ML20126M078

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Annual Report.Fiscal Year 1991

ML20126M078
Person / Time
Issue date:	12/31/1992
From:	Cotter B Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:
References
NUREG-1363, NUREG-1363-V04, NUREG-1363-V4, NUDOCS 9301080196
Download: ML20126M078 (41)

Text

. . - . - . - - . - - . _ . - - - . . - - . _ - - -

. NUREG-1363 Vol. 4

)

l

)

ATOMIC SAFFil'Y AND LICENSING BOARD PANEL ANNUAL REPORT FISCAL YEAR 1991 uns=-

use -

December 1992 L

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

, Washington, DC 20555 l

l 7882 R8AM ' PDR 1363 R r~>- . , - , - , - -,, --

-r-- - .n,.- . - - , - - - - . , - - - . - - , , . _ , , - , _ . , , , ,, ,. _- - - - - - - a, . , - m e,,, v . ar a *

~

a .

AVAILABILITY NOTICE Availability of Beference Materials Cited in NRC Publications Most documents cited in NRC publications will be available from one 'of the following Sources

. 1. - The NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW., Lower Level, Washington, DC 20555

2. The Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. Box 37082, Washington, DC 20013-7082

3. 1he National Technical information Service, Springfield, VA 22161 Although the listing that follows represents the majority of documentr cited in NRC publica-tions, it is not intended to be exhaustive, Referenced documents available for inspection and copying for a fee from the NRC Public Document Room include NRC correspondence and interna! NRC memoranda: NRC bulletins, circulars, information notices, inspection and investigation notices; licensee event reports; vendor reports and correspondence: Comrnission papers; and applicant and licensee docu-monts and correspondence.

The following documents in the NUREG series are available for purchase from the GPO Sales Program: formal NRC staff and contractor reports. NRC-sponsored conference proceed-ings, international agreement reports, grant publications, and NRC booklets and brochures.

Also available are regulatory guides, NRC regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations, and Nuclear Regulatory Commission issuances.

Documents available from the National Technical Information Service include NUREG-series

. reports and technical reports prepared by other Federal agencies and reports prepared by the Atomic Energy Commission, forerunner agency to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Documents available from public and special technical libraries include all open literature items, such as books, journal articles, and transactions. Federal Register notices, Federal and State legislation, and congressional reports can usually be obtained from these-libraries.

Documents such as theses, dissertations, foreign reports and translations, and non-NRC

- conference proceedings are available for purchase from the organization sponsoring the publication' cited.

Single copies of NRC draft reports are available fresi to the extent of supply, upon wntten requeat to the Office of Administration, Distribution and Mail Services Section, U.S, Nuclear- -

Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555J Copies of industry codes and standards used in a substantive manner in the NRC regulatory -

process are maintained at the NRC Library, 7920 Norfolk Avenue (Bethesda, Maryland, for a

use by the public ' Codes and standards are usually copyrighted and may be purchased from the originating organization or', if they are Arnetican National. Standards, from the

- American National Standaras institute,1430 Broadway, New York, NY 10018,

--.__W, 8

h NUREG-1363 -

Vol 4 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD PANEL ANNUAL REPORT FISCAL YEAR 1991

/\

December 1992 i

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY! COMMISSION Washington, DC 20555-g-

AllSTRACT In Fiscal Year 1991, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Commission. The Panel also replaced several badly lloard Panel ("the Panel") handled 48 proceedings, a needed technical disciplines lost to retirement over the percent increase over the previous year. The cases last two years. This report summarizes, highlights, and addressed issues in the const ruction, operation, and main- analyzes how the wide-ranging issues raised in NRC pro-tenance of commercial nuclear power reactors and other ceedings were addressed try the judges and licensing activities requiring a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Imards of the Panel during the year.

l r

l l

iii . NUREG-1363, Vol. 4 l

l _ _ . - . .

. _~. . - - . - - - - .. .- - - . - - - . . . --

CONTENTS Page l

I AH STR A C P . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ... ......... ..... .............. ............ iii - l

i EXECUTIVE SUMM ARY . . . . .... . ................................................... . vii  !

1 Oveni ew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . , . . . . . . . . ...... ................................. vil Docket Data . . . .. ... ., ............ .. .. ........ .. ......................... ' vii Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . ... .. ...... .. ........... ............. ' vii i

I. INTRODUCI'lON . . . . . . . . ....... . ....... .. ..... ....... ........ ........ 1-

11. !!NSURING THE PUBLIC IIliALTII AND SAFETY: SIGNIFICANT FISCAL YEAR 1991 DECISIONS , , . . . .... ..... . ...... ........... .......... ... .... ,, 2 A. Panet J urisdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . ............ .. ......... ..... 2 H. S ig nifica n t Pa n e t D ecisio ns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1. Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Proceedings . . ... ... ... ... . . .... . .. . 2

2. Experiments with Americium and Plutonium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , 2

3. Late Intervention: Ignorance of the Law . ... ... ....... ..... ........., . ... ... 3

4. Standing . . . .. .. ......... , , .... .. ..... ......................, 3

5. Technical Specifications Amendments .. . . .... . .. .. ..... .. ....... . . . 3

6. Civil Penalties . ...... . .. .. ,,.. . , , ........ .... ...... ,, .. ...... 3

7. Written Testimony . . . . . ........ . .... ......... ... . .. .. .......... ..... 4

8. Inspection Fees .. . .... . ....... . ... . .. ...... ....... ..... .. ... 4

9. Special Nuclear Materials: Emerge ncy Plan . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . 4

10. Discovery: Materials License Proceedings , ............ ...... .... . .. ............ 4

11. Dismissal of Parties from Proceedings . . . . . . .. .... ,, ...... ................. 4

12. Informal Procedures to Resolve Contested issues . ...... , ........ ...... .. .. ,, 4

13. Standards for Review for Show Cause Determinations . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

14. Decommissioning: NEPA Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .......... 4 III. FISCAL YEAR 1991 CASELOAD AN ALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ...... ....... . 5 A. Oveniew , . . .. . ,. ... . ..... ..... .., .... ......, ........ ,. ... ......... 5 H. The Fiscal Year 1991 L)ocket . . .. . ,,, ..,. ... ..... ................. ... ... . 5 C. Case Management . ... .... . ... . . . ... , , ..... . .......... .... .... 6-D. Types of Cases . ... ........ . .... , , ....... ... .. .. .. . . .. . ....., 6' E. Operating Licenses . . .... .. ... . . .. ..... . ..... . . . .. ., . . 8 IV PERSONNEL AND SUPPORT . . . . . . ., ...... . .. ..... ........ .. .. .... . .. 9

- A. Panel Members .... .. . .. ... .. . . . . . .... . ... ..... . .. 9 H. Professional and Support Staff . . . .... .. . . .. . .. . . . . ..... 9

1. Technical and Legal Support Staff . ., . . . . .. . .... ... .... 9

2. Administrative Support Staff . .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . 9 v NUREG-1363. Vol. 4

_-_a___________-____ - _

V. ENII ANCING THE ADJ UDICATORY PROCESS . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 "A.' General.............................................................................. 11 B. The PanePs Electronic Docket . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......................n- 11 C. H ea rin g Proced u res . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

- D. Coordination with the Office of the Licensing Support System Adtnh.6trator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '12 E. Agency Cou rt R eporting Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -i . . .

. .13 VI. ~ CONCLUSIONS A. Fiscal Year 1991 in Ret rospect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-B. Meeting the Adjudicatory Demands of the Next Decade . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 APPENDICES

-A Organizational Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... .. ............................................ 17 B Atomic Safety Licensing Board Panel . . . . . . .......... ........................................ 19 C Biographical Sketches of Panel M embe rs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-D- Selected issuances of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Boards . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 )

E Major Federal Statutes and Regulations Relevant to ASLBP Adjudications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31.

FIGURES

1. Fiscal Year 1983 Caseload Mix by Percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ 6

2. Fiscal Year 1991 Caseload Mix by Percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... .............. .......... 7

3. Fiscal Year 1992 Projected Caseload Mix by Percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 ............... ....... 17

- 4. Fiscal Year 1993 Projected Caschud Mix by Percent . . . . . . ............. ..... ................ :7-TABLES

1. Fiscal Year 1991 Docket Recapitulation . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :5

2. Panel Caseload by Fiscal Ye a r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-

3. Increase in Average Caseload per Full-Time Judge / Full. Time Panel Member . . . . . . . 4 ............. 5

4. Average Case Age by' Type /Overall in FY. 1991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L6

~

'5. Months FY 1991 Cases Were on Docket . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ............................ 6 a.

NUREG-1363, Vol. 4 -- vi _

l l

l EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

Overview Cascioad per Judge: The average caseload per full-time judge increased 13 percent in Fiscal Year 1991 over the Although the Fiscal Year 1991 caseload reflected the average of the seven previous years.

kinds of disputes that arise from the regulation of a newly matured industry, three unusual cases were filed. They included the first litigated haarings involving the appeal by a utility of a major civil penalty, the first antitrust case Completed Proceedings: Of 48 proceedings on the docket in a decade, and the first application to construct an during the year,24 (50 percent of all proceedings) were enrichment facility. closed in 1991. Fifty-two percent of the cases closed were on the docket for only 6 r y or less.

Otherwise, however, only 3 of the 48 cases on the Panel's docket for Fiscal Year 1991 related to applications for -

construction permits or operating licenses. The Fiscal Year 1991 cases focused on issues arising out of the con-tinuing operation of more than 115 nuclear power plants or related facilities, or programs related to 8,000 materi.

Adm,m,strat. i ion als licenses and other nuclear licenses. Thus, new filings during the year focused principally on applications for license amendments and challenges to NRC staff en-forcement actions. Staffing: At the close of the previous fiscal year, retirements had reduced full-time Panel personnel As described in this report, the Panel continues to im- significantly. To replace lost technical disciplines, the prove the efficiency of the Commission's hearing process. Panel hired two full-time and six part-time judges, The highlights are given below. bringing the total to 40 judges (15 full-time and 25 part time). The newly hired judges also lowered the am Ee age of fuH-time Panel members to 56 and Docket Data part-time Panel members to 68. Nevertheless, more than Case Age: .The average age of all cases on the docket 70 percent of all judges are currently eligible to retire.

during the liscal year (as of September 30,1991) was 13.8 Consequently, during the year, the Panel established months, a decrease of 49 percent over the Fiscal Year registers of qualified candidates, both to obtain and 1986 average afe- replace technical disciplines necessary to the Panel's work. load and to expedite replacement of retirees. _

Case Filings: The number of new cases filed in Fiscal Year 1991 exceeded the number of new cases filed in 1990 by 17 percent. Inspector General's Audit: During the year, the Panel implemented five recommendations made by the Caseload: Of the 48 cases on the Panel's docket for Fiscal Inspector General in his June 1990 audit of Panel Year 1991,25 cases involved nuc! car power reactors or operations. Four of the recommendations urged related facilities (3 involved applications for construction continuation and completion of existing Panel programs.

permits or operating licenses). The remaining 23 proceedings involved other types of Commission licensees.

The Paners Electrnnie Docket: The Panel made Enforcement: During Fiscal Year 1991, 7 of 15 substantial progress in expanding the scope, depth, and enforcement proceedings were closed, availability of its Computer Automation Project (CAP) electronicdocket during Eiscal Year 1991. At the close of Other Cases: Of the four categories of cases that the the fiscalyear, the Pane! was:(1) enhancing the system by inspector General's audit recommended referring to the adding licensing panel and appeal board issuances within Panel, one Fqual Employment Opportunity (EEO) case 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of decision; (2) briefing other State and Federal was received at the end of the year. agencies that inquired about the CAP system; (3) expanding the database to hold additional caseh) ads; and Prehearing Contention Resolution: For all proceedings, (4) conducting a major cost reduction study of almost 73 percent of all formal contentions were resobed personal-computer-based, full-text systems to substitute before trial, a continuation of prior experiences, for our minicomputer-based system.

vii NUREG-1363, Vol. 4

I, INTRODUCTION The Atomic Safety and I.icensing floard Panel ("the go beyond the issues placed before them by the parties in Panel") was created by the Commission pursuant to Sec- order to identify, explore, and resolve any significant tion 191 of the Atomic linergy Act of 1954, as amended. question necessary to avoid any threat to the public health

'the first licensing board was appointed November 9. and safety.'lhus, if the public's health or safety are impli-1962. In the ensumg 29 years, nuclear reactor licensing cated, licensing boards must ensure that those interests and construction permit hearings conducted before the are fully explored and effectively preserved.

Panel's licensing boards have been characteri/cd as among the rnost complex, lengthy, and controversial ad. Moreover, w hile the Panel has moved away from the lar ge ministrative hearings conducted by the itederal Govern. nuclear power plant operatmg license proceedings that rnent.This results principally from three factors, dominated its docket during much of this decade, the site decontamination, enforcement actions, reactor operator, and materials license proceedings that are taking their -

1:irst, these hearings routinely involve difficult interre- place continue to raise difficult and sometimes unex.

lated questions of policy, law, engineering, and risk as- plored questions of law and science. And in the near sessment, often at the cutting edge of science and tech- future, projected proceedings invoMng facility decom-nology. 'lhus, hcensing boards must confront not only missioning, license renewal, license applications for new disputed legal and factual arguments, but also competing reactors, and new reactor design certtfication are likely to technical and scientific theories, opinions, and research once again rank among the most complex and contested findings. Second, hearings before licensing boards are the proceedmgs conducted by the 17ederal ndministrative ju.

principal public administrative vehicle through which in- diciary. Certainly, they will involve novel scientific issues, dividuals. organizations, and State and local governments 1:inally, work has begun by the Department of Energy can exercise an equal voice in the resolution of their which will lead to the high-level waste repository pro-concerns about regulated nuclear activities. 'lhus, diffi- ccedmg a case that could become the most complex and cult technical questions are often resolved in the compli- controversial administratise proceedmg ever conducted cated environment of local concerns about the conse- by the Federal Government.

quences of severe accidents and the national debate over the role nuclear power should play in meeting the Na- In Fiscal Year 1991, the Panel handled 48 proceedings.

tion's energy needs. 'lhird, in decidmg whether a license, This report summari/es, highlights, and analyzes how the permit, amendment, or extension should be granted to a wide-ranging issues raised in these proceedmgs were ad-particular applicant, individual boards must be more than dressed by the boards and the judges of the Panel during mere umpires. Where appropriate, they are required to that year.

1 NURiiG-1303 Vol. 4

11. ENSURING TIIE PUllLIC IIEAUril AND SAFETY:

SIGNIFICANT FISCAL YEAR 1991 DECISIONS A. Panel Jurisdiction See Appendix D. Some of the more significant cf these formalissuances are summariecd below, He Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (as amended by the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974) ("the Act") and its 1. Shoreham Nuclear Power Stat.mn implementing regulations require that a formal hearing Proceedings be held on every application for a construction permit for a nuclear power plant or related facility.There are also During h_ scal Year 1991, a licensing board issued a num-opportunities for hearings at the operating license stage ber of decisions for Shoreham responding to motions and and for hearings for license amendments to nuclear hearing requests filed by the Shoreham-Wading River power reactors. Finally, other sections of the Act or the Central School District and Scientists and Engmeets for ---

Commission's rules provide an opportunity for a formal Secure Energy. Dese petitioners wanted Shoreham to hearing on antitrust issues, civil penalties, various en, e ntinue operating as a nuclear facility. I heir opposition forcement actions, and other matters upon which the to decommissioning Shoreham arose out of an agreement Commission could require a hearing. He Panel's formal between the Long Island Lighting Company ("LILCO")

proceedings are governed by the Administrative Proce- and the State of New York that LILCO would not operate dure Act,5 U.S.C. $ 551, et scq. as implemented by the Shoreham and would sell Shoreham to the Long Island Commission's own rules of practice set out at 10 C.F.R. Power Authority for subsequent decommissionmg.

Part 2. Most hearings are held at or near the site of the llLCO did not request decommissioning during Fiscal licensed facility or business.

Year 1991, but it did request and was granted certain license amendments and a Possession Only License on a Informal hearing procedures are authorized in matters affecting one of the NRC's more than 8,000 materials finding that no significant hazards would result from al-lowing Shoreham to be maintamed more economically, licensees. See 10 C.F.R. $$ 2.1201-2.125L While the .Ihe petitioners opposed these licensing acticas, contend-deliberative process for judges remains the same under .

ing that they constituted de facto decommissioning, an either type of hearing, informal hearings involve signifi-action that should require the NRC to prepare environ-cantly different procedures for developing the record mental impact statements. The petitioners also claimed-upon which decisions must be tused.The principa' differ-that any environmental impact statements must consider ences include the use of a presiding officer (a single ad-ministrative judge ), written submittals by the parties, the operation of Shoreham as one of the cost-benefit and, if the presiding officer determines it to be necessary options.

after considering the written submittals, oral presenta- On the basis of severalinterim rulings by the Commission tions by the parties subject to questionmg by the presidmg indicating, among other things, that resumed operations officer. Although the mformal hearing procedures have for Shoreham was not an option, the licensing tward re-the potential to shorten and simplify the hearing process, jected most of the petitioners' requests, including all of the realization of that potentialin large degree depends the contentions they submitted for litigation during this on the presiding officer's abdity to identify, focus on, and period. Long Island Lighting Company (Shoreham Nuclear -

explore the matertal factual and technical issues

• Power Station, Unit 1), LUP-91-1,33 NRC 15 (1991);

LBP-91-7,33 NRC 179 (1991); LUP-91-23,33 NRC 430

- - .. (1991); LUP-91-26,33 NRC 537 (1991); LBP-91-32,34 ll. SlgHillCant I,anel DeCIS10HS NRC 132 (1991). However, the board did find that one of the petitioners had standing to intervene (see discussion During Fiscal Year 1991, the Panel's boards and presiding on organizational standing, infra).

officers published 38 decisions and issued several hun-dred memoranda and orders in connection with the 48 2. Experiments with Americium and proceedings on the Panel's docket for Fiscal Year 1991. Plutonium in a Subpart L proceeding concerning a university testing facility, the presiding officer granted a license for con-

= ducting experiments with unencapsulated americium and l

l

' As a matter of Panel practice, an Atomic Safety and licensing uaard Panel ( ASI.HP) judge having expertne (i.c, legal or technical)com ple- 8All citations refer to volume and page numbers of NuclearRedat<xy menting that of the single presidtog officer as rouhnely assigned to the Conynmion Inuances, and all cases may he found in the two electmnic proceedmg as a special assistant. legal databases. LEXIS and WIhTI AW.

NUREG-1363, Vol. 4 2

plutonium. Curators of the University of Missouri (Trump-S the licens;ng luard found that a New York organization ProjectK IEP-91-31, 34 NRC 29 (1991). To ensure had standmg to intervene in a license arocndment pro-safety, the presiding officer ordered fire extinguishers to cceding involving the Shoreham facility, llistorically, an be installed and the licensee's procedures to be modified crganization establishes standing in an NRC proceedmg to reduce the risk of a serious fire that might disperse after some of its members, who potentially could oc in-nuclear materials, jured by the action in question, authori/c it to represent their interests. However, the board concluded that this

3. 1. ate Intenention: Ignorance of the Law organization had standing on its own behalf based on its organizational function of disseminating information to in a Subpart 1. proceeding involving a Massachusetta its members. Specifically, this organization was unable to company engaging in the conversion of depleted uranium, act on information that was essential to its activities when the presidmg officer dismissed an untimely petition fa, a the NRC failed to issue environmental impact statements hearing when the petitioners had not requested a hearing for several licensing actions. In granting standing, the within 30 days of receiving actual notice of the application board recognized that the purpose of the National Envi-and had not demonstrated an adequate excuse for un. ronmental Policy Act of ensuring well-informed govern- --

timeliness as required by the regulations. Nuclear Metals, ment decisions and stimulating public comment on Inc4 LBP-91-27, 33 NRC 548 (1991). The petitioners agency actions effectively lowers the threshold for estab-argued that they lacked notice because the public infor- lishing injury to informational interests, mation about the application did not include notice of the

c. Inferred Standing right to oppose the application. In dismissing the petition, the presiding officer held that the principle " ignorance of In a license amerdmer.1 proceeding involving Georgia the law is no excuse" applies to the timeliness provisions Power Company (Vogtle, Units 1 and 2), l_BP-91-33,34 in the regulations, particularly if a petitioner has enough N RC 138 (1991), a local intervenor had participated in an knowledge to inquire further. The presiding officer also earlier NRC proceeding invohing the same nuclear facil.

noted that in this case the petitioners had received actual itv. The board did not require this intervenor to again notice of the application 8 months before filing their estabbsh standing because its standing already was estab-request for a hearmg. lished in the earlier case.

4. Standing 5. Technical Specifications Amendmcnts

a. Presumption of Standmg Bmed on Close Proximity to In Georgia Power Company (Vogtle, Units 1 and 2),

the Facility IBP-91-21, 33 NRC 419 (1991), a local organization contended that a technical specifications amendment, in-Fer purposes of determining whether an intervenor has volving a plant modification by a licensee, should not be _

standing, injury has traditionally been inferred in NRC allowed because there was a better way of making this _

cases where intervenors live within 50 miles of the nuclear modification. The licensee's method met current NRC facility. In a license amendment proceeding involving the regulatory guidance. In dismissing the contention, the Palo Verde nuclear facility, a party contended that the board concluded, as a matter of law, that if regulatory 50-mile presumption should only apply to construction requirements were met, the board could not limit a licen-permit or operating license proceedmgs which involve see's choice of actions even if one method was clearly wide-ranging activities that can potentially affect a large better than the other.

geographic area. Because license amendment proceed-ings are usually much more limited in sebpe, it claimed 6. Civil Penalties that the petitioner, a resident of Tempe, Arizona, must allege the specific injury that could occur from the af. In Fewell Geotechnical Engineering. Ltd.. LBP-91-29,33 fected activities. The licensing board disagreed and found NRC 561 (1991), the staff ordered a radiographer to be that the petitioner did not have to show specific injury if suspended from his job for 3 years for violating operating there was potential for offsite consequences. The board procedures and not being truthful. The licensing board found this potential present at Palo Verde because the modified the order by reducing the period of suspension license amendment involved changes to several systems = to 9 months and requiring the radiographer to serve 3 that were important to safety. Arizona Public Service Com. additional months as a radiographer's assistant before pany (Palo Verde, Units 1,2, and 3), IEP-91-4,33 NRC resuming work as a radiographer. In reducing the penalty, 132 (1991). the board differentiated between types of willful miscon-duct, The willfulness here, lying when panicked and in a

b. Organizational Standing stressed state of mind, was not as culpable as those cases in which individuals have intentionally plotted to deceive In Long Island Lightmg Company (Shoreham Nuclear the NRC.The board's decision was appealed by the NRC Power Station, Unit 1), IEP 91-32,34 NRC 132 (1991), staff.

3 N UREG-1363, Vol. 4

7. Written Testimony applications for construction permits or operating li-censes for a pnxluction or utilization facility. Adpanted

'in Tulsa Gamma Ray Inc., LilP-91-25, 33 NRC 535 Afedical Systems, Inc., I.llP-91-9, 33 NRC 212 (1991),

(1991), a civil penalty proceeding, a party requested that the licensee, an Oklahoma radiography company, be re- 11. Dismissal of Parties from Proceedings

- quired to file written testimony, as oppmed to being able to use live testimony, at the hearing.'lhe licensing board in a license amendment proceeding for the Palo Verde held that the licensee in a civil penalty cae.e has a right to nuclear reactors, several petitioners seeking intervention present live testimony where credibility is a significant were dismissed for failing to appear at the prehearing factor.

conference, 'the board concluded that their failure to seek a continuance, formally withdraw, or explain their

8. Inspection Fees f ilure to appear, was not only a default, but was con-temptuous conduct proscribed by the Commissmn's regu-lations. Arimna Public Scn ice Company (Palo Verde Units In a show-catise proceeding seeking license revocation for failure to pay an NRC inspection fee, a Missouri-based 1,2, and 3), LilP-91-13,33 NRC 259 (1991)f -

byproduct material licensee had requested a waiver of that fee on the ground that its licensed equipment was 12. Informal Procedures to Resolve Contested used exclusively for government projects. Rhodes-Sayre & Issues Associates. Inc.. I.HP-91-15, 33 NRC 535 (1991). Ihc licensing board considered this request and also analyzed in a license amendment proceeding for the Vogtle whether the otaff should have imposed some lesser sane- facility, the licensees agreed to pursue mformal resolu-tion than license revocation. It concluded that there was tion of the issues before the issues were accepted as no abuse of staff discretion in either instance, and also contentions in the proceeding /lhe licensing board deter.

found that the enforcement actions taken were consistent mined that it was authorized to utilize informal with other similar NRC actions and with the Commis- procedures to resolve these issues, it further concluded sion's regulations. that questions posed by a licensing board preceding the grant of a hearmg in order to clarify areas of concern do

9. Special Nucicar Materials: Emergency ""'

Units** 1"""",

anddis""'E 6'o58 Po*rr

2) LilP-91-6,33 Company NRC 169 (1991). (vosele pg

13. Standards for Review for Show Cause in a Subpart L proceeding concerning a university,s test.

mg facihty, the presiding officer determmed that it is Determinations 3 appropriate for a fire department to have a procedure in in evaluating the actions of the NRC staff in issuing an which firefighters may cease fighting a fire when radiation Order to Show Cause why a license should not be revoked -

levels reach dangerous levels. This is similar to procc- for nonpayment of a license fee, a licensing board based dures when great heat or smoke causes firefighters to its review on whether the staff abused its Cscretion.The cease fighting a fire from a threatened location. Curators board concluded that, even though severe, the sanction ,

-of the University of Missouri (Frump-S Project), was ccmsistent with Commission regulations and with en-LIlP-90-38,32 NRC 359 (1990). forcement actions in similar cases. Rhodes-Sayre & Associ-

10. Discovery: Materials License Proceedings

14. Decommissioning: NEPA Requirements in an enforcement action against an Ohio medical facility, a party against whom summary disposition was granted in a proceeding involving an application for a Possession contended that the licensing board could not rely on cer- Only License for the Rancho Seco facility, a petitioner, tain affidavits in support of the motion since the party had who opposed the facility's shutdown, claimed the license not had an opportunity to cross-examine the affiants.The could not be issued without a NEPA review The licensing licensing board ruled that the affidavits were permissible board found that NEPA doe not obligate the NRC to for use because the party had ample time to engage in-' - conduct a review of a licenscu s decision to cease opera-discovery concerning the affidavits even though a tions of the reactor.Moreover, the NRCis not required to

_ prehearing conference had not been held. The board review a licensee's decision to cease operations of and reasoned that Commission regulations do not prohibit decommission a power reactor, and there is no require.

licensing boards from ordering formal or informal discovJ ment that the licensee submit a decommissioning plan cry upon the request of a party prior to a prehearing contemporaneously with its application for a Possession conference in a materials license proceeding.The reguia- Only License as contended by petitioner. Sacramento Mu-tory prohibition'against discovery prior to a prehearing nicipal Utility District (Rancho Seco Station), LilP 17, conference found in 10 C.F.R. S 2.740(b)(1)is limited to 33 NRC 379 (1991); LHP-91-30,34 NRC 23 (1991).

NURiiG-1363, Vol. 4 4 l

l

111. FISCAL YEAR 1991 CASELOAD ANALYSIS A. Overview Table 2 Panel caseload by fiscal year Since the first licensing board was appointed by the Com- Fiscal Year No. of Cases mission in 1962,610 cases have been filed,584 of which had been closed by the end of Fiscal Year 1991, Dunng 1984 63 Fiscal Year 1991, the Panel had 48 proceedings on its 1985 55 docket, representing a 20-percent increasc in the number 1986 58 of cases from the previous year. Of these 48 ptoceedings, 1987 52 25 involved nuclear power plants or related facilities, and 1988 50 23 involved other Commission licensees. Unlike the dec- 1989 40 ades of the 1970's and 1980's, construction permit and 1990 40 -

operating license proceedings for nuclear reactors did not 3993 43 dominate the Panel's docket during Fiscal Year 1991.

B. The Fiscal Year 1991 Docket Table 2 shows that (ahhough greater than in 1989 and 1990) the number of cases on the ASL13P docket in Fiscal Year 1991 was somewhat less than in Fiscal Years 1984 For proceedings on the Fiscal Year 1991 docket requiring through 1987.

the submittal of contentions, the Panel or parties resolved 73 percent of all these contentions before hearing. In the However, this decrease was accompanied by an even same period,30 new cases were docketed as shown in greater decrease in the number of Panel members. At the Table 1. The type of new filings continued to reflect a end of Fiscal Year 1991, the Panel had 40 judges (15 trend, beginning during the late 1980's, toward more fo. full-time and 25 part-time). In 1982, the Panel had 68 cused proceedings of greater technical and legal diversity members.Thus, as Table 3 shows, the average caseload of typical of a maturing industry. Twenty.four proceedings each of the Panel's full time judges mereased over the last were closed during the year. 8 years, and in 1991 was 16 percent greater than the average for the 7 previous years.

Table 1 Table 3 Fiscal Year 1991 docket recapitulation increase in average caseload per full time

. judge / full. time panel member _

Status of Cases Date Number Average No.of Cases Fiscal Year per Judge 3 Pending 10/01/90 18 Docketed FY91 1984 5.8 10 Total FY91 48 1985 5.6 1986 6.0 Closed FY91 24 1987 5.4 Pending 10/01/91 24 1988 6.2 1989 5.4 1990 5.9 1991 6.8 Table 2 depicts the Panel's caseload during the past 8 years. The total number of cases on the docket during Fiscal Year 1991 was 20 percent greater than in Fiscal Years 1990 and 1989.The Panelis preparing for an even 'the figure represents an actual count of cases, inetuding mose on wtuch t,n ree judges sat and thme assigned to a single presiding officer larger caseload over the next few years. and technical advimr.

5 NUREG-1363, Vol. 4

C. Case Management average age of cases can also be traced to the employment of appropriate case management tools. In recent years, One measure of success in an adjudicatory program is the licensing tuards and presiding officers have been effec-speed with which individual proceedings move from in. tive in focusing on and efficiently resolving disputed is-itial filing to final resolution.This is generally reflected by sues between patties, expediting schedules, and encour-the average age of the cases on the docket. Average case aging the Settlement of cases. See pages Il-13, infra.

age,in turn, is a function of two interrelated factors: case .

filings and case closings. The average age of proceedings lifficient case management is also reflected in Table 5.

on the Panel's docket has fallen significantly over the last Fifty-two percent of the Panel's cases on the docket in .

5 years. In Fiscal Year 1986, the average age of the cases Fiscal Year 1991 were closed within 6 months from the on the Panel docket was approximately 27 months. In time they were first docketed. Seventy-nine percent were Fiscal Years 1988,1989, and 1990, that number had fallen closed in less than 1 year.

to 18.1 months,17.4 months, and 19.2 months, respec-tively. 'lhen, as Table 4 shows, case age fell even more Table 5 dramatically to 13.8 months in 1991. hionths IT 1991 cases were on docket _

Tahle 4 Duration of Cases No. of Cases Percent Aserage case age by type /overallin FY 19914 110 3 Months 16 33 Type and (Number) All Cases Average 4 to 6 Months 9 19 of Cases (Months) (Months) 7 to 9 Months 7 15 10 to 12 Months 6 12 Construction Permit (1) 77 77.0 More Than 12 Months 10 21 nforcement (16) 198 12.4

1. Tsc Amendments (16) 92 5.7 Matt ,als License (6) 39 6.5 D. Types of Cases Operat ing Licenses (1) 111 111.0 Rcmand (5) 30 6.0 12rge, complex operating and construction permit pro-Suspended (i) 112 112.t) ceedings involving the licensing of nuclear reactors have Retrievable Storage (1) 3 3.0 dominated the Paners docket during the past several liEO Matter (1) 1 100.0 decades; beginning in the late 1980's, however, the Pan-Docket Average 13.8 el's major caseload shifted to cases invohing the regula-tion of these reactors after they had been licensed. 'lhe difference in cases for these two cras is demonstrated by . -

llistorically, these numbers for average number of comparing Figure 1, depicting the caseload mix for 1983, -

months on the docket are somewhat misleading because with Figure 2, representing the caseload mix for 1991.

they have been inflated by the presence of a handful of proceedings characterized by late development of new issues, delays in the issuance of crLat licensing docu- onw noin w ments, ordelays sought by the parties themselves. If these **

delayed cases are excluded from the calculations, the

-average age of cases during the past several years woull drop significantly and would be only 8.1 months for Fiscal Year 1991.

While in large part owing to a reduction in the number of g

{

active operatmg heense proceedings and the long-term OT.g n,  % m period associated with such cases, the reduction in the hp J r QQr coNsmenoN

~

• • Average age" means the number of months from the time a heensmg -

F board n f irst appointed turuany 30 io ho days after a keense appheatum Nr n formally docketed > until the case s cluwd or the end of the acalycar, whwfwwer is carbcr. Average age indudes waiting tune resuhing from kg* ;tg [t suspensum of work or unavalabihty of hearing documents texcept tg m ' MT sPerrAt>

weso m 4n where a hcerree has tequested that the enure proceedmg he sunwnded. M rs for cumple, Wehmgton Pubbe Power Supply System. WI' DSS Nu-dear l'roject No. 3K -Average age does not mdusle the tune a caw has been penshng on appeat i..igure 1. I tscali, ear 1983 caseload ma. by percent NUREG-1363, Vol. 4 6

_ - _ _ _ _--_--_ - i

• NT Emoact*0m Ann aen .

2

'*'"C[3 .

c2 ANittR.Uyr

/+  : s 2

. , a,

.. ,.. g UCENSE If_t UCE ME h U bi "

d_ 5 " - Mg

^*17":NTF Q.%..,i "",'{" ^'"%" t7 4  :

$,W.[:/ . u

~

$t+=5 1

1 '

' btATI IdAL g MNI1; RIAL.

%, j 4

,' license "

J

,' !K I NSC N6 e

g 12 $ )

oronAnNo ucrNsN CONURtGION PORWT gnig g b 41 kLMAND I 14 G DI COAtMis5KJNING ._

10 4 29 Figure 2. Fiscal Year 1991 caseload mix by percent Figurc 3. Fiscal Year 1992 projected caseload mix by percent The two figures graphically illustrate the significant shift -

in the nature of the cases before the Panel. In Fiscal Year 1983, construction permit and operating license proceed-ings accounted for 62 percent of the Panel's docket. An'i while license amendment proceedings were, at 26 per-cent, a significant element in the Panel's docket, no sig- i:Niuacosti:N7 nificant number of enforcement actions were filed in Fis- 3"

/ " " " " No cal Year 1983.

Fiscal Year 1991, in contrast, saw operating licensing and "$ENN construction permit proceedings constituting only 4 per. "*

cent and 2 percent cf the Panel's docket, respectively.5 coNuneenoN  %

Enforcement actions and license amendment proceed. nmuT a ings, however, accounted for almost 65 percent of the #

• e"ERAUNg Fiscal Year 1991 Panel docket. "cf77s'![i 22 Q ggy [I5 w.m + -

On the basis of caseload projections, the pattern reflected in the Fiscal Year 1991 casekia,i is expected to continue uCONSE AMENmtEM

%f "","g R _

"" "^N D^^

over the next 4 years with the gradual introduction of jytGN MI license extension, site selection, and standardized design proceedings, and possible renewed action under previ- Figure 4. Fiscal Year 1993 projected caseload mix ously deferred construction permit (CP) and operating by percent license (OL) applications. In addition, beginning in 1993, hearings are projected for rulemaking proceedings which will be held to certify the design of the new reactors presently planned by the nuclearindustry. Figures 3 and 4 forecast the projected near-term Panel caseload mix for Just as in Fiscal Year 1991, enforcement and license Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993, respectively, amendment proceedings are expected to dominate the Panel *s near-term cocket, with these typcs of proceedings accounting for approximately 59 percent of the projected Fiscal Year 1992 docket and 51 percent of the projected Fiscal Year 1993 docket. CP and OL proceedings, on the other hand, are expected to drop to less than 5 percent of the Panel's Fiscal Year 1992 docket and 7 percent of its

_. Fiscal Year 1993 docket. Preliminary mid-term projec-

• In iddition to these proceedings the 1991 docket included four car _ tions for Fiscal Year 1993 through Fiscal Year 1995 indi-ryocer pnteedings retnanded after the Seabrook Nucicar Power Sta- cate that the Fiscal Year 1991 type of caseload mix will im operating liceme was granted. A potentiany large antitrust case and a uranium ennchntent facility hcensing rav were also docketed in continue to be the baseload of the Panel's docket.

1991. However, its relative importance may diminish with the 7 NUREG-1363, Vol. 4

-introduction of for example design certification decom-

, , , power reactors.e Although these 44 plants represent only missioning, and license extension proceedings. 38 percent of the total number of plants licensed,in fact they represent approximately 45,832 net megawatts of E. Operating Licenses electricity or 46 percent of all ciectrical generation try nuclear means.

At the end of the fiscal year, only some remand issues on

- one nuclear power reactor, the Seabnxik Nuclear Station, remained under active consideration by a licensing intrd 'These units include Ikaver valley 2, tiraidwint, tiyron t and 2, Cal-

, laway 1.Catawha 1 and 2, Chnton 1 and 2. Comanche Peak I and 2, of the Panel. Ilowever, m. the last 10 years, h,eensing thablo Cany[n lm,and 2,0.ntico k"d s l ermi 2,freGrand Gulf l and 2 boards have authorized or facilitated the issuance of full- i gg e2 power operating licenses for 44 commercial nuclear 3.and Wolf Creek 1.Shoreham 1 was beensed ut not operated.soits output is not included in these total generation figures.

1-5 NUREG-1363, Vol. 4 8

n IV. PERSONNEL AND SUPPORT A. Panel Members 1. . Technical and Legal Support Stafi I xgal support and advice for the Panel and its 41 full and During Fiscal Year 1991, the Panel succeeded in replac* part-time judges is provided by the Panel's Legal Support ing vital technical and legal skills lost in 1990 and recent Staff. 'lhe staff consists of the Panel's Chief Counsel, a years. The remarkable stability of the PanePs judicial Staff Senior Attorney, and scasonal interns and law clerks staffing over the years changed markedly with the loss of who are added as required by the caseload. Directed by full. time Judges 11oyt (law) liarbour (Geology),I.inen' the Chief Counsel, the staff provides legal advice, re-berger (Physics), and Paris (Environment). In addition, search capabilitics, opinion drafting, editing senices, and ,

the Panet lost part time Judges Kirk-Duggan (law, fico' support at hearings. It also supports the Chief Adminis-

~

nomics), Milhollin (law). Steindler (Chemistry), and trative IAw Judge with assistance en a broad range of Wenner (law) during 1990, policy matters; provides legal training and keeps Panel members informed of important nuclear related activi-Consequently, several new judges were added to the ties and legal proceedings; oversees, with the help of the Panel during Fiscal Year 1991. On January 7,1991, two Administrative Support Staff, the Panel s legal / technical full-time inembers, Judges Peter S.1.am(Nuclear lingi- library; and participates in the evaluation of computer necting) and Charles N. Kelber (Physics) joined the support appropriate to the conduct of adjudicatory pro-Panel. Six part-time members, Judges Richard R. Parizek ceedings.

(Geology). Harry Rein (Medicine), George F. Tidey (Medicine),1.cster S. Rubenstein (Metallurgical lingi- liistorically, individual licensing boards have obtained neering) Peter A. Morris (Physics), and Thomas E lil- technical support from a Panel reactor safety engineer feman (Physical Chemistry) were sworn in. On July 1, and an environmental health scientist. However, both 1991, two former NRC Appeal Board members Judges positions were vacated in 1984 and have not been filled G. Paul llollwerk !!! (law) and Thomas S. Moore (law), because of personnel ceiling limitations. During Fiscal were added as full. time Panel members following the Years 1988 *brough 1990, technical assistance, particu.

Appeal Board's abolishment. larly in physics and computer development, was provided by the Paners Senior Technical Advisor. This position Commission appointment to the Panel is based upon the was vacated in 1991 and has not been fillad. Currently, t' e appointee's recognized experience, achievement, and in- Panel uses Administrative Judges (Techaical), when they -

dependence in his or her field of expertise. Once ap. are available, to perform these support functions.

pointed to the Panel, judges are assigned, as cases arise, to individual licensing boards where their professional ex- 2. Administrative Support Staff pertise will assist in resolving the technical and legal mat-ters likely to be raised during the proceeding. Program Support: The Paners Program Support and i

Analysis Staff (PSAS) plans, develops, and coordinates As of the end of the fiscalyear, the Panel had available a - policies and programs to support the Panel, its areas of total of 40 judges (15 full-time and 25 part-time). See responsibilities include hudget assistance, personnel Appendix B, By profesion, the judges of the Panel in- talor relations, professional senices, paralegal services, l cluded 12 lawyers,10 public health and environment sci- travel, space and facilities, adjudicatory files and senices, l entists,8 engineers, S physicists, and 3 physicians. Collec- library facilities. secretarial, and other administrative

l. tively, Panet members held 60 post-baccalaureate hearing support to the Panel. See Appendix A, L degrees in engineering, scientific, or legal disciplines. " Organizational Chart." In addition, the PSAS maintains Several part-time memNrs ce or have been heads of the Panel's electronic docket, which is 'available to l

departments at major universities or national laborato- individual judges and other offices of the Commission ries. As a group, they represent more than nine centuries through the PanePs INQUIRE system. The PSAS also of experience in the nuclear field.See Appendix C. adrsinisters the NRC court reporting contract (excluding the reporting contract for the Office of the Secretary).

B. ProreSsional and support starr I,rm.mo,io, e,,c,ssi,g s,,,inot rise Cnief of the Information Processing Section reports to the Director Support for theactivities of the Panel,individuallicensing and Assistant to the Director.The section is responsible boards, and the Paners judges is structured along func- for supporting the Imard by developing and implementing -

tional lines: (1) legal, (2) technical, and (3) administ rative. the following senices: (1) docket management; (2) mail i The Chief Administrative Judge of the Panel manages distribution; (3) automatic data pnxessing (ADP)

L and supenises these interrelated support auivities. systems; (4) Panel adminhtration and individual 9 NUREG-1363, Vol. 4 _ j 1

a

...~ _. . - . - . . . . - . - . - . - . _ - . = .

.i prcreedings support -(particularly. full text database consultation with Panel members and' legal Counsett management systems); and (5) training in the use of the . periodic f evaluatibns of - both ' the Panel's existing.

Panel's computerited systems, including software,- computer system :. and . newly ' introduced computer hardware, and INQUIRE. See pages 11-13; infra. In . ~ hardware and software products.'

addition, this section is responsible for conducting, in t

5 t

A

)

i 1-i 1

l

.j NUR EG-1363.' Vol. 4 lb d l

V. ENilANCING Tile ADJUDICATOllY PitOCESS A. Gerieral able computers for use by judges conducting hearings in the field.

l<estrictions on support personnel and concerns about Finally, all licensing board Panel decisions are added '.o the costs of delays in the Commission's licensing process, the adjudicatory database in full-text form, generaP, on have moved the Panel rapidly toward achieving the goal of the date those decisions are issued.The decisions ere thus an " electronic" offic e, particularly for managing its volu- immediately availa' le to all Commission offic% in full minous and complex hearing records. Important adminis' text.

trative tasks such as travel and timekeeping have been computerized. The Panel's judges and critical support Internally, INQUllW uses a search-and retrieval logic personnel have been provided the necessary hardware similar to that emploved by the 1.!!NIS and WilSILAW and software to obtain maximum efficiency from their legal research system's.1lowever, to pumit easy access to electronic workstations and the Panel's computerized

~

the system by a potentially wide rarac of users with vary-docket. ing degrees of expertise, INC UIMi employs a series of user-friendly, fill-in-the-for sc cen panels.On the basis

11. Tlle Pattel's Electroniic Docket of information the user p. . des through these panels about the nature, scope, and form of search desired, IN-QUllW automatically rencrates and executes the neces- -

As presently configured, j.udges and professional support sary search-and retrieval logic (i.e., commands). In addi-staff can, from their desks, draft, share, and comment on tion, INQUllm produces formatted and indexed reports proposed decisions; access and quickly search either the

, according to the user-defined layouts, thereby providing Panel's electronic docket or the Commission's document information about types cf documents contained on the retrieval system; conduct legal research through 1.liXIS system. Selected documents can be downhiaded for print-3r Wi!STI.AW; and communicate with each other or ing or word processing.

other employees of the NRC through the Commission's electronic mail system. However, the memory and storage capabilities of per-sonal computers (PCs) have expat,ded to the point where in an effort to achieve greater cost benefits, the Panel PCs can perform specifie functions like a minicomputer-began to explore replacing INQUllm, a complicated but at a fraction of the cost. Similarly, software capabili-minicomputer-based system, with a personal computer- ties have expanded to the point where some programs based system. INQUllm, which is composed of an adj- may wellbe able to perform functions now performed by udicatory database and a companion search-and-retrieval INQUllm.

system, currently operates on an lit M 9370 minicomputer -

physically hwated at the Commission's White Flint One Consequently, the Information Processing Section is con-facility. Several offices, including the Commission, are ducting a compiner study (based on new ADP require-wired directly to the minicomputer containing IN. ments developed by the Panel) of personal computer-QUllE, thereby permitting quick and continuous access based full text systems for possible replacement of the to the system.The PanePs system is directly connected to INQUllE system. The following software were or are the Whitt. Flint minicomputer through a communications being studied:

controller located at the Panel's llethesda offices. Other authorized users may access INQUlfW from any kica- L Personal Librarian System (PLS) tion, using a personal camputer equipped with a modem. 2. IIRS Software Products

3. Folio Views fly the end of the day on which any document in any 4. Innerview proceeding is received, the document has been abstracted 5. IZE Software Products and routinely entered into the Panel's adjudicatory data. 6. Kenetic base. In addition, in selected complex cases, the full text 7. I.itidex of significant documents such as pre-filed testimony and 8. MagcIlan (Lotus) hearing transcripts are electronically indexed and added 9. Oracle (NUDOCS) to the a ! judicatory database. At the close of Fiscal Year 10. Racontex 1991, approximately 200.000 pages of hearing transcripts 11. Text Management System (TMS) and related materials had been loaded onto the Panel s 12. Topic adjudicatory database. Where appropriate, discrete por- 13. Verity tions of the database conces ning a specific proceeding ctm 14. Word Cruncher be loaded onto the hard disk of one of the Panel's port- 15. Zyindex 11 N UREG-1363, Vol. 4

L These personal umputer systems include state-of the. among the parties and to the possible settlemer,t of dis-art information search technology, including CD-ROM puted issues. In this manner, a large number of r,roposed databases, image retrieval, concept searching, natural contations and adjudicatory matters are resolved before language queries, thesauruses, and graphic interfaces a formal hearing takes place.

that can be distributed across multiple devices, media, and platforms (mainframes, minicom puters, and personal 1.icensing boards also routinely encourage the settlement computers). 'the Panel anticipates that these enhanced of cases. During Fiscal Year 1991, boards had substantial personal computer-based systems can be built on kical success in settling cases before final adjudication, Signifi-area networks and can be accessed and maintained by cant litigation expenses were avoided by settlements of simultaneous users, at a fraction of the cost of maintain. docketed cases involving Cambridge Afedical Technolog ing mainframe systems hke INQUIFi!. During 1991, the Corporation, Order of October 19,1990; Clercland Electric Panel co npleted software rmmch which duplicated Illuminating Company (Perry, Unit 1), IJIP-90-39, 32 some miniframe INQUIRi! funcuons on a personal com- NRC 368 (1990); American Radiolabeled Chemicals. Inc.,

puter system, and began tesung a prototype. Order of November 5,1991; St. Afary Afedical Center.

IllP-90-46,32 NRC 463 (1990); Northern States Power Adjudicatory bodies and legal associations throughout Company (Prairie Island, Units 1 anu LilP 8A,33 North America are showing much interest in the Panel's NRC 210 (1991); Cinrichem,lncorporated, Order of March electronic docket and its growing experience in the use of 14,1991: Trimessee Valley Authority (Sequoyah, Units I such dockets in managing complex cases. He Panel's and 2), IJIP-91-10,33 NRC 231 (1991); Barnett Industrial electronic docket has served as the basis for a course on X Ray, IJIP-91-16,33 NRC 274 (1991); l'ermont Yankee the use of computers to manage complex cases which is Nuclear Power Corporation (Vermont Yankee Nuclear offered annually by the National Judicial College in Power Station), Order of September 3,1991; and Arizona Reno, Nevada. Artides describing some aspects of the Public Service Company (Palo Verde, Units 1,2, and 3),

Panel's system appeared in the American Bar Associa- IJ1P-91-37A,34 NRC 199 (1991).

( tion's Judges Journal md the Federal Bar News and Journal An increasing number of enforcement, reactor license during the fall of 1990.

amendment, and materials licensing proceedings now dominate the Panel's docket.The materials licensing pro-C. Hearing Procedures ecedings, emanating from NRC oversight of more than 8,000 materials licenses, are generally conducted as infor-In nddition to its efforts to computerize the licensing mal pmceedings under 10 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpart L.

pmcess, the Panel continues to explore and implement These proceedings rely on the active involvement of a traditional case management tools and techniques to single presiding officer to create and shape the record in streamline, focus, and resolve contested licensing mat- the proceeding, A hearing is conducted only for those ters. Typically, th< hearing on a particular application for issues that the presiding officer cannot resolve after con-a nuclear facility wxnse has three elements: (1) health, sidering the written submittals of the parties, safety, and the common defense and security aspects of theapplication,as required bythe Atomiclinergy Act:(2) In proceedings before a single administrative judge, the environmental considerations as required by the National Panel has adopted a policy of assigning a legal or technical Environmental Policy Act; and (3) emergency planning administrative judge from the Panel as an assistant the requirements, designated presiding officer, While obtaining the benefits -

of the informal procedures, the assignment preserves the For purposes of efficiency, boards frequently structure - cross-expertise of the traditkmal three-member licensing their hearing schedule into distinct phases, each dealing Imards to ensure issuance of fully informed decisions, with' discrete groupings of related issues. In the case of a complex pmceeding that involves numerous issues under D. Coordination with the Office of the several distinct topics, the Panel has periodically created -

sepat ate, parallel licensing boards to handle one or more L.icensing Support System topics. Besides the time saved through parallel adjudica- Administrator tion, each board car. be assigned Panel members whose expertise matches the issues to be resolved. -The Panel's substantialinterest it. the electroniclicensing file to be developed in co..aection with the proposed Licensing Imards have also taken an active role in shaping construction of a high-level nuclear waste repository is the issues before them through a thorough review and, if based on several grounds. First, under the Commission's appmpriate, consolidation of admissible contentions, an current adjudicatory rules of practice, the Panel will be active involvement in monitoring the discovery portion of the adjudicatory body responsible for making the initial the pmceeding, and an affirmative attempt to foster an decision whether the site ultimately chosen and the atmosphere conducive to the free exchange of views facility actually built satisfy applicable safety and NURim 4363, Vol. 4 12

i l

environmental requirements. Second, the Panel has al- meetings, and investigative interviews, other than those ready acquired, through its own electronic docket, sub, of the Commission itself, held anywhere in the United stantial experience in the development and use of elec- States. 'lhe NRC offices using the court reporting serv-tron!c media, llecause of the former, the Panel took an ices administered by the Program Support and Analysis active supporting role in the development of the proce Staff of the Panelincluded the AtomicSafety and Licens-dural rules and support systems intended to govern the ing Appeal Panel; the Advisory Committee on iteactor proceeding. In light of the latter, once the Commi<sion Safeguards; the Advisory Committee on Nuc! car Waste; adopted special procedural rules intended to govern any and the Offices of Administration, Analysis and thalu-

. waste repository proceeding, the Panel focused its atten- - ation of Operational Data, General Counsel, Govern-tion on actively sharing its experiener and exper1ise in ment and Public Affairs,Information Resources Manage-

" electronic dockets" with the Officc of thc licensing Sup- l ment, investigations, Inspector General, Nuclear port System Administrator, the office created by the Materials Safety and Safeguards (NMSS), Nuclear Reac-Commission to oversee the development of a state-of* tor Regulation, and Personnel.

the-art, full text and image computerized document re-trieval system for the parties and the Panel to use in conducting the high-level waste proceeding. 'the sched.

, ule calls for the Panci to adjudicat e any discovery disputes 'The Panel's court reporting contract provW for the . j after the discovery documents (estimated at up to 20 preparation of computer readable diskettes of the tran-  ;

million pages) are loaded in the Licensing Support Sys- script of the hearing in large, compicx cases. In the appro-tem's electronic registry. That repository will eliminate '

priate case, parties are directed to file findings of fact, the need for all but a minimal amount of discovery in the conclusions of law, and pre-filed testimony on computer-proceeding. readable diskettes. Such filings are prepared in ASCII (the American Standard Code for Information Inter-E. Agency Cotirt Reporting Services change) to overcome the problem of incompatibility among computers and software. I!ach day's filings are During Fiscal Year 1991, the Panel continued to manage then compiled and fully indexed by the PSAS's Informa-the NRC court reporting contract for all proceedings, tion Processina Section.

i i

13 NUREG-1363, Vol. 4 ~ l 1

, - - - - - . - . ~ . - - - - - - - - . - - . - . - - .

VI. CONCLUSIONS-A. Fiscal Year 1991 in Retrospect judges to preside. The use of Panel members to conduct such proceedings will not only climinate concerns regard.

Fiscal Year 1991,like 1990 and 1989, represented a tran, ing the use of the private sector to make discretionary sitional year between the massive operating license pro. policy decisions, but could also reduce cost by climinating ccedings of the 1980's and the more varied, discrete en. duplicative admimstrative overhead and contractor ex-forcement and materialslicense proceedings of the early penses. ,

1990's. l H. Meeting the Adjudicatory Demands l The current docket reflects the maturing of the nuclear i industry and its transition from the construction and m4 Ofille Next Decade 1 i tial operation era of the 1970's and 1980's to the opera-tion, license renewal, and waste-handling era of the Given the economic, energy, and public health and safety 1990's. Given the increasing climination of first. costs imposed upon Commission applicants, licensees, generation operating license proceedings as a major fac. and the public at large in the event of unnecessary or f or in the Panel's caseload, Ihe Fiscal Year 1991 caseload avoidable delaysin the nuclear licensing and enforcemen6 e could reasonably be viewed as the Commission's adj. process, the Panel will continue to endeavor to improve

- udicatory "baseload"(l.c., the number and type of cases its procedures and rnake the hearing process as efficient likely to occur in any particular year given the current as possible.

number and oiserations of the Commission's licensees).

So viewed, the Panel's Fiscal Year 1991 docket can be The ability of the Panel as a whole to deal efficiently with used to gauge future demands on the adjudicatory re- the new and different technical issues of future proceed-sources of the Comntission in light of the additional ings could be severely impaired by reducing the depth and caseload that would be generated by new or enhanced range of expertise represented by the judges remaining regulatory programs, the initiation of a second generation on the Panel. At the end of Fiscal Year 1991, the Panel of nuclear power reactor licensing proceedings, and li- was substantially at risk in that regard as a consequence of cense extension cases. What is not clear is whether the the average ages of 56 for full. time judges and 68 years for major utility civil penalty case and the antitrust case filed part-time judges. Consequently, the Panel has initiated during the year are exceptions to the rule or a sign of an active program to establish registers of persons quali-things to come. Such uncertainties make workload fore- fied for appointment to the Panel in the wide range of casting difficult. disciplines required. The Panel expects its register pro-gram to bear fruit in the coming years. The Panel also Presumably the Panel's underutilization in areas identi- provides extensive training for its judges in complex tech-fled by the Inspector General will be corrected. In those nical areas and in the rapidly chat.ging legal areas in-areas (security clearances, personnel, and equal employ- volved in nuclear law. This training will continue to en-ment opportunity), the Commission can no longer afford sure the necessary expertise to meet the Commission's the added expense of using outside hearing examiners or workload.

NUlWG-1363, Vol. 4 14 i

i APPENDICES pens

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART ATOM!C SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD PANEL

!s the statutory ofLee that performs the hearing = funcien for the Commissioa and such other regulatory functons as the Commisnon authorizes. Re Chief Adminis-trat ve Judge devciers and apples procedures governing the activittes of Boards.

Administratar Judges, and Administrative law Judges and males appropnate recommendations to the Commission concensing the ru!es governmg the conduct of heanrigs.

Chief Administratne Judge (Chairman) - B. Paul Cotter, Jr.

Deputy Chief Adm:mstrative Jedge (Executive) Robert M. Lazo Deputy Cluef Administratwe Judge (Technical) Fredenck J Shon THE PANEL i I

Conducts all licensing and other heanngs as directed by the Commiswe primarily ,

l through indwidual Atomic Safety and 1)censmg Boards appomted by either the Commission or the Chief Admimstrat:ve Tudge.There is no fixed number of posi-tions in the Panet The Panel is compnsed of (1) any number of Admmistrative j Judges (full-time and par 14ime), who are lawyers, physecists. engineers, and envi-ronmental scientats; and (2) the Admmistrative Ls= Judg-s. sbo hear anntrust.

cml penalty, and other cases and serve as Atomic Safety and Ucensieg Board Chatr-rnen. One to three Administrative Judges serve as pres > ding efficers akme or on boards for a broad ra ge of proceeding *.

"3 PROGRAM SUPPORT AND ANALYSIS STAFF TECHNICAL AND LEGAL SUPPORT STAFF Prrsides planning, development, coord2 canon, implemectation and anaiyses of Prmides a3 legal and technical wp;crt to the Cbei Adminisnative Judge, the Ad-ministrat:ve Law Judges, boards, and Panel pedicies and programs in support of the Panet, including budget; personnel labor relations; professional services; travel; space and facilities; equipment, contracts; in-formaton management, including ADPequipment; adjudicatory fites and semces: Director and Chief Counsel Ire 5. Dewry thrary facilities; secretarial stenographe and clerical semces meledmg field hear-ing space, equipment management and coordination; meetings; employee training and development; FOIA; bcense fee data; secunty; safety engincenng-Director Dvs W. Irins Assistant to the Director Jack G. Whe*stine 5 >

[ Information Processing Section $ ,

Z y "

y Provides support and sernees in informat2cn ennagement,stich includes comput- --

< erized adjudscatory files. license fee data, and other management informatkm appli. X E cable to Panel actmues.

^

u Chief James M. Cutchin V 1

~

APPENDIX 11 ATOMIC SAFE'IT AND LICENSING IlOARD PANEL Fiscal Year 1991 I. Panel Members 1 A. Ofucers JUDGE II. PAUL CO' ITER, JR. JUDGE FREDERICK J. silon Chief Administrative Judge (Chairman) Deputy Chief Administrative Judge (rechnical) .

JUDGE ROllERT M. I AZO JUDGE IVAN W. SMrrH Deputy Chief Administrative Judge (Executive) Chief Administrative I;tw Judge II. Full Time Administrative Judges JUDGE CilARIJ!S HECilllOEFER JUDGE CIIARLES N. KEIEER Attorney Physicist JUDGE PETER IL IILOC!!

Attorney JUDGE J11RRY R. K1JNE Environmental Scientist JUDGE G. PAUL llOll.WERK III Anomey JUDGE PETER S. LAM Nuclear Engineer JUDGE JAMES 11. CARPENTER Ocetmographer JUDGE MORTON A. M ARGULIES JUDGE RICHARD F. Colli Attorney Environmental Scientist JUDGE JOHN H FRYE Ill JUDGE THOMAS S. MOORE Attorney Attorney C, Part-Time Administrative Judges JUDGE GEORGE C. ANDERSON JUDGE THOMAS E. ELillMAN Marine Iliologist Nuclear Engineer Seattle, Washington Raleigh, North Carolina JUDGE GLENN O. BRIGirr -JUDGE GEORGE A. FERGUSON Engineer Physicist Hethesda, Maryland Shady Side, Maryland JUDGE A. DIXON CALLIHAN JUDGE ilARRY FOREM AN Physicist Physician -

Oak Ridge, Tennessee Minneapolis, Minnesota

' All ASillP officers professional and administrative staff., and full-time Panel members are based in llethesda, Maryland 19 NUREG-1363, Vol. 4

M -r i

JUDGE RICllARD If, FOSTER - JUDGE KENNETli A. McCOLLOM

. linvironmental Scientist . Electrical Engineer Sunriver, Oregon Stillwater, Oklahoma l

JUDGE J AMilS P. GLEASON JUDGE MARS 11ALL E. MllilliR Attorney -

Silver Spring, Maryland t na Beach, Florida JUDGE CADET 11. IlAND, JR.

Marine Biologist JUDGE PITI'ER A. MORRIS Ilodega llay, California Physicist Potomac, Mary.and JUDGE DAVID 1. IlETRICK N ca "

JUDGE RICilARD R. PARIZEK 7 n ona Geologist University Park, Pennsylvania JUDG13 ERNEST E.11111 Nuclear Engineer L Danville, California JUDGE 11 ARRY Rl!!N l Physician j i- _ JUDGE FRANK F.1100PER longwood, Florida Marinc Biologist Ann Arbor, Michigan JUDGE LESTER S. RUllENSTEIN [

JUDGE 1ILJZABErli B.JollNSON Q'gg",8Cfni i  !

- Nuclear E,ngineer q Oak Ridge, Tennessee ,

JUDGE DAVID 10 SCllINK JUDGE WALTER 11. JORDAN Oceanographer Physicist College Station. Texas Oak Ridge, Tennessee GEOW, F. EW -

JUDGE J AMES C. lAMU 111 .;

S:mitary Engmeer liouston, Texas -

Washington, D.C.

JUDGE EMMETil A. LUEUKE JUDGE SliELDON J. WOLFE

, . Physicist Attorney Chevy Chase, Maryland Fairfax, Virginia -

II. Professional Staff-

' LEE S. DEWEY ROBERT R. PIERCE, Director and Chief Counsel, -Senior Attorney Technical and Legal Support Staff III. Administrative Officers :

. ELVA W. LEINS, Director - JAMES M. CUTCillN V, Chief, Program Support and Analysis Staff Information Processing Section J ACK G. WliEISTINE Assistant to the Director, Program Support and Analysis Staff NURl!G-1363, Vol. 4 20 7 o - a-m-wr ,y gi

APPENDIX C l IIIOGRAPillCAL SKETCIIES OF PANEL MEMilERS ANDERSON, GEORGE C H.S., University of British Co- Department of Justice, and an associate attorney in the lumbia (1947); M.A., University of British Columbia law firm of Gardner, Carton & Douglas in Washington, (1949); Ph.D., University of Washington (1954). Dr. An- D.C. After graduating from law school, he clerked for a derson, currently Professor Emeritus at the School of Federal district court judge nnd a State supreme court Oceanography, University of Washington, has been a judge, part time member of the Panel since 1973. In addition to  ;

authoring over 40 publications in the fields of limnology BRIGIIT, GlENN O. U.S., University of Oklahoma and oceanography, Dr. Anderson has held numerous (1949); M.S., University of Oklahoma (1950). Judge teaching, research, and administrative positions over his Bright has been a full-time member of the Panel since 40-year career w'.h the University of Washington, the 1972. llefore his appointment to the Panel, he spent 22 Atomic Energy Commission and the National Science years with the Phillips Petroleum Company or its succes-Foundation. He was Director of the School of Oceanogra- sor subsidiaries in various technical and management po-phy at the University of Washington for several years, sitions overseeing nuclear matters, includig one year as a technical consultant to the Government of Venezuela, BECllllOEFER, C/lARIJN A.B., magna cum laude. Har. and several years at the Idaho National !!ngineering vard College (1955); ILH., liarvard law School (1958). laboratory in charge of experiments for SPERT I and Judge Hechhoefer has been a full time legal member of SPERT 11.

the Panel since 1978. Before his appo ntment to the i

Panel, his Federal sersice included positions as Counsel C4/JJilAN, A. DIXON. A.H., Maahall Um.versity(1928);

M. A., Duke University (1931); Ph.D., New York Umver -

to the Atomic Safety and 1.icensing Appeal Board, attor-ney with the Office of the General Counsel of the Atomic sity (1935); D.Sc. (Hon.), Marshall University (1961). Dr.

Callihan has been a part time member of the Panel smce Energy Commission, and attorney-adviser in the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Ifousing and Home Finance 19a in his 58-year career, he has held positions as a Agency. He is currently the editor of the Administrariw physicist with the Umon Carb;de Corporation and Co-Judiciary News andloumaland a memberof the Executive lumbia University, and as assistant professor at the Col-Committeeof theNationalConferenceof Administrativt, lege of the City of New York. Dr. Callihan is currently the chairman or member of several committees concerning Law Judges. He has also held several leadership positions withintheSectionof Administrativelawof the American nuclear reactor operations for the United States Army and the American Nuclear Society. In 1988, he received Har Association.

the American National Standards Institute's Meiitorious BLOCII, PETER B. H.S., Tufts University (1962); ILB,

1. ^*"

Harvard law School (1965); ILM., Harvard Law School C4RPENTER, J4MES 11. H.A., University of Virginia (1967). Judge Bloch has been a full-time member of the (1949); M.A., Johns Hopkins University (1951); Ph.D.,

Panel since 1981. His prior positions include: Assistant Johns Hopkins University (1957). Dr. Carpenter has been .

Director of the Office of Hearings and Appeals, U.S. a full-time member of the I anel since 1981. In addition to Department of Energy; attorney-advisor, Office of Opin- numerous publications in the fields of marine science and ions and Review, FERC; Executive Director of the Com- environmental chemistry and research activities for the -

mission on Law and the Economy of the American Har Chesapeake Bay Institute, Dr. Carpenter has held teach.

Association; Senior Research Associate and Project Man- ing and administrative positions wath Johns Hopkins Uni-ager, the Urban Institute; and attorney-adviser, U.S. Se- versity and the University of Miami (Coral Gables, Flor-curities and Exchange Commission. Judge Bloch has pub- da). During his 34-year career, Dr. Carpenter has been lished several articles on the conduct and management of on the editorial boards of several national journals, held criminal investigations, senior positions in several professional associations, and chaired or participated in numerous professional commit-

- Boll.HERK, G. PAUI, Ill. H.A., University of Notre tees on emironmentalissues, particularly the marine en-Dame (1975); J.D., Georgetown University law Center vironment. Dr. Carpenter was a member of the commit-(1978). J udgc Hollwerk has been a full-time legal member tee that issued the HEIR I report (Committee on the of the Panel since July 1991. Before being appointed to Hiological Effects of loni7ing Radiation).

the Panel, Judge Hollwerk served as an administrative

( judge on the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel, Cole, RICIIARD E H.S.C.E., Drexel University (1959);

j a senior attorney on the staff of the NRC Office of Gen- M.S.S.E., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1961); i eral Counsel, a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney with the Ph.D.. University of North Carolina (1968). Dr. Cole has l

21 NUREG-1363, Vol. 4 l

- been a full-time member of the Panel since 1973. In in three professional fields. In addition to publishing nu4

~

addition to publishing numerous articles on water, was- merous professional papers in the biological and chemical tewater treatment, and international training of environ. fields, Dr. Foreman has held teaching, administrative, mental engineering, Dr. Cole has held teaching, adminis- and research positions with the University of Minnesota trative, and engineering positions in the United States and the University of California, the latter involving work -

and Guatemala with the University of North Carolina, in the area of radiation and biomedictd research at los Pennsylvania State University, and the State of Pennsyl- Alamos, vania. lie has held several leadership positions and com-mittee assignments with numerous professional associa. FOSTER, RICHARD F. II.S., University of Washington tions, and is a Diplomate of the American Academy of (1938); Ph.D., University of Washington (1948). Dr. Fos-Environmental Engineers, ter has been a part-time rnember of the Panel since 1981i Dr. Foster is the author of numerous professional papers COTTER,B. PAUL 4 /R. AA, Princeton University (1959); on the discharge of heat and radionuclides into water. ,

J,D., Georgetown University (1968). Judge Cotter has pathways, and has headed or participated on several pan.

been the Chief Administrative Judge of the Panel since els and committecs on radiation and the environment for, 1980. Before 1980, Judge Cotter was a member and then among others, the U.S. Public Ilealth Service, the Na-Chief Administrative Judge of the Department oflious- tional Academy of Sciences, the International Atomic ing and Urban Development Board of Contract Appeals, Energy Agency, and the NRC Advisory Committee on a trial attorney with the U.S. Department of Transporta. Reactor Safeguards. During his 50-year career, Dr. Fos-tion, and in private practice for 6 years. Ile is on the ter has also held research and management positions with faculty of the National Judicial College, is a member of the State of Washington, the University of Washington, the American i;tw Institute, and is a recognized leader in and numerous laboratories and companies at the lian-the use of computers in managing complex cases. He is a ford, Washington facility, trustee of the American Inns of Court Foundation, Chair Elect of the Hoard of Directors of the Supreme Court FRFE. JOHN H, III. A.H., Davidson College (1958);

Opinion Network, holds several leadership positions with LLit, Vanderbilt Umversity (1965). Judge 1 rye has been--

the American Bar Association and the Federal Bar Asso. ^ I"II-time member of the Panel since 1981. Ilefore his L ciation, and has written extensively in the field of adra.inis- appomtment to the Panel, Judge Frye was the Counsel to :

trative law' the Panel and was in private practice m Washington,.

D.C., for 8 years. He has held leadership positions with EllBIAN, THOAMSS. II.S., Denison University (1953); numerous committees of the Federal liar Association, Ph.D., Iowa State University (1957). Dr. Elleman was nd has published in various law journals.

appointed to the Panel as a part-time member in 1990.

GLEAf0N, JAAIES P. B.S.S., Georgetown University Over the coune of his 38-par career, Dr. Elleman has (1948); LLB., Georgetown University (1950). Judge coaducted research in private mdustry, including Caro' Gleason has been a part-time member of the Panel since

. lina Power & Light Co. and General Atomics, and at

" 1980 and held a similar appointment from 1957-1970.

North Carolina State University where he ts currently a

, During his 41-year career, Judge Gleason has held nu.

professor of nuclear engmcering, a department he merous elective and appointive offices at the county, headed from 1974 to 1979. He has published more than State, and Federallevel; taught at the University of Mary-60 articles m the field of nuclear chemtstry. Dr. Elleman is hmd and Harvard University; maintained a private law also an American Board of Health Physia Board Certt' and consultant practice; and served as an aide to two U.S.

fied Health Physicist. Senators.

FERGUSON, CEORGE A. B.S., Howard U.niversity HAND, C4DET H., JR.11.S., University of Connecticut (1947); M.S., Howard University (1948); Ph.D., Catholic (1946); M.A., University of California, Berkeley (1948);

University (1%5). Dr. Ferguson has been a part-time Ph.D., University of Califomiac Berkeley (1951). Dr,

- member of the Panel since 1972. During his 44-year ca- Hand has been a part-time member of the Panel since reer, he has held teaching, adminierative, and research 1971. Currently Emeritus Professor and Ementus Direc-

. positions with Howard University, the U.S. Naval Re- tor of the University of Ca'ifornia Bodega Marine Labo-search laboratory, the University of Pennsylvania, and ratorv, Dr. Iland has held teaching, research, and admin-Clark College (where he was chairman of the Physics

~

istrative positions with - Mills College, the Scripps-Department). Dr. Ferguson is a member of the American Institution of Oceanography, the University of California Physical Society and several teaching associations. at Berkeley, and the University of California at Davis.

FOREAfAN, HARRY. B.S., Antioch College (1938); Ph.D., HETRICK DAVID L H.S., Rensseher Polytechnic Insti-Ohio State University (1942); M.D., University of Califor- tute (1947); M.S., Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute nia (1947). Dr. Foreman has been a part-time member of (1950); Ph.D., University of California, Los Angeles the Panel since 1971. Dr. Foreman's career spans 50 years (1954). Dr. Hetrick became a part-time Panel member in NUREG-1363, Vol. 4 22

- - ... -- -. - ,, ,r - - -

- - ,, - - ~_- --- - - . - - - . - - .--- . -- - - -

1972. Dunng his career as a physicist, Dr. Hetrick has of Tennessee, Dr. Jordan spent 27 years at the Oak Ridge worked as a private consultant to General Atomics, National laboratory in utious research and management 11ughes Research Laboratories, the Marquardt Corpora- positions, ending his long tenure there as its Deputy Di-tion, and H rookhaven National l aboratory, l le has taught rector, physics at California State University at Northridge, the i University of Hologna in Italy, Rensselaer Polytechnic KELBER, CHARlliS N. II.A., University of Minneapolis i Institute, and at the University of Arizona. Dr. lietrick (1947); Ph.D. University of Minnesota (1951). Hefore j has also worked on nuclear projects at the United King, joining the Panel as a full-time rnember in 1990, Dr. l dom Atomic Energy Agency in Aldermaston, England, Kelber was the Paners Scnior Technical Advisor from j the International Atomic Energy Agency in Cuernavaca, 1988 to 1990. lie alsc served in various senior technic:d Mexico and at the les Alamos National laboratory. positions in the Division of Nuclear Regulatory Research at the Atomic Energy Commission and at the NRC. Ile-HHJ,ERNESTE. II.S., Universityof California Herkeley fore joining the Commission in 1973, Dr. Kelber was a (1943); M.S., University of California, llerkeley (1959). senior scientist at Argonne National laboratory for 18 Judge Hill has been a part time member of the Panel years.11e is a Fellow of the Amcrictm Nuclear Society and since 1972. Currently the president of Ilill Associates, a the American Physical Society.

nuclear engineering consulting company, Judge 11111 has held numerous nuclear cugmeenng and management po-KUNE, JERRY R. B.S., University of Minnesota (1957);

sitions in the pnvate sector, with the Atonue Energy M.S., University of Minnesota (1960); Ph.D., Univasity Commission, and at the Iawrence 1.ivermore National of M nnesota (1964). Dr. Kline has been a full-time mem-laboratory.

g g7 g p ggg , ;g g the Panel, Dr, Kline held various research and manage-UOOPER. FRANK E II.A., University of California mem pWHms with the Puerto Rico Nuclear Center, the (1939); Ph.D., University of Minnesota (1948). Dr. Agonne National laboratory, the Atomic Energy Com-rmssion, and the NRC. lie is the author of numerous 11ooper has been a part time member of the Panel since 1973. Currently a Professor Emeritus at the University of sdennfic papet s and reports m the fields of radioecology Michigan, Dr, llooper has held teaching and administra- and soi! science.

tive positions at the University of Michigan, the Institute en State University (1967);

f'r Fishenes Research, and the University of Minnesota. IA3f, PETERUniversity M.S., Stanford S. U.S.,( Oreg'1968); Ph.D., Stanford In 1962-63 and again m 1966. Dr. Hooper was an aquatic versity (1971). Dr. Lam was appointed to the Panel as a ecologist with the Atomic Energy Commission, i< rom '

full-time judge in 1990. He joined the Nuclear Regulatory 1979 to 1988, he was chairman of the Ecology, Fishenes Commission as a reactor systems engineer in 1983 and and Wildlife Program in the School of Natural Resources became Chief of the Reactor Systems Section of the NRC at the University of Michigan. Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data, JOHNSON, EUZABETH B. B.S., Western Kentucky Uni- # "" "E "** ""' #

versitY (1943); M.S., Vanderbilt UniversttY (1952).JudEe

• E" "" " ^**""

National laboratory. He has taught engineermg courses Johnson has been a part-time memberof the Panel since 1975. Currently on the stafl of the Instrumentation & at San Jose State University and George Wa?.ington Controls Division of the Oak Ridge National laboratory, Judge Johnson has held physicist and engineer positions LAAfB, JAAfES C,1#. U.S.C.E., Virginia Military Insti-on various Union Carbide Corporation nuclear projects tute (1947); M.S., Massachusetts Institute of Technology at Oak Ridge and elsew here, and was a research assistant (1952); Sc.D., Massachusetts Institute of Technology with the Manhattan Project. During her 48-year career, 4

(1953). Dr Lamb has been a part-time member of the-Judge Johnson published numerous Atomic Energy Panel since 1974. Currently a distinguished visiting pro-Commission and other professional papers, principally fessor of civil engineering at George Washington Univer-concenied with reactor experiments and nuclear sity and professor of sanitary engineering at the Univer-criticahty. sty of North Carolina, Dr. Iamb has also held teaching, engineering, management, and research positions in pri-JORDAN, IVALTER H. A.D., University of Oklahoma vate industry, at Newark College of Engineering, Univer-l (1930); M.S., University of Oklahoma (1931); Ph.D., Cali- sity of North Carolina, and Massachusetts Institute of fornia Institute of Technology (1934). Dr. Jordan has Technology.

been a part-time member of the Panel since 1970. Dr.

, Jordan is the author of numerous articles, professional IAZO, ROBERT Af. B.S., University of Alberta (1946); - - - -

papers, and books in the nuclear and radar fields, and is a M. A., University of Hritish Columbia (1950); Ph.D., Uni-Fellow of the American Nuclear Society and the Ameri- versity of Notre Dame (1954); J.D., Rutgers University can Physical Society. In addition to holding teaching posi- (1958). Dr. Iazo has been a member of the Panel since tionsat the University of South Dakota and the University 1970, first in a part-time capacity ar'd, since 1972, in a t

23 NUREG-1363, Vol. 4

4 full time capacity, lietween 1977-80, he serv i as the Moore was in private practice in the firm of Volpe, llos-the< m c Secretary of the Panel, and since 1980, as its keyandI yons. worked in the Civil Division of the Depart-Dep , Chief Administrative Judge,liefore joining the ment of Justice, served as administrative assistant to the Panel as a full. time member. Dr.1 azo maintained a pri. Oovernor of Ohio, and clerked for Judge hiiller on the vate legal practice and was a member of the Patent De- Sixth Circuit beforejoining the Nuclear Regulatory Com-putments of Imth Standard Oil of New Jersey and lic11 mission in 1980.

Telephone I almtatories.

AIORRIS, l'E/ER A fl.A., Swarthmore College (1943);

LUEhAE, EAIAIETil A. II.A., Ittpon College (1936); Ph.D., University of Virginia (1951). Dr. hiorris served as Ph.D., University of Illmois (1941). Dr. I uebke became a a full time administrative judge with the Panel from 1981 part time member of the Panelin 1987 following 15 years to 1987. lie was appointed as a part time judge in 1991, of ser3 ice as a futbtime member. A Fellow of the Amen. Ilefore serving on the Panel, Judge hiorris worked as crm Nuclear Society ard recipient of a Presidential Cer. Operational Physics Supervisor with !!.l. duPont de tificate of hierit for hiicrowave Radar Research Dr. Nemours and Co. from 1951 to 1957, and served the 1 uebke spent 27 years in private industry involved in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission as Director Office of design, testing, and operation of nuclear power plants for Operations.and Director, Division of Reactor 1 icensing. -

submarines. liefore that, he taught at the University of h lendu at Madues h PARIZF.K, RICilARD R. II.A., University of Connecti-Iech I '

cut (1956); hi.S., University of Illinois (1960); Ph.D., Uni-versity of Illinois (1961). Dr. Pariiek was appointed as a AlcCOl10Af. ElWNETil A. II.S., Oklahoma State Uni- part time administrative judge in 1990; lie has been a versity (1948); M.S., University of Illinois (1949); Ph.D., profeno m e Ocology Depanment at Pennsylvania lowa State University (1964). Dr. hicCollom has been a State Um(versity since 1961 and is president of his own part-time member of the Panel since 1972.11c is currently consugng nrm. D . Panzek holds several positions in Dean and Professor limeritus of the College of!!nginect- prokswnal assoctations and has authored or - co-ing, Architecture and Technology, Oklahoma State Uni. authored more than 120 scientific and technical papers.

versity. During his 43 year carect, he has held teaching, REIN, //ARRP ll.S., New York University (1953); M.D.,

research, and administrative positions wph Oklahoma State University of New York (1957); J.D., University of State University, Iowa State Un vers,ty, i and the Atom,c i

Florida (1982). Dr. Itcin was appointed to the Panel as a linergy Division of Phillips Petroleum Company. In addi-part. time administrative judge in 1990. Dr. llein is an tion. he has held numerous leadershm positions with sev-active trial lawyer and has 23 years of active clinical medi-eral professional associations and the Oklahoma lloard of cal experience. Currently, Dr. Rein's trial work is limited Registration for I!ngineers and land Surveyors.

to medically related cases. Dr. Rein has published several AIARGUllES, AIORTON B. fl.A., llrooki Yn ColleEe

"" ' '" "E '" #"

practics lie has also conducted seminars and courses for (1953); J.D. Ilrooklyn Iaw School (1954). Judge Mar-gulics has been a futbtime member of the Panc' , ace lawyers across the United States pertaining to the discov.

cry and trial processes related to caes involving medical 1982. liefore his appointment to ,the Penel, Judge Mar- questions.

pulics served as an Admmistrative law Judge (1969-1982),11egional Counsel, and trial attorney for the RUBENSTEIN, LESTER S. II.S., University of Arizona Interstate Commerce Commission, and as a member of (1953); M.S., Carnegie Institute of Technology (1962).

the Army Judge Advocate General's Corps. Judge Rubenstein was appointed to the Panel as a part-time member in 1990. liefore joining the Panel, he served Affl1ER, AfARSilAll E. A,lI. with honors, University of in various leadership capacities with the Nuclear Regula-Illinois (1935); 1.1 11., Univr3ity of Illmois (1937). Judge tory Commission,includmg Assistant Director for Region Miller was a fulbtime mc vr of the Panel (1974-1985) IV Reactors, NRR; Director Systems Division and Stan-and has been a part-tis.c member since 1985. Judge Cardization, NRR; and Assistant Director Division of -

Miller was ar lmmistrative law Judge fo, the U.S. Systems Integration, NRR, llefore joining the Atomic i

Department oi abor for 11) cars and previously a part* linergy Commission in 1967, he worked for the National

- ner for 15 years in the Washington, D.C., law firm of Aeronautics and Space Mministration as a researcher Dan /anskyp Dickey, Ile is the author of several books on and for the TRW and Westinghouse corporationsiJudge legal practice. Rubenstein has written several articles and papers and lectured on the policies and licensing procedures of the Af00RE, THOAIAS S. B.A., Miami University (Ohio) Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

(1968); J.D., Ohio State University (1972). Judge Moore was appointed to the ASI.llP in 1991 after a distinguished SCHINE, DAl7D R. ll.A, Pomona College (1952): M.S.,

10. year career as an admirdstrative judge on the Commis- University of California,1 os Angeles (1953); M.S., Stan-sion's Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board. Judge ford University (1958); Ph.D., University of Cahfornia, N U Rl!O- 1363. Vol. 4 24

l i

I San Diego (1962). Dr. Schink has been a part-time mem- liefore his appointment to the Panel, Judge Smith served ,

her of the Panel since 1974. Currently a prefenor of as an Administrative law Judge for the Social Security  ;

c(canography and formerly the Asulate Dean of the - Administration and as a trial attorney in the Antitrust College of Geosciences at Texas A&M University, Dr. Division of the Ilderal Trade Commission. lie also Schink has written monographs and professional papers scrwd as a county prosecutor, Deputy Director of the on marine geochemistry, silicon, radium, rad <m. and early Ohio Department of 1 Jguor Control, and engaged in the dipenesis. Dr. Schink has also held teaching and research private practice of law. j poskions at the Palo Alto laboratory.Tetedyne isntopes, .

University ofIthode Island, Scripps Inrtitute of Oceanog' TIDEV, GEORGE /MNCIS. II.A., University of Virginia raphy, and Stanford University. In addition, Dr. Schink 5 (1980WD Univasityof Virginia (1984).Dr.Tideywas has sen'ed on several advisory pancis for the National appointed to the Pancl as a part-time memberin 1991. lle Science l'oundation und the United Nation' is currently an assistant professor in obstetrics and gyne.

S/lON, FREDERICK /. li.S., Columbia University. Judge colm at Me Unhcrsity of Texas Medical School. lie taught in the same field at George Washington Universt.y -

Shon has been a full-time member of the Panel since 1972 nd is engaged in a pnvate practice in these areas. Dr.

and currently serves as its Deputy Chief Administrative ." idey has co authored several articles on female ferti Judge (rechnical). liefore his appointmeat to the Pariel, Judge Shori held management positions with the Atornie He is a memba of the Amencan College of Obsteines  ;

and Gynecology, the American 17ertility Society, and the line*gy Commission, and worked as a physielst with the Amencan Medical Association, I awrence f(adiation I aboratory and several cor;xnations within the nuclear industry. J udge Shon has also served as l a consultant on reactor safety to the Spanish and Danish if0l#E. Sl/ Ell >0N J. A.ll., liarvard University (1942): '

Atomic I!nergy Commissions, and taught nuclear engi- I Lil.. Georgetown University (1956). J udge Wolfe was a necting at the University of California at lierkeley, full time member of the Panel frorn 1976 to 1988, when -

he assumed part time status, liefore his appointment to SA flTil,IVAN IV. Pre law, Ohio State University, Mexico the Panel. Judge Wolfe was a partner h Coal Mines City College, Kent State University (1946-48); J.D., Wm liquipment Sales Company of Terre llaute, Indiana, an McKinley School of law (1952). Serving the NI(C as attorney with the Civil Aeronautics lloard, and, for 20 Chief Administrative l aw Judge since 1978, Judge Smith years, a trial attomey with the Civil Division of the U.S.

has been a full time member of the Panel since 1975. Department of Justice.

4 t.

I l

25 NUllI!G-1363, Vol. 4

. - - - - - - -~- . . . - - - - - - - . - . - - . - - - - , - -

Al'I'ENI)lX I)

SEl,ECTEI) ISSUANCES ()F Tile AT()MIC SAFETY ANI) I,1 CENSING ilOAlti)S October 1,1990 to Septenther 30,1991 o ADV ANUl;l) Ml.1)lCAl, SYSTI:MS. INC. (One thicket Nos. $0-$99 l: Sit, $0 60011S11 (ASI.lll' 1:actory llow, Geneva 0100 41011), ths ket No. No.79-422 01. liS) 30-160$$ Unt'(ASI Ill' No. 89 -$92 02 Civl') hiemorandnm and Order,1 Jill 90-37,32 NltC 270 Memorandurn and ()rder, l 111' 91-7,33 NitC 212 (October 31,1990)

(Marc h 19.1991).

e ( Ull ATOltS Ol' 'illii UNIVlillSil Y 017 MIS-

• Altt/ON A PUllt .lC SliltViCli COMl'AN Y, rt al. SOUlti (l l(U MI'- S l'roject), Ihwket Nos.

(l'alo Verde Noticar Ocnesating Stanon, Units I,2 70 00270, 30 02278-M1 A ( ASt .lll' No.

and 3), lhicket hos. $0 528 Ol A, $0-529-Oi,A, 90 613-02 MI A)

$0 $30.()! A ( ASI til' No. 91- 632 01-01 A) hiemorandmn 4md Order, 1.111'-90 = 33,32 NltC 245 Memorandum and Oider, 1,111'-91-20,33 NltC 416 (October 3,1990)-

(May 14,1991).

Memorandum and 01 der,1.111'-90 -34,32 NitC 2$3

• Alll/ON A l'Ull! IC S!!1tVICl! COMPAN Y, et al (October l$ 1990).

(Pato Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Uruts 1,2 Memorandum and Order,1 Jil'-90-35,32 NitC 259 and 3), 8 hklet Nos. $0-$28 OI A ..,

$0-$24 d)I A-2, $9 530 01 A-? ( ASI 111' No. (Octobn 20,1990).

91-633-0$-Ol A- 2) Memorandum and Order, l.Ill'.90-38,32 NitC 3$9 Memorandum and 01 der, l.Ill' 91= 4,33 NitC 153 (Novcinber 1,1990).

(l'ebr uary 19, 1991)

Memorandum and Order,1.111'-90-41,32 NltC 380 Memorandum and Order,1 JIP-91-13,33 NltC 259 (Nowmba Hi,1990b

( APnl 24,1991).

gygg, g gg g g,-904 32 NRN9 Memorandum and Oider,I.llP 91-18,33 NitC 394 ("C" " '

(May 3,1991). Memotandum and Orden, l . IIP-91-11,33 NRC 251 Memorandum and 0 dcr, I IIP- 91-19,33 NitC 39 7 (May 9,1991)- Memorandum and Otder, I lli'-91-12,33 NitC 2$3 e llAltNiiTI' INI)USI'RI A1. Lit AY, th>cket No.

30-30691- CivP ( ASI lil' No. 91- 636 Civ P) Memorandum and Order,1 Jil'-91-14,33 NRC 265

( April 2$.1991).

Memorandum and Order. l . IIP-91-16,33 NitC 274

( Apol 30,1991). Memorandum and Order, I.llP-91-31,34 NitC 29 e Cl JiVlil A N D I!! 1 TiltlU 111.UMIN ATINO COMPA! Y,rt al. (Peny Nuclear Power Plant. Unit Memorandum and Order, l .llP-91-34,34 NitC l$9 1). Ihslet No. 50 440-Ol A-2 (ASI 111' No. 40~ ( Aug' ust $,1991).

605-02-Ol A) e lil!Wi!!J. Ol!Ol'l!Cl!NICAl, I!NOINiilittlNO, initial Deen, ion, I til'- 90-39,32 NitC 368 (Novem' l.TD., DMet No. 030-3(i870 OM ( ASI Jil' No.

ber1,1990)'

91 - 629 0 M )

• COMMONWii Alli'll lii)lSON COMI'ANY, et al. Initial Decision,1 JIP-91-29,33 NltC $61 (June 2$,

(Carrol County Nuclear Station Umts I and 2), 1991).

27 NUlti!O-1363 Vol. 4

4 1

o 1 LORIDA POWl R AND LIGitT COMPANY and 2) Docket Nos. 72-10,50-282- RS,50-306-RS (l'utLey Point Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 3 (ASlJIP No. 91-627411-RS) and 4). Docket Nos. 50-250-OI A-6, Memorandum and Order, I IIP-91-8 A,33 NRC 210 50-251-01 A-6 (ASlJIP No. 91-625-02-01 A-6) (March 14,1991).

Memorandum and Order, LilP-91-2,33 NitC 42 (January 23,1991). e NUCll!AR Mirl'Al.S. INC., Docket No.

40-672-MIA (ASIJIP No. 91439-02-MIA) e GliORGIA POWi!R COMPANY, et al. (Vogt! Memorandum and Order,1JIP-91-22,33 NRC 427 Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2), Ibcket 16, 1991)'

Nos. 50-424-OI A, 50-425-OI A (ASI IIP No.

9041740-OI A) Memorandum and Order,1JIP-91-27,33 NRC 548 Memorandum and Order, IJIP-91-6,33 NitC 169 (June 18,1991).

(February 28,1991). e PUlllJC SliRVICE COMI'ANY OP NI!W Memorandum and Order. LilP-91-21,33 NI(C 419 HAMPSHIRE (S(abrmk Station, Unit 1). Docket (May 15,1991). No. 50-443-OI A (ASIJIP No. 91-640-09-OI A)

Memorandum and Order, IJIP-91-28,33 NRC 557 o GEORGIA POWi!R COMPANY, et al. (Vogtle (June 18,1991).

Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2), Docket Nos. 50-424-OI A-2,50-425-01 A- 2 (ASIJIP No. . PUllLIC SERVICE COMPANY OP NEW 91447-OI A-2) IIAMPSillRl! (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2),

~ ~

let u mn um md Order. LilP-91-33,34 NitC 138 '

fMI P N bO- 19 [ O 11 )

Memorandum and Order, IllP-90-40,32 NRC 376 Memorandum and Order, LilP-91-36,34 NRC 193 (November 7,1990).

(September 12,1991).

• PUllLIC S!!RVICE COMPANY OP N!!W o LONG ISLAND IJGirl1NG COMPANY llAMPSHIRi! (Seabrook Station, Units I and 2), ,

(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1) Docket Docket Nos. 50-443-OLR-4, 50-444-OLR-4 No. 50-322-OI.A (ASLilP No. 91-621-01-OIA) _ (ASLilP No. 90420-04-llRil-4)

Memorandum and Order, LilP-91-1,33 NRC 15 Memorandum and Order, LilP-91-8,33 NRC 197 (January 8,1991). (March 12,1991).

Memorandum and Order,1JIP-91-7,33 NRC 179 Memorandum and Order, IJIP-91-24. 33 N RC 446 (March 6,1991). (May 30,1991).

Memorandum and Order, L11P-91-23,33 NilC 430

• PUllllC SERVICE COMPANY OP NEW (May 23,1991). IIAMPSillRE (Seabrook Station, Units I and 2),

Docket Nos. 50-443-Ole 3 & 5,50-444-OLR-3 & 5 Memorandum and Order, IllP-91-35,34 NRC 163 (ASIJ1P No. 90-61943-OLR-3, (August 29, 1991). 91-630-01-OLR-5)

Memorandum and Order, LilP-91-3,33 NRC 49 o 1.ONG ISLAND LIGilTING COMPANY (January 29,1991).

(Shoreham Nu-Jear Power Station, Unit 1), Docket No. 50-322-OI A-2 (ASI.HP No.91-631 e PUlllJC SERVICI! COMPANY OF NEW OI A-2) IIAMPSHIRE (Seabrmk Station, Units 1 and 2),

t MM-R fen on n nd Order,lJIP-91-26,33 NRC 537 ip 0s;9 5

Memorandum and Order, LilP-90-44,32 NRC 433 Memorandum and Order, LilP-91-32,34 NRC 132 (December 18, 1990).

(July 18,1991),

e RHODES SAYRE & ASSOCIATES, INC.,

o .NORTiiERN - STATES POWER COMPANY Docket . No. 30-29086-SC (ASIJIP No.

(Prairic Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 _

91-628-01-SC)

NUR110-1363, Vol. 4 28 l'

m _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ - ___ __ _ _ .

i hiemorandutn and (hder,1 Jil'-91-15,33 NitC 268

• TliNNilSSlitiVAlll!Y AUTilOltlTY (Sequoyah (April 25,1991). Nuclear I'lant, Units 1 and 2), thxket Nos.

50-327-Ol A, 50-328-01 A (ASI Jil' No. '.t435-e SACit ANil!NIO h1UNICll'Al, trilllTY DIS- 07-Ol.A)

Titf(T(Itancho Seco Nuclear Otneratmg Station),

Docket No. 50-312-OI A (ASI.lil' No. 91434- hiemorandum and Order,Illi'-91-10,33 NitC 231 OS.Ol.A) (hiarch 18, 1991).

Memoranduni and Order,1.111'-91-17,33 NitC 379 W', 1E DC h'a

, .I'U N GMM 30-12319-CivP (ASI.llP No. 90-618-03-CivP) hienunalidum and Order, I.llP-91-30,34 NitC 23 hitmorandum and Order,1.111'-90-42,32 NitC 387 (October 29.1990).

• Sl!QUOY All 1 JElli COltPOllA'110N, lhicket hiemorandam and Order,1. IIP-90-43,32 NitC 390 No. 404)K027 41LA (ASI.lll' No.91-623 (November 15,1990).

hil A) hiemorandum and Order,1.llP-91-5,33 NitC 163 hiemorandum and Order, I IIP-91-25,33 NitC 535 (January 24,1991). (June 13,1991).

• SI'. h1 Ally hil! DICAL . Clin'l lil(-- 11 Oil AllT/ST.

h1 AltY hil! DICAL Cl!N'llilt-GAltY, Docket

• Wit ANGl.lill I AllOll ATOllillS. IAltSliN Nos. 030-31379-Ohi, 030-01615-0h1 ( ASI.lll' No. I AllOltATOltillS, OltlON ClllihilCAl. COht-l'ANY AND JollN P. IAllSliN, Docket No.

90 612- Ob0ht) Memorandum and Order, I.llP-90-36,32 NitC 267 (October 31,1990). 9999004-SC-11 (ASI Jil' No. 91-648-01-SC-It)

Memorandum and Order, l. IIP-90-40,32 NitC 463 Memorandum and Order,1.llP-91-37,34 NitC 196 (December 26,1990). (September 26,1991).

29 NUltI!G-1363 Vol. 4

M2MMk.

j

.{< ,

Al'l'ENDIX E MAJOlt FEDEllAls STATUTES AND ltEGUI.ATIONS ItELEVANT TO ASLill' ADJUDICATIONS

1. Federal Statutes Part 32, Specific Domestic ljcenses to Manu.

facture or Transfer Certain items

1. The Atomic linergy Act of 1954, as amended. Containing flyproduct Material 42 U.S C. $$ 2011 et 3cq, PubL 83-703,68 giart 33, Specific Domestic 1.icenses of Ilroad S,l'A l . 919.

Scope for Ilyproduct Material

2. The linergy 1(corganir.ation Act of 1974, as Part 34, ljcenses for Radiography and Radia-amended, 42 U.S.C. $$ 201-401, Pub.1- tion Safety llequirements for Radio-93-438,88 STAT.1233- graphic Operations

3. Uranium Mill Tailings 1(adiation Control Act Part 35, Medical Use of Ilyproduct Material of 1978, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 99 7901 ct 3cq . Pub.l..95-604,92 STAT. 3021. Part 39, l.icenses and Radiation Safety Requirements for Well logging

4. Administrative Procedure Act. 5 U.S.C.

Part 40, Domestic 1.icensing of Source Material

$$ $51-559.

S. Transportatun Safety Act of 1974,49 U.S.C.'

$ 9 1801 et seq . PubL 93-633, f,8 STAT. 2156. Pari 50, Domestic 1.icensing of Production and Utilization Facilities

6. National linvironmental Policy Act of lH,9, as l' art $1, linvironmental Protection Regula-arnended, Pub.l.91-190,83 STAT. 852, tions for Domestic ljeensing and Related Regulatory 1 unctions

" 9 'E Part $3, Criteria and Procedures for Determin-gY h;' (fg" '

ing Adequacy of Available Spent Nuclear

8. Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982,42 U.S.C. Fuel Storage Capacity 10101 et seq . Pub.1 97-425, 96 STN!'. Part 55, Operators'l_icenses -

Part 60, Disposal of liigh-l.evel Radioactive

11. REGUI ATIONS Wastes Geologic Repositories Title 10, Code of l'ederal Regulations (26 Parts): Part 61, ljcensing Requirements for l amd Dis-posal of Radioactive Waste Part 0, Conduct of Employees Part 70, Domestic ljcensing of Special Nuclear Part 2, Rules of Practice for Domestic l_icens. Material ing Proceeding.i Part 71, Packaging and Transportation of Part 19, Notices, Instructions, and Reports to Radioactive Material Workers; Inspections Part 72, ljcensing Requirements for the Stor-age of Spent- Fuel in an Independent Part 20, Standards for Protection Against Spent Fuel Storage installation (ISFSI)

Radiation Part 73, Material Control and Accounting of Part 21. Reporting of Defects and Noncomph.' Spec al Nuclear Materials ance Part 30, Rules of General Applicability to Domestic 1.icensing of Byproduct Mate- Part 140, Financial Protection Requirements rial and Indernnity Agreements 31 NUREG-1363, Vol. 4

Nnc e onu :ns u s Nuct i An H[GUL A1Dhy COMMMJON 1. hlPOHINtN H p_ p;n (A6sgredli f*Jpp , H., v .NHC, Ad d Voi , Nam-and A16em14m NHCM 1IfQ,

21. m BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET ' ' ' ' ' - d *"rl

<r. in.i.ation ontr ..< m .)

NUltIiG-1363 Vol. 4

2. Tilli Af 40 bultlif t i J, oAI L ht POH I it)tu tM 4L D Atomic Safety and I.icensing floard Panet Annual lleport: l'iscal Year 1991 uooth vrAn 1)ecember 1992

4. > va OH anANt Nuuai H to Au l ttsu b t t, lvpl Os HtpoHf li. Paul Cotter, J r. Annual

7. Pt niou covt ot D o,.uw,. o.t..;

IT 1991 S. - NAML AND ADUHL L.S Dimion, OMic. & Heepon, U !> U*s.a' HeigWelor y Lwremissim. aNi PU.

m i.,9O OHMNU.

.* . 94 BAN./ A hun. ie emo.ay , vmo, nr,e no no.m,9 w.. 3 .Ut NBC, pomtee

~

Atomic Safety and 1.icensing floard Panel U.S. Nuclear llegulatory Commission Washington,1)C 20555 e t,noNsoHnu ohu.,N>< A nun - NAME AND ADDHi 55 Of NHC.1p

• S A"* && atm.' . It Whacta, pe onle NHC Dsmoon OHece w hqun.

US f Asclear hogWato'y Cunmsstim, and rnathrq ACO.ht )

Same as 8. above 10, SU6 'i'l[ Mt N1 AH V NO T L b Tenth Annual iteport n.AnsiHAct me wo.o. sio..i In l'iscal Year 1991, the Atomic Safety and 1.icensing floard Panel ("the Panel") handled 48 proceedings, a 20-percent increase over the previous year. 'the cases addressed issues in the construction, operation, and inain-tenance of commercial nuclear power reactors or other activities requiring a license from the Nuclear llegula-tory Commission. 'the panel also replaced several badly needed technical disciplines lost to retirement over the _

last two years. 'this report summarizes. highlights, and analyzes how the wide-ranging issues raised in NitC pro-ccedmgs were addressed by the judges and licensing boards of the Panel during the year.

12 KEY WORDS/Ot$C4tPTORS (Ust wnds a phranet that will assist f.s.arctmen in laabng ue ruport.) 11 AVAILADIUTY 6I AltMENT Unlimited 14, SE CUnliY CLASStf ICATION ASLllP AnnualItcport g g, ,., y ,

1 tscal Year 1991 Five-Year Projections Uncianified U "" " P"'

Contentions 1 iled Unclassified

15. f AIMutit Of PAGL S 16 PHICt.

l Nne rono au mea)

Printed on recycled paper Federal Recycling Program

~

DECE31BER 1992 NUREG-LM3, Vol. 4 ATO5 tlc SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD PANEL ANNUAL REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1990 UNITED STATES POSTAGE D ES A!D WUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION usatac WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 FERMIT NO. G-67 l OFFICIAL BUSfNESS PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE $300 t

l' 120555139531 1 1: N1921991cC1 US N C-010" PIV FOI t DUaLIr1TIONS SVCS TOS-PDo-NUcEG o-211 Wa3"INGTON DC 20555 l

l 1

_ _ _ _ _ _ _