ML20071H043

Response to Judge Laurenson 830422 Order Re Contention Ii. Parties Stipulated to Witnesses & Exhibits.Summarizes Witnesses Testimony.Ucla Case Will Be Presented in 4 H. Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20071H043
Person / Time
Site:	05000142
Issue date:	05/13/1983
From:	Cormier W CALIFORNIA, UNIV. OF, LOS ANGELES, CA
To:
References
NUDOCS 8305240479
Download: ML20071H043 (6)

Text

.

DOCKETED uE :~

'83 I!Ay 19 A11 :12 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA _

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD e

'In the Matter of )

) Docket No. 50-142 THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY ) (Proposed Renewal of Facility OF CALIFORNIA ) License Number R-71)

) '

(UCLA Research Reactor) ) May 13, 1983

)

UNIVERSITY'S RESPONSE TO ALTERNATE BOARD MEMBER'S APRIL 22, 1983 ORDER CONCERNING CONTENTION II _

l l

DONALD L. REIDHAAR GLENN R. WOODS CHRISTINE HELWICK 590 University Hall 2200 University Avenue

' Berkeley, California 94720 Te.lephone: (415) 642-2822 Attorneys for Applicant

.3 THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY l OF CALIFORNIA 9305240479 830513 PDRADOCK05000g2 l

~ '

By Order 1/ dated Apr.il 22, 1983 concerning the hearing on Contention II, Judge Laurenson directed the parties to satisfy certain prehearing requirements including giving consideration

. to some alternative for resolving Contention II without an adjudicatory hearing. The parties were also directed to file by May 13, 1983 a list of proposed witnesses and exhibits, a <

summary of the expected testimony, an estimate of the time necessary for the party to present its case, and any stipulations reached. In response University provides the following information.

1. Stipulations. In a conference call on May 6th, initiated by University, the parties stipulated to the witnesses and exhibits each intended to call. The parties were unable to agree on an alternative means of resolving Contention II. The stipulation is to be forwarded to Judge Laurenson by Staff's counsel.

University had recommended that the parties adopt the suggestion contained in the Order that the parties proceed on the basis of stipulated documents, affidavits of witnesses and arguments and briefs of counsel. CBG rejected the recommendation asserting that there were material facts in dispute that would I

b!" Order Scheduling Hearing on Contention II Before Alternate Board Memb,er" (Order) .

require an evidentiary hearing. University believes that the parties' disagreements concern the inferences and conclusions to be drawn from specific f acts rather than any genuine dispute over the specific material facts themselves. In its separate letter of May 10, 1983 to CBG, University proposed another alternative to proceeding with a hearing on Contention II.

University is awaiting CBG's response.

2. Summary of Witness Testimony. University expects to call the following witnesses who will testify as indicated:

(a) Dean Russell O'Neill of the School of Engineering -

the educational and research purposes of the NEL facility; the incidental nature of any use of the reactor by non-academics; the operating costs devotad to educational uses; (b) Mr. Neill Ostrander - the manner of reporting reactor operating hours and port hours at the NEL facility; the distinction between port hours and operating hours; the reported port hours for non-academic users for recent years; the costs associated with reactor operation by non-academic users; the costs devoted to educ.ational uses of the reactor; faculty and staff salary expense of the NEL; various uses of the reactor; method of billing for research uses of the reactor; G

.2 M W

(c) Mr. Charles Ashbaugh - educational uses of the ,

reactor; various classes which use the reactor; substance of the classes which use the reactor; research users of the reactor; use of reactor for operator training; use of reactor for

- demonstrations; use of reactor by oth'er institutions; reactor usage chart explanation; explanation of class use of the reactor chart; explanation of operating log entries; (d) Dr. Emil Kalil - the non-academic use that he makes of the reactor; (e) Mr. Chuck Noski of Deloitte, Haskins and Sells -

the inappropriateness of using a cost accounting method for distributing facility costs that is based on port-hours of reactor usage; .

(f) Mr. Don Rebok or Mr. John Dahl of the UCLA Finance Office - the information contained in the Finance Office letter to the NRC of January 25; 1982; the University's policy l

with respect to auxiliary enterprises; (g) A UCLA Engineering student (as yet unidentified) -

the educational use that is made of the reactor.

t

, Because of scheduling conflicts that are as yet un-resolved University may not call Dean O'Neill nor Dr. Kalil.

The substabce of University's testimony is contained in its

,c

', 4

, N s

s j - .

-> s . ,

s ,

exhibits (as identified. in 1thel stipulation document) which,are s,

matters of record..in this p'roceeding. It shocid be noted that th6 January}25 and' April 19, 1982 letters'of University to the

, , s _

NRC were app' ended to University's,Eeptember.7,,1982 Motion for Summary Disposition. '

3. Time Necessary for Case at Hearing. University expects to be able} to present its case in abo'ut four hours.

Dated: May 13, 1983.

DONALD L. REIDHAAR

, _GLENN R. WOODS CHRISTINE HALWICK By _

WILLI AM H. CORMIER Representing UCLA i

P

\

s

(

T

• \ \

1 r

g 4

l.

i '

l .

l

.3 a

l i s  %

s t

om em m..

\

t.

g

~

?

s UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD DME ,T,ED i

In the Matter of ) 13 UU l9 bl

) .

• Docket No. 50-142 THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY ) (Proposed Renewal of Facility OF CALIFORNIA ) License Number Rg71)C

)

(UCLA Research Reactor) ) , ,

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the attached: UNIVERSITY'S RESPONSE TO ALTERNATE BOARD MEMBER'S APRIL 22, 1983 ORDER CONCERNING CONTENTION II in the above-captioned proce,cding have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid, addressed as indicated, on this date: MAY 13, 1983 .

John H. Frye, III, Chairman Mr. Daniel Hirsch Administrative Judge . Cte. to Bridge the Gap ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 1637 Butler Avenue, #203 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Los Angeles, CA 90025 Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. John Bay, Esq.

Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke 3755 Divisadero #203 Administrative Judge San Francisco, CA 94123 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD l U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. Daniel Hirsch

Washington, D.C. 20555 Box 1186 l Ben Lomond, CA 95005 Dr. Oscar H. Paris Administrative Judge Nuclear Law Center ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD c/o Dorothy Thompson U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 6300 Wilshire Blvd., #1200 Washington, D.C. 20555 Los Angeles, CA 90048 Counsel for the NRC Staff Ms. Lynn G. Naliboff l OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR Deputy City Attorney U.S. Nucleart Regulatory Commission City Hall l Washington, D.C. 20555- 1685 Main Street Santa Monica, CA 90401 l Chief, Docketing and Service Section OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY U.S ' Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington,cD.C. 20555 James A. Laurenson ~[ '

s -

" ~ ~

Administrative Judge bV I ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD WILLIAM H. CORMIER U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Con. mission UCLA Representative Washington, D.C. 20555 -

THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY

[ OF CALIFORNIA