 Cf R 50 57(aH4) technical quahGcations of personnel to operate nuclear power plant safely; LBP-8125,14 NRC 242 (1981)
Appbcant's Gnancial quahncations questmned in Board-adopted contenten; LBP 8138,14 NRC 778 (1981) 10 Cf R 50 57(c) request for fuel loading and low-power operation; LBP-8121,14 NRC 110 (1981) 10 C F R 50 59(b) reportmg and recording of deviations from estabhshed operatmg procedures for maintaining and monitoring mater chemistry, spent fuel puoi, ALAB-650,14 NRC 54 (1981) 10 Cf R 50 71
, Licensee's technical quahficatens to operate TMi-1 questmned in restart proceedmg. LBP 81-32,14 NRC 479 (1981) 10 Cl R 50 71(c)O Apphcant ordered to include commitments concerning installation of spent fuel racks in Dresden FSAR mhen updated, LBP 81-37,14 NRC 762 (1981) 10 Cf R 50.91 pubhc health and safety standard satisfied by Boral 95'E leaktightness/951 confidence level snarantee.
ALAB-650,14 NRC 55 (1981) 10 CF R 50.109 contention, structures, systems, components not backfitted in conformance with safety standards, recent Regulatory Guides. LBP-81 18,14 N RC 76 (1981) 10 CF R 50109(a) impositen of requirements beyond agency regulations; CLI-81 16,14 NRC 17 (1981) 10 Cf R 50. App. A contenten citmg noncomphance of classification of rehef and block valves denied; LBP-81-27,14 NRC 327 (1981)
[
contention, comphance regarding intergranular stress corrosion and crackmg not demonstrated.
l LBP-88 34,14 NRC 642 (1981) i contention, failure to docurnent rnethod for fuel densification analysis, admitted, LBP 81 18,14 NRC 85 (1981) contenten, noncomphance of initial test program, rejected, LBP-81-18,14 NRC 81 (1981) contenten, remote shutdown capabihty, being reviewed by staff, LBP-8123,14 NRC 171 (1981) contention, smgle failure cnterma, de power system, bems reviewed by staff, LBP-81-23,14 NRC 170 (1981) contentions involving environmental quahfication of control systems. TMI action plan, bems reviewed by staff, LBP-8123,14 NRC 170 (1981) violation concernmg on-site punct generation alleged. LBP-8124,14 NRC 223 (1981) 10 Cf R 50. App B apphcant's quainy suurance programs in comphance, L BP-8121,14 NRC 115-116 (1981)
'N anurance of safe ocidmg operatens. LBP 81-34, :4 NRC 668 (1981) contenten citmg noncomphance of classancaten of rehef and block valves denied LBP-81-27,14 NRC 327 (1981) contention, comphance of constructen QA program not documented, rejected LBP-8118,14 NRC 44 (1951) 42
9
~ '
LEGR CITATIONS INDEX R FCL'LATIOM contenten, conformance of plan to audit Q A durmg construction, rejected. LBP-81 18.14 N RC 86
=
(1981)
Licensee's techmcal quahGcatens to operate TM1-1 questioned in restart proceedmg. LBP-8132.14 NRC 479 (1981) performance of audits of spent fuel rack fabricators for quahty assurance program; L BP-8137,14 NRC 725, 730 (198I) proposed Q A program for TMl-1 operatens found satisfactory. L BP-8132.14 NRC 427 (1981) quahty assurance program, spent fuel storage, meets apphcable regulaimns; LBP-8137.14 NRC 723 (1981) types of denciencies disclosed m audits. LBP-8137,14 NRC 726 (1981) violation. Q A procedure for comphance with 10 Cf R 21, not estabbshed. LBP-8137.14 NRC 728 (1981) 10 CF R 50. App C Apphcanft (mancial quahficatens questioned an Board-adopted contention. L BP-BI 38,14 NRC 778 (1981) shommg of availabihty of resources by apphcants for operating hcenses, LBP-8124,14 NRC 1983.195.
197 (198i) 10 CF R 50. App D deGnition of Class 9 accident in proposed annen to; ALAR 650,14 NRC 48 (1981) postulanon of fuel handhng accidents involung 7 X 7 fuel suembhes in spent fuel puois. LBP-8137.14 NRC 747 (1981) 10 CF R 50, App E comphance of apphcant. State and local emergency plans durmg low-power testmg. L BP-8121.14 NRC 119. 121 123 (1981) contenten. noncomphance of meteorological measurement program eith Draft Guides, dismissed eithout prejudice. LBP 81 18,14 NRC 78 (1981) einergency plannmg contention to track latest version; LBP 81-35.14 NRC 686 (1981) emergency preparedneu requirements to be met before recerung construction permit or operstmg hcense; DD-81 14.14 NRC 281 (1981) factorms of effects of earthquakes into emergency plans, L BP B136,14 NRC 704 (1981) generic emergency plan for evacuation routes not suitable LBP-8136.14 NRC 699 (1981) sia deGciencies in emergency plannmg described in contension. L BP-8138,14 NRC 777 (1981) 10 CF R 50. App E (Rev )
contention citmg noncomphance of emergency response plans sufGcient to reopen record of full power hcensing proceedmg. LBP-8127.14 NRC 326,332 (1981) 10 CFR 50. App E lit contention, state and local emergency plant "not markable". LBP-8124.14 NRC 189 (1981) 10 CFR 50. App E. IV B intent of requirement for emergency plan. DD-81 14,14 NRC 283 (1981) 10 CFR 50. App E. IV D mecimg design objective of alerting system; DD 81 14.14 NRC 281 (1981) 10 CF R 50. App E. IV D 3.
2.206 petitener cites failure of Appbcant to comply with emergency planning requirements for notificaten system. DD-81 16.14 NRC 781 (1981) amendment of, regardmg operatonal date for emergency notincation systems. DD-Bi 16.14 NRC 782 (1981) i 10 CFR 50. App 1 i
l contention, prescribed dme and release measures not used in Staffs radiation effects analysis, rejected.
I LBP 81 18,14 NRC 83 (1981) cost-benent balance of health effects of low level. routme radioactive emissions. L BP-8134.14 NRC
,675-680 (1981) radiation emisssons contention challeriges regulanott. lacks specificity; LBP 81-24.14 NRC 209 (1981) site boundary doses of accidental release of radiaison from steam generator repairs. LBP-8130,14 NRC 361 (1981) 10 CFR 50, App 3 testmg to assure leaktightness of containment; LBP-8134,14 NRC 640 (1981) 10 CFR 50. App K comphance, final safety testing. ECCS, LBP 5124.14 NRC 215 (1981) l 10 Cf R 50. App R new fire proiecten requirements and esemptions from them; DD-8113.14 NRC 276-277 (1981) 43
O LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX B EGL'LATIONS
/
s 10 C FR 51 EIS not required for issuance of hcenu amendment to allow installation of spent fuel storage racks.
L BP-8137,14 NRC 759 (1981) 10 Cf R St.5tcHI) environmental review of proposed amendment specid nuclear matenals hcense involving shipment of sgna fuct aswmbhes; ALAB-e$1,14 NRC 310 (1981) 10 ClR 51.7 l
negative declaration EIS p oposed shipment of spent fuel assembhes; ALAB451,14 NRC 311 (1981) l 10 Cf R Sl 7(b)
NE PA requirements for EI A involving transfer of spent fuel assembbes; ALAB-651,14 NRC 316,317 (1981) 10 Cf R 51.21,51.23 and 51.26 conuderation of CANDU Raactor contention prohibited at operating hcense stage; LBP 8124.14 NRC 229 (1981) 10 CF R 51.26 need for power analyred at construction permit stage; LBP-8124,14 NRC 197 (1981) 10 Cf R St.52td) challenges to staff EI A, spent fuel pool espenuon, ALAB-650,14 NRC 67 (1981) 10 Cl R 55 hcenurig of shift supervisor; LBP-8132,14 NRC 577 (1981) 10 CF R 55.ll(b) administration of esammations to reactor operators; LBP-Bi 32.14 NRC 473 (1981) 10 Cf R 55.2455.23 NRR Director recommends esamination of all TMi-1 hcensed personnel. LBP 8132,14 NRC 388,451, 455. 473, 476, 508, 569 (1981) 10 CF R 70 amendment of Special Nuclear Matenals License to allow transportation of three spent fuel assembbes; ALAB-651,14 NRC 309 (1981) reviwd requirements for emergency preparedness at power reactor sites. DD'81 14,14 NRC 281 (1981) 10 Cf R 70.31tdl apphcation of safety standards to proposed spent fuel shipments; ALAB451,14 NRC 323 (1981) 10 Cf R 71 deugn of casks for shipment of spent fuel assembhes; ALAB451,14 NRC 318 (1981) 10 CIR 7112 packaging requirements shipment of three spent fuel assembhes, ALAB-651,14 NRC 309 (1981) 10 CF R 73 deugn of casks for shipment of spent fuel assembhes; Al.AB451,14 NRC 318 (1981) 10 Cf R 73 I resincted operating hcense proceeding, apphcant's physical secunty plan found in conformance, AL AB 65).14 NRC 630 (1981) 10 Cf R 7) 37 secanty requirements for shipment of spent fuel assembhes; ALAB451,14 NRC 319 (1981) 10 CFR 73 40 resincted operating hcense proceeding. apphcant's phyuca secunty plan found in comformance; s
ALAB-635,14 NRC 630 (1981) 10 CFR 73 45 emergency planning not a hcensed activity; LBP-8124,14 NRC 180 (1981) 10 CiR 73 55 restncted opersims hcense proceeding, apphcant's physical secunty plan found in conformance; ALAB-635,14 NRC 630 (1981) 10 CFR 100
- as a substitute for 10 Cf R 50 44 in htigation of hydrogen control issues; CLI 81-15,14 NRC 9-10,12 (1981) baus for estimate of unfiltered leakage from containment; LBP-8134,14 NRC 640 (1981) calculation of radiation doses from postulated fuel-handhng accident; LBP-Bi 37,14 NRC 747 (1981) htiga of hydrogen gas control contentions, LBP 8124. le NRC 207 (1981); LBP 81-27,14 NRC 327 l
radmactne relesws from cracked containment; LBP 81-34,14 NRC 641 (1981) 10 CFR 100 3tc) i l
contention populaton center distance too short in light of TMI accident; LBP-8124,14 NRC 228 (1981) l s
44
O F
LEG AL CTTATIONS INDEX mLcCianoNs h
10 Cf R 10010(cH2) contention, noncomphance of meteorological measurement program with Draft Guedes, dismissed witnout prejudice LBP8818.14 NRC 78 (1981) 10 CIR 10011 espusure rmks during low power testmg, LBP.8121,14 NRC 124,130 (1981) 10 CIR 100 ll(aH2) consention dealms with offsite radiation releases from hydrogen combusuon denied LBP-8127,14 NRC 327 (1981) 10 Cf R 100 ll(aH3) and 100 f1(b) cuntention, population center distance too short in hght of TMl accident, LBP 81-24,14 N RC 228 (1981) 10 Cf R 103, App A contention criticmns non-conservative seismic design spectra and damping factors accepted, LBP 51 18, 14 NRC 80 (1981) noncomphance, seismic design classifications, control room habitabihty, radiosctive easte systems, contenison rejected, L BP 51 18,14 NRC 78 (1981) semmic issue ramed in show cause proceeding based on Staffs use of acceleration value at nearby site; L BP.81 II,14 NRC 379 (1981) 10 Cf R 100 App A,Ill(c) stabihty of spent fuel pool. ALAB-630,14 NRC 62 (1981) 10 CIR 100 App A. VitaHI) s,ontention, noncomphance of methods for senmac response analysis, rejected, LBP-8118, le NRC 83 (1981) 10 Cf R 100. App I contention, noncomphance of meteorological measurement program with Draft Guides, dismissed without prejudice, LBP-81 18,14 NRC 78 (1981) 10 Cf R 110 84(d) consohdation of fuel esport applications seasts Esecutive Branch views on apphcation, CL1-8 818,14 NRC 302 (1981) 16 Cf R 824 and k sniervention in antitrust proceeding denied, other means available to protect petitioner's interests.
LBP 8128,14 NRC 337 338,331 (1981) 18 Cf R 292 2 206 petitioners as quahfying small power production facihty; DDull 15,14 NRC $9 (1981) 18 Cf R 292, Subpart B definition of qualifying small power production facihty; DD'81-l$.14 NRC $9 (1981) 18 Cf R 29261 2 206 petitioners assert resource recovery plant subject to regulation as pubhc utihty; DD-81 l$,14 NRC
$91 (1981) 18 Cf R 292 30$(bHI) intervention in antitrust proceeding dependent upon availabihty of other means to protect petitioner's 2 crests LBP 88 28,14 NRC 337 (1981) 40 Cf R 19 adequacy of monitoring apparatus in containment building to detect hydrogen esplosions, LBP 8134,14 NRC 649 (1981) 49 Cf R 17179 shipment of spent fuel assembhes, ALAB-631,14 NRC 318 (1981) o 45
.v O
V -
p p
m Y:
b,.
h1,..
in -
I!
n LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX y
ST4TUTES N.
y, f[
Administrative Procedure Act. 5 USC 557(c) adoption of verbatim findings of fact in TMI I restart proceeding. LBP-8132.14 NRC 399 (1981) 6 Atomic Energy Act 104d and 182a. 42 USC 2134(d) and 2232(a) f-apphcation of safety standards to proposed spent fuel shipments; ALAB-651.14 NRC 322-323 (1981)
Atomic Energy Act 105(a) e conditens for instituims anistrust proceeding. LBP-8128.14 NRC 349 (1981)
Atomic Energy Act 105(cH2). 42 USC 2135(cH5)(1976)
P..
untimely intervention in antitrust proceeding. situation inconsistent with antitrust laes not shoen; LBP 8128.14 NRC 348 (1981) y Aiomic Energy Act 189 petitioners not entitled to hearing as a matter of right in fuel apphcation proceeding. CLI-8118.14 NRC 302 (1981)
L.
Atomic Energy Act of 1954 as amended. 182,186 P,.
considerstma of mailgram as false matenal statement. LBP:81-32,14 NRC 555 556 (1981)
F' Atomic Energy Act of 1954. as amended.189a reqwrements for conducting a hearing relaims to decontamination of Unit I; CLI-8125.14 NRC 622 3
(1981)
Atomic Energy Act 2741.
5/
interested state's right to hearing on effectiveness of low power test hcense; CLI-8122,14 NRC 600 (1981) 6 Energy Reorganization Act. 201. 42 USC 5841 number of Commissioners needed to determane an action. CL1-8121.14 NRC 597 (1981)
National Environmental Pohey Act of 1969 (NEPA) 102(2HC). 42 USC 4332(2HC) necessity of EIS, shipment of sgnt fuel assembhes; ALAB-651.14 NRC 310. 315 (1981) p' National Environmental Pohcy Act of 1969.102(2){C) and (E) 42 USC 4332(2HC) and (E) 6.
consideration of alternatives to shipment of spent fuel assembhes. ALAB-651.14 NRC 321 (1981) h Naimnal Environmental Pohey Act of 1969,42 USC 4321 EIS not required for issuance of heense amendment to allom installation of spent fuel storage rads;
[f; LBP-81-37,14 NRC 759 (1981)
Pubhc Utihties Regulatory Pnhey Act of 1978, 210 untimely petsison to intervene in antitrust proceeding, other means available to protect petitener's interests. LBP-8128.14 NRC 337 (1981) f b.
v:
k m
V p T
t
,p.
s e
5g L1 r
m
~. -.
V:-. _.
O x
[.
F1 hi y.
i i
i
,s H&
LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX f.;
OTIIFRS f
u~
P, '
Yi Federal Rules of Civil Praedure Rule 42(a)
L' cunnotidation of prueedings involvmg common issues LBP 8131,14 NRC 377 (1981)
Tribe. Amerman Constitutenal law, p 507 (1978) definang property interests that meril due process protection; LBP-8126,14 NRC 256 (1981) l..
I m
n-I
$4 kta
~ ' '
W .
2eSy t
)
-m J
%V M
ff.
Id.
L C
N
~3 P,
(,'
k --
f l
t ~..
y i :*-
k.
O I,,
r.
1 L7, t.b
1 m
u r
v-r b
SUBJECT INDEX P
ACCIDENT, LOSS OF COOLANT integnty of drywell to withstand pressure generated dunng; vulnerability of Control Rod Dnve Mechanism Hydraulic unit and Traversing In-Core Probe to puoi-swell phenomenon dunng; summary r
disposition of contentena denied; LBP-8 5 34,14 NRC 637
[-
involving spent fuel pool, ALAB-650,14 NRC 43 (1981)
ACCIDENTS r
class 9, specific scenanca, nesus to TMI 2 required of contentions; LBP-8132,14 NRC 381 (1981) due to increased number of spent fuel assembhes to be stored in spent fuel pool inadequately addressed.
LBP-BI 37,14 NRC 708 (1981)
AIRCRAFT radmactive emissions as hazard to guidance systems of; LBP-81 14, le NRC 637 (1981)
L AIRPLANE CRASH 1
contention alleging incorrect basis for probabilities of not admissibic; LBP-8124,14 NRC 175 (1981)
I contention, objecten to esclusion from operating hcense proceeding; LBP 8135,14 Nke 682 (1981)
AMENDMENT of operating hcense to transfer operating authonty for Unit I to GPU Nuclear; CLI-8117,14 NRC 299 5,-
1981) 5 of (Special Nuclear Materials License for shipment of 300 spent fuel assembhes; AL (1981)
See also Operating License Amendment i
ANTICIPATED TRANSIENTS WITHOUT SCRAM (ATWS)
,f decision reserved, pending issuance of Fed. Reg. notice. concerning effect of rulemaking on admissibihty 6
of issue; LBP-8135,14 NRC 682 (1981)
I-*
issues questioned under Board's sua sponte authority; LBP-8123,14 NRC 159 (1981)
I mitigation of, through installation of automated standby liquid control system, contenten accepted, briefs k
on admissibihty of contenten required LBP 8124,14 NRC 175 (1981)
ANTITRUST untimely petiten to intervene denied for lack of nexus; LBP 8128,14 NRC 33) (1981) conditen of hcense. 2.206 petition asserting failure of licensee denied DD 81 15,14 NRC 589 (1981)
ANTITRUST PROCEEDING resumption of discovery ordered, schedule for submission of bnefs entsbhshed, two preheanng conferences scheduled, LBP-8119,14 NRC 87 (1981)
APPEAL BOARD i.
decision on physical secanty, NRC review of, CLI-88-21,14 NRC 595 (1981)
Y not convened to consider conditions imposed by LB for withdrawal of construction permit apphcation; b
ALAB-652, le NRC 627 (1981)
R referral of earthquake issue to; LBP 8136,14 NRC 691 (1981)
APPELLATE PROCEDURE E
regarding decmon upholding site selection; LBP-81-32,14 NRC 381 (1981)
I-APPELLATE REVIEW
(
scope of, of final disposition of licensing proceeding. ALAB-652,14 NRC 627 (1981)
APPLICANT entitlement of, to receive construction permit; ALAB-648,14 NRC 34 (1981)
T ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
[
appointment of, to rule on petitens regardmg chemical decontaminaten of Unit I; CLI-8125,14 NRC s-616 (1981) scope of review, espropnation of land issue raised for first time on appeal; ALAB 648,14 NRC 34 (1981)
BAY ENTRANCE FAULT f
capabihty of, and effect on restart of BWR; LBP-8120,14 NRC 101 (1981) 9
[^
a Si t:
[
e i
9 SUBJECT INDEX l
BOARD petition for intervention, role concermns contentions in operating license proceedings; LBP-8130A,14
-w NRC 364 (1981)
]
See also Appeal Board, Atomic Safety and Licenung Appeal Board, Licensing Board, Licensing Boards BORAL
}
integrity, arrasion, and swelling in spent fuel pool, ALAB-650,14 NRC 43 (1981)
{
BRIEFS requirements for, and functions of,in spent fuel pool espansion proceeding; ALAB-650,14 NRC 43 (1981)
BUHNE POINT FAULT capablity of, and effect on restart of BWR; LBP-8120,14 NRC 101 (1981)
CAllf0RNI A motion by Governor of for oral briefing of alleged incident of sabotage at another facahty denied.
ALAB-649, le NRC 40 (1981) participation as interested state in operating hcense amendment proceeding; LBP 8120,14 NRC 101 (1981) request by Governor of, for maiver of immediate effectiveness rule, CLI-8122,14 NRC 598 (198 8) request by Governor of, to clarify procedure for review of Appeal Board decision on physical security; CLI-8121,14 NRC 595 (1981)
CANADA emergency planning by, for nuclear power plant in U.S.; LBP-8124,14 NRC 175 (1981)
CLAMS, ASI ATIC biofouhng of steam generating plants by, contention admitted, LBP-8124,14 NRC 175 (1981)
CLARIFICATION given of status of participants, and designation of lead intervenors; LBP-8135,14 NRC 682 (1981)
COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL defensive apphcation of, to operating hcense proceeding, need for power issue; LBP-8124,14 NRC 175 (1981)
COMMUNITY DETERIORATION reconsideration of decinon to caciude cuntentions on in TMI I restart proceeding, CLI-81-20,14 NRC 593 (1981)
COMPUTER CODES motion to strike contention on construction of, denied; LBP-8122,14 NRC 150 (1981)
CONSOLIDATION of operating hcense proceeding and show cause proceeding; LBP 8131,14 NRC 375 (1981)
CONSTITUTION spphcation of Due Process Clause of to labor union request for hearing on overtime restrictions, LBP-8126.14 NRC 247 (1981)
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT i
denial of 2.206 petition to suspend or revoke, on bens of evacuation considerations; DD-81 14,14 NRC 279 (1981) entitlement of apphcant to receive; ALAB-648,14 NRC 34 (1981)
L CONSTRUCTION PERMITS l
request granted for withdrawal of apphcations for; site redressing ordered, LBP-8133,14 NRC 586 (1981)
CONSTRUCTION PROCEEDINGS l
terminated follommg withdrawal of permits; LBP 8133,14 N RC 586 (1981)
CONT AIN M ENT i
contention questioning strength of, lacks specificity; LBP-8124,14 NRC 175 (1981)
I leaktightness of, adequacy of monitoring apparatus in, rehabbty of emergency sump pump in; summary I
disposition of contentions sought; LBP-8134,14 NRC 637 (1981)
[
post-accident momtoring of pressure boundary inadequate; Board disposition of contention of voluntarily I'
dismissed intervenor, LBP 8123,14 NRC 159 (1981) f0NTAINMENT, ICE CONDENSER
(
origin of; hydrosen burr in; entry into; CLl-81 15,14 NRC I (1981) l CONTENTIONS l
admisubihty of, in operating hcense proceedings; LBP 8130A,14 NRC 364 (1981) g conuderations affecting the admissitnhty of, in operating license proceedings, degree of specificity of,
-m LBP-8124,14 NRC 175 (1981) g hberal basis and specificity of, eithdramat of,in TMI I restart proceeding. LBP-8132,14 NRC 381 (1981) h responses to motions to dismiss; criteria for late admissibihty, specificity; LBP-81 18,14 NRC 71 (1981) o sponsored by withdrawing intervenor, admissibihty of; LBP-8123,14 NRC 159 (1981)
Y-1 52 t
I i
O
.m.
SUBJECT INDEX sua sponte adoption of, NRC staff delays cited by Board as reason for; LBP-8138,14 NRC 767 (1981)
- 'h TMI-related, admission of, to low-power hearing; CL1-88 22,14 NRC 598 (1981)
CONTROL ROOM subcontention, post accident habitability, accepted LBP-8818,14 NRC 78 (1981)
CONTROL SYSTEMS, REACTivlTY escensive reliance on Doppler effect to mitigate effects of transient-caused overpower of system cited in summanly damissed contention; LBP-8134,14 NRC 637 (1981)
CORROSION general and galvanic in spent fuel storage racks, adequate assessment not made; LBP 8137,14 NRC 708 (1981)
COST BENEFIT aueument of health hazards of low-level, routine radioactive emiss ons; LBP-8134,14 NRC 637 (1981) contention cites inadequate consideration of decommissioning, spent fuel accident, fuel costs and supply, easie storage costs, LBP-8138,14 NRC 767 (1981)
CRITICALITY analysis performed on proposed free-standing, high-density spent fuel racks, LBP-84 37,14 NRC 708 (1981) in spent fuel pool, ALAB-650,14 NRC 43 (1981)
DECAY HEAT removal not discuned in SER supplement, contention not admitted, LBP-8127, le NRC 325 (1981)
DECOMMISSIONING addressing plan for in operating license proceeding; LBP-3124,14 NRC 175 (1981)
DECONTA MIN ATION chemical, of Unit I pnmary coolant system. appointment of Board and guidance on conduct of bearing, license modifications, CLI-8125,14 NRC 616 (1981)
DELAY by NRC Staff in issuance of documents cited by Board as reason for sua sponte adoption of contentions; me'thods for band!ang, LBP 8138,14 NRC 767 (1981)
DENSiflCATION fuel cladding failures due to, summary disposition of contention denied, LBP 51,34,14 NRC 637 (1981)
DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA subcontention enticismg non-conservative seismic design spectra and damping factors, accepted, LBP-81 18,14 NRC 71 (1981)
DEVIATIONS in design, structures, and components, contention asking documentation denied; LBP-8127,14 NRC 325 (1981)
DIESE L GENER ATORS for on-site power generation, contention alleging unreliability not admitted; LBP-8124,14 NRC 175 (19811 DIRECTOR OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT demes 2.206 petition, show cause proceedMg askmg suspension of operation pending full compliance, emergency planning; DD-81 16,14 NRC 781 (1981)
DIS ASTE RS consideration of multiple; LBP-8136,14 NRC 691 (1981)
DISCO % ER Y Board management of, institution of progress reportst LBP 8135,14 NRC 682 (1981) objections to interrogatones; LBP-8124,14 NRC 175 (1981) order issued to sinke certain motions and anseers relatmg to; LBP-8125,14 NRC 241 (1981) purposes of and reasonable limitations upon; LBP-8122,14 NRC 150 (1981) resumption of, ordered in antitrust proceeding; LBP-81-19,14 NRC 87 (1981) rightstif applicants concerning bases of, escuses for noncompliance; entension of deadlines for; LBP 5130A,14 NRC 364 (1981)
DUE PROCESS labor unio s claims violation of procedural rights in enforcement case involving overtime restnctions; I BP-8126.14 NRC 247 (1981) de*"
EARTHQUALES ability of Category I structures to withstand, motion to stnke contention denied LBP 8122,14 NRC 150 (1981)
Board interprets contention dealing with ability of Category I structures to withstand, LBP-81-25,14 NRC 241 (1981) esceeding SSE, emergency planning for; LBP-8136,14 NRC 691 (1981)
$3
G SUBJECT INDEX
-.~ ~ ~ T ELECTRIC POWER SYSTEMS plant fails to meet single failure cntenon, Board deposition of contention of voluntarily Aa====I intervenor; LDP-88 23,14 NRC 159 (1981) redundant, subcontention, Applicast's design fails to provide adequate '
-allowed; LDP-81 18, 14 NRC 71 (1981) safety-related, subcontentenn, noncompliance of cnteria with Rev. 2 of Guides, rejected; LDP-81 lt,14 NRC 71 (1981) standby, subcontention, noncompliance of diesel generstar enits with Rev. 2 of Guides. P LDP-8118,14 NRC 78 (1981)
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT Class IE, subcontentions dealing with qualificaten of, one rejected, one =P-LSP-81 18,14 NRC 78 (1981) environmental qualification of,2.206 petition asking suspension of operations for derh in, d==ial-DD 8113,14 NRC 275 (1981) safety-related, contention dealing with environmental qualification denied; LSP-8127,14 NRC 325 (1981) safety-reisted, environmental qualification of; Board deposition of contention of voluntarily dammissed intervenor; LBP-8 8-23,14 NRC 159 (1981)
EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEM (ECCS)
Final safety testing contention admitted; LBP 8124,14 NRC 175 (1981)
EMERGENCY PLANNING adequacy of, for k,*-power testing, correction of Staff misstateawnta rosarding belicopter assistance for notification; CLI-8 8-22,14 NRC 598 (1981) as hcensed actreity, NRC junediction; contenten alleging state and local plans *not workable" admitted; LBP 8124,14 NRC 175 (1981) contention admitted, record of full-power hcensing proceeding reopened; LBP-8127,14 NRC 325 (1981) contention desenbes failure to comply with regulations for; LBP-88 38,14 NRC 767 (1981) contention limited to evacuation; LBP-8135,14 NRC 682 (1981) existing prompt notification system described in response to 2.206 petition for show cause pra== ting on; DD 8117,14 NRC 784 (1981) low-power test proceeding, development of pnst TMI requirements; naka for low-power operation; state and adequacy of, at Diablo Canyon; applicant's en*ertency preparedness; comaty plans for; LDP-81-21,14 NRC 107 (1981) notification system,2.206 petition for show cause prar== hag, suspensaan of operations pendang full comphance; DD 81 16,14 NRC 781 (1981) revised requirementa for; DD 81 14,14 NRC 279 (1981)
EMERGENCY PLANS for earthquake enceeding SSE, evacuation time and methods, shelter frorn radiation, radiation does estimates, muluple duasters LSP 8136,14 NRC 691 (1981)
ENFORCEMENT ACTION 2.206 petition asserting failure to abide antitrust condition of lacense densed, DD-81 15,14 NRC 589 (1981)
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS scope of, and consideration of alternatives regarding spent fuel pool espansmn; ALAB-450,14 NRC 43 (1981) under NEPA, scope of, for shipment of spent fuel assemblies; ALAB-651,14 NRC 307 (1981)
ENYlRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS of radon releases dunns uranium finel cycle, demonstration of; ALAB454,14 NRC 632 (1988)
ENVIRON M ENTAL IMPACT not considered in evaluating fuel esport applicatmas; CLI-8818,14 NRC 301 (1981)
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPRAISAL (EIA)
NEPA requisements for, involving spent fuel shipments; ALAB-651,14 NRC 307 (1981) regarding installation of spent fuel storage racks faulted by intervenor; LBP-8137,14 NRC 708 (1981)
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (Els) need for, under NEPA, for highesy transportation of 300 spent fuel assemblies; ALAB-ell,14 NRC 307 (1981) on chemical decontamination of Unit 1. NEPA requirements for hennags on; CLI-8125,14 NRC 616
' ' ~T (1981)
EVACUATION dental of 2.206 petition to suspend or revoke construction pernut on the basis of deficient plans for; DD-8114,14 NRC 279 (l981) time and methods, consid* stion or, for multiple disasters; LDP 81 )6,14 NRC 691 (1981)
Sd
O pm SUBJECT INDEX EXCEIPTIONS raised for first time on appeal of spent fuel pool espansion decision; ALAlk650,14 NRC 43 (1981)
EXPERT INTERROGATOR motion granted for qualification of, under 10 CFR 2.733; LBP-8129,14 NRC 353 (1981)
EXPORT of special nuclear materials to Philippines; CLI-81-18,14 NRC 301 (1981)
See also Fuel Esport Application EXPROPRIATION of land, amants raise spectre of second attempt by applicant; ALAIL648,14 NRC 34 (1981)
FAULTS See Bay Entrance Fault; Bahne Point Fault; Geologic Anomalies, Little Salmon Fault FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE spectricity expected in pleadings; LBP 8124,14 NRC 175 (1981)
FERRITE subcontention, control of content in weld metal and filler materials, allowed; LDP-81-18,14 NRC 71 (1981)
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS impact of on technical decisions examined in TMI I restart proceeding; LBP 8132,14 NRC 381 (1981)
FIN ANCIAL QUALIFICATIONS contention alleging Applicant lacks resources to operate plant admitted in operating license proceeding; LBP-8124,14 NRC 175 (1981) of Applicant, dumissed intervenor's contention questions: LBP-88 38,14 NRC 767 (1981)
FIRE PROTECTION 2.206 petition asking suspension of operations for deficiencies in, denied; esemption requested from new requirements for; DD-81 13,14 NRC 275 (1981) adequacy of program regarding electric cables, redundant safety systems; Board disposition of contention of yoluntarily demissed intervenor; LDP-8123,14 NRC 159 (1981)
FUEL channel deformations esplored in operating license proceeding to permit installation of new spent fuel storage racks; LBP 8137,14 NRC 708 (1981) subcontention, densification analysis, compliance with Guides, accepted; LBP-81 18,14 NRC 71 (1981)
See also Reactor Fuel Rods; Spent Fuel; Spent Fuel Pool; Spent Fuel Pool Espansion; Spent Fuel Racks, Spent Fuels; Uranium Fuel Cycle FUEL EXPORT APPLICATION bealah, safety and environmental impacts not considered in: CLi-81 18,14 NRC 301 (1981)
FULL CORE DISCHARGE CAPABILITY alternatives to proposed installation of spent full racks available to Applicant to achieve; LBP-81-37,14 NRC 708 (1981)
GEOLOGIC ANOMALIES tremors, tunnel fault at site of Perry, Ohio, plant; LBP-8124,14 NRC 175 (1981)
GROUND #ATER evaluation ofimpacts of drawdown of, motion to strike contention granted; LBP-8122,14 NRC 150 (1981)
HEALTH AND SAFETY contentions of dismissed inervenor, sua sponte adoption of; LDP-88 38,14 NRC 767 (1981) impacts not considered in evalusting fuel caport applications; CLi-81 18,14 NRC 301 (1981) of workers in spent fuel pool areas, adequacy of protection during rack removal red installation questioned LBP 8137,14 NRC 708 (1981)
HEALTH PHYSICS PROGRAM approppate organization and stamns to ensure safe operation of facility examined in TMI-I restart proceeding; LBP 8132,14 NRC 381 (1981)
HEARING as a matter of right denied on fuel esport applications; CLI-81 18,14 NRC 30! (1981) interested state's right so, under AEA; CLI-81-22,14 NRC 598 (1981)
HEARINGS on decontamination of primary coolant system, AEA, NEPA requirements for; CLI-8125,14 NRC 616 (1981)
HEARINGS, OPERATING LICENSE requiremenu for Board's caercise of sua sponte authority to adopt dismissed intervenor's contentions; CLI-8124,14 NRC 614 (1981) b*
l 1
0 SUBJECT lNDEX HYDROGEN contamination of innde of fuel rod, summary disposition of contention denied, LBP-8134,14 NRC 637 (1981) contentens dealing with fuel claddmg reaction, combustion, and escensive generation insufficient to reopen record; LBP-8127,14 NRC 325 (1981) control systems and hcense conditions to mitigate escessive generation; CLI-Bi 15,14 NRC 1 (1981) gas in containtnent structure questioned under Board's sua sponte authonty; LBP 8123,14 NRC 159 (1981)
See also Igniter Hydrogen Mitigation System HYDROGEN CONTROL Board arcatment of contentions, credible accident scenario required, LBP 8124,14 NRC 175 (1981) subcontention, inadequate post accident management, rejected, LBP 81 18,14 NRC 71 (1981)
HYDROGEN CONTROL RULE Commission TMi 1 Order on; CL1-81 15,14 NRC I (1981)
ICE buildup at service water intake; Board disposition of contention of voluntarily dismissed intervenor; LBP 8123,14 NRC 159 (1981)
IGNITER HYDROGEN MITIGATION SYSTEM installation of, as condition of full-power hcense; CLI-8815,14 NRC I (1981)
IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVENESS REVIEW interested state requests waiver of CLI-8122,14 NRC 598 (1981)
INERTING to prevent hydrogen burn; esemption from requirement for; CLl-81 15,14 NRC i (1981)
INSPECTORS views c(, concerning quality of TMI l management; LBP-8132,14 NRC 381 (1981)
INTERGRANULAR STRESS CORROSION AND CRACKING of sensitired stamicas steel components in LWR, summary disposition of contentions denied; LBP-3134, 14 NRC 637 (1981)
INTERVENOR withdrawal of. because of htigation costs of operatmg hcense proceeding; LBP-8123,14 NRC 159 (1981)
INTERVENORS responsabihties of, regarding participation in NRC proceedings; ALAB-650,14 NRC 43 (1981) nghts of, to raise issues in new operating hcense proceedmss; CLI-81-16,14 NRC 14 (1981) tardy; Appheant, Staff file *last word" bnefs in operating hcense proceeding, coordination of, LBP-8124 14 NRC 175 (1981)
INTERVENTION by labor unwn in enforcement case involving overtime restnctions; LBP-SI 26,14 NRC 247 (1981) consohdated, designation of lead intervenors in; LBP-8135,14 NRC 682 (1981) in operating hcense proceeding, residence requirements for; LBP-81-24,14 NRC 175 (1981) late. in antitrust proceeding; cogninble interest to support; LBP-81 19,14 NRC 87 (1981) petition in antitrust proceedmg denicd for lack of timchness and lack of nesus, LBP-8128,14 NRC 333 (1981) request denied concerning authanution to esport special nuclear matenais to Ph.hppenes; CLI-81 18,14 NRC 301 (1981) standing of petitioners for; factors to be considered in petitions for; scheduhng of prehearms conference regardms; amendmg petitions for; LBP 8124,14 NRC 235 (1981) (Append to LBP-8124)
JURISulCTION Board lack of, motion to eithdraw apphcation for operating hcense amendment, LBP-8120,14 NRC 101 (1981) of retation or intervention boards in operating hcense proceedmg; LBP-8130A,14 NRC 364 (1981)
JURISDICTION, N RC over emergency planning activities, required for hcensing nuclear power plants, which may take place in Canada. LBP-5124,14 NRC 175 (1981)
- LABOR UNION standing to intervene in enforcement case involving overtime restrictions; LBP-Bi 26,14 NRC 247 (1981)
LEAD STORAGE BATTERIES subcontention, comphance with Guides, rejected, LBP 81 18,14 NRC 71 (1981)
LEAKAGE CONTROL SYSTEM subcontention, design of main steam isolation valve; LBP 81 18,14 NRC 78 (1981)
LICENSE for fuel loading and low-power testing effective for Umt I subject to documentation by NRR Director; l
CLI-8122,14 NRC 598 (1981) 1 I
l l
1
O
+-
m SUBJECT INDEX LICENSE CONDITION w
2.206 petition assertmg hcensee's failure to abide denied DD-81 15,14 NRC 589 (1981)
LICENSE CONDITIONS concerning hydrogen control; CLI 81-15,14 NRC I (1981) relative to management capabihty issues required if TMI I is restarted; LBP-8132,14 NRC 381 (1981)
LICENSE, RJLL POWER effectiveness decision for Unit I made without prejudice to Unit 2 effectiveness review; CLI-8115,14 NRC I (1981)
LICENSES OPERATING new, requirements in response to TMI accident; CLI-81 16,14 NRC 14 (1981)
LICENSING BOARD (LB) make-up of,in consolidated operating license /show cause proceeding; LBP 81-31,14 NRC 375 (1981) requested by Commission te desenbe bases for sua sponte adoption of dismissed intervenor's contentions; CL18124,14 NRC 614 (1981)
LICENSING BOARDS prerequisites for the raising of safety issues sw. sponte by; consideration of EPZ size as generic issue; LBP-8136,14 NRC 691 (1981)
LICENSING PROCEEDING. TANDEM objection to decision denying contention on; LBP-8135,14 NRC 682 (1981)
LICENSING PROCEEDINGS differentiation of distnct court proceedings from; LBP 8124,14 NRC 175 (1981)
LIMITED %ORK AUTHORIZATION partial initial decisions vacated folhing withdrawal of construction permits; LBP-8133,14 NRC 586 (1981)
LIQUEFACTION necessity of site dewatenna system to preclude; LBP 8131,14 NRC 375 (1981)
LITTLE SALMON FAULT capabihty of, and effect on restart of BWR; LBP 8120,14 NRC 101 (1981)
LOW POWER TEST PROCEEDING findings of fact on radon gas release; QA; unresolved generic safety inues, e.nergency planning; rehef, safety and block valves; LBP-8121,14 NRC 107 (1981)
MAINTENANCE, SAFETY RELATED deferral of, recordkeeping proposed budect cut, inadequate and understaffed QA/QC prognms extensive overtime considered in TMI-s restart proceeding; LBP-81-32,14 NRC 381 (1981)
M AJOR FEDERAL ACTION shipment of spent fuel assembhes as; ALAlt651,14 NRC 307 (1981)
M AN AGEMENT CAPABILITY Commission states intentson to begin effectiveness review immediately on partial initial decision on, in restart proceeding; CLI-81-17,14 NRC 304 (1981) considerations in partial initial decision issued in TMI-I restart; LBP 8132,14 NRC 381 (1981)
GPU Nuclear's to be ccasidered instead of Metropohtan Edison's in restart proceeding; CLI-81 17,14 NRC 299 (1981)
M AN AGEMENT STRUCTURE crganization, technical resources, QA managers and technical staff considered in TMI I restart proceedms; LBP-8132. I4 NRC 381 (191:1)
METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING subconter tion, noncompliance of measurement program, denied without prejudice; LBP 81-18,14 NRC 71 l
(1981)
MONITORING i
l of events in cuntaintnent building during LOCA, adequacy of apparatus for; LBP-8134,14 NRC 637 (1 9111)
MONITORS, LOCAL POWER RANGE degradation of, through coolant flow-induced vibration of fuel assembhes; LBP-8134,14 NRC 637 (1981)
MOTION p-.
to strike three contentions for default granted in part, denied in part; LBP 88 22,14 NRC 150 (1981)
MOTIONS l
rephes to answers to; so dismiss contentions, responses to; LBP-81-18,14 NRC 71 (1981)
NEED FOR POWER requirement for raising contention at operating license stage; LBP-8135,14 NRC 682 (1981)
' k l
l N
l 1
l l
l
O SUBJECT INDEX NRC STAFF delays in issuance of documents cited by Board as reason for sua sponte adopuan of contentsons; LDP 8138,14 NRC 767 (1981) response not filed to motion for stay of effectiveness of full-power hcenses; ALAB447,14 NRC 27 (1981)
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION adjudicatory responsitulitas of, cxincerning efficiency of hcensing process; DPRM-812, le NRC 289 (1981) guidelines for specificity in picadings; LBP-81-24,14 NRC 175 (1981) referral of rulings to; LBP-Bi-36,14 NRC 691 (1981) responsitnhties under NEPA regard.ng forecasts of need for power, reconsideration of decisions based on 1
EIS, DD 8112,14 NRC 265 (1981) l OPERATING LICENSE i
amended to transfer operating authority for Unit I to GPU Nuclear; CLI-8117,14 NRC 299 (1981)
I modification of, following chemical decontanunation of pnmary cnotant systems; CLI-8125,14 NRC 616 (1981) modification sought to permit installation of high-density spent fuel storage racks and withdrawal of some of present racks; LBP 8137,14 NRC 708 (1981)
See also Licenses Operating OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT motion to wi hdraw application, without prejudice; seismic -
.iions; LBP-8I 20,14 NRC 101 t
(1981)
OPERATING LICENSE PitOCEEDING consolidation with show cause proceeding; LBP-8131,14 NRC 375 (1981) requirements of non-party partecipants in; LBP-81-35,14 NRC 642 (1981) review of decision granung full-power hcenses, Units I and 2; ALAB-647.14 NRC 27 (1941)
OPERATING LICENSE PROCEEDINGS Board consideration of sua sponte issues; LBP-84 23,14 NRC 159 (1981)
See also Heanngs, Operating License OPERATING LICENSES Commission revmw of, request for famed time periods for completion of, denied DPRM 812,14 NRC 289 (1981)
OPERATOR TRAINING commitments of TMI l licenses towards; LBP-81-32,14 NRC 381 (1981)
OVERTIME i
resenctions, labor union request for hearing densed; LBP-8126,14 NRC 247 (1981)
PENNSYLVANIA, COMMONWEALTH OF l
settlement agreement with licenses cons.dered in TMI-I restart pr~walr LBP-88-32,14 NRC 381 l
(198I) l PERSONNEL l
subcontention, inadequacies in qualification and training of, rejected, LBP 81 18.14 NRC 71 (1981)
PHILIPPINES i
caport of special nuclear matenals to; CLI-41 18,14 NRC 301 (1981)
PHYSICAL SECURITY applicant's plan for, found in conformance with AEA and agency regulations; ALAB-653,14 NRC 629 (1981) intervenor requests clarification on procedure for seeking review of M6 on; CLI-88-21,14 NRC 595 (1981) l PIPE BREAKS at pipe cracks initiated by water hammer, safety of design to prevent questioned, LBP-88-34,14 NRC l
637 (1981)
POLICY STATEMENT Further Commission Guidance for Power Reactor Operating Lacenses, requested stay of denied; CLI-81 16,14 NRC 14 (1981)
' POOL SWELL PHENOMENON vulneratulity of Control Rod Dnve Mechanism Hydraulic Unit and Traversing lo. Care Probe to; LBP-81-34,14 NRC 637 (1981) l POTASSIUM IODIDE l
contention concerning distnbution of to households within 10 nules of plant admissible; LBP-8124,14
- r. %
NRC 175 (1981)
POWER EXCURSION contention cites inadequacy ofindustry standard theory for transiset analyses; LBP-8134.14 NRC 637 (1981)
- S SB l
O l
SUBJECT INDEX POWER NEEDS 2 206 petition to reopen record on, construction permits, denied DD-81 12,14 NRC 265 (1981) collateral estoppel doctnne apphed to contentions on, htigated at construction pernut stage; LBP-8124,14 NRC 175 (1981)
PREHEARING CONFERENCE regarding petitions for intervention, scheduhng of; L8P-8 8 24,14 NRC 235 (1981) (Append to L8P.8124)
PREHEARING CONFERENCE, SPECIAL edmusion of partses, enotions to dismiss and to stay, admissitnhty of contentions, adoption of special discxvery procedures; L8P 88 24,14 NRC 175 (1981)
PRESSURE SEALANT seboontentum, deterioration of, accepted; LBP-81 18, le NRC 71 (1981)
PRESSURE VESSEL contentions concerning cracking, machining defects, not admitted; L8P-8124,14 NRC 175 (1981) subcontention alleging Applicant's failure to desenbe behavior under LOC conditions rejected; L8P 8818, 14 NRC 71 (1981) vulnerabihty of, to undetectable cracks, haked to need for notification system in emergency planning; 2.206 petition for show cause proceeding; DD'81 16,14 NRC 781 (1981)
PSYCHOLOGICAL STRESS i-
. tion of decision to esclude contentions on in TMI I restart proceeding; CLI-81-20,14 NRC 593 (1981)
QUALITY ASSURANCE Board aska Apphcant and Staff to desenbe program in detail; LBP-8138,14 NRC 767 (1981) contention limited to imphcstions arising from stop work order; L8P-8133,14 NRC 682 (1981) contention questsons adequacy of anserance that spent fuel tube and rack construction and Boral-10 loading meet specificatsana; LBP-8137,14 NRC 708 (1981) contention, program csusing unsafe construction, admitted, L8P-8124,14 NRC 175 (1981) operating program questioned under Board's sua spante authonty; L8P 8123,14 NRC 159 (1981) program dunns construction, subcontentions, conformance with Guides, rejected LBP 81 18,14 NRC 71 (1981) program imp'ementation for design and construction considered is low-power test proceeding; LBP-8121, 14 NRC 107 (1981)
RADIATION adequacy of spent fuel equipment for monitoring of questioned. LBP-8 8-37,14 NRC 708 (1981) shelter from, and dose estimates during hypothesized multiple duasters; L8P-8136,14 NRC 691 (1981)
RADIOACTIVE EMISSIONS as hazard to aircraft guidance systems; beslth effects of routine, low-level; summary dispcsition of conten,tiwn sought; LBP-8134,14 NRC 637 (1981) contentica desenbed, effects on public ether than at esclusion boundary; LBP-84 38,14 NRC 767 (1981)
RADIOACTIVE WASTE appropnate staffing of program esamined in TMI I restart proceeding; LBP-8132,14 NRC 381 (1981) tres ment system for spent fuel pools, adequacy of questioned, L8P-88-37,14 NRC 708 (1981)
RADON envi.comental effects of releases anacciated with uranium fuel cycle, requirement for demonstration of genuine issue of material fact; ALAB-634,14 NRC 632 (1981) releases from uranium mining and milhng for reactor fuel, consideration of in low-power test proceeding; L8P-8121, to NRC 107 (1981)
REACTOR summary disposition of contention, applicant's inalmlity to effect cold shutdown in 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />, denied; L8P-81-34,14 NRC 637 (1981) vessel level instrumentation system, contention describing deficiencies denied; L8P-81-27,14 NRC 325 (1991)
REACTOR COMPONENTS effects of flow-induced vibrations on jet pumps, spargers, fuel pens, core instrumentation, and fuel rods; wesequer.
L8P fi 34,14 NRC 637 (1981)
REACTOR COOLANT subcontention, maintenance of water purity, accepted; L8P-51 18,14 NRC 71 (1981)
REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEMS Justice Department investigation of leek rate test data for TMI 2 LBP-8132,14 NRC 381 (1981) safety of rehef, safety and block valves, low-power testing; L8P-8 8 21,14 NRC 107 (1981) 99
O SUBJECT INDEX REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEMS, PR!*iARY appointment of Board, guidance on conduct of beanns regarding decontamination of. CL1-8125,14 NRC 616 (1981) asymmeenc blowdown loads. Board disposition of contention of voluntanly dismissed intervenor;
~~*
REACTOR CORE inadequate post-accident monitoring systems; Board disposition of contention of voluntanly dismissed intervenor: LBP-8123,14 NRC 159 (1981) lateral support of,insuffwient to eithstand combined lateral seismic and blowdown forces, LBP-8134,14 NRC 637 (1981)
REACTOR FUEL RODS summary disposition sought for contentions on hydrogen contaminatmn of inside of, effects of flow induced vibration on, deficiencies in dnve system; unr-liabihty of pattern control system; reactivity insertion from dropped; ejection accident. LBP REACTOR VESSEL fracture toughness properties of, Board disposition of contention of voluntarily dismissed intervenor; LBP-8123,14 NRC 159 (1981)
RECORD 2.206 petition to reopen, construction pernuts, to reassess need for power, denied; DD-81 12,11 NRC 265 (1981) motion to supplement denied, empropriation issue raised for first time on appeal; ALAB-648,14 NRC 34 (1981) on storage racks in spent fuel pool, revising, stnhing, or modifying evidence on; LBP-8137,14 NRC 708 (1981) reopening, full-power hcensing proceeding, emergency planning contention admitted LBP 8127,14 NRC 375 (1981)
REGUt ATIONS interpretations of 2.760s and 50 47(s). LBP-81-36,14 NRC 691 (1981)
REGULATORY GUIDES apphcabihty of, comphance with; bringing newly issued guides into play; LBP 81 18,14 NRC 71 (1981)
RESTART PROCEEDING Commission intenton to begin imrnediate effectiveness review, partial initial decision on management competence; ALAB estabhshed to hear initial appeals; CLI-81 19,14 NRC 304 (1981) consideration of GPU Nuclear's management capabihty instead of Metropohtan Edison's to operate Unit 1; CLl-81 17,14 NRC 299 (1981) partial initial decision issued on management capabihty to operate Unit 1: LBP 8132,14 NRC 381 (1981)
TMI l, reconsideration of decision to esclude psychological stress contentions; CLI-8120,14 NRC 59)
(1981)
REVIEW of physical security decision, intervenor requests clanfsation on procedure for seeking; CLI 8121,14 NRC 595 (1981) sur, sponte, by hcensing board, prerequisites to raising safety issues; LBP-8 8 36,14 NRC 691 (1981)
See also immediate Effectiveness Review R EVIEW, E FFECTIVEN ESS on partial initial decision on management competence to begin immediately; CLI-81 19,14 NRC 304 (19811 RULEM AKING l
denial of request for reconsideration of petition for, fined time periods for completion of licensing review; DPRM-812,14 NRC 289 (1981)
RULES OF PR ACTICE bnefs, enceptions, findings of fact, responsibihties of parties, reopening of proceedings, harmless error, in spent fuel pool espansion proceeding; ALAB-650,14 NRC 43 (1981) changed circumstances in need for power con, Ni; burdens of proof and persuasion in summary disposition; designation of lead intervenors; non-party partripetion; LBP-8135,14 NRC 682 (1981) consideration for granting a stay of order; LBP 8130,14 NRC 357 (1981) consohdation of operstmg hcense proceeding and show cause proceeding; LBP-813I,14 NRC 375 (1981) factors govermns grant of stay requests; ALAB-647.14 NRC 27 (1981) junndiction of boards, admissibehty of contentions, d.acovery; LBP-81-30A,14 NRC 364 (1981)
NRC review of Appeal Board decision on physical security; CLI-8121,14 dRC 595 (1981) operating license proceeding, special preheanns conference order, junsdiction, standing, admissitahty of contentions, collateral estoppel; LBP 8124, 44 NRC 175 (1981) procedure for appeal of decision upholding site selection; LSP-8132,14 NRC 381 (1981)
&hs A
1 s
l l
O StJBJECT INDEX referral of re'ings to appeal board or Commission; LBP 8136,14 NRC 691 (1981) rephes to ansvers to motions, responses to motions to dismina contenuons; LBP-81 18,14 NRC 71 (1981) raie of pretru discovery,interrogrtones, and contentions: LBP-8125,14 NRC 241 (1981) show-cause prt ceeding. acceptabihty of emergency plans for evacuation. DD-81 14.14 NRC 279 (1981) standard of entertise required for espert interrogator; LBP-8129,14 NRC 353 (1981) standing of labte union to intervene in enforcement case involving overtime restnctions; LBP-8126,14 NRC 247 (1981) standmg to intersene, discretiorary intervention, participation, consolidation of parties, in decontamination beanns. CLI-8125,14 NRC 616 (1981) summary disposition of health and safety and environmental contentions LBP-8134.14 NRC 637 (1981) untimely peution for intervention in antitrust proceedmg denied, LBP-5128,14 NRC 33) (1981) esiver of immediate effectrveness rule. LL1-8122,14 NRC 598 (1981)
SABOTAGE monon by Governor of Cahfornia for oral bnenng of alleged incident of, at another facihty demed; ALAB-649,14 NRC 40 (1981) of spent fuel shipments considered in EI A; ALAB-651,14 NRC 307 (1981) radiological, apphcant's physical secanty plan adequate to meet design basis threat of ALAB-653,14 NRC 629 (1981)
SAFE SHUTDow N EARTHQUAKE (SSE) emergency plans for earthquake exceed ng; LBP 8136,14 NRC 691 (1981) plant capabihty, Board disposition of contention of voluntarily dismissed intervenor; LBP-81-23,14 NRC 159 (1981)
SAFFTY clanncation of Memorandum and Order concerning long-term issues; CLl-II-23,14 NRC 610 (1981) genene ivues of stauon blackout. ATWS, reactor vessel matenal toughness, qualification of Class IE safetprelated equipment considered in low-power test proceeding. LBP-8 3-21,14 NRC 107 (1981) quahfied individuals to pronde review of and operanonal advice esamined in TMI I restart proceedmg, LBP-8132,14 NRC 381 (1981)
SANCTIONS for failure to adequately answer discovery requests; LBP 81-22,14 NRC 150 (1981)
SE"'RITY PROCEEDING ion by Cahforma Governor for oral bnefing of alleged incident of sabotage at another facihty denied; ALAB-649,14 NRC 40 (1981)
SEISMIC CONSIDER ATIONS concerning installation of new free-standmg storage racks in spent fuel pool; LBP-8137,14 NRC 708 (1981) l in consohdated operstmg license /show cause proceeding; LBP 8131,14 NRC 375 (1981) of BW R located in active carthquake rone; LBP-81-20,14 NRC 101 (1981) j SENSITIZED STAINLESS STEEL subcontention, noncompliance, apphcants' control of use of, rejected; right to reparticularize contenuon demed LBP-II 18,14 NRC 71 (1981) summary disposinon sought of contentions dealing with intergranular stress corrosion and cracking of components made of, LBP-8134,14 NRC 637 (1981)
SHIFT M ANNING requirements at TMI I esamined in restart proceeding; LBP 8132,14 NRC 381 (1981)
SHOW CAUSE PROCEEDING consohdation with operating hcense proceed ng; LBP-8131,14 NRC 375 (1981) suspension of operation pending full comphance, emergency planning,2.206 petition denied; DD'81 16,14 NRC 781 (1981)
SH UTDOWN remote capabihty for; Board disposition of contention of voluntanly dismissed intervenor; LBP-8123.14 NRC 159 (19811 SHliTDOWN, COLD contention cites applicant's inability to effect in 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />, LBP 81-34,14 NRC 637 (1981)
SITE redressing ordered following withdraesi of construction permits: LBP 8133,14 NRC 586 (1981)
SITE DEW ATERING SYSTEM necessity of, to preclude hquefaction; LBP-81-31.14 NRC 375 (1981)
--- e SPECI AL NUCLEAR MATERIALS export to Phihppines, petsuoner's request to intervene and for beanns denied; CLI-81 18,14 NRC 301 (1981) hcense amended, highway transportation of 300 spent fuel assemblies allowed; ALAB-651,14 NRC 307 (1981) 61 l
l O
]
sunnrr mDEX l
physical security plan for, in conformance with AEA and agency reguistions; ALAH53,14 NRC 629 (1981)
SPENT FUEL Special Nuclear Materials license amended to allow highesy transportation of 300 assemblies; packaging i
requirements for; ALAB-651,14 NRC 307 (1981) 1 SPENT FUEL POOL contention concermns Iml-over rejo:ted LBP-88 24,14 NRC 175 (1981) rnadification to permit installation of five high density storage racks and withdrawal of some of present ones; LBP-8137.14 NRC 708 (1981) motion demed for summary disposition of contention citing inadequate consideration of design basis accident involving; LBP 8 8 34,14 NRC 637 (1981) subcontention alleging design deficwncies admitted, LBP-81-18,14 NRC 71 (1981)
SPENT FUEL POOL EXP4NSION license amendment permitting installation of new storage racks affirmed; ALAB-650,14 NRC 43 (1981)
SPENT FUEL RACKS free-standing structures, operating hcense modification sought to install free; LBP 8137,14 NRC 708 (1981)
SPENT FUELS control of heavy loads near; Board disposition of contention of voluntarily dismissed intervenor LBP 8123,14 NRC 159 (1981) disposition of, in shetdown facihty located in actrve earthquake zone; LBP 88 20,14 NRC 101 (1981) osidation of, in espanded pool, ALAB-650,14 NRC 43 (1981) stored, inadequate predection of, during unattended operation of spent fuel pool, contention summarily dismissed, LBP 88 34,14 NRC 637 (1981)
STANDING residence requirements for intervention in operating license proceeding; LBP-88-24,14 NRC 175 (1981)
STAY of Board Ordrr cancelling further bearings on license amendments to permit generator repairs denied; LBP-II N.14 NRC 357 (1981) of effectiveness of full-tcrm operating licenses for Units I and 2 deniet ALAB447,14 NRC 27 (1981) of Statement of Pohey, Further Commissaan Guidana for Power Reactor Operatiud Licenses, denied; CL1-81 16,14 NRC 14 (1981)
STEAM GENERATOR secondary side water chemistry program; Board disposition of contention of volectarily dismissed intervenor: LBP-5123,14 NRC 159 (1981)
STEAM GENERATORS intervenor's application for stay of Final Order cancellies further hearings on hcense amendments to permit reporn denied; LBP-8130,14 NRC 357 (1981)
SUA SPONTE ISSUES Board consideration c(in operating license oraceeding; LBP 81-23,14 NRC 159 (1981) requirements for Licens.ng Board's adopuan of CLI-9124,14 NRC 614 (1981)
SUMMARY
DISPOSITION burdens of proof and persuasion for; LBP 8135,14 NRC 682 (1981)
SUEPENSION OF OPERATIONS 2.206 petition based on fire protectica matters and environmental qualification of electrical equipment; DD-81 13,14 NRC 275 (1981) pending full compliance, emergency planning,2.206 petition for r%ow :ause proceeding denied, DD-8816.
14 NRC 781 (1981)
SYSTEMS INTERACTION contenison deshng with interaction of safety and non-safety-related systems denied; LBP-8127,14 NRC 325 (1981)
TECHNICAL QUALIFICATIONS of apphcant to construct nuclear plant gaiestioned,intervenor's request fx summary disposition of contention denied, LBP-5134,14 NRC 637 (1981) of personnel to operate nuclear power plant safely; Board interpretation of contention; LBP 88 25,14 NRC 241 (1981)
(
TESTING low-power, risks of at Diablo Canyon; LBP-8121,14 NRC 107 (1981)
~ w THREE MILE ISLAND development of post-accident emergency plann:ng requirements at Diablo Canyon; LBP-8121,14 NRC 107 (198il effect of accident on spent fuel pool; ALAB-650, is NRC 43 (1981) effect of Unit 2 accident on Unit I operation; LBP 8132,14 NRC 181 (1981) 62 l
l i
O SUBJECT INDEX escensive hydrogen genersten and burn at Unit 2.CLI-81 l5,14 NRC I (1981) requirements for new operating hcenses in response to accident at. CLI-Bi 16,14 N RC 14 (1981) restart proceeding, reconsideration of decison to esclude psychological stress, community detenoraten contentens CLI-8120,14 NRC $93 (1981) contention, nonconformance of apphcant with regulatory guides resulting from accident; LBP 81 18,14 NRC 78 (1981)
TR AINING organiraten operator accelerated retraining program; of non-licensed personnel; independent review of hcensee's programs, adequacy of, considered in TMI I restart proceeding. LBP-Bl 32,14 NRC 381 (1981)
See tino Operator Training TR ANSPORTATION of spent fuel racks and tubes, contention questions adequacy ofinspecten to detect damages resulting from, LBP 8137,14 NRC 708 (1981)
TURBINES subconsenten, orientation of, and protection against low-trajectory missiles, accepted. LBP-81 18.14 NRC 71 (1981)
URANIUM FUEL CYCLE demonstraten of environmental effects of radon releases denng. ALAB-654.14 NRC 632 (1981) environmental effects considered in low power test proceeding; LBP-8121,14 NRC 107 (1981)
URANIUM MINING AND MILLING for reactor fuel, radon gas releases from; LBP-8121,14 NRC 107 (1981)
VALVES rehef and bkxk. inadequate qualification of, contention denied LBP-81-27. I4 NRC 325 (1981) rehef. safety and block, consideraten of in iso-power test proceeding; LBP-8121,14 NRC 107 (1981)
VlBR ATION flow-induced, summary disposition of contentions dealing with effects on reactor components denied.
VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL hitervenor's moton granted, contentions raised sua sponte by Board; LBP-81-23,14 NRC I$9 (1981)
WASTE disposal problems of nuclear power plants; ALAB-651,14 N'tC 307 (1981)
WATI R H AMMER centention questions safety of design to prevent pre break accidents al ppe cracks initiated by; LBP-8134,14 NRC 637 (1981)
WELDING of pping, safety of, welder quahficatens questioned in contention; LBP-8134,14 NRC 637 (1981)
.<, w t.
F I
N
s-Q aW-N. W ~
M.&
g'{
-pr u w..
A hyj 1$~l.
g,
%W.
g FACIUTY INDEX
-..W ALLENS CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, Unit I: Docket S466-CP CONSTRUCTION PERMIT; September I,1981; SECOND ORDER, LBP-8134,14 NRC 637 (1981) y-N ALVIN W. VOGTLE NUCLEAR PLANT, Units I & 2; Dockets 54424, 50 425 r6*
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT: July 2,1981; DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206; Mi.d.
DD-8112,14 NRC 265 (1981)
M' BYRON STATION, Units I and 2; Dockets STN 54454-OLA,50-455-OLA OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; Au8ust 19,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; M; y' LBP-8134A,14 NRC 364 (1981)
COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION. Units I and 2; Dockets 50-445, 50 446 f.
SPECI AL PROCEEDING: September 22,1981; ORDER; CLI-8124.14 NRC 6141981) i>4f COM ANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION Units I and 2; Dockets 50-445-OL, 50-446-OL ( Apphcation for Operstm8 License) 7.'
OPERATING LICENSE; July 23, 1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; LBP 81-22. I4 NRC 150 8
(1981) i?'
OPER ATING LICENSE;, July 24,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; LBP-81-23,14 NRC 159 g1s (1981)
OPER ATING LICENSE; July 30,1981; ORDER: LBP-8125,14 NRC 241 (1981)
OPERATING LICENSE; September 25.1981; ORDER CONCERNING SUA SPONTE ISSUES, ik\\
SCHEDULING ORDER. NOTICE OF EVIDENTIARY HEARING and PREHEARING A
CONFERENCE; LBP 8138.14 NRC 767 (1981)
M DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Units 2 and 3. Dockets $4500,50 501 SPECI AL PROCEEDING: September 3,1981; MEMORANDUM; ALAB 652,14 NRC 627 (1981)
"D;).
n DAVIS BESSE NUCLEAR POW ER STATION, Units 2 and 3; Termination of Proceedints; Dockets b
50 500CP,54501-CP c?;;7 CONSTRUCTION PERMIT: August 28.1981; ORDER; LBP-81-33,14 NRC 586 (1981)
DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, Units I and 2; Dockets $4275 OL,54323 OL
%s%
OPERATING LICENSE:Au8ust 4,1981; MEMORANDUh8 AND ORDER. LBP 8127,14 NRC 325 V
(1981)
DI ABLO CANYON NUCLEAR PLANT, Units I and 2; Dockets $4275-OL,54323-OL (Low Power
'!lg Test Proceedm8)
- '6 OPERATING LICENSF, July 17,1981; PARTI AL INITIAL DECISION; LBP 8121,14 NRC 107
, Q' (1981)
'c-DI ABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, Units I and 2; Dockets $4275 OL,54323 OL (Security Proceedm8) 7 6...
CPERATING LICENSE, Septemher 21,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; CL1-8122,14 NRC Oi (J.
598 (1981) 3 g; OPER ATING LICENSE; July 15,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; ALAB-649,14 NRC 40 4
y (1981) p,,
OPER ATING LICENSE; September 9,1981; DECISION; ALAB-653,14 NRC 629 (1981)
M' :
OPER ATING LICENSE; September 17,1981; ORDER; CLI-Bi 21,14 NRC 595 (1981) 5b DRESDEN NUCLEAR POWER ZTATION, Unit 1: Docket 5410
_/p SPECIAL PROCEEDING. September 28. 1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; CLt-8125,14 3.V NRC 616 (1981)
.9.
DRESDEN STATION. Units 2 and 3. Dockets $4237-OLA,54249-OLA (Spent Fuel Pool Modication)
-w[ ~
OPER ATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; September 24,1981; PARTIAL INITIAL DECISION.
- *y S
HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION, Units I and 2; Dockets 54654.54355 N
SPECIAL PROCEEDING: September 11,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; ALAB-654,14
' M NRC 632 (1981)
W; HUMBOLDT B4Y POWER PLANT Unit No. 3. Amendment to Facihty Operatin8 License; Docket
- 03:
?' W 54133 OLA W;%
?
- e.,.
$lh ss w
+. -.
--[]
M' UiGL
G FAC1UTY INDEX
~'"5WIF OPE R ATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; July 14,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; L8P-5120,14 NRC 101 (1981)
INDI AN PolNT, Unit 2; Dockets 54247,54286 SPECIAL PROCEEDING; September it,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; CLl-8123,14 NRC et0 (1981)
INDI AN POINT, Unit 3. Dockets 54247,54286 SPECI AL PROCEEDING; September 18,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; CLI-8123,14
(
NRC 610 (1981) 1 LA CROSSE BOILING WATER REACTOR, OPERATING LICENSE AND SHOW CAUSE; Dockets l
54409-OL,54409-SC (Pronssonal Operatint License DPR 45)
OPERATING LICENSE, Au8ust 19,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; LBP-8131,14 NRC 375 (1981)
MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, Units I and 2. Dockets $4245,54286 (10 CFR 2.206)
SHOW CAUSE; September 29,1981; DIRECTOR'S DECislON UNDER 10 CFR 2.206,00 8117,14 NRC 784 (1981)
NORTH COAST NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT 1; Docket 54376 SPECIAL PROCEEDING; July 2,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; ALAB448,14 NRC 34 (1981)
I OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION, Transportaten of spent fuel from, for storste at McGuire Nuclear
'l Station; Ducket 74 2623 AMENDMENT TO MATERIALS LICENSE $NM 1773, August 10,1981; DECISION; ALAB451,
{
14 NRC 307 (1981)
PALISADES NUCLEAR POWER FACILITY; Docket $4255-C0 SPECI AL PPOCEEDING, July 31, 1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; LBP 88 26,14 NRC 247 (1981)
PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION, Units 2 and 3 Dockets 54277,54278 SPECIAL PROCEEDING, September 11,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; ALAB-654,14 NRC 632 (1981)
PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT. Units 1 & 2, Dockets $4440-OL 50 441-OL OPERATING LICENSE; April 9,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Append to L8P-84 24,14 NRC 235 (1981)
OPER ATING LICENSE; July 28,1981;SPECIAL PREHEARING CONFERENCE MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CONCERNING PARTY STATUS MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND TO STAY, THE ADMISSIBILITY OF CONTENTIONS, AND THE ADOPTION OF SPECIAL DISCOVERY PROCEDURES, L8P-8124,14 NRC 175 OPERATING LICENSE; September 9,1981; MEMOAANDUM AND ORDER; LDP-8135,14 NRC 682 (1981)
SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, Unit I; Docket 50 272 OLA (Spen Fuel Pool E spansion)
OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; July 17,1981; DECISION; ALAB-650,14 NRC 43 (1981) l SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, Un ts 2 and 3; Dockets $4361 OL,54362-OL j
OPERATING LICENSE; September 14,198t; ORDER; LBP 8136,14 NRC 691 (1981) l SEABROOK STATION, Units I and 2; Dockets 50-443,50-444 (10 CFR 2.206)
SPECI AL PROCEEDING; July 8,1981; DENI AL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF I
PETITION FOR RULEMAKING: LPRM-812,14 NRC 289 (1981)
SPECIAL PROCEEDING, July 15,1988; DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206; DD 8114,14 NRC 279 (1981)
SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION, Unit 1; Docket 54322 OL OPER ATING LICENSE; July 7,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; LSP-8118,14 NRC 71 (1981)
ST. LUCIE PLANT, Unit No. 2; Docaet 54389 A ANTITRUST PROCEEDING; July 7,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; LBP-8119,14 NRC 87 (1981) e g
ANTITRUST PROCEEDING; Au8ust 5,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; LBP 88 28,14 NRC 333 (1981)
ANTITRUST PROCEEDING Au8ust 7,1981; DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2 206; DD 81 15,14 NRC 589 (1981)
~
THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, Unit I; Docket 50 289 (Restart)
OPERATING LICENSE; Au8vst 13,1981; ORDER; CLI-41 17,14 NRC 299 (1981)
RESTART PROCEEDING, Au8ust 20,1981; ORDER; CLI-81 19,14 NRC 304 (1981)
SPECIAL PROCEEDING; September 17,1781; ORDER; CLI-8120,14 NRC $93 (1981) w A
66
O FACIIIIY LNDEX THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, Unit I, Docket 54289-SP (Restart)
SPECIAL PROCEEDING; Au8ust 27,1981; PARTIAL INITIAL DECISION, LBP 81-32,14 NRC 381 (1981)
THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, Unit No. 2; Docket 50 320 SPEGAL PROCEEDING; September ll,1988; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ALAB454,14 NRC 632 (1981)
TRO3AN NUCLEAR PLANT; Docket 54344 (10 CFR 2.206)
SPECIAL PROCEEDING; July 13,1981; DIRECTOR'S DEC.SION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206; DD 81 13,14 NRC 275 (1981)
TURKEY POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING, Units 3 and 4; Dockets $4254SP,5425I-SP (Proposed Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses to Permit Steam Generator Repairs)
SPECIAL PROCEEDING; August 12,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; LBP-8130,14 NRC 357 (198I)
UCLA RESEARCH REACTOR; Docket 54142 OL (Proposed Renewal of Facility License)
OPERATING LICENSE; Au8ust 10,1981; ORDER RELATIVE TO PARTICIPATION OF DANIEL O. HIRSCH UNDER 10 CFR 2.733; LBP 51-29,14 NRC 353 (1981)
WILLI AM B. MCGUIRE NUCLAR STATION, Transportation of spent fuel from Oconee Nuclear Station for stor:Be at; Docket 74 2623 AMENDMENT TO MATERIALS LICENSE SNM-1773; August 10,1981; DECISION; ALAB-651, 14 NRC 307 (1981)
WILLIAM B. MCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION, Units I and 2: Dockets $4369,54370 OPERATING LICENSE; July 1,1981; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; ALAS 447,14 NRC 27 (1981)
SPECI AL PROCEEDING; June 29,1981; ORDER: CLI-81 15,14 NRC I (1981)
SPECIAL PROCEEDING; November 3,1980; ORDEk; CLI 81 16,14 NRC 14 (1981)
ZION NUCLEAR PLANT, Unns I and 2; Dockets $4295,54304 (10 CFR 2.206)
SHOW CAUSE: September 29, 1981; DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206; DD 8116,14 NRC 781 (1981)
J 67
.i I
E, 1 ANA2 120555078877 US NRC k t!
L PUB CATIONS MGT BP PDR NUREG COPY LA 212 DC 20555 WASHINGTON i
i I
5 O
p I
1.
p R
--