|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20217H9511999-10-21021 October 1999 Memorandum & Order.* Proceeding Re Nepco 990315 Application Seeking Commission Approval of Indirect License Transfers Consolidated,Petitioners Granted Standing & Two Issues Admitted.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 991021 ML20217N2561999-10-21021 October 1999 Transcript of Affirmation Session on 990121 in Rockville, Maryland Re Memorandum & Order Responding to Petitions to Intervene Filed by co-owners of Seabrook Station Unit 1 & Millstone Station Unit Three.Pp 1-3 ML20211L5141999-09-0202 September 1999 Comment on Draft Reg Guide DG-4006, Demonstrating Compliance with Radiological Criteria for License Termination. Author Requests Info as to When Seabrook Station Will Be Shut Down ML20211J1451999-08-24024 August 1999 Comment Opposing NRC Consideration of Waiving Enforcement Action Against Plants That Operate Outside Terms of Licenses Due to Y2K Problems ML20210S5641999-08-13013 August 1999 Motion of Connecticut Light & Power Co,Western Massachusetts Electric Co & North Atlantic Energy Corp to Strike Unauthorized Response of Nepco.* Unauthorized Response Fails to Comply with Commission Policy.With Certificate of Svc ML20210Q7531999-08-11011 August 1999 Order Approving Application Re Corporate Merger (Canal Electric Co). Canal Shall Provide Director of NRR Copy of Any Application,At Time Filed to Transfer Grants of Security Interests or Liens from Canal to Proposed Parent ML20210P6271999-08-10010 August 1999 Response of New England Power Company.* Nu Allegations Unsupported by Any Facts & No Genuine Issues of Matl Facts in Dispute.Commission Should Approve Application Without Hearing ML20210H8311999-08-0303 August 1999 Reply of Connecticut Light & Power Co,Western Massachusetts Electric Co & North Atlantic Energy Corp to Response of New England Power Co to Requests for Hearing.* Petitioners Request Hearing on Stated Issues.With Certificate of Svc ML20210J8501999-08-0303 August 1999 Order Approving Transfer of License & Conforming Amend.North Atlantic Energy Service Corp Authorized to Act as Agent for Joint Owners of Seabrook Unit 1 ML20211J1551999-07-30030 July 1999 Comment Opposing That NRC Allow Seabrook NPP to Operate Outside of Technical Specifications Due to Possible Y2K Problems ML20210E3011999-07-27027 July 1999 Response of New England Power Co to Requests for Hearing. Intervenors Have Presented No Justification for Oral Hearing in This Proceeding.Commission Should Reject Intervenors Request for Oral Hearing & Approve Application ML20209H9101999-07-20020 July 1999 Motion of Connecticut Light & Power Co & North Atlantic Energy Corp for Leave to Intervene & Petition for Hearing.* with Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20195H1911999-06-15015 June 1999 Application of Montaup Electric Co & New England Power Co for Transfer of Licenses & Ownership Interests.Requests That Commission Consent to Two Indirect Transfers of Control & Direct Transfer ML20206A1611999-04-26026 April 1999 Memorandum & Order.* Informs That Montaup,Little Bay Power Corp & Nepco Settled Differences Re Transfer of Ownership of Seabrook Unit 1.Intervention Petition Withdrawn & Proceeding Terminated.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 990426 ML20205M7621999-04-15015 April 1999 Notice of Withdrawal of Intervention of New England Power Co.* New England Power Co Requests That Intervention in Proceeding Be Withdrawn & Hearing & Related Procedures Be Terminated.With Certificate of Svc CLI-99-06, Order.* Joint Request for ten-day Extension of Schedule Set Forth in CLI-99-06 in Order to Facilitate Parties Settlement Efforts Granted,With Exception of Date of Hearing. with Certificate of Svc.Served on 9904071999-04-0707 April 1999 Order.* Joint Request for ten-day Extension of Schedule Set Forth in CLI-99-06 in Order to Facilitate Parties Settlement Efforts Granted,With Exception of Date of Hearing. with Certificate of Svc.Served on 990407 ML20205G0921999-04-0505 April 1999 Joint Motion of All Active Participants for 10 Day Extension to Permit Continuation of Settlement Discussion.* Participants Request That Procedural Schedule Be Extended by 10 Days.With Certificate of Svc ML20205G3091999-03-31031 March 1999 Petition That Individuals Responsible for Discrimination Against Contract Electrician at Plant as Noted in OI Rept 1-98-005 Be Banned by NRC from Participation in Licensed Activities for at Least 5 Yrs ML20204E6401999-03-24024 March 1999 Protective Order.* Issues Protective Order to Govern Use of All Proprietary Data Contained in License Transfer Application or in Participants Written Submission & Oral Testimony.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 990324 ML20204G7671999-03-23023 March 1999 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50.54(a) Re Direct Final Rule,Changes to QA Programs ML20207K1941999-03-12012 March 1999 North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Participation in Proceeding.* Naesco Wished to Remain on Svc List for All Filings.Option to Submit post-hearing Amicus Curiae Brief Will Be Retained by Naesco.With Certificate of Svc ML20207H4921999-02-12012 February 1999 Comment on Draft Contingency Plan for Year 2000 Issue in Nuclear Industry.Util Agrees to Approach Proposed by NEI ML20203F9471999-02-0909 February 1999 License Transfer Application Requesting NRC Consent to Indirect Transfer of Control of Interest in Operating License NPF-86 ML20199F7641999-01-21021 January 1999 Answer of Montaup Electric Co to Motion of Ui for Leave to Intervene & Petition to Allow Intervention out-of-time.* Requests Motion Be Denied on Basis of Late Filing.With Certificate of Svc ML20199H0451999-01-21021 January 1999 Answer of Little Bay Power Corp to Motion of Ui for Leave to Intervene & Petition to Allow Intervention out-of-time.* Requests That Ui Petition to Intervene & for Hearing Be Denied for Reasons Stated.With Certificate of Svc ML20199D2461999-01-19019 January 1999 Supplemental Affidavit of Js Robinson.* Affidavit of Js Robinson Providing Info Re Financial Results of Baycorp Holding Ltd & Baycorp Subsidiary,Great Bay Power Corp. with Certificate of Svc ML20199D2311999-01-19019 January 1999 Response of New England Power Co to Answers of Montaup Electric Co & Little Bay Power Corp.* Nep Requests That Nep Be Afforded Opportunity to File Appropriate Rule Challenge with Commission Pursuant to 10CFR2.1329 ML20206R1041999-01-13013 January 1999 Answer of Little Bay Power Corp to Motion of New England Power Co for Leave to Intervene & Petition for Summary Relief Or,In Alternative,For Hearing.* with Certificate of Svc ML20206Q8451999-01-12012 January 1999 Written Comments of Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Co.* Requests That Commission Consider Potential Financial Risk to Other Joint Owners Associated with License Transfer.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 990114 ML20199A4741999-01-12012 January 1999 Answer of Montaup Electric Co to Motion of Nepco for Leave to Intervene & Petition for Summary Relief Or,In Alternative,For Hearing.* Nepco 990104 Motion Should Be Denied for Reasons Stated.With Certificate of Svc ML20206Q0151999-01-12012 January 1999 North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Answer to Petition to Intervene of New England Power Co.* If Commission Deems It Appropriate to Explore Issues Further in Subpart M Hearing Context,Naesco Will Participate.With Certificate of Svc ML20199A4331999-01-11011 January 1999 Motion of United Illuminating Co for Leave to Intervene & Petition to Allow Intervention out-of-time.* Company Requests That Petition to Allow Intervention out-of-time Be Granted.With Certificate of Svc ML20198P7181998-12-31031 December 1998 Motion of Nepco for Leave to Intervene & Petition for Summary Relief Or,In Alternative,For Hearing.* Moves to Intervene in Transfer of Montaup Seabrook Ownership Interest & Petitions for Summary Relief or for Hearing ML20198P7551998-12-30030 December 1998 Affidavit of J Robinson.* Affidavit of J Robinson Describing Events to Date in New England Re Premature Retirement of Npps,Current Plans to Construct New Generation in Region & Impact on Seabrook Unit 1 Operation.With Certificate of Svc ML20195K4061998-11-24024 November 1998 Memorandum & Order.* North Atlantic Energy Services Corp Granted Motion to Withdraw Proposed Amends & Dismiss Related Adjudicatory Proceedings as Moot.Board Decision LBP-98-23 Vacated.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 981124 ML20155J1071998-11-0909 November 1998 NRC Staff Answer to North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Motion for Leave to File Reply.* Staff Does Not Object to North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Motion.With Certificate of Svc ML20155D0041998-10-30030 October 1998 Motion for Leave to File Reply.* Licensee Requests Leave to Reply to Petitioner 981026 Response to Licensee 981015 Motion to Terminate Proceedings.Reply Necessary to Assure That Commission Is Fully Aware of Licensee Position ML20155D0121998-10-30030 October 1998 Reply to Petitioner Response to Motion to Terminate Proceedings.* Licensee Views Segmentation Issue as Moot & Requests Termination of Subj Proceedings.With Certificate of Svc ML20155B1641998-10-26026 October 1998 Response to Motion by Naesco to Withdraw Applications & to Terminate Proceedings.* If Commission Undertakes to Promptly Proceed on Issue on Generic Basis,Sapl & Necnp Will Have No Objection to Naesco Motion.With Certificate of Svc ML20154K8751998-10-15015 October 1998 Motion to Withdraw Applications & to Terminate Proceedings.* NRC Does Not Intend to Oppose Motion.With Certificate of Svc ML17265A8071998-10-0606 October 1998 Comment on Integrated Review of Assessment Process for Commercial Npps.Util Endorses Comments Being Provided by NEI on Behalf of Nuclear Industry ML20154C8171998-10-0606 October 1998 Notice of Appointment of Adjudicatory Employee.* Notice Given That W Reckley Appointed as Commission Adjudicatory Employee to Advise Commission on Issues Related to Review of LBP-98-23.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 981006 CLI-98-18, Order.* Grants Joint Motion Filed by Naesco,Sapl & Necnp for Two Week Deferral of Briefing Schedule Set by Commission in CLI-98-18.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 9810061998-10-0505 October 1998 Order.* Grants Joint Motion Filed by Naesco,Sapl & Necnp for Two Week Deferral of Briefing Schedule Set by Commission in CLI-98-18.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 981006 ML20153H4471998-10-0101 October 1998 Joint Motion of Schedule Deferral.* Naesco,Sapl & Necnp Jointly Request Temporary Deferral of Briefing Schedule as Established by Commission Order of 980917 (CLI-98-18). with Certificate of Svc ML20154F9891998-09-29029 September 1998 License Transfer Application Requesting Consent for Transfer of Montaup Electric Co Interest in Operating License NPF-86 for Seabrook Station,Unit 1,to Little Bay Power Corp ML20154D7381998-09-21021 September 1998 Affidavit of FW Getman Requesting Exhibit 1 to License Transfer Application Be Withheld from Public Disclosure,Per 10CFR2.790 ML20153C7791998-09-18018 September 1998 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Reporting Requirements for Nuclear Power Reactors.Util Endorses NRC Staff Focus on Operability & Funtionality of Equipment & NEI Comments ML20151Z5611998-09-18018 September 1998 Order.* Pursuant to Commission Order CLI-98-18 Re Seabrook Unit 1 Proceeding,Schedule Described in Board 980904 Memorandum & Order Hereby Revoked Pending Further Action. with Certificate of Svc.Served on 980918 ML20151Y0331998-09-17017 September 1998 Order.* All Parties,Including Util,May File Brief No Later than 981007.Brief Shall Not Exceed 30 Pages.Commission May Schedule Oral Argument to Discuss Issues,After Receiving Responses.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 980917 ML20153E8771998-09-16016 September 1998 Comment Opposing Draft NUREG-1633, Assessment of Use of Potassium Iodide (Ki) as Protective Action During Severe Reactor Accidents. Recommends That NRC Reverse Decision to Revise Emergency Planning Regulation as Listed 1999-09-02
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20210S5641999-08-13013 August 1999 Motion of Connecticut Light & Power Co,Western Massachusetts Electric Co & North Atlantic Energy Corp to Strike Unauthorized Response of Nepco.* Unauthorized Response Fails to Comply with Commission Policy.With Certificate of Svc ML20210P6271999-08-10010 August 1999 Response of New England Power Company.* Nu Allegations Unsupported by Any Facts & No Genuine Issues of Matl Facts in Dispute.Commission Should Approve Application Without Hearing ML20210H8311999-08-0303 August 1999 Reply of Connecticut Light & Power Co,Western Massachusetts Electric Co & North Atlantic Energy Corp to Response of New England Power Co to Requests for Hearing.* Petitioners Request Hearing on Stated Issues.With Certificate of Svc ML20210E3011999-07-27027 July 1999 Response of New England Power Co to Requests for Hearing. Intervenors Have Presented No Justification for Oral Hearing in This Proceeding.Commission Should Reject Intervenors Request for Oral Hearing & Approve Application ML20205G0921999-04-0505 April 1999 Joint Motion of All Active Participants for 10 Day Extension to Permit Continuation of Settlement Discussion.* Participants Request That Procedural Schedule Be Extended by 10 Days.With Certificate of Svc ML20205G3091999-03-31031 March 1999 Petition That Individuals Responsible for Discrimination Against Contract Electrician at Plant as Noted in OI Rept 1-98-005 Be Banned by NRC from Participation in Licensed Activities for at Least 5 Yrs ML20207K1941999-03-12012 March 1999 North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Participation in Proceeding.* Naesco Wished to Remain on Svc List for All Filings.Option to Submit post-hearing Amicus Curiae Brief Will Be Retained by Naesco.With Certificate of Svc ML20199H0451999-01-21021 January 1999 Answer of Little Bay Power Corp to Motion of Ui for Leave to Intervene & Petition to Allow Intervention out-of-time.* Requests That Ui Petition to Intervene & for Hearing Be Denied for Reasons Stated.With Certificate of Svc ML20199D2311999-01-19019 January 1999 Response of New England Power Co to Answers of Montaup Electric Co & Little Bay Power Corp.* Nep Requests That Nep Be Afforded Opportunity to File Appropriate Rule Challenge with Commission Pursuant to 10CFR2.1329 ML20206R1041999-01-13013 January 1999 Answer of Little Bay Power Corp to Motion of New England Power Co for Leave to Intervene & Petition for Summary Relief Or,In Alternative,For Hearing.* with Certificate of Svc ML20199A4741999-01-12012 January 1999 Answer of Montaup Electric Co to Motion of Nepco for Leave to Intervene & Petition for Summary Relief Or,In Alternative,For Hearing.* Nepco 990104 Motion Should Be Denied for Reasons Stated.With Certificate of Svc ML20206Q8451999-01-12012 January 1999 Written Comments of Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Co.* Requests That Commission Consider Potential Financial Risk to Other Joint Owners Associated with License Transfer.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 990114 ML20155J1071998-11-0909 November 1998 NRC Staff Answer to North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Motion for Leave to File Reply.* Staff Does Not Object to North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Motion.With Certificate of Svc ML20155D0041998-10-30030 October 1998 Motion for Leave to File Reply.* Licensee Requests Leave to Reply to Petitioner 981026 Response to Licensee 981015 Motion to Terminate Proceedings.Reply Necessary to Assure That Commission Is Fully Aware of Licensee Position ML20155D0121998-10-30030 October 1998 Reply to Petitioner Response to Motion to Terminate Proceedings.* Licensee Views Segmentation Issue as Moot & Requests Termination of Subj Proceedings.With Certificate of Svc ML20155B1641998-10-26026 October 1998 Response to Motion by Naesco to Withdraw Applications & to Terminate Proceedings.* If Commission Undertakes to Promptly Proceed on Issue on Generic Basis,Sapl & Necnp Will Have No Objection to Naesco Motion.With Certificate of Svc ML20154K8751998-10-15015 October 1998 Motion to Withdraw Applications & to Terminate Proceedings.* NRC Does Not Intend to Oppose Motion.With Certificate of Svc ML20153H4471998-10-0101 October 1998 Joint Motion of Schedule Deferral.* Naesco,Sapl & Necnp Jointly Request Temporary Deferral of Briefing Schedule as Established by Commission Order of 980917 (CLI-98-18). with Certificate of Svc ML20236W0931998-07-30030 July 1998 Reply to Staff & Naesco Objections to Joinder of Necnp & to Naesco Objection to Standing.* Advises That Jointer Issue Involves Only Question of How Pleadings May Be Captioned. W/Certificate of Svc ML20236U4221998-07-27027 July 1998 North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Supplemental Answer Standing Issues.* Request for Hearing & Petition to Intervene,As Applied to Sapl & New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution,Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20236T5201998-07-27027 July 1998 NRC Staff Response to 980709 Submittal by Seacoast Anti- Pollution League & New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution (Necnp).* Board Should Deny Intervention by Necnp. Staff Does Not Contest Sapl Standing.W/Certificate of Svc ML20236J1111998-07-0202 July 1998 North Atlantic Energy Svc Corp Answer to Supplemental Petition for Hearing.* Util Will Respond to Any Further Petitions on Schedule Directed by Licensing Board Memorandum & Order of 980618.W/Certificate of Svc ML20249B9151998-06-24024 June 1998 NRC Staff Answer to Seacoast Anti-Pollution League (Sapl) 980605 Request for Hearing & to New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution 980618 Request for Intervention.* Board Should Not Grant Sapl 980605 Request.W/Certificate of Svc ML20249B7631998-06-18018 June 1998 Supplemental & Amended Petition for Institution of Proceeding & for Intervention Pursuant to 10CFR2.714 on Behalf of Seacoast Anti-Pollution League & New England Coalition on Nuclear Power.* ML20249A9501998-06-12012 June 1998 Supplemental Petition of Great Bay Power Corp for Determination of Reasonable Assurance of Decommissioning Funding ML20199K3861998-01-29029 January 1998 Petition for Determination That Great Bay Power Corp'S Acceleration of Decommissioning Trust Fund Payments Would Provide Reasonable Asurance of Decommissioning Funding Or,In Alternative,Would Merit Permanent Exemption ML20217P7781997-12-18018 December 1997 Petition to Suspend Operating License Until Root Cause Analysis of Leaks in Piping in Train B of RHR Sys Conducted, Per 10CFR2.206 ML20140B9601997-06-0404 June 1997 Suppl to Great Bay Power Corp Petition for Partial Reconsideration of Exemption Order to Submit Requested Cost Data & to Request,In Alternate,Further Exemption ML20135A1051997-02-21021 February 1997 Petition of Great Bay Power Corp for Partial Reconsideration of Exemption Order.* Seeks Reconsideration of Staff'S Preliminary Finding That Great Bay Is Not Electric Utility as Defined by NRC in 10CFR50.2 ML20094N4021992-03-27027 March 1992 App to Appeal of Ofc of Consumer Advocate (Nuclear Decommissioning Finance Committee) Appeal by Petition Per Rsa 541 & Rule 10 ML20076D1281991-07-17017 July 1991 Licensee Motion to Dismiss Appeal.* Appeal Should Be Dismissed Based on Listed Reasons.W/Certificate of Svc ML20073E1301991-04-22022 April 1991 Opposition of Ma Atty General & New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution to Licensee Motion for Summary Disposition.* Board Should Reopen Record,Permit Discovery & Hold Hearing on Beach Sheltering Issues ML20070V3311991-03-29029 March 1991 Licensee Motion for Summary Disposition of Record Clarification Directive in ALAB-939.* Licensee Request That Motion Be Moved on Grounds That Issues Herein Identified Became Moot & Thus Resolved.W/Certificate of Svc ML20070V4061991-03-25025 March 1991 Massachusetts Atty General Response to Appeal Board 910311 Order.* License Should Be Vacated Until There Is Evidence of Adequate Protective Measure for Special Needs Population. W/Certificate of Svc ML20076N0831991-03-21021 March 1991 Massachusetts Atty General Response to Appeal Board 910308 Order.* Opposes Licensing Board Issuance of Full Power OL Based on Reliance of Adequacy of Plan.W/Certificate of Svc ML20076N1861991-03-19019 March 1991 Intervenors Reply to NRC Staff & Licensee Responses to 910222 Appeal Board Order.* NRC & Licensee Should File Appropriate Motions & Supply Requisite Evidentiary Basis That Will Allow Board to Make Decision.W/Certificate of Svc ML20070M5151991-03-18018 March 1991 Licensee Response to Appeal Board 910308 Order.* Listed Issues Currently Being Appealed Should Be Dismissed as Moot. W/Certificate of Svc ML20076N0671991-03-15015 March 1991 Licensee Response to Appeal Board 910311 Order.* Controversy Re Special Needs Survey Resolved.Next Survey Will Be Designed by Person Selected by State of Ma & Licensee Will Pay Costs.W/Certificate of Svc ML20070M3781991-03-11011 March 1991 Licensee Response to 910222 Appeal Board Order.* Response Opposing Suspending or Otherwise Affecting OL for Plant Re Offsite Emergency Plan That Has Been Twice Exercised W/No Weakness Identified.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20070M2101991-03-11011 March 1991 Reply to Appeal Board 910222 Order.* Response Opposes ALAB-918 Issues Re Onsite Exercise Contention.W/Certificate of Svc ML20029B6061991-02-28028 February 1991 Response of Ma Atty General to Appeal Board 910222 Order.* Questionable Whether Eight Issues Resolved.To Dismiss Issues Would Be Wrong on Procedural Grounds & Moot on Substantive Grounds.W/Certificate of Svc ML20070E7741991-02-25025 February 1991 Opposition to Licensee Motion to Dismiss Appeal of LPB-89-38.* Believes Board Should Not Dismiss Intervenors Appeal Because There Was No Hearing on Rejected Contentions. Board Should Deny Licensee Motion.W/Certificate of Svc ML20066H0831991-02-12012 February 1991 Licensee Motion to Dismiss Appeal of LBP-89-38.* Appeal Should Be Dismissed Either as Moot or on Grounds That as Matter of Law,Board Correct in Denying Hearing W/Respect to Contentions at Issue.W/Certificate of Svc ML20066H0021991-02-0808 February 1991 Licensee Response to Appeal Board Order of 910204.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20067C5081991-02-0101 February 1991 Ma Atty General Response to Appeal Board Dtd 910122.* Identifies Two Issues That Potentially May Be Resolved. State Will Continue to Investigate Facts Re post-hearing Events That May Effect Pending Issues.W/Certificate of Svc ML20029A0451991-01-28028 January 1991 Licensee Suggestion for Certified Question.* Draft Certified Question for Appeal Board Encl.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20029A0431991-01-28028 January 1991 Licensee Response to 910124 Memorandum & Order.* Common Ref Document Derived from Copying Respective Portions of Emergency Response Plan & Associated Documents Provided.W/ Certificate of Svc ML20070U4811991-01-24024 January 1991 Motion Requesting Limited Oral Argument Before Commission of City of Holyoke Gas & Electric Dept New Hampshire Electric Cooperative Mact Towns ML20029A0091991-01-24024 January 1991 Response to Appeal Board 910111 Order.* Atty General Will Continue Ad Intervenor in Facility Licensing Proceeding. Changes to Emergency Planning for Facility Forthcoming. W/Certificate of Svc ML20029A0121991-01-24024 January 1991 Motion for Substitution of Party.* Atty General s Harshbarger Moves That Secretary of NRC Enter Order Substituting Him in Place Jm Shannon as Intervenor to Proceeding.W/Certificate of Svc 1999-08-03
[Table view] |
Text
. -~ . _ . . _
.: ,l Filed: December 21, 1983 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION before the ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
)
In the Matter of )
)
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW
) Docket Nos. 50-443 OL HAMPSHIRE, et al. ) 50-444 OL
)
(Seabrook Station, Units 1 & 2) )
)
APPLICANTS' MOTION TO COMPEL SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES FROM THE NEW HAMPSHIRE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Contention NH-10)
The Applicants move, for the reasons set forth herein, that the Board issue an order compelling the New Hampshire Attorney General ("NHAG") to file supplementary answers to certain of the interrogatories propounded to NHAG by the Applicants.
In support of this motion, the Applicants say as follows:
i 8401030141 831221 PDR ADOCK 05000443 G PDR
J. _. +- --.-,i .,t4 *-
- 1. Contention NH-10 was admitted by the Board on September 13, 1983. LBP-82-76, 16 NRC 1029, 1040-41 (1982). It provides as follows:
"The Seabrook Station control room design does not comply with general design criteria 19 through 22 and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, and NUREG-0737, item I.D.1 and I.D.2."
- 2. On December 8, 1982, the Applicants propounded interrogatories to NHAG, including certain interrogatories relating to Contention NH-10 (numbered II-1 through II-13). These interrogatories sought to elicit, inter alia, information as to the aspects of the Seabrook Control Room design that NHAG contended were deficient and any changes or modifications to the Seabrook Control Room design that NHAG contended ought to be made, together in both regards with NHAG's basis for its contentions. (Similar interrogatories were propounded to each of the other intervenors. Each of the others, however, answered Interrogatory No. II-1 (i.e., "Does [Name of Intervenor) intend to litigate
[as defined] Contention NH-10?") in the negative.)
r
- 3. In response to these interrogatories, NHAG l
answered to the effect that it was then engaged in a review of the Seabrook Control Room design, by and l
l l
, J through its retained expert (Dr. Stephen T. Fan), and that it did not expect to have reached any definite position until completion of a design review then being undertaken by the Applicants (the so-called Detailed Control Room Design Review or "DCRDR"). (For the convenience of the Board, copies of Applicants' interrogatories Nos. II-1 through II-13, and of NHAG's responses thereto, are attached to this motion.)
- 4. Given NHAG's position, on June 13, 1983 the Applicants suggested that litigation of Contention NH-10 be deferred, and no party objected to that suggestion.
- 5. Since NHAG filed its answers, the DCRDR has been performed. On July 7, 1983, a DCRDR report was sent by the Applicants to the Staff, and a copy was provided to NHAG. On July 26 through 29, 1983, a series of meetings between the Applicants and the Staff on the subject of the DCRDR were held, and, at NHAG's request, Dr. Fan was invited to attend and did attend.
l During the course of that those meetings, Dr. Fan requested copies of certain documents regarding the 1
, DCRDR and these copies were furnished to him. On l August 11, 1983, a DCRDR " follow-up" report was sent by I
i l
l i
I . - _ - - . . - - -
, o the Applicants to the Staff, and a copy was provided to NHAG.
- 6. Since August 11, 1983, NHAG has not supplemented any of its answers to interrogatories or otherwise acted in response to contention NH-10.
On the basis of the foregoing subsequent events, the Applicants submit that NHAG should now be ordered to re-answer Interrogatories Nos. II-1 through II-13.
By their attorneys, 4 V
Thomas G. Dignan, Jr.
R. K. Gad III Ropes & Gray 225 Franklin Street Boston, Massachusetts 02110 Telephone: 423-6100 Dated: December 21, 1983
_4_
l
. o CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Robert K. Gad III, one of the attorneys for the Applicants herein, hereby certify that on December 21, 1983, I made service of the within " APPLICANTS' MOTION TO COMPEL SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES FROM THE NEW HAMPSHIRE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Contention NH-10)"
by mailing copies thereof, postage prepaid, to:
Helen Hoyt, Chairperson Ms. Diana P. Randall Atomic Safety and Licensing 70 Collins Street Board Panel Seabrook, NH 03874 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke William S. Jordan, III, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Harmon & Weiss Board Panel 1725 I Street, N.W.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Suite 506 Commission Washington, D.C. 20006 Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Jerry Harbour G. Dana Bisbee, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Assistant Attorney General Board Panel Office of the Attorney General U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 208 State House Annex Commission Concord, NH 03301 Washington, D.C. 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Roy P. Lessy, Jr., Esquire Board Panel Office of the Executive Legal U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Director Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Washington, D.C. 20555 Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Robert A. Backus, Esqui.re Appeal Board Panel 116 Lowell Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory P.O. Box 516 Commission Manchester, NH 03105 Washington, D.C. 20555
Philip Ahrens, Esquire Ms. Anne Verge, Chairperson Assistant Attorney General Board of Selectmen Department of the Attorney Town Hall General South Hampton, NH Augusta, ME 04333 Charles Cross, Esquire JoAnn Shotwell, Esquire Shaines, Madrigan & McEachern Assistant Attorney General 25 Maplewood Avenue Department of the Attorney General P. O. Box 366 One Ashburton Place, 19th Floor Portsmouth, NH 03842 Boston, Massachusetts 02108 Ms. Roberta C. Pevear Mr. Patrick J. McKeon Assistant Attorney General Selectmen's Office the Town of Hampton Falls 10 Central Road Drinkwater Road Rye, NH 03870 Hampton Falls, NH 03844 Mrs. Sandra Gavutis Mr. Calvin A. Canney Assistant Attorney General City Manager the Town of Kensington City Hall RFD 1 126 Daniel Street East Kingston, NH 03827 Portsmouth, NH 03801 Senator Gordon J. Humphrey Mr. Angie Machiros U.S. Senate Chairman of the Washington, D.C. 20510 Board of Selectmen (Attn: Tom Burack) Town of Newbury Newbury, MA 01950 Senator Gordon J. Humphrey Mr. Richard E. Sullivan 1 Pillsbury Street Mayor Concord, NH 03301 City Hall (Attn: Herb Boynton) Newburyport, MA 01950 Mr. Donald E. Chick Town Manager's Office Town Manager Town Hall Town of Exeter Friend Street 10 Front Street Amesbury, MA 01913 Exeter, NH 03833 1
Brian P. Cassidy, Esquire Brentwood Board of Selectmen l Regional Counsel RFD Dalton Road Federal Emergency Management Brentwood, NH 03833 Agency - Region I '
442 POCH Boston, MA 02109 Gary W. Holmes, Esquire Holmes & Ells i 47 Winnacunnet Road Hampton, NH 03841
/
l
{
\
Robert K. Gad III d
)
l i
j i
s 4
I l
t
- E=
i 6- y r, . -i r-k t !
p i
$ l
!: i 9 ;
t, I (e) state whether the facts .d opinions listed in t-t.
response to the foregoing are contained in any written fl ,
6 \
report, ~ memoranda, or other transcript, and, if so, f p
whether NHAG is willing to produce the same without the i C; !
necessity of a notice to produce; h' l (f) state whether the opinion of any expert witness ,
4 is based in whole or in part on any scientific rule or h I )
principle, and, if so, set forth such rule or
~
principle; ,
J ,
(g') state whether the opinion of any expert witness -
\i 1 is based in whole or in part on any code or regulation, !
, 1 governmental or otherwise, and, if so, identify each k' ,
i such code or regulation and the specific section or 3
portion thereof relied upon; and 4 '
l lf A .
(h). state whether the opinion of any expert witness 4
jb y.
is based in whole or in part upon any scientific or lj I
l engineering book or other publication, and, if so, identify the book or publication.
!p.
II-1. "3 Does IEAG intend to litigate contention NH-
] L 10 (Control Room Design)?
i (If the answer to this i' fl . 1 58 ,
interrogatory is an unqualified negative, you may i
proceed to Interrogatory III-1.) -
3
- / ! l' w
l l
(([]
s fI~
n;e b,
lh f, .i.
i e [,
rt ,
- 2 i
ai
v
.. i i
.I r .'
m.I 42
! L" Q: i 1
' < F. : : :
II-2. Please specify in detail each respect in
- f j
- 1 which NHAG contends that the Seabrook control room i pi ',
design- does not comply with GDC-19. 1 j
!D a
'g- ; '
II-3. Please sepcify in detail each respect in
~ U2.,,
f ..
i which NHAG contends that the Seabrook control room Tj de2ign does not comply with GDC-20.
ll
[
t II-4. Please specify in detail each respect in !
l which NHAG contends that Seabrook control room design
, ; )>
j does not comply with GDC-21. la i j,,
II-5. Please specify in detail each respect in ,
O(,
h' which NHAG contends that Seabrook control room design : ;
j r
, does not comply with GDC-22.
l' i n II-6. Please specify in detail each respect in
{
which NHAG contends that Seabrook control room design .
u l does not comply with NUREG-0737, Item I.D.1. l J l.
II-7. Please specify in detail each respect in
[:1 which NHAG contends that Seabrook control room design i;
5 4
does not comply with NUREG-0737, Item I.D.2? i t
- t 4 -
! F II-8.
Please specify each change in the Seabrook a j(r .;
I :.
control room design that, if made, would satisfy NHAG l I '
1 r that the Seabrook control room design complies with all i ,;
I applicable regulatory requirements. [qi! -
l
.: E LL II-9. For each change specified in response to the - l' ,
j,l ' ;^
foregoing interrogatory, please: (i) identify each and i 1:p l
I
_g_
,3 k l
\ _____ -- .. _. l
\W
', G r, I E
i:
b every United States nuclear power plant that di j
incorporates the change specified, and (ii) identify k
each dnd every United States nuclear power plant that ! ?
g !
does not incorporate the change specified.
...p II-10.
p
)
Please describe each respect in which each if I
change specified in response to Interrogatory No. II-8 ;t; d
would or might have an offsetting negative effect on g, t
1.
control room efficiency or operator performance.
II-11. k
.; j When did NHAG first review the Seabrook ,
control room design, and what persons reviewed that ,
a h
design on NHAG's behalf?
.!r !
II-12. [
+!
When did NHAG last review the Seabrook
)
control room design, and what persons reviewed that design on NHAG's behalf?
{k.f r II-13.
Does NHAG intend to offer the testimony of '
l any expert witness with respect to this contention? If '
' ?,
so, please: (
JI (a) identify each expert witness whom NHAG intends 1 (y ,i 3
pi l
}d g .
to present with respect to this contention; .t i t
' y# '
(b) ( '
.L state the substance of the facts to which each , c. . , y expert witness is expected to testify; ,e .
'h )
(c) state the substance of the opinion or opininns i j :
4 ,
j l d to which each expert witness is expected to testify; g., '
/
f{ Il 7 1:
a J[a y {
" I z
-lo- .fi {
U i l
!.? 1 !*
J N
\; y ?
'\
n
\ _ _ _ . _ _ - _ - - _ - . - - - - - -
^
}
- (d) provide a summary of the grounds for each i opinion to which each expert witness is expected to
{
testify; (e) state whether the facts and opinions listed in 4
response to the foregoing are contained in any written report, memoranda, or other transcript, and, if so, ,
i whether NHAG is willing to produce the same without the !
necessity of a notice to produce; (f) state whether the opinion of any expert witness l
is based in whole or in part on any scientific rule or ,
principle, and, if so, set forth such rule or '
- principle; '
c
(
(g) state whether the opinion of any expert witness i
f is based in whole or in part on any code or regulation, k governmental or otherwise, and, if so, identify each I a
such code or regulation and the specific section or !
portion thereof relied upon; and i (h) state whether the opinion of any expert witness l is based in whole or in part upon any scientific or s h; engineering book or other publication, and, if so, identify the book or publication.
l III-1. Does NHAG- intend to litigate contention NH- 1 13 a (Operations Personnel Qualifications and Training)? -
I
- I i
i i
l i
I h
.. . 3 l
1 D s Contention NH-10 Control Room Design II-l Yes.
l -
I t
II-2 through II-7 For the purposes of clarity, these Interrogatories can be answered together. A detailed Control Room Design Review or preliminary Control Room Design Assessment is required under NUREG-0737, I.D.1 and Supplement thereto. Equally important to this review requirement is the requirement under 1.D.2 that safety parameters be displayed as a system. Evaluation of control room design problems since the accident at Three Mile Island has indicated that improvement of Control. Room Design and procedures is essential to safe operation of a nuclear power facility. It is noted that review of emergency procedures is required by NUREG-0737, I.C.l.
The focus of New Hampshire's contention is to assure that an assessment of the Control Roon Design and ih emergency procedures is performed and results in appropriate modifications. The Applicant's answers to Interrogatories NH-10.13 and NH-10.14 reflect that such a-review or assessment has not been performed and that human factors and task analyses have not been
, performed. Similarly, the Applicant has not developed a proposal for SPDS.
The State of New' Hampshire has not performed a technical. assessment of the Applicant's compliance with General Design Criteria 19, 20, 21, and 22 and at j this time, we do not intend to offer direct testimony l on these specific issues. However, the absence of the required review and assessment process required by
} NUREG-0737 indicates that compliance with the General J Design Criteria has not been demonstrated. Since we have not had an opportunity to review the DCRDR or prelimihary assessment, as neither is yet available, ue cannot be more specific on areas in uhich the Applicant has failed to improve Control Room Design and procedures as required by NUREG-0700 and 0737.
o fn LJ New Hampshire bases its position that a detailed Control Room Design review is required on the following regulatory requirements and documents. j These documents, in general, indicate the importance of timely and review and upgrading of Control Room Design procedures.
Because the Applicant has not !
completed its Control Room Design Review, this is a I partial list which may be supplemented. '
GDC 13, 19, 20, 21, 22 NUREG-0700 .
i NUPEG-0737, I.C.1, I.D.1, I.D.2, II.F.1, II.F.2, and Supplement 1 II.B.1, II.D.3, l r
NUREG-0800 NUREG-0696 t
Regulatory Guide 1.97 ,,
i,1
] Documents produced by the Applicant in response !!
/ to the New Hampshire's interrogatories on j Contention NH-10 I Technical Note: The Control Room Design Review, ll E.W.
1982 Hagen (Ed.), Nuclear Safety, 23 (291-299), ii" I
I i
Survey of Control Room Design Practices with ,'
Respect to Human Factors Engineering, J.L. I Seminara, S.W. Parsons, Nuclear Safety, 21 (603-617), 1980 ,
Human Factors Engineering Enhancement of Nuclear Power Plant Control Rooms, J.L. Seminara, R.W.
Pack, S. Seidenstein, S.K. Eckert, Nuclear Safety, 21 (351-363), 1980 f Human Factors Engineering in the U.S. Nuclear E' Arena, E.W.
Hagen, G.T. Mays, Nuclear Safety, 22 (337-346), 1981 )
L F
Some Possible Ways to Improve Nuclear Power Plant b Instrumentation, Y.Y. Hsu, A.L.M. Hon., Nuclear Safety, 22 (728-737), 1981 [
t E
F
.L
th Establishing Priorities in Control Room Design l
Review, E.L. Zebroski, M.E. Maddox, P.E. Dietz, Nuclear pp. 30-34 Engineering International, July 1982, II-8 New Hampshire believes that changes to control room design and procedures should result from a thorough Control Room Design Review, including. human factors and task analysis. New Hampshire has not performed such an analysis since this is the responsibility of the Applicant under 0737, I.C.1, I.D.1, and I.D.2.
Once a Control Room Design Review is produced and New Hampshire has an opportunity to review it, New Hampshire will comment on the proposed upgrading of control room design and procedures.
II-9 As far as is known to New Hampshire, every nuclear '
power plant in the United States is required to '
perform a Control Room Design Review and/or Assessment.
l II-10 5 When specific changes in control room design are proposed as a result of a Control Room Design Review and of the development of procedures for transients .)
and accidents as required by NUREG-0737, I.C.1, New l Hampshire will be in a position to review such changes j for possible off-setting negative effect on control .!
room efficiency or operator performance, as well as the significance of such changes in enhancing the safe operation of the plant.
t II-ll New Hampshire began reviewing the Seabrook FSAR when it was received in November of 1981. Initial review -
of the FSAR was on a non-technical basis by the staff of the Attorney General's Office, E. Tupper Kinder, a Esquire and George Dana Bisbee, Esquire. Technical i i
review was begun by Dr. Stephen S. T. Fan in August of 1982. - ;
1 II-12 Review of the Seabrook control room design ic -
continuing process and continues to be revie,;
Dr. Stephen S.T. Fan. 'y q
d L
' d b f t<
i l
t 4
\
$h II-13 New Hampshire has not yet determined which witnesses I it will offer with respect to this contention.
G-1 The documents upon which the above answers are :
based are listed in the above Interrogatories.
G-2 The answers are not based upon any type of study, calculation, or analysis other than a review of ;
the FSAR, RAI, and the above-mentioned documents j by Dr. Fan.
G-3 ~ The above answers were developed as a result of a number of discussions between Dr. Fan and Assistant Attorney General E. Tupper Kinder since August of 1982 and are not based on communications with any other individuals.
Contention NH-13 Operations Personnel Qualifications III-l Yes.
ll III-2 Item I.A.l.1 does not apply to the position of station manager.
l l III-3 New Hampshire does not assert non-compliance with Item '
I.A.2.1 with regard to the position of station manager.
l l
III-4 New Hampshire does not assert non-compliance with Item I.A.2.3 with regard to the position of station manager, j III-5 Chapter 13 of the FSAR does not provide sufficient detail to ensure that the station manager has the proper qualifications and training to respond properly in controlling or mitigating an accident in which the core is severely damaged. New Hampshire's concern focuses on .the ability of the station manager to determine the extent of core damage, understand instrumentaion response in an accident environment, understand the expected chemistry results and ramifications of severe core damage, and properly determine the level of radiation inside the containment.
-