|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARJPN-99-029, Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 72 Re Reporting Requirement for Nuclear Power Reactors1999-09-20020 September 1999 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 72 Re Reporting Requirement for Nuclear Power Reactors ML20212E4181999-09-15015 September 1999 Petition Per 10CFR2.206 Requesting OL for Unit 2 Be Modified or Suspended to Prevent Restart Until Reasonable Assurance That Licensee in Substantial Compliance with Terms of OL & Has Proper Consideration for Public Health & Safety JPN-99-022, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Requirements for Industry Codes & Stds1999-06-22022 June 1999 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Requirements for Industry Codes & Stds ML20202J6321999-01-20020 January 1999 Transcript of 990120 Meeting in Peekskill,Ny Re Decommissioning.Pp 1-132.With Related Documentation ML20198E9721998-12-21021 December 1998 Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC-Licensed Activities. Orders That Wh Clark Prohibited for 1 Yr from Engaging in NRC-Licensed Activities JPN-98-052, Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50,52 & 72 Re Changes,Tests & Experiments.Util Endorses & Supports Position Presented by NEI & Commends Commission for Initiative to Address Disconnects1998-12-21021 December 1998 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50,52 & 72 Re Changes,Tests & Experiments.Util Endorses & Supports Position Presented by NEI & Commends Commission for Initiative to Address Disconnects ML20198L2731998-12-21021 December 1998 Comment Supporting NEI Re Proposed Rules 10CFR50, 52 & 72 Re Changes,Tests & Experiments JPN-98-050, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Nuclear Power Plants.Encourages NRC Staff to Withdraw Proposed Change & to Work with Nuclear Power Industry & Other Stakeholders to Accomplish Goal1998-12-14014 December 1998 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Nuclear Power Plants.Encourages NRC Staff to Withdraw Proposed Change & to Work with Nuclear Power Industry & Other Stakeholders to Accomplish Goal ML20155F4561998-08-26026 August 1998 Demand for Info Re False Info Allegedly Provided by Wh Clark to Two NRC Licensees.Nrc Considering Whether Individual Should Be Prohibited from Working in NRC-licensed Activities for Period of 5 Yrs ML20238F5271998-05-20020 May 1998 Partially Deleted Transcript of 980520 Enforcement Conference in King of Prussia,Pa Re J Stipek.Pp 1-46 IA-98-261, Partially Deleted Transcript of 980520 Enforcement Conference in King of Prussia,Pa Re J Stipek.Pp 1-461998-05-20020 May 1998 Partially Deleted Transcript of 980520 Enforcement Conference in King of Prussia,Pa Re J Stipek.Pp 1-46 ML20238F5241998-05-0606 May 1998 Transcript of 980506 Enforcement Conference Held in King of Prussia,Pa Re Con Edison,Indian Point.Pp 1-75 JPN-97-037, Comment on Final Direct Rule Changes to Paragraph (H) of 10CFR50.55a Codes & Standards. Effective Date of New Rule Should Be Delayed Until Listed Concerns Can Be Resolved & Appropriate Changes Incorporated1997-12-0101 December 1997 Comment on Final Direct Rule Changes to Paragraph (H) of 10CFR50.55a Codes & Standards. Effective Date of New Rule Should Be Delayed Until Listed Concerns Can Be Resolved & Appropriate Changes Incorporated ML20148M6471997-06-19019 June 1997 Comment Opposing Porposed NRC Bulletin 96-001,suppl 1, CR Insertion Problems ML20133N0511997-01-0505 January 1997 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Draft Policy Statement on Resturcturing & Economic Deregulation of Electric Util Industry ML20149M4621996-12-0909 December 1996 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Draft Policy Statement on Restructuring & Economic Deregulation of Electric Utility Industry ML20077G3481994-12-0808 December 1994 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR2,51 & 54 Re Nuclear Power License Renewal ML20070P0561994-04-19019 April 1994 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re NRC Draft Policy Statement on Use of Decommissioning Trust Funds Before Decommissioning Plan Approval ML20029C5771994-03-11011 March 1994 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR20 Re Draft Rule on Decommissioning.Informs That 15 Mrem/Yr Unreasonably Low Fraction of Icrp,Ncrp & Regulatory Public Dose Limit of 100 Mrem/Yr ML20059C3031993-12-28028 December 1993 Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-21-2 Re Definition of Commercial Grade Item ML20045H8751993-07-19019 July 1993 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR55 Re Exam Procedures for Operator Licensing.Supports Rule ML20045F2451993-06-28028 June 1993 Comment on Proposal Re Radiological Criteria for Decommissioning NRC-licensed Facilities.Opposes Proposed Criteria ML20044F5681993-05-20020 May 1993 Comment on Draft Commercial Grade Dedication Insp Procedure 38703,entitled Commercial Grade Procurement Insp. Endorses NUMARC Comments Dtd 930517 JPN-02-034, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50.54 Re Receipt of Byproduct & Special Nuclear Matl1992-07-0606 July 1992 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50.54 Re Receipt of Byproduct & Special Nuclear Matl JPN-91-021, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR71,170 & 171, Rev of Fee Schedules;100% Fee Recovery. Endorses NUMARC Comments. Approx 300% Increase in NRC Fees for FY91 Will Have Major Impact Upon Operating & Maint Budgets of Plants1991-05-13013 May 1991 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR71,170 & 171, Rev of Fee Schedules;100% Fee Recovery. Endorses NUMARC Comments. Approx 300% Increase in NRC Fees for FY91 Will Have Major Impact Upon Operating & Maint Budgets of Plants JPN-91-005, Comment Re SECY-90-347, Regulatory Impact Survey Rept. Util Concurs W/Numarc Comments.Analysis of Info from NUREG-1395 Insufficient to Complete Evaluation.Root Cause Analysis of Seven Themes Listed in SECY-90-347 Recommended1991-01-28028 January 1991 Comment Re SECY-90-347, Regulatory Impact Survey Rept. Util Concurs W/Numarc Comments.Analysis of Info from NUREG-1395 Insufficient to Complete Evaluation.Root Cause Analysis of Seven Themes Listed in SECY-90-347 Recommended ML20066G4411991-01-23023 January 1991 Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR2,50 & 54 Re Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal.Substantive Typo in 901015 Filing on Behalf of Licensee Noted ML20058G6341990-10-30030 October 1990 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re fitness-for-duty Program JPN-90-068, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR51 Re Renewal of Nuclear Plant OLs & NRC Intent to Prepare Generic EIS1990-10-22022 October 1990 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR51 Re Renewal of Nuclear Plant OLs & NRC Intent to Prepare Generic EIS ML20065H7541990-10-15015 October 1990 Comment Re Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 54 on Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal.Commission Assessment of Four Alternatives Should Be Expanded to Include Not Only Safety Considerations But Other Atomic Energy Act Objectives JPN-90-067, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 54 Re Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal.Endorses Comments Submitted by NUMARC1990-10-15015 October 1990 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 54 Re Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal.Endorses Comments Submitted by NUMARC JPN-90-052, Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-55 Re Revs to FSAR1990-07-0909 July 1990 Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-55 Re Revs to FSAR JPN-90-050, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR55 Re Operators Licenses Mod for fitness-for-duty.Proposed Rule Will Place More Stringent Restrictions on Licensed Operators & Unnecessary1990-07-0202 July 1990 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR55 Re Operators Licenses Mod for fitness-for-duty.Proposed Rule Will Place More Stringent Restrictions on Licensed Operators & Unnecessary ML20012C6491990-03-0909 March 1990 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection Against PTS Events. Any Utilization of NRC Proposed Application of Reg Guide 1.99, Rev 2,would Be Inappropriate W/O re-evaluation by NRC ML20005F6521989-12-13013 December 1989 Comment on Proposed Draft Reg Guide DG-1001, Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants. Util Concurs w/industry-wide Position Presented by NUMARC & Offers Addl Comments ML20246P6061989-07-0707 July 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Significant & Independent Industry Efforts Already Underway to Address Issue ML20245K1941989-06-16016 June 1989 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites JPN-89-008, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants1989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20235V9011989-02-24024 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants. Supports NUMARC Position.Proposed Rule Will Hinder Important Initiatives to Improve Maint JPN-88-063, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program.Util Has Constitutional Concerns Re Proposed Random Testing Which Should Be Fully Addressed Prior to Rule Being Promulgated.Endorses NUMARC & EEI Comments1988-11-18018 November 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program.Util Has Constitutional Concerns Re Proposed Random Testing Which Should Be Fully Addressed Prior to Rule Being Promulgated.Endorses NUMARC & EEI Comments ML20205L8521988-10-21021 October 1988 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR20 Re Cleaning or Disposing of Nuclear Waste.Incineration of Radwaste Oil Should Not Be Allowed JPN-88-015, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Licensee Announcements of Inspectors.Rule Includes Requirement Contrary to Mgt Notification Practices.Rule Should Clarify Length of Time Applicable Once Inspector Arrives on Site1988-04-18018 April 1988 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Licensee Announcements of Inspectors.Rule Includes Requirement Contrary to Mgt Notification Practices.Rule Should Clarify Length of Time Applicable Once Inspector Arrives on Site JPN-88-002, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Proposed Policy Statement on Integrated Schedules for Implementation of Plant Mods.Concerns Re Schedule as License Amend Expressed1988-01-25025 January 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Proposed Policy Statement on Integrated Schedules for Implementation of Plant Mods.Concerns Re Schedule as License Amend Expressed JPN-87-062, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR4,11,25,30,31,32,34,35,40,50, 60,61,70,71,73,74,75,95 & 110 Re Retention Period for Records.Proposed Changes Ineffective in Reducing Record Vol & Rule Remains Inconsistent & Complex1987-12-31031 December 1987 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR4,11,25,30,31,32,34,35,40,50, 60,61,70,71,73,74,75,95 & 110 Re Retention Period for Records.Proposed Changes Ineffective in Reducing Record Vol & Rule Remains Inconsistent & Complex JPN-87-053, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Revising Backfitting Process for Power Reactors.Minor Alterations Urged Re Conditions Under Which Backfit Needed to Assure Adequate Protection1987-10-15015 October 1987 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Revising Backfitting Process for Power Reactors.Minor Alterations Urged Re Conditions Under Which Backfit Needed to Assure Adequate Protection JPN-87-051, Comment Opposing Draft NUREG-1150, Reactor Risk Ref Document. Reduced Uncertainty in Risk Assessment Found to Be Significant W/Respect to NUREG-1150.NUREG Also Does Not Consider Value of Operator Actions.Addl Comments Encl1987-09-28028 September 1987 Comment Opposing Draft NUREG-1150, Reactor Risk Ref Document. Reduced Uncertainty in Risk Assessment Found to Be Significant W/Respect to NUREG-1150.NUREG Also Does Not Consider Value of Operator Actions.Addl Comments Encl ML20235Y9911987-07-20020 July 1987 Notice of Issuance of Director'S Decision Under 10CFR2.206 Re Emergency Planning for School Children in Vicinity of Indian Point.* Request to Suspend OLs Denied ML20151C5061987-02-18018 February 1987 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Licensing of Nuclear Power Plants Where State &/Or Local Govts Decline to Cooperate in Offsite Emergency Planning ML20093H6421984-10-15015 October 1984 Comments on Staff Presentation at Commission 841002 Meeting. Commission Should Conclude Proceedings Due to Inescapable Conclusion That Facility Safe to Operate & Poses No Undue Risk to Public.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20098D2721984-09-26026 September 1984 Comments on Commission 840905 Meeting Re Facilities,Per Sj Chilk 840911 Memo.Licensee Agrees W/Staff That Further Mitigative Features or Plant Shutdown Unnecessary Due to Low Risk.Certificate of Svc Encl 1999-09-20
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20212E4181999-09-15015 September 1999 Petition Per 10CFR2.206 Requesting OL for Unit 2 Be Modified or Suspended to Prevent Restart Until Reasonable Assurance That Licensee in Substantial Compliance with Terms of OL & Has Proper Consideration for Public Health & Safety ML20094J7571984-08-13013 August 1984 Responses to 840730 Unpublished Order Directing NRC & Inviting Other Parties to Submit Views on Judge Gleason Dissent Re ASLB Recommendation Concerning Accident Probability.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20094J8781984-08-13013 August 1984 Response to Commission 840730 Order Permitting Comments from Parties Re Chairman Gleason Dissent to ASLB Recommendations to Commission.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20094J8971984-08-13013 August 1984 Comments on ASLB Chairman Gleason Dissent in Recommendations of Special Proceeding.Significant Risk Reduction Already Accomplished at Facility.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20084J8521984-05-0404 May 1984 Response Opposing New York Pirg (Nypirg) Petition for Suspension of Operation.Nypirg Fosters Discord Which Inhibits Coordination of Emergency Planning Efforts. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20088A4711984-04-0606 April 1984 Petition for Suspension of Operation to Relieve Unacceptable Risk to Area School Children.Issue of Emergency Planning for Schools Must Be Resolved.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20024C3731983-07-0707 July 1983 Memorandum Opposing Pirg of New York Motion for Reconsideration of Commission 830610 Order.Pirg Should Not Be Permitted to Relitigate Arguments Fully Considered & Ruled Upon by Commission ML20024C3761983-07-0707 July 1983 Response Opposing Pirg of New York Motion for Reconsideration of Commission 830610 Order.Motion Untimely, Identifies No Matters of Fact or Law & Improperly Raises New Issues.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20072E8211983-06-23023 June 1983 Response Supporting Pirg of Ny Motion for Reconsideration of Commission 830609 Decision,Permitting Facility Operation W/O Restriction Despite Continued Noncompliance W/Emergency Planning Requirements.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20072D6241983-06-22022 June 1983 Motion for Immediate Reconsideration of Commission 830610 Order CLI-83-16 Permitting Continued Plant Operation. Commission Did Not Consider Current Status of Emergency Planning in Decision.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20072H5781983-06-22022 June 1983 Request 2-wk Extension to File Findings of Fact for Commission Questions 3 & 4.Atty Familiar W/Case Resigned ML20072E8241983-06-22022 June 1983 Answer Opposing Intervenor Motion for Extension of Time to Submit Proposed Findings.Motion Is Attempt to Delay Hearings.If Intervenor Motion Granted,Exemption Should Apply to All Parties.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20072D6291983-06-21021 June 1983 Motion for Extension Until 830711 to File Proposed Findings of Fact.Time Needed Since Intervenors Filing Consolidated Findings & One Atty Suffered Death in Family. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20071P3111983-06-0303 June 1983 Response Opposing Friends of the Earth/New York City Audubon Soc Request to File I Levi Affidavit.Testimony by Affidavit Improper Since No cross-examination Possible.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20071L5421983-05-24024 May 1983 Response Opposing Licensee Motion for Reconsideration of ASLB Denial of Licensee Motion to Admit Dp McGuire Testimony Before Trial ML20023D9341983-05-20020 May 1983 Response Opposing Util 830509 Motion for Reconsideration. Deposition Inadmissible as Evidence Under Federal Rules ML20071G9761983-05-20020 May 1983 Motion for Leave to Submit Written Comments on NRC 830505 Order to Suspend Facility Operations.Deficiencies Determined to Be Significant by FEMA Are Not Sufficiently Deficient to Require Suspending Operations ML20023D0941983-05-13013 May 1983 Motion for Opportunity to Address Issues Outlined in Commission 830505 Order CLI-83-11 Establishing Procedures for Decision on Enforcement Action.Intervenor Entitled to Participate as Matter of Right.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20074A4541983-05-11011 May 1983 Motion for Extension of Deadline (to 830615) for Filing Corrections to Transcripts & Deadline (to 830624) for Filing Comments.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20074A4461983-05-0909 May 1983 Motion for Reconsideration of Ruling Denying Licensee Motion to Receive Dp McGuire Deposition Transcript Into Evidence. Licensees Entitled to Place Deposition in Record. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20073S8781983-05-0909 May 1983 Motion for Opportunity to Address Issues Outlined in Commission 830505 Order CLI-83-11,establishing Procedures for Decision on Enforcement Action on Emergency Planning Issues.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20073S8801983-05-0606 May 1983 Motion for Extension of Deadline Until 830627 for All Parties to Submit Proposed Opinion,Findings of Fact & Recommendations Re Enforcement Action on Emergency Planning Issues.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20204G2681983-04-27027 April 1983 Motion to Amend Svc List to Add Sp Wasserman & Delete P Chessin,Lr Schwartz & M Oppel.Notice of Appearance & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20073R3471983-04-26026 April 1983 Motion Requesting Initiation of Studies on Human Response to Radiological Emergencies,Risks to Individuals Living Near Site & Difficulty of Evacuation in Emergency ML20073R3531983-04-25025 April 1983 Motion Requesting Completeness of Record on NRC Questions 3 & 4 Re Emergency Planning Issues,Including Capability for Handling Phone Calls in Emergency Planning Zone During Emergency ML20069L1181983-04-22022 April 1983 Motion to Strike Selected Intervenor Testimony Re 830309 Emergency Exercise.Testimony Cumulative,Repetitive, Conclusory,Lacks Adequate Foundation & Irrelevant. Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20069L2131983-04-22022 April 1983 Motion for Admission Into Evidence of EPZ Tour Documents, Exhibits CE-11,CE-11A & CE-11B ML20204G3251983-04-22022 April 1983 Motion to Strike Portions of 830309 Emergency Drill Testimony Under Commission Questions 3 & 4 Filed by Witnesses for Various Intervenors.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20069K6031983-04-20020 April 1983 Motion to Compel Deposition of FEMA Witnesses P Mcintire, J Keller,R Kowieski & RW Krimm & to Preclude Witnesses from Presenting Testimony at 830426-29 Hearings Outside Scope of 830309 Exercise.W/Certificate of Svc ML20073G0351983-04-12012 April 1983 Motion for Approval of Encl Stipulation Re Intervenor Observation of 830309 Radiological Preparedness Exercise ML20073G1271983-04-12012 April 1983 Motion for Extension to Submit Testimony on Contention 6.2. Expert Witnesses a Stewart,B Brazelton & D Bohning Will Not Be Able to Testify Until Late May 1983.Findings of Fact Should Be Due 10 Days After Testimony.W/Certificate of Svc ML20073G1461983-04-11011 April 1983 Further Response in Opposition to Licensee 830407 Motion to Impose Sanctions.Motion Unrelated to Discovery.Draft Testimony Privilege Not Waived by Submitting Testimony Early.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20073B7361983-04-0707 April 1983 Further Suppl to Motion to Impose Sanctions on Greater New York Council on Energy.Komanoff Comments on Study & Aug-Sept 1982 Version of Study Must Be Produced.Use of Oct 1982 Study Should Be Precluded.W/Certificate of Svc ML20073L6361983-04-0707 April 1983 Further Suppl to Motion to Impose Sanctions on Greater New York Council on Energy,D Corren & Energy Sys Research Group, Inc.Depositions & Ltr Support Conclusions of Intentional Frustration of Util Discovery Rights.W/Certificate of Svc ML20072R7441983-04-0101 April 1983 Response to New York Pirg 830329 Motion for Order Requiring Production of Documents Re 830309 Emergency Planning Exercise.Exercise Evaluations Sought Should Be Regarded as Privileged.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20073C6581983-04-0101 April 1983 Motion for Submission,Under Commission Question 5,of Bl Cohen 830124 Testimony on Commission Question 1.ASLB Refused to Admit Testimony Under Question 1 But Testimony Is Relevant to Question 5.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20072N2641983-03-25025 March 1983 Response Opposing Licensee Motion for Sanctions Against D Corren,Greater New York Council on Energy & Esrg,Inc. Council Did Not Intentionally Withhold Discoverable Matls. Clarifies Misunderstandings.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20069H5671983-03-24024 March 1983 Response to Licensee Motion to Compel Under Commission Question 6.Resources Unavailable to Develop Study on Health Effects.Parents Concerned About Indian Point Does Not Bear Burden of Proof.W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20072K0991983-03-23023 March 1983 Suppl to Motion to Impose Sanctions Against D Corren,Greater Ny Council on Energy & Energy Sys Research Group,Inc for Failure to Produce Oct 1982 Study, Economics of Closing Indian Point Nuclear Power Plants. Related Correspondence ML20072L4521983-03-21021 March 1983 Motion to Strike Portions of Testimony of Some Rockland County Witnesses on Questions 3 & 4.Testimony Conclusory & W/O Supporting Factual Basis.Foundation Does Not Exist for Factual Matl Introduction.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20069F5191983-03-18018 March 1983 Motion for Time to Present Evidence Re 830309 Radiological Emergency Response Planning Exercise.Presentation Needed to Complete Record.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20069F4861983-03-17017 March 1983 Motion to Impose Sanctions Against D Corren & R Rosen of Greater Ny Council on Energy & Energy Sys Research Group,Inc for Failure to Respond to Interrogatories.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20069B8281983-03-14014 March 1983 Motion to Strike Certain Intervenor Prefiled Testimony Under Commission Questions 3 & 4 Re Emergency Planning Filed on 830311.Licensees Denied Any Meaningful Right to Discovery from Witnesses.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20069D0141983-03-14014 March 1983 Response Opposing Licensee Motion to Compel Greater Ny Council on Energy Further Response to Interrogatories.Motion Inappropriate & Unnecessary.Interrogatories Were Unclear & Burdensome.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20069C9481983-03-14014 March 1983 Answer Opposing PASNY Motion to Strike KT Erikson Testimony. Testimony Relevant to Contentions 3.2 & 3.7 & Is Based on Erikson Personal Knowledge ML20069D0871983-03-14014 March 1983 Motion for Waiver of Requirement to Distribute Indian Point 3 Emergency Plan & Emergency Planning Implementation Procedures Document to All Parties.Plans Are Voluminous & Expensive to Produce ML20069D1441983-03-14014 March 1983 Motion to Compel West Branch Conservation Assoc & Parents Concerned About Indian Point Further Responses to Licensee First Set of Interrogatories Under Commission Question 6.W/ Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20069D0491983-03-14014 March 1983 Motion to Strike Selected Intervenor Testimony.Objects to Intervenor 830311 Witness List for Commission Questions 3 & 4,presenting 99 Witnesses in 5 Days.Testimony Is Cumulative, Conclusory,Hearsay or W/O Foundation.W/Certificate of Svc ML20071F0001983-03-11011 March 1983 Motion to Amend Svc List to Include AP O'Rourke,New Westchester County Executive.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20071E5321983-03-0909 March 1983 Response Opposing Intervenor 830228 Motion for Extension of Deadlines to Complete Record on Emergency Planning Issues in Commission Questions 3 & 4.ASLB Resolved Scheduling Question.Certificate of Svc Encl 1999-09-15
[Table view] |
Text
- '
f p, 9^ DOCHETED USNRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION T2 E013 Ph 58 Before the Commissicners:
Nunzio J. Palladino, Chairman CrF:Cr C HCPG' '
Victor Gilinsky ": "." [ - 9 '
' ~
John F. Ahearne Thomas M. Roberts James K. Asselstine
)
In the Matter of )
)
CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC. ) Docket Nos.
(Indian Point, Unit No. 2) ) 50-247 SP
) 50-286 SP POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK )
(Indian Point, Unit No. 3) ) Aug. 13, 1982
)
LICENSEES' RESPONSE TO AUGUST 9, 1982 MEMORANDUM AND CERTIFICATION The Power Authority of the State of New York and Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. hereby respond to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board's (Board's)
Memorandum and Certification (Seeking Further Commission Guidance) (Aug. 9, 1982) (Memorandum).
While alleging a new development as the basis for certifying two questions to the Commission relating to probabilities and consequences, the Memorandum seeks to reargue, under the label " certification," an issue the Commission has resolved twice.1 Memorandum and Order at
- 1. The Memorandum suggests that the number of intervenor contentions was significantly reduced.
Memorandum at 1 & n.l. To the contrary, in the April 23 Order all of the intervenors' contentions were incorporated r208170285 820813 PDR ADOCK 0D000247 -
Q--
g PDR
16-17 (July 27, 1982); Memorandum and order at 3 & n.5 (Sept. 18, 1981).
The Memorandum contends that the hearing "should not '
[be] blind . . . to relevant evidence simply because the party presenting it lacks the expertise to perform a probability analysis." Memorandum at 3. Inasmuch as the Commission has instructed on two occasions that witnesses testifying on the safety of the plants address both aspects of risk -- the probability of a release at Indian Point and the consequences of such a release -- for each accident i
scenario, the Memorandum's statement suggests underlying dissa*.isfaction with the Commission's repeated directives.
Contrary to the Memorandum's assertion, the relevance of evidence is not self-evident. In this proceeding, evidence on the risk posed by the Indian Point plants is relevant contentions. Since the intervenors were informed that they would have the " opportunity in the consideration of [a]
contention to present evidence and arguments that were included in [the incorporated] contentions," Transcript at 586 (Apr. 13, 1982) (Second Special Prehearing Conference)
(Statement of Judge Carter); see id. at 587, in effect, all intervenor contentions cited in the Board April 23 order were incorporated by reference. Thus, the number of contentions have not been reduced from 57 to 22, at all.
See Transcript at 604-05 (Apr. 13, 1982) (Statement of Judge Shon); Licensees' First Set of Interrogatories and Document Requests under Commission Question 1 to Union of Concerned Scientists /New York Public Interest Research Group, Inc.,
Friends of the Earth, Inc., New York City Audubon Society, and Parents Concerned About Indian Point 7-29 (June 16, 1982). One of the consequences of incorporating contentions has been that over 171 intervenor witnesses and approxi-mately 50 interested State witnesses had been scheduled to testify on emergency planning alone.
l only when it addresses both the probability and consequences of a release on a plant and site specific basis.
The intervenors' strategy from the outset of this proceeding has been to discredit the use of Probabilistic Risk Analysis (PRA) methodology to calculate the probability of a nuclear accident.1 They have chosen not t'o engage in any PRA-type analysis. Thus, it is not surprising that the Memorandum notes that "little mention of probability" was found during a review of the intervenors' contentions and bases. Memorandum at 4.
Although the Memorandum characterizes intervenors as impecunious 2 and unable to present witnesses with "the
- 1. Intervenors attack the use of PRA by arguing that the probability of nuclear accidents cannot be predicted within a degree of reasonable certainty. See "Some Consequences of Catastrophic Accidents at Indian Point and Their Implications for Emergency Planning," Direct Testimony of Brian Palenik and Dr. Jan Beyea, a t 9-10, 6 7-7 0 (June 7, 1982); UCS/NYPIRG Response to Licensees' First Set of Interrogatories under Commission Question 1, at 1-6, 8-9 (July 23, 1982).
- 2. During the year ending February 28, 1981, the Union of Concerned Scientists, Inc. (UCS) raised S1,528,619 and spent S346,564 on nuclear safety research and S148,706 on energy policy research. The Union of Concerned Scientists, Inc. -- Statement of Support, Revenue and Expenses and i Changes in Fund Balances (year ended February 28, 1981).
The New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG), having raised S1,4 20,24 2 for the year ending August 31, 1980, New York Public Interest Research Group, Inc. Annual Report-Charitable organization (year ended August 31, 1980),
likewise, is far from impecunious. And surely the Attorney General of the State of New York, who co-sponsored expert witnesses Dr. Jan Beyea and Brian Palenik, has sufficient resources.
interdisciplinary expertise"1 necessary to provide testimony in accordance with the Commission's order, Memorandum at 2-3, in fact, the intervenors' failure to do so is because of hostility to quantitative risk assessment and not for financial reasons. However, even financial reasons do not justify a failure to comply with Commission testimonial requirements. "[T]he reluctance of [these} organizations to I
)
support litigation voluntarily undertaken may not be attributed to exiguous finances and does not excuse the failure" to present testimony as required by the Commission. In re Consumers Power Co. (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2), 1 N.R.C. 473, 474-75 (1975).
Intervenors do have experts capable of addressing both the probability and consequences of a release. Intervenors' experts on the consequences of a release at Indian Point are employed by the New York City Audubon Society, one of the intervenors. The Memorandum states that the expertise required to present probabilistic analysis "would encompass statistics, nuclear and/or mechanical engineering, meteorology, health physics, and traffic engineering."
Memorandum at 3. Yet, the testimony of these intervenors' experts " encompassed" those specific disciplines noted in
- 1. UCS is a " coalition of scientists, engineers, and other professionals" and has "' spent a decade conducting research into nuclear power questions. '" Memorandum and Order (Ruling on Petitions to Intervene and Agenda for Second Special Prehearing Conference) at 30 (Apr. 2, 1982).
the Memorandum.1 See "Some Consequences of Catastrophic Accidents at Indian Point and Their Implications for Emergency Planning," Direct Testimony of Brian Palenik and Dr. Jan Beyea (June 7, 1982).2 Additionally, UCS has hired Robert K. Weatherwax as its expert 3 for the specific purpose of reviewing licensees' probabilistic safety study.4 Having enumerated " problems" with the Commission's instructions, the Memorandum concludes by telling the Commission how risk testimony should be presented: as "a combination of consequence and probability testimony taken from different sources." Memorandum at 4. This is the very argument which has been presented to the Commission by intervenors, USC/NYPIRG Opposition to Licensees' Petition for Directed Certification of Issues Arising from the Atomic
- 1. Moreover, the Board ruled, over licensees' objections, that intervenors' experts were qualified to testify in the disciplines of traffic engineering, health physics, and meteorology. Transcript at 2997-3003 (July 8, 1982).
- 2. In characterising the testimony of Dr. Beyea and Mr. Palenik as having " withstood probing cross examination,"
Memorandum at 4, the Memorandum seems to have made a ,
premature determination. The Memorandum may have prejudiced i the value of this testimony.
- 3. Mr. Weatherwax , an engineer, is with Sierra Energy and Risk Assessment, Inc., and previously was associated with the nuclear engergy consulting firm of Science Applications, Inc., and with Princeton University's Aerospace Systems Laboratory and the Aerospace and Mechanical Sciences Department.
- 4. A copy of the Indian Point Probabilistic Safety Study was transmitted to Mr. Weatherwax on May 26, 1982.
Safety and Licensing Board's Order of April 23,1982, at 9 (May 25, 1982), and addressed by the licensees.1 The Board's certified questions la and b attack the fundamental premise of the NRC's Statement of Interim Policy on Nuclear Power Plant Accident Considerations under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as applied in the Commission's September 18, 1981 Indian Point order and reaffirmed in its July 27 Order. That premise is that one witness' accident probabilty estimates cannot be matched with an independent witness' consequence estimate due to the myriad of methodological and phenomenological assumptions which must be consistent for both halves of the risk equation in order to provide meaningful results.
Regarding the questions 2a and 2b certified by the Board, such questions are clearly premature because the Commission has provided that emergency planning improvements 1.
[S]uch an approach results in an unrealistic and disjointed discussion of any given release scenario because the probabilities of each of the multitude of occurrences in an event tree must be analyzed together with the consequences of each of those events for the specific Indian Point plant design in order to have a meaningful. dialogue concerning the entire release scenario. One cannot divorce the discussion of either aspect of the risk equation from the other without rendering the outcome meaningless.
Licensees' Petition for Directed Certification Pursuant to 10 CFR S 2.718(i) and for Waiver of 10 CFR S 9.103 at 15 (May 10, 1982)
(emphasis in original).
must be considered "in light of" risk considerations. The July 27 Order directs that:
additional emergency planning measures, not required by NRC or FEMA, could be raised for Indian Point as prudent risk-reduction measures in light of the risk posed by Indian Point as opposed to the spectrum of risks posed by other nuclear plants.
- Memorandum and Order at 15-16 (July 27, 1982) (emphasis added). Since the Commission has thus required the risk posed by Indian Point to be addressed firstl, the Commission need not address Board questions 2a and 2b at this time.
- 1. Licensees urged the Board's adoption of this, sequence of testimony at the April Special Pre-Hearing Conference. Transcript at 728, 749, 766 (Apr. 13-14, 1982). The Board's principal reason for commencing the case with emergency planning issues was the unavailability of certain witnesses in July and August. Memorandum and Order at 21 ( Apr. 23, 1982). That, of course, is no longer a problem. Consequently, there is no reason at all not to address safety issues first when the hearings reconvene.
Predictions of what will occur at the expiration of the so-called "120 day clock" would, of course, be of little use to the Commission in a record that is unlikely to be finalized before the clock's expiration, particularly if the Board still entertains a substantial number of emergency planning witnesses after eliminating contentions as requested by the July 27, 1982 Order. Moreover, the State has responded to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (" FEMA") deficiency comments, indicating that extensive improvements in off-site emergency planning are underway, most of which will be completed by October, 1982. (The State's response has been filed and identified in the record. See Transcript at 3656, WBCA Exhbits 3 and 4.) This schedule of anticipated improvements provides yet another compelling reason to hear emergency planning testimony after completion of safety testimony.
_ _ ___ _ .J
CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing, the Power Authority of the State of New York requests that the Commission reaffirm its decision of July 27 without further opinion.
Respectfully submitted, N.
Brent L. Brandenbu'rg,'Esq. Charles Morgan, Wr.
A CONSOLIDATED EDISCON CO. Paul F. Colarulli OF MEW YORK, INC. Joseph J. Levin, Jr.
4 Irving Place New York, New York 10003 MORGAN ASSOCIATES, CHARTERED 1899 L Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 466-7000 Thomas R. Frey General Counsel Charles M. Pratt Assistant General Counsel POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Licensee of Indian Point Unit 3 10 Columbus Circle New York, New York 10019 (212) 397-6200 Bernard D. Fischman Michael Curley J
Richard F. Czaja David H. Pikus SHEA & GOULD l 330 Madison Avenue -l New York, New York 10017 ;
(212) 370-8000 l Dated: August , 1982
000KETED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -
US E
!!UCLEAR REGULATORY COliMISSIOli ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges: 0FflCE OF SECRET 1.i: <
COCKETING & SERVICE Louis J. Carter, Chairman Frederick J. Shon Dr. Oscar H. Paris
)
In the Matter of: )
)
COtISOLIDATED EDISON CO!!PANY OF )
NEW YORK, INC. ) Docket lios. 50-247 SP (Indian Point, Unit No. 2) ) 50-286 SP
)
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF )
ITEW YORK )
(Indian Point, Unit No. 3) )
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the 13th day of August, 1982, I caused a copy of the Licensees' Response to August 9, 1982 Memorandum and Certification to be served by first-class mail, postage prepaid on the following:
Louis J. Carter, Esq., Chairman Charles M. Pratt, Esq.
Administrative Judge Thomas R. Frey, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Power Authority of the 7300 City Line Avenue State of New York Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19151 10 Columbus Circle New York, New York 10019 Mr. Frederick J. Shon Administrativs Judge Janice Moore, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Counsel for NRC Staff U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the Executive Wa shing ton, D. C. 20555 Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Dr. Oscar H. Paris Washington, D.C. 20555 ;
Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Brent L. Brandenburg, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Assistant General Counsel Washington, D.C. 20555 Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
Docketing and Service Branch 4 Irving Place Office of the Secretary New York, New York 10003 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Ellyn R. Weiss, Esq.
William S. Jordan, III, Esq.
Joan Holt, Project Director Harmon and Ueiss Indian Point Project 1725 I Street, N.W., Suite 506 New York Public Interest Research Washington, D.C. 20006 i
Group 9 Murray Street Charles A. Scheiner, Co-Chairperson New York, New York 10007 Westchester People's Action Coalition, Inc.
John Gilroy P.O. Box 488 Westchester Coordinator White Plains, New York 10602 Indian Point Project .
New York Public Interest Research Alan Latman, Esq.
Group 44 Sunset Drive 240 Central Avenue Croton-On-Hudson, New York 10520 White Plains, New York 10606 Ezra I. Bialik, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Blum, Esq. Steve Leipzig, Esq.
New York University Law School Environmental Protection Bureau 423 Vanderbilt Hall New York State Attorney 40 Washington Square South General's Office New York, New York 10012 Two World Trade Center New York, New York 10047 Charles J. Maikish, Esq.
Litigation Division Alfred B. Del Bello The Port Authority of New York Westchester County Executive and New Jersey Westchester County One World Trade Center 148 Martine Avenue New York, New York 10048 White Plains, New York 10601 Andrew S. Roffe,.Esq.
New York State Assembly Albany, New York 12248 ,
t
l Stanley B. Klimberg, Esq.
Marc L. Parris, Esq. General Counsel Eric Thorsen, Esq. New York State Energy Of fice County Attorney 2 Rockefeller State Plaza County of Rockland Albany, New York 12223 11 New Hempstead Road New City, New York 10956 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Pat Posner, Spokesperson U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Parents Concerned About Indian Washington, D.C. 20555 Point P.O. Box 125 Atomic Safety and Licensing Croton-on-Hudson, New York 10520 Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Renee Schwartz, Esq. Washington, D.C. 20555 Paul Chessin, Esq.
Laurens R. Schwartz, Esq. Honorable Richard L. Brodsky Margaret Oppel, Esq. Member of the County Legislature Botein, Hays, Sklar and Hertzberg Hestchester County 200 Park Avenue County Office Building IIew York, New York 10166 Uhite Plains, New York 10601 Honorable Ruth W. Messinger Zipporah S. Fleisher
!! ember of the Council of the West Branch Conservation City of New York Association District 44 443 Buena Vista Road City Hall New City, New York 10956 New York, New York 10007 Mayor George V. Begany Greater New York Council Village of Buchanan on Energy 236 Tate Avenue c/o Dean R. Corren, Director Buchanan, New York 10511 New York University 26 Stuyvesant Street Judith Kessler, Coordinator New York, New York 10003 Rockland Citizens for Safe Energy 300 New Hemstead Road Geoffrey Cobb Ryan New City, New York 10956 Conservation Committee Chairman Director, New York City David H. Pikus, Esq.
Audubon Society Richard F. Czaja, Esq.
71 West 23rd Street, Suite 1828 330 Madison Avenue New York, New York 10010 New York, New York 10017 Lorna Salzman Amanda Potterfield, Esq.
Mid-Atlantic Representative P.O. Box 384 Friends of the Earth, Inc. Village Station 208 West 13th Street New York, New York 10014 New York, New York 10011
.. Ruthanne G. Miller, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Donald Davidoff Director, Radiological Emergency Preparedness Group Empire State Plaza Tower Building, RM 1750 Albany, New York 12237 x
l mc Paul' W ColdrIIlli %