ML20057B592
| ML20057B592 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Three Mile Island  |
| Issue date: | 06/22/1983 |
| From: | Plaine H, Zerbe J NRC OFFICE OF POLICY EVALUATIONS (OPE), NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20049A457 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-92-436 SECY-83-245, NUDOCS 9309220284 | |
| Download: ML20057B592 (13) | |
Text
__ _
s ,
,.. 1
- \
O .01 i v I o
[r m ,3%
[b( 's
\s.; elfl N eI .
ADJUDICAkbRY ISSUE (Inf0rIT18 tion) SECY-83-245 June 22, 1983 DISTRIBUTION LIMITED TO COMMISSIONERS, OGC, OPS
~
For: I. rajssioners N K From: / obn' . Z 'e, Director Of' ce of Policy Evaluation Herzel H. E. Plaine
/ General Counsel REVIEW 0F GPU v. B&W TRIAL TRANSCRIPT, OF STAFF REPORT
Subject:
ON TRIAL R E6RD, AND OF COMMENTS OF PARTIES TO THE TMI-1 RESTART PROCEEDING ON THAT REPORT ,
Pu rpose: To identify and evaluate information of possible significance for the TMI-1 (Restart) decision and to provide an evaluation of the trial transcript for litigation purposes Discussion: Introduction .
Pursuant to Commission direction of February 25 and March 25, 1983, OPE and OGC have reviewed the ED0 staff's
- March 28, 1983 report on the GPU v. B&W trial record and :
the comments by parties to thTIMI-1 Restart proceeding on that report. OGC has also reviewed the GPU v. B&W trial transcript.
An analysis of the implications of these reviews to the Commission's immediate effectiveness decision for TMI-1 restart is in Attachment A, which was prepared by OPE.
J Attachment B is OGC's analysis of the staff report in light of OGC's.re. view _of._1he transcript. Attachment B J as preparefi.
~, p .
- s-y .- { .
- -- - Informatian in this reccid t dektEd .
in ::ddrim ' P the Fedm of intermation
Contact:
l Dan Berkovitz, 0GC, X 43224 M U: "
Michael Blume, OGC, X a1493 Fr .
~~ ~~ 43295- ;
9309220284 930428 / ;
PDR FOIA GILINSK92-436 PDR m _
^^
, r. <
n The Commissioners 2 ,
I ,
f I !t
[)'
u i
i I
w k )
i l --
\. _
OPE's conclusions in Attachment A are based on: (1) the parties' comments; (2) the staff report.on the GPU v. B&W trial record; (3) the record in the TMI-1 restart proceeding; and (4) the OGC trial transcript review and analysis found in SECY-83-136 and Attachment B to this >
paper. '
s i
l
. 3 ,
F $
L p
N f,
l
1
. .+. .
9
.The Comissioners 3 u
I
. .1
Background
p~'.- ~
. l.
t
'a 1
t
)
k
. I I ,
a
+
1 h
' o i I m :
d
?
'I a
i I
i General Comments
- i
?
w -- .
e t
F e
l
- "#"*-F **meaw.
,j The Comissioners 4 !
-. *- I l
r i .
i i
! 1 i
/ r ;
1
'10 , I I
e ,
- ,- j 1 ~,
J +
t k
I Attachments:
A. OPE Evaluation of the Implications of i the GPU v. B&W Trial Reviews and Parties' '
Coments for a TMI-1 Imediate Effectiveness Decision '
B. 0GC Analysis of GPU v. B&W Transcript and !
of Staff Report on GPU v. B&W Trial Record !
l i
DISTRIBUTION:
Commissioners OGC 4 OPE SECY i
.i
[
1
. ..4,.
s r
?
r
.?
r
' T
-i
-t t
i i
t i
t, L
ATTACHMENT A .
m
/ '
)
5 i
/,
L' ,i
! /. .
1 r e -
$~ % . ;
, . 9. h. ' ,
..I ,
l I
b I
t
-i.
1 l
i I
F P
7 i
s a + , < . ,e .- - .
ATTACHMENT A GPU v. BABC0CK & WILC0X: IMPLICATIONS OF STAFF REVIEW AND PARTIES' COMMENTS FOR A TMI-1 IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVENESS DECISION We have evaluated the staff review team's report on the GPU v. B&W trial record and the parties' coaments on that staff report. tee following discussion summarizes party comments and outlines our view of the implications of the staff report and the parties' comments to the THI-1 immediate effectiveness decision. We have made the following assumptions in conducting this analysis.
1 Additionally we believe We will inoivicually discuss the significance of those issues we feel are important to an immediate effectiveness decision.
Adequacy of the Staff Report Several parties commented that the staff's report reviewing the GPU v. B&W trial record was inadequate. In particular they alleged that it represents no more than a protection of the staff's vested interest, supporting its <
earlier conclusion that GPU management is adequate and that TMI-1 should be restarted.
1/ This review has not evaluated '
These two items will be reviewed separately by us.
i
m oi 2 -
We believe This issue will be further discussed in our review of i
1 i
i I
J
-- ---a_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ______._
. . .. ~
3 .
w=m, We believe We thbrefoFE :
i L
b Thus,bPEdoesnotbelieve t
t r
~
4 *
~______....__.._.___..---
First, our review of the. trial record indicates. .that t
we have seen However, OPE does not
[
i
r F
5 '
t T
_ i
. ~
OPE does not believe that OPE believes ;
OGC believes that i i
t 4
.h
gb 7,/
A>
o': A, sg>o f
0 ea . S. , Q.
L Q t 0, g"*yp IMAGE EVAL.UATION A @,
/ ,;W'g,
+
////p (,, th*
^
s TEST TARGET (MT-3) s h/ l e>kl g, C (2Q (t 2= 5 l.0 r 1-
~ 33 l"l12.2 I 20 l,l l:kS0 im
!] l.8L l.25 1.4 1.6 l __
+ 150mm >
d 6" >
9 %3 e [g/s 4 !
d,og [%g/ g,// &.y) ~ _
////7oks
. w ', +
gje. .> , 1 ,
~ ~
g'&\'* O ^a je ). ll r (( -x;
"%' (
~~
4{bL & h, of , i 4p <r
/ ep l -
x
)
4 7
& 4 / /0 o.- s
- 2. n i.
,Y IMAGE EVALUATION [j/j/// / N,
\ //g g[6 8b* TEST TARGET (MT-3) [,)[W["/g, 49 } >
l.0 ~32 e 2.2 g - tass 1.1 G=29 o
! l.8 l'wa l I.25 li 1.4 lq 1.6 ll === p=
4.--------- 150mm >-
4_.____.__._._______ _. - 6 " >
s p ' Mgr sp ,,ox n
y g 4> y + x.
x
- g, a7 //Ax
.A 'e , ,.<3o, o
! ' Cf ' f b 1
/ -
ce4 .
s ..9 i,13.[f2,s e ,44b . d I ON ,
/ /.o p[Q,'
O
,h O~ ';'
r.
,O, %
%0 .
IMAGE EVALUATION b
- /o// 'D
'(h* TEST TARGET (MT-3) 4 qy c/'[j[(q,fg
, /g, 4j
' M
<> kr%M
~"
1.0 ~-
"?"-.
,Y L= =
1.1 l[l!=22 l l.8
!j: as=
1.25 1.4 tll 1.6
.I lIl 4 - -- - - 150mm >
4_____ .__ ______._.-
6" >
h A e xzzz,*>gx s 4/ y ' ,4)ht J
y[j/ , , 7 .
Q~6q;f4[
s Oy vy,,p y <
qq/(D;'
5 ,
. _3t'r____
d&$?; # l l0
, W.. 4 afp , 4, X IMAGE EVALUATION 7
,p 4,
\o/
. N J ///
- x
% 4j 9 f TEST TdNDET (MT-3) fj
/ b 4f 4,
<g fgr 4
'\$s@gy t# 4tg%j t l.0 L:' f"W t;; f3?
!lt 2.2
, . b riz l,l i l!I l.8 i ljj .__
l.25 1.4 jil I.6 l
,[=== ,
- 150mm >
4 4 _ __
g" p A~9
~e A,
%g ,/
%rN.m,T /
n,
/#
&.+,
- <;g g& s~4,4 ^,, D s/.yx g
% (~ ; ~
I op i ep &
[c. _a
<tb r1 e.
-4 3"N 'hj.,. , . - , , , _
+., afdl;d*,hkdhh ' . ..,j ,
r K
ana c' .
'* 4 e
6 ,
t In our view, k'e i .
believe that On the basis of the
~
record,wecontinuetoEeiievethat We have independently noted 1
~
l l
l I
I j
.. ~
=~ .
7 ,
OPE does not believe t
I i
Our review OPE will b'e prepared to, discuss thiTs~in~atter 1
1 i
l
~
a j
4 8 - ,
l Our revidw I
I f
OPE will be prepared to discuss this mattere further i
i i
I e
7 9
6 i