ML20141A467
| ML20141A467 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/31/1986 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-0750, NUREG-0750-I02, NUREG-0750-V22-I02, NUREG-750, NUREG-750-I2, NUREG-750-V22-I2, NUDOCS 8604040477 | |
| Download: ML20141A467 (109) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_ __ . - - ----
- y . . - .
e
. NUREG-0750 Vol. 22 Index 2 -
E.??ECT5ENCT GP 72DM@MSCIMy%WAGT.MSN@' -
$4 R # dOWCm ~ l
~u.#' P %u@@IW,d,u
~
2'
.1.;#.w,e,nn&,%s%s..'."'%
,,,s.m
.n F.*Nif,~(:l pp' jut,,v>.T:;.
w.e y <. .n,j'ln.1M.a *@,;$ f u i - - Y ,M , ,3 8 %ppy v.,i -
.s a W .a Apmm" .ac.s n .+ -
w. WNUCLEAR$wwens,,REGU.LATOR WJi ~ n w.nw ~an.~.nn.- y w - R:'&nCOMMISSIONi..lSSUA~NCESWTME! ..~.w mq:MM+.'*Q y.*:' %%2f%QWidj-Q ? Wn% y $~Nik;&G%diWi~;NEAG2hxl$in$%&mDG;fLt,W'f**Ml.%n f nQf
- e&Q
$,M.p,@,:w^ *d:
.wy@ u ,fRm@r4xW.a n
'..99 C2t u W @'%w QM:a M -@dw N i pg, Wn;.- s v -
#o detinber 5. ? ' M n~1 9 8,N-{f g N ytp g 4T E., .
- h. W 4*h G d d r. B.~. ,+D d.- M.fA 2&h Wi'Aj
'M*'A. .
xgwg v.~.NU. wr ME%M **.Kn%)? w c**%',; M%s@ .- mTin'd%qe m~t.y ~ E '
,y
&#&M:wn,#"'hh[$
' '" #F/Q ' gi[p . *
< , spyg... 4. ,
{h, $ hykg
.y jww h M vn ,.
N, ' an
... e ., ,:. . *l;,tu m,M6#s sJ g @. M.;:C TE a. $a ? 4. x , Us!MW '
g' g"
, w: g w a -w>, a. ,,
8.I . *i '.;$ 1 [,S '.. .:L 5f',W%l f Qam ';.ySCAy sR v:u., .g .)d.. 2,.+ 5.vOth.f-a; 0 $. o h%f A;lh'W'f.*?fbh
.s i.,w , t g y hs.}fj$,k;4 } , ': V{?${k.?W . }?).kih: ,
~
.l -
os e.w ' y ,t s,,.. 4.. ..*;>
, gs c:
c9 m.;.,. fjfp ,w > m,ve.*,;. y*p a.- e.. m. f; ,f,g yvd_ A.g
t ' i ' '. . ,,' -* %, .
. QQY 'f ,[*,; C p;, ,, . . ,
'!,M.,- c,. .w , of.(M,: . "(du,7 *K'* p,:fkW3, %Jf[f.a hy
-J'4%y c;;; f',5^l(il.
[,,:
. .N/ . v((td,;. ,, av::.i. . .!,C.,., , .
',14 ~
t ,
., h* 'h -
.r n j
$, : . e . vo%sm~q'1
".a,h;;d .. =
- m. :b . m. n . .. w ai.
' U. S. NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION . t :
f
. . . l e
i k h40j 860331 ! 0750 R PDR l i
. (
1
. . - . . . , . . . ., .g,_..., . . . . .
, {. '
m.,a%
, .g. ,
(" , s
, o i ,.
l
4 - i . l [~ NUREG-0750 j , Vol. 22 L ' Index 2 , l ,
^
f t e '
'^*
$.9
't
~
i 4 INDEXES TO : '. u .. K , s 1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY l . - - COMMISSION ISSUANCES l j j i ,- P o July - December 1985 -
, a i
~
o l v , ,
"l
. i 1
's * .\
j - , s l1j i
.i 1 n, j US NUCLE AR REGUL ATOR Y COMMISSION . . .
ei a3 ,, g , 4 n
, r,. ,.
- . .4 j *Y i l , s
~ , i .
i l + % I
, , . % =- =,=1*-are= -e, e=Og s .-- a+- = -
J \ . . . I
, , l 1
i .
',---,.-.-,.-.c...__,--,- _ , - - - . . . , . _ - - . . ---._- .-,
1 1
e Foreword Digests and indexes for issuances of the Commission (CLI), the Atomic Safety and ucensing Appeal Panel (ALAB), the Atomic Safety and ucensing Boerd Panel (LBP), the Administrative Law Judge (AU), the Directors' Decisions (DD), and the Denials of Petitions of Rulemaking are presented in this document. These digests and indexes are intended to serve as a guide to the issuances. Information elements common to the cases heard and ruled upon are: Case name (owner (s) of facility) Full text reference (volume and pagination) - Issuance number issues raised by appellants Iegal citations (caws, regulations, and ststutes) Name of facility, Docket number Subject matter ofissues and/or rulings j Type of hearing (for construction permit, operating license, etc.) ; Type cfissuance (memorandum, order, decision, etc.). ; I~ These information elements are displayed in one or more of five separate formats arranged as follows:
- 1. Case NameIndex The case name index is an alphabetical arrangement of the case names of the issuances. Each case name is followed by the type of hearing, the type ofissuance, docket number, issuance number, and full text reference.
- 2. Digests and Henders i
The headers and digests are presented in issuance number order as follows: - the Comnussion (CLI), the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel (ALAB), i the Atomic Safety and ucensing Board Panel (LBP), the Administrative law , Judge (AU), the Directors'. Decisions (DD), and the Denials of Petitions for , Rulemaking. ' The header identifies the luuance by issuance number, case name, facility l ,
- name, docket number, type of hearing, date ofissuance, and type ofissuance. '
The digest is a brief narrative of an issue followed by the resolution of the i issue and any legal references used in resolving the issue. If a given issuance covers
, more than one issue, then separste digests are used for each issue and are designated alphabetically. '
9 lii I
~
e
~r
. a e
~ '
'? ;? .l,,
t {: ;G. ' - .- . 9 .
, .. J ~ 4,,,; . .; - g~ .,' '-l
_e - .:
.', c.*.,O.,s; M.
o
'..* . -!!s , . .
~.
- 3. Lap!CitationsIndex
. This index is divided into four parts and consists of alphabetical or
' J- ; s ,
alphanumerical aranpreents of Cues, Regulations, Statutes, and Others. Dese e- ' citations are listed as given in the issuances. Changes in regulations and Statutes
. c .;. ", may have occuned to cause chanys in the number or name and/or applicability 3 ,
c. .
, ? ;- , of the citation.It is th:2 fore important to consider the date of the issuance.
., . De references to c-sss, regulations, statutes, and others are general'y
>. l followed by phrases that show the application of the citation in the particular
..: '4 ;-r issuance. These phrases are focowed by the issuance number and the full text
', s 'I .- ]3 reference.
.-( . -
! 4. Subject Index Subject words and/or phrases, arranged alphabetically, indicate the issues and subjects covered in the issuances. De subject headings are followed by phrases that give specific information about the subject, as discussed in the issuances being indexed. Rese phrases are followed by the issuance number and the full text reference.
- 5. Facility Index
'- his index consists of an alphabetical arrangement of facility n aes from the
; issuance. He name is followed by docket number, type of hearing, date, type of issuance, issuance number,and full text reference.
i 4 1 e e h O iv
- -.. 7.._..
e i i
9 } )
. I J
O I CASE NAME INDEX , l
. )
i AR120N A PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY, et al. OPERATING LICENSE. ORDER DISMISSING PROCEEDING Docket Nos. STN 50-5294L, 1 STN 50-530-OL ( ASLBP No. 80 447-010L); LBP-85-26,22 NRC !!8 (1985) OPER ATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; ORDER. Docket No. STN 50 528 ( Apphcation m Respect of a Sale and Leaseback Financens Transacuon by Pubhc Semce Company of New
]
Meuco) CLI-8517,22 NRC 875 (1985)
-l REQUEST FOR ACTION. DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 C.F R. ( 2.200. Docket No.
50-528. DD-85-12,22 NRC 44911985). DD-8515. 22 NRC 643 (1985) i BOSTON EDISON COMPANY l OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; DECISIOS.. Docket No. 50-293-OLA; ALAB 816. 22 ' NRC 461 (1985) ' OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT, MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER; Docket No i 50 293 OL A ( ASLBP No. 85 510-01 L 4); LBP-85-24. 22 NRC 97 (1985) CAROLIN A POW ER & LIGHT COMP ANY and NORTH CAROLIN A EASTERN MUNICIPAL POW ER AGENCY l
)
OPER ATING LICENSE; PARTIAL INITI AL DECISION ON EMERGENCY PLANNING AND i i S AFETY CONTENTIONS. Docket No. 50-400 OL ( ASLBP No. 82-472-03-OLJ; LBP-85-49, 22 i NRC 899 (1985) I
) OPERATING LICENSE; PARTIAL INITIAL DECISION ON SAFETY CONTENTIONS; Docket l No. 50-400 0L i ASLBP No 82 472-03OL); LBP-85 28,22 NRC 232 (1985) i OPER ATING LICENSE; REASONS SUPPORTING SUMM ARY DISPOSITION OF l )
EMERGENCY PLANN!NG CONTENTIONS Docket No 50-400-OL (ASLBP No. 82-472-03-OL). LBP-85 27A. 22 NRC 207 (1985) i CLEVEL AND ELECTRIC ILLUMIN ATING COMPANY. et al. s OPER ATING LICENSE; CONCLUDING PARTIAL INITIAL DECISION ON EMERGENCY ) l PLANNING. HYDROGEN CONTROL AND DIESEL GENERATORS. Docket Nos. 50 440-OL,50-441 OL ( ASLBP No. 81-457-04-OL); LBP-85-35,22 NRC 514 (1985) OPER ATING LICENSE: MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER, Docket Nus. 50-440 OL,50-441-OL; ALAB-820,22 NRC 743 (1985). LBP-85-33,22 NRC 442 (19851 REQUEST FOR ACTION; DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 C F.R. ( 2.206. Docket Nos.
; 50 440. 50-441; DD-8514. 22 NRC 635 (1985p COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY OPER ATING LICENSE; MEMod ANDUM AND ORDER. Docket Nos. 50-456-OL,50-457 OL; AL AB-817,22 NRC 470 (1985); LBP 85-40,22 NRC 759 (1985) l OPER ATING LICENSE, MEMOR ANDUM DETAILING R ATION ALE IN SUPPORT OF JUNE 21.1985 ORDER ON ADMISSIBILITY OF NEINER FARMS CONTENTION 4 (R AILROAD l EXPLOSION). Docket Nos. 50-456. 50-457. LBP 85 27,22 NRC 326 (1985)
J OPERATING LICENSE; MEMORANDUM OF RATIONALE FOR SUMM ARY DISPOSITION OF NEINER FARMS CONTENTION 1; Docket Nos. 50-456,50-457 LBP-85-43,22 NRC 805 (1985) COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY AND ALL LIGHT WATER REACTORS IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUEST; DIRECTOR'S DECislON UNDER 10 C F.R. ( 2.206; Docket No. 50 295. DD 8510,22 NRC 143 (1985) j - CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY REQUEST FOR ACTION. DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 C F R { 2.206. Docket No. 50-213. DD-85-20. 22 NRC 971 (1985) l t' 1 l l 1 I l l 1 i, - i e 4 k
, _ , . . - . . . - . . . _ _ _ . - .m- . . _ _ - . _ . . . - - . - - - . _ _ . - , . . - _ _ - _ _ . _ .
,- ,p w q ;g . ._ _
, n; .$$%Q$f'il.&j:?.N&'.l
- ' q.. s=
,4 , c.
~ J
.c; y 5'* um g g ..j 0 ,-, y9. .g a
~ , - n.~,s t,5y; ,b . ,; ,
"=^ s e
#.'I.; ,
, e
+ ~ . . : 2. - ~ . . . . a 5 ::~ : - . ... - - .
e
~
CASE NAME INDEX
\ DUKE POWER COMPANY, et al.
~ ' OPERATING LICENSE: DECISION; Docket Nos. 50-413 OL,50414-OL; ALAB 813,22 NRC 59 (1985); ALAB-825,22 NRC 785 (1985) FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY
- OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER; Docket Nos.
50-250 OLA 2,50-251-OLA 2 (ASLBP No. 84-504 07 LA) (Spent Fuel Pool Espansion); LBP 85-36,22 NRC 590 (1985) OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; ORDER; Docket Nost 50 250 OLA l. 50 251-OLA l (ASLBP No. 84-496-03-LA) (Vessel Flus Reduct on); LBP-85-29,22 NRC 300 (1985) GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY
' SPECIAL PROCEEDING; DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 C.F R. ( 2.206; Docket Nos.
', 70-1308,721-SP; DD-8516,22 NRC 851 (1985)
GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES NUCLEAR CORPORATION e :. , , , REQUEST FOR ACTION; DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 C.F R. ( 2.206; Docket No. 50-289; DD-85-20,22 NRC 971 (1985) SPECIAL PROCEEDING, ORDER; Docket Nos. 50-289 RA,50 289 EW; CLI 85-19,22 NRC 886 (1985) HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER COMPANY, et al. OPERATING LICENSE; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Docket Nos. STN 50498-OL, STN 50499-OL (ASLBP No. 7942107 OL); LBP 85-42,22 NRC 795 (1985); LBP-8545,22 NRC 819 (1985) ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY, et al. OPERATING LICENSE; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Docket No. 50 462-OL; LBP 85 22,22 NRC 89 (1985) INQUIRY INTO THREE MILE ISLAND UNIT 2 LEAK RATE DATA FALSIFICATION PROCEDUR AL RULING; ORDER AND NOTICE OF HEARING; Docket No. LRP; CLI-8518, 22 NRC 877 (1985) JOHN L N ANTZ RULEMAKING DENIAL; DENIAL OF PETITION FOR RULEM AKING; Docket No. PRM 50 35; DPRM-85 3,22 NRC 173 (1985) KERR-McGEE CHEMICAL CORPOR ATION M ATERIAl S LICENSE; MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER; Docket No. 40-2061 ML ( ASLBP No. 83-495 01 ML); LBP 85-46,22 NRC 830 (1985) MATERIALS LICENSE; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, Docket Nos. 40 2061 ML,40-2061 SC (ASLBP Nos. 83-49541-ML,84-502 01 SC); LBP-85-38,22 NRC 604 (1985)
. SHOW CAUSE; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER; Docket No. 40 2061 SC ( ASLBP No.
84-502 01-SC); LBP 85-48,22 NRC 843 (1985) LONG !$ LAND LIGHTING COMPANY OPERATING LICENSE; CONCLUDING PARTIAL INITIAL DECISION ON EMERGENCY PLANNING; Docket No. 50-322-OL 3 (Emergency Planning); LBP-85 31,22 NRC 410 (1985) LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY OPERATING LICENSE; DECISION; Docket No. 50-322-OL; ALAB-818,22 NRC 651 (1985); ALAB-824,22 NRC 776 (1985) LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY OPERATING LICENSE; DECISION Docket No. 50-382-OL; ALAB-812,22 NRC 5 (1985) M AINE YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY REQUEST FOR ACTION; DIRECTOR'5 DECISION UNDER 10 C.F R. ( 2.206; Docket No.
~
50 309; DD 85-17,22 NRC 859 (1985) METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, et al OPER ATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; ORDER; Docket No. 50 320 OLA ( ASLBP No. , 80-44244-LA); LBP-8544,22 NRC 816 (1985) SPECIAL PROCEEDING; DECISION; Docket No. 50-289-SP (Management Phase); ALAB.826,
, 22 NRC 893 (1985)
SPECIAL PROCEEDING; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. Docket No. 50 289 SP; ALAB-815, . 22 NRC 198 (1985); ALAB-821,22 NRC 750 (1985) 2
~, -,...----o-w-,wm r-,, ,
, s (f g a
i
- i CASE NAME INDEX i ,
I i SPECI AL PROCEEDING. P ARTI AL INITI AL DECislON ON THE REM ANDED ISSUE OF THE DIECK AMP M AILGR AM. Docket No. 50-289-SP ( ASLBP No 79-42949 SP) (Restart . Remand on Management). LBP 85-30. 22 NRC 332 (1985) [ P ACIFIC G AS AND ELECTRIC COMP ANY ! OPER ATING LICENSE; MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER; Docket Nos 50-275-OL 50-323-OL- t CLI-85-14. 22 NRC 177 (1985p I l PHIL ADELPHI A ELECTRIC COMPANY IMMEDI ATE ACTION REQUEST; DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 C F R ( 2.206; Dockei Nos 50-352,50-353; DD 85 il. 22 NRC 149 (1985: , , OPER ATING LICENSE; DECISION; Docket Nos. 50 352-OL,50 353-OL; ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985# ,. OPER ATING LICENSE. FOURTH PARTI AL INITI AL DECISION Docket Non,50 352 OL, ,#- 50-353-OL ( ASLBP No. 81465-07-OL). LBP-85 25,22 NRC 101 (19856 i i OPER ATING LICENSE; MEMORANDUM; Docket Nos. 50 352 0L,50-353-OL;CLI-8513,22 > I NRC i (1985) *
! OPER ATING LICENSE. MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER. Docket Nos 50152-OL. 50 353-OL; *
] AL AB-814. 22 NRC 191 t1985), AL AB 823. 22 NRC 773 (1985P; CLi-85-15. 22 NRC 184 - (1985: . S, . ' 3~ OPER ATING LICENSE; ORDER; Docket Nos. 50 352-OL 50-353 OL; CLI-8516,22 NRC 459
~
~,.- ,
j (1985) ~ - ./ REQUEST FOR ACTION. DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 C F.R. ( 2.206. Docket Nos 50 352. 50-353. DD-8518. 22 NRC 870 (1985) f.
.Y h-[ .
) REICH GEO-PHYSICAL. INC. - : a ._ ' M't CIVIL PEN ALT); INITIAL DECislON: Docket No. 3014828 (ASLBP No 85 508-010T) ;i. A T, (Licene Not 2318304-01. E A-84 78). AL3 851,22 NRC 941 (1985) I f.( ' f
- 7. ' . . "
CIVIL PEN ALTY; SUPPLEMENT TO INITI AL DECISION; Dockei No. 30-1482) ( ASLBP No. "' ' . Yf 85 508414)T (Licenw Nov 2518304-01. E4-84-78; AL3 85 2,22 NRC %8 (1985) . ;i* ~[,h ~ SOUTHERN C ALIFORNI A EDISON COMP AN) =
,- t REQUEST FOR ACTION. DIRECTOR'S DEC1510N UNDER 10 C.F.R ( 2 206. Docket No. , ,
J;, - - 50 206. DD 85-20,22 NRC 971 (1985# ; , . . l, X ; TEX A5 UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMP ANY. et al
,' --*4ts OPER ATING LICENSE, MEMOR ANDUM. Docket Nos 50-445 OL,50 446-OL ( ASLBP No. , ,
IL 79-4304h-OLP. LBP 85 37. 22 NRC 601 (1985) '
=-
?
OPER ATING LICENSE, MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER; Docket Nos. 50-445-OLAOL 2. ' j $0446-OLAOL-2 (45LBP No 79-430-06-OL); LBP-85 32,22 NRC 434 (1985); LBP 35 39. 22 NRC 755 (1985); LBP 85 41,22 NRC 765 (1985) OPER ATING LICENSE; MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER. Docket Nos. 50-445 OL,50-446 OL ( ASLBP No 79-430-064)L) LBP 85-47,22 NRC 835 (1985) THE DETROIT EDISON COMPANY. et al-REQUEST FOR ACTION DIRECTOR's DEcl510N UNDER 10 C F.R. I 2 206; Docket No-l 50 341. DD 8$-13,22 NRC 454 (19858 I UNIVERSITY OF LowELL l SPECIAL PROCEEDING; MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER; Docket No- 50-223 5P ( ASLBP No. 85 509-02-5Pl; LBP-85 23,22 NRC 95 (19851 ' i VIRGINI A ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY OPER ATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; INITIAL DECISION; Docket Nos 50 338 OLA 1. 50-339-OLA 1 ( A5LBP No 83-40101 L A). LBP 85 34. 22 NRC 481 (19857 OPER ATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; MEMOR AN()UM AND ORDER. Docket Nos. ' 50 338 OLA 1,50 339-OLA l; ALAB-822,22 NRC 771 (1985)
. WISCONSIN PUBLIC SERVICE CORPOR ATION ,
REQUEST FOR ACTION; DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 C.F R. ( 2 206; Docket No. 50-305; DD-85-20,22 NRC 978 (1985)
+ r i
i
> 1 4 !
i h t i
m .r- . . r&**s . , g .n.a ,W, @, f , " .r,
- h .- '
g
' , , .a . ;, ..) .: i{ n( l.a.,'
. . { .* * [\ b.' r,,,.' i e 2 s.
.,e{ ' 'Ts k.7
#- ' 1,9 ' ;, ' . , , .. ;
p , s 4'.= ., s
- 6. d
.s..= f , IL f., ,".'9.'i p
' .- -e
.. .,..'y....,L e
ss !w- ? .. . s
,'h- yy .v'.
'n._',. 4 b
r, *
- q o_ h '* l*
, ,,t- ,
} b % 5
,'\, _ t 4 L 4 " "
O e w GC g 1
\
, , 34 -.u. ,, _ . _ .
&- - 4 - +- ,. ,,_."%. . .- m. M* **' 8"* ** ' '
. ~
- }
.t e
r % e f i. t P h 1 M L
.f,.
) . P3 <
w
.il O
4 i~
#4 #r.
=L
(
' ". /,.,% ;,
p .a . g.8 g I '3 t I a%.,
#. ,1
$ I
- ~
- 2, 3 ,
rN' * *
,M V T. '"&i .
b' I . man
. , . -y % . g y. .
?
'6 l .
6 6' , s y b 4
- e' d h
*i l
e 9 i n 4 , I I. 3 W
's t
.4
's.
.4, <}.,
+
e s
-...m,,,w-.
e
l 1 <
\ \
4
)
1 l ' , i
' . .I I
i* 1
- DIGESTS '
3 ISSUANCES OF THE NLCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
,-, 'J',
,,91 .
CLI 8513 PHILADELPH!A ELECTRIC COMPANY (Limenck Generstmg Sunon. Units I and , ,
, 2). Docket Nos. 50-3524L. 50 353-OL; OPERATING LICENSE; July 24, 1985; * ! MEMORANDUM ,
- j A The Commimon reveemed the Limensk Ecology Acuon's commenis on effecuveness of '
the Second and Third Parual iniual Decisions of the Licensms Board (LBP 84-31. 20 NRC 446 =_,' i (19841 and LBP 8514, 21 NRC 1219 (1985H. These comments addressed delesauon of issues - I to the Staff through heense condmons, need for local orgamrauona lo approve their emergency - - 2 #
;i ; - . ;
,s plans, adequacy of surveys of transport-dependent mdividuals, possible measures to mmgate '
* - ,' ',-7 i severe accidents, and procedural ruhngs The Commission also reviewed the Licensms Board de. - ;sgl '
casions sua sponte The Commisuon determmed that neither the comments nor the decisions ~, ~ ' *
'I ,
marranted suymg the effccuveness of the decisions. This Memorandum did not affect the Com- ' L mission's pnor deiermmation that questions involsms heanns nghts of the mmates at the State '
, , 'd D .,
Correcuonal Insutuuon at Graterford. Pennsylvama, warrani stayms efIecuveness of the authon-i 2auon for issuance of a full-power operaung license
/ ,..;- '
y . [ ' f. j CLI 85-14 PACIF1C GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, '
-9 . ,
~ ,
qj Umts I and 2). Docket Nos. 50 275-OL,50-323 OL; OPERATING LICENSE; August I,1985; - ' * ' C!MRANDUM AND ORDER - + f,6 5 - , A The Commission authonzes the issuance of a full-power operaung license for the Diablo
.D ^
4 l . Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Umt 2 upon findmg that all matters have been adequately resolved . ,' NJf ~ ' ' and denies the Joint Iniervenors' request to suy the effecuseness of such authonration for fail- ' ] ure to meet the stay entena m 10 C.F.R. ( 2.788(e). *
, c [.! ' . [i
- d'-
l Cli-8515 PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY ILimench Generstmg Stauon, Units I and 2), Docket Not 50 3524L. 50 353-OL; OPER ATING LICENSE. August 8.1985. MEMOR AN-
, DUM AND ORDER ' ] A The Commission addreswd all the comments raised by the Graterford mmates and , found that neither these comments nor the Staff bne0ng raised any issues which warranted stay-mg effectiveness of the Licensms Board's authonrahon for issuance of a full-power hcense for "'
. Limenck Generstmg Station. Umt i Accordingly, the Commission made the authonzation sm. l mediately effecuse.
! CLI 8516 PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY (Lamenck Generstmg Station, Umts I and l 2), Docket Nos. 50 352OL,50 353-OL; OPER ATING LICENSE; September 19.1985; ORDER A By completmg its consideranon of emergency plannmg issues raised by the Graterford m-mates, the Licensmg Board has mooted the need for the esemption to 10 C.F R. i 50 47(a) and (b) which et had granted Philadelphia Elecinc Company m May 1985. The Commission has therefore vacated, on grounds of mootness, ALAB-809 and the undertyms Licensms Board deci-saons whch addressed the esemption issue.
I CLI-8517 arf 2ONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY. et al. (Palo Verde Nuclear Generstmg Su-I uon, Umt 17. Docket No. STN 50-528 (Apphcation m Respect of a Sale and Leaseback Fmanc. j - mg Transacnon by Pubhc Servce Company of New Mesico); OPERATING LICENSE AMEND- ' i MENT; December 12,1985; ORDER
- A in this matter the Commission has determmed that m the totahty of the circumstances, j the proposed sale and leaseback financial nansaction with the licenw amendment recommended j . by the StafT and subject to specified conditions es acceptable under the Atomic Energy Act and
, the Commissson regulations j B The lessor and anyone elw who may acquire an mierest under the sale and leswback j financittg transecuon are prohibited from esercisms any control over the hcensees I t s
, *I.
p .
,7 ' , .A. i n ,. .. . . . . > . s ,
.,(.M
-q ( $.' Sr...h
% "";' ,, y . y [-'%
N" MSh.h, G b. (..T.'. .q.
,.\.
e " ' -
)
t @ 1:qi,.: p /' *. o wqy t' '
,. , .. , ., .. w '
I
",6 - ~
v - - 1.., ,
* ' ___L _ . . . . . s.
a DIGESTS
- V ISSUANCES OF THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMM 5510N C The hmitations in to Cf R. 6 50 81, " Creditor Regulations." are apphcable to the
+
named lessor m the sale and leaseback financmg transaction and any successor in enterest to that lessor.
. CLI-8518 INQUIRY INTO THRLE MILE ISLAND UNIT 2 LEAK RATE DATA FALSfFICA.
TION, Docket No. LRP; PROCEDUR AL RULING; December it,1985; ORDER AND
, NOTICE OF HEARING r- A The Commission establishes the rrotedures to govern e' legislative format heanns (or.
dered m CLI 85 2), to develop suKicient informauon for the idenuficahon of persons involved m and (8:e facts surroundmg the reactor coolant system leak rate data falsincations at Three Mile
-- s ,
Island Unit 2 pnor to the March 28. 1979 accident. The Commission authontes the appointment of a Presidmg Board to rule on peuuons to intervene, to conduct preheanns procedures and the heanns, and to issue a recommended decision. After issuance of the Presiding Board's Andmss. the NRC Stan is to recommend to the Commission what acuon,if any, should be taken agamst
! mdmduals found to have engaged m wrongdoing The Commimon wdl then address wheiher to mmate enforcement proceedmss agamst mdividuals and whether employment restramts imposed
- on certam mdividuals in the Three Mde Island. Unit I restart proceeding should be hned CLi 83.l9 GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES NUCLEAR CORPORATION (Three Mde Island Nuclear Station. Umt 19, Docket Nos. 50 289 RA, 50-289-EW; SPECIAL PROCEEDING; I - December 19.1985; OR DER 1 A The Commewon estabhshes procedures for determmms whether to hft a condition im-
' ' posed m the TMI-I restart proceeding on GPU Nuclear Corporanon. The condinon requires 4-o .
?
'/'
- - GPU Nuclest to noury the Commemon before assigning Robert Arnold of Edward Wallace to
., , < . '
- certain positions. The Corrmission sohcits views from the public and the NRC Stati regarding whether Messrs. Arnold or Wallace edifully, knowmsty, or with a reckless disregard for the
;,, 1 :i') truth made a matenal false statement to the NRC, if the Commession determmes that l'ere is a *
' . (r. ;.; ,
> W.:.Q; T, w, ,; < reasonable basis for answer,ng that quesuon afGrmauvely, the Commismon will consider initiaung e M @, b , % ' , <;{,-h an adjudicatory hearms to resolve whether to retam the nou6 cation requirement. If the Commis-s ,. q;g ,. ; , " ; 3 soon reaches a contrary determmanon, the Commission intends to hft the nouficauon e requirement.
4 l
-,a.g ..=.?
. - i
' k . ,Y . fg f , / J ,. # *
.,'j [ 'g t e., , - . . . g A _ / e, 9 -
g
- m .m
. .;," ".,,.d.'".Q ',4.." **, M \
f
.- - a* *; ;, e ;f ,9
- e_ ;_ . %- ,a e ws,%,,;b -
g % % ,
- s < , . g. -
'Yl' s .sy s i I ' # , .
~
r .a ta .e l 7 's ' , ].
/ .. ., ed h t [ b,,,. r.
-%, 4 "v s
. h* *- ' ; &q
.../* 3 }f, l? s n ,& ,
4
, ' .; ( * . .; , .
*ge r
'he,.
; s
. . . c ,.
; se m* w. . .
e 6
a l l DIGESTS I ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARDS
.e
. , s, AL AB-812 LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY (Waterford Steam Electne Stauon, Umt
% ; ' r .' '
+
Ji, Docket No. 50-382-OL; OPER ATING LICENSE. July 11,1985, DECISION , A The Appeal Board demes most of Joint intervenors' monon to reopen the record in this . . operatmg hcense proceeding on issues of quahty assurance and managemem character and , , compe'ence and refers the remamder to the Commission, insofar as it raises issues that may ,,
- relate t . natters under mvestigauon by NRC's OfGce of 19vesuganons. The Appeal Board also ,
l denies as moot Jomt Intervenors' monon for a protective order. j B A wccessful mohon to reopen the record of an adjudicatory proceeding must be timely. ,g , address a sigmfrant safety or environmental issue, and show that a different result might have ,f ' .. been reached had the nemly proffered matenal been considered imtially. Bare allegaMons or the
- simple submission of new contenuons is not enough. Lommana Po*er & Light Co. (Waterford ,
3 Steam Electnc Stanon. Umt 31, ALAB 786, 20 NRC 1087,1089 (1984), See also Pacinc Gas . and Electnc Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units I and 2), CLI 88-5,13 NRC 361, [ ~;. . 3o3 (1981). A. .~ J i C At a mimmum, the new matenalin support of a monon to reopen must be set forth with
- i . 4
-~ ! a degree of paruculanty in escess of the basis and specincity reqmrements contamed m 10 l
C F R ( 2.714th) for admissible contenuons it must be tantamount to evidence and possess the , , attnbutes set forth in 10 C.F R. 4 2 74)(c) dennms admisuble evidence for ad ludicatory proceed- --
; mgs. Specincally, the new evitesce supporung the monon must be relevant, matenal and reha. '_ . l j ble. Pacinc Gas and Electnc Co (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant. Umts i and 2), ,
ALAB-775,19 NRC 1361,1366 67, afrd sub nom San Les Obispo Mothers for Peace v. NRC, - ( 751 F 2d 1287 (D C. Cir.19847, vacated in part and reh's en banc granted on other grounds, ' 760 F.2d 1320 (1985). See also ad at 1367 n.it - , D A motion to reopen that raises previously uncontested assues musi also aausfy, m addauon
- to other requrements, the standards for admitting late-filed contennons embodied m 80 C.F R.
i ( 2.714(al(l). Pacinc Gas and Electnc Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and . 3 2), CLI-82 39,16 NRC 1712,171415 (1982L E The burden of sausfying all of the reqmrements of a monon to reopen that raises pre. viously uncontested issues is a heavy one See Kansas Gas and Electne Co (Wolf Creek ~ j Genersung Stauon, Umt No.1), ALAB 462, 7 NRC 320. 338 (1978) See also Metropohtan l Edison Co. (Three Mile Island Nuclear Stauon, Umt No Is, CLI-85 7, 21 NRC 1104,1106 , j (1985). F Neither the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, nor the Commission's implement-l mg regulauons mandate a demonstrauon of error-free construction. What they regare is simply j a fmdmg of reasonable assurance that, as bmit, the facehty can and will be operated without en. 1 dangenng the pubhc health and safety. 42 U.S C. 66 2133(d'. 2232(al, 10 C.F. R. I i 50.57(a)(3)h) See also Umon Elecinc Co. (Callaway Plant, Uma 17, ALAB 740,18 NRC 343, 346 (1983). ' l G In exammms claims of quahty assurance derwiencies, one must look to the emphcanon
- of those deliciencies in terms of safe plant operation To determme of the regmsste reasonable assurance entsts, two quesuons must be addressed. (11 whether all ascertamed construcuon
- errors have been cured, and (2) even af so, whether there has nonetheless been so pervasse a i
breakdown m the quality assurance procedures as to raise legmmate doubt about the overall I
- safety of the facihty. Ibid -
14 The considerauons that must be addressed m esammmg claims of quahty assurance den.
! ciencies - i e., whether all ascertamed construcuon errors have been cured, and of so, whether i
7 l 1 J _- ._ . l
, l l .
1 _ .n , l I l , e o l , . n, , \ , , e a t. . .I ,
~
%:f'l7% & ,, ,,
l kd: k* /,hf.s [hd W MW,* ;"Q}y$ MY >a , l p, , N ! if 4
,.u ** > , .. _ . ~ . , . ..... .. . . .~
(.
- g s .
DIGESTS ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICE.MSING APPEAL BOARDS there has nonetheless been so pervamve a brealidown in the quehty assurance procedures as to raise legitimate doubt about the overall safety of the facihty - are also pertment to the dispost-
- tion of a monon to reopen on quahty assurance. See Umon Electne Co. (Callaway Plant, Unit I), ALAB-750, IS NRC 1205,1209-11 (1983); Pacinc Gas and Electnc Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2), ALAB 756, is NRC 1340,1344-45 (1983), aff'd sub nom.
.. [. , , .
San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace v. NRC, 751 F.2d 1287 (D C. Cir.1934), vacated in part and reh's en banc granted on other grounds,760 F.2d 1320 (1985); Diablo Canyon, ALAB 775,
, J 19 NRC at 1367.
y ,
# i The importance of " managerial attitude" to an apphcant's quahty assurance program -
i.e., the willingness of company ofHcials to implement the program to the fullest - has long
*
- been recosmred. Consumers Power Co. (Mediand Plant. Umts I and 2), ALAB 106, 6 AEC r: 182, 134 (1973).
! 3 Remedial measures directed to construction and related quality assurance deficiencies
~
may be consdered as part of the appraisal of an apphcant's character and competence. Houston Lighting & Power Co. (South Texas Prosect, Umts I and 2), ALAB-799,21 NRC 360,37174 (1985). K The unumely hstmg of histoncal examples of alleged construction quahty assurance defi-ciencies is msufncient to warrant reopemns of the record on the issue of management character t' and competence. Diablo Canyon, ALAB-775,19 NRC at 1369-70.
' ' '* " ~ L Documents or portions of documents generated by an apphcant or the staff in connection S ;- wuh the construction and regulatory overscht of a facihty are acceptable evidence m support of a motion to reopen. Diablo Canyon, CLI.815,13 NRC at 363.
, p' , ,
M The NRC rehes upon an apphcant's quahty assurance program, and its implemeniation,
, ,J. ._ i
, j to ensure that a nuclear power plant and its component parts are desgaed to acceptable cntena
, , ;[ ' [ 7.\( . . . . and standards, and that the plant and its components are constructed or fabncated in accordance G" s'7 h[, ;dQ , h' 's ,i M. ' M':7 , ',kd7 : ' . '
wah their demsn. See 35 Fed. Reg.10,49s (1970); 10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendix B.
' N Delessnon of quahty assurance activities is acceptable under the NRC's regulations, so
.s r ,
,y long as an apphcant bears the ultimate responsibehty for quahty assurance performance and is
.,-j(g Ng/g.g a/ G- , ,
.
- y* -
- able to assure itself that its delegate is performms adequately.10 C.F R. Part 50, Appendia B.
l }q, 2W-%. ,
. - Cntenon I, Commonwealth Ed son Co. (Byron Nuclear Power Station, Umts I and 2),
K' W. Q. 4 , ALAB-793,20 NRC 1591,1598 (1984).
.Q , ,
Servmg up exhibns in support of a motion to reopen without citation to pertinent portions
*;w W e 'i? O
- S ,/ .,. '
'$ ;! or an explanation of the purpose 06'the enhabus contnbutes nothms of value to a proceeding.
.( ' y ".M' ' j;p%[,'M,.b j . # , g O - '.: 'Gk ;
. t- V, ,m" #
P Although audas are an important element of an apphcant's overall program and are re-
./- +
.A. quared by 10 C.F R. Part 50. Appendis B. Cntenon XVill, they provide but a third level of 5
, s / d.Q ], , assurance. The pnncipal levels of assurance are provided by, Grst, quahty craftsmanship and.
" ~', ,, - [ i, . 5 D
$$1 4(. ~
second, quahty mspect:4ms. Proper dispostionmg of documents generated in a quahey assurance program to identify _A i,
, y * ' * , . ,4' Q and record discrepent or changed conddeons is a vital part of a quahty assurance program, be-
,y' .' ,
l,,* , J. i *' J, M cause it is through this process that the suspect condinon is eventually corrected or, in some 5<M }3 cases, Judged by a quahfied person to be acceptable in spne of the discrepency. See 10 C.F R. Part 50, Appendia B, Cntena XV, XVI. In addnion, certam of these documents must be evaluat-ed for reportabihty to the Commission under 10 C.F R. l 50.55(e) and 10 C.F R. Part 21.
- * . ,. u. . y V, h,
^
R Lengthy discusson of charges devoid of ment is unnecessary See San Luis Obispo Moth.
' ' - 4- ers for Peace,751 F.2d at 1320-21.
- q. .1 Ca
- N' I . S Eshibits that are unmtelheible. are submitted without citauon to perunent portions, are
./ ,{- J i ' "* "',
out of date, have no apparent relanon to a specifie charge, and generally do not support the
' n e , pomt for which they are offered, do not consutute the " relevant, matenal and rehable" evidence .*
, 9Q* "r' > required to support a motion to reopen. Diablo Canyon. ALAB-775,19 NRC at 1366-67.
, T A draft is a workms document and it is entirely reasonable that et will go through several
- v.; s . ,
v.' revisons before it appears m final form and presumably reflects the actual, intended pn tion of
. -[* *
- g d. '$ [ ' the preparer. As such, it is not a particularly useful nem on which to rely in support of a motion ,
to reopen. F _ U A board may not rety upon es parte mformation, presented in camera by the ornce of in-vestigations, in makms licensms decisions. See Statement of Pohcy; investigations, In pections, _ ., ,, and Adjudicatory Proceedings,49 Fed Reg. 36.032, 36,033 (1984).
. - e
.' I l y N. ' ~ l a i i j
i 5 , D Y f* d , t_._ . _ . - - - _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . . _ _ . . . . - _ . - _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _____._____a
1 l l
- l
- l
. _ x,,: a - t ,
t I L DIGESTS ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARDS V The NRC's dependence on a hcensee for accurate and umely information about its facih-ty makes candor an especially important element of management character. See Metropohtan - Edison Co. (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Umt 1), ALAB-772,19 NRC 1193,1208 (1984), rev'd in part on other grounds. CLI-85-2,21 NRC 282 (1985). See also id., CLl-85-9, ' 21 NRC lil8,1136-37 (1985); South Texas,21 NRC at 371 (nesus of pancular character trait o. e-to parucular performance standards contemplated by Atomic Energy Act and NRC regulanons is $, - required). "
- O Evidence consisung of the views of an mdividual submitted in affidavit form m support of a monon to reopen should be submitted m an amdavit by that individual and not by counsel.
! .i .? .
Diablo Canyon, ALAB 775,19 NRC at 1367 n.18 [ s X Because the Commission must necessanly depend heavily on a permittee or hcensee to I report important mformanon and to assume a role of at least parhal self-pohems, it is essennal that the motivauon tu discover, analyze, and correct potentially safety-segmficant problems ongs- , nate with plant management. Y lt is enurely appropnate to consider an applicant's successful remedial efforts m connec- , non with clasms that it lacks the necessary character and competence to operate a plant safely. See South Texas, 21 NRC at 37174. Not to do no would have the undesirable elTect of dis- ' couragmg apphcants and hcensees from promptly undertakmg such correcuve measures , 2 The adsudicatory boards are not obhged to do a party's research for it. See Louisiana Power & Light Co. (Waterford Steam Electnc Stauon, Umt 3), ALAB-801,21 NRC 479,483-84 (1985); Philadelphia Electnc Co. (Limenck Generaung Station Umts 1 and 2), ALAB-804,21 NRC 587,592 & n.6 (1985). ' AA A contenuon challensms the adequacy of the staffs review of an apptwauon is not huga- s V. ble in an operaung Irense proceedmg. See Pacific Gas and Electre Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Umts I and 2), ALAB 728,17 NRC 777, 807, review dechned, CLI-83 32,18 . NRC 1309 (1983). This follows logically from the fact that at is the appicant that ulumately bears the burden of prov ng its enutlement to the pnvilege of an operaung hcense. See Consum- *2 < ers Power Co. (Midland Plant, Umts I & 2), ALAB-315,3 NRC 101,103 (1976). ' BB The NRC's adjudicatory boards are not empowered to direct the staff in the conduct of * ^ ets inspection and investigaiory dunes. Carolma Power and Light Co. (Shearon Harns Nuclear I Power Plant. Units I,2,3, and 4), CLI-8012, ll NRC 514, $1617 (1980). 1 CC The staffs review of contested technical issues is a segmfacant ingredient of NRC heens- 'M ,, + -r mg proceedmss, even though its adequacy cannot be htigated per se, as a comention. DD The followmg techmcal tasues are discussed: Construcuan Quahty Assurance (QA); i , ' a - Stamng; weldms, Audits; inspector Quahfications; Welder Quahicanons, QA Documentation; ' Pipe Supports. ' ^ ' ,i-AL AB-813 DUKE POWER COMPANY, et al. (Catamba Nuclear Stauon, Umts I and 2), Docket Nos 50-413-OL,50-414-OL; OPERATING LICENSE; July 26,1985. DECISION A The Appeal Board amtms three Licensing Board perhal imual decisions that together au- ' thonte full power opersuon of the two-umt Catawba facihty, but leaves for resoluuon m a separ-ate decision all quesuons pertammg to that part of the Lwenang Board's authontauon permitung ' the receipt and storage at Catawba of spent fuel generated at the apphcants' Oconee and McGuire facihtses. B Neither the Atome Energy Act of 1954, as amended, nor the Commission's implement-ing regulauons mandate a demonstranon of error-free construcuon. What they require as simply - a findmg of reasonable assurance that, as built, the facility san and will be operated without en- , t. dangenng the pubhc health and safety. 42 U.S.C. (( 2133(dl, 2232(sh 10 C.F.R. 6 50.57(a)(3)(i). See also Umon Elecine Co. (Callaway Plant, Umt 1), ALAB 740,18 NRC
- 343, 346 (1983).
C in esamimns claims of quahty assurance deficiencies, one must inok to the 6mphcanon ' of those defriencies in terms of safe plant operanon. This mouiry necessitates careful considers- . non of whether all ascertamed construction errors have been cured and whether there has been a breakdown in quahty assurance procedures of sumcient dimenseons to raise legitimate doubt as to the overall integnty of the facihty and its safety-related structures and components. Ibid. , D The Commission's Rules of Practice require an appellant to idenufy clearly in its bnef
- the errors of fact or law that are the subsect of the appeal. For each 6ssue appealed, the precise k'
9 k , I e l: l . '-
- 1. -
8
# g i
7g , k 6 x h o . ' y , ,4 7 y . . , J e -M' li ' { g .. .K ,
;h-kl m : H '
- r. Q V ; , . ,, '
m v., ; .g. . . e ,
-4
.w. '
..n
. A- . . c ;.; .1_ .a. c A -,; . n. . ._ n - , _. ,
t DIGESTS E' i. ISSUANCES OF THE ATOhllC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARDS
^ ' '
pornou of the record rehed upon in support of the asseruon of error must also be provided.10 C.F.R. 2.762(d)(l). E A party's fa lure to submit a bnef contaimns sufGcient informanon and argument to
- allow the appellate tnbunal to make an intelhgent disposinon of the issues presented by its appeal is tannarnount to their abandonment. Duke Power Co. (Catawtie Nuclear Stauon, Umts I e and 2), ALAB-355,4 NRC 397,413 (1976).
F A mere reference in a brief to previously filed proposed Gndmss of fact and conclusions i e of law without further illummation as to why the proposed findings are correct will not suffice to
- e. . , show why a board's contrary determmanon is errrmeous.
ge
- " Because hcensing boards must be vested wnh conaderable lautude in determimns the O
course of the proceedmes which they are called upon to conduct, an appeal board will review )
'D.^ licenang board scheduhng ruhngs only to the estent necessary to insure that no party has been (
- y. '
*i denied a fair opportunity to advance its cause. Southern Cahforma Edison Co. (San Onofre Nuclear Genersung $tauon, Umts 2 and 3), ALAB-212,7 AEC 986,991 (1974). See also Public D Service Co. of Indiana (Marble Hill Nuclear Generaung Stanon, Units I and 2), ALAB-459,7 NRC 179,188 (1978).
H A mere showmg that a IKenang board erred by curtaihng cross exammation is not sufG-
- cient to warrant appellate rehef. In addition, the complamms pony must demoastrate actual pre-Judwe - i.e., that the ruhng had a substanual effect on the outcome of the proceedmg. Houston
. w ,. .
/ Lighung & Power Co. (South Texas Propect, Umts I and 2), ALAB-799,21 NRC 360,376-77 5- .
(1985), ciung Long Island Lightmg Co. (Shoreham Nuclear Pover Stanon, Umt I), ALAB-788, 20 NRC 1802,1851 (1984). See also Louimana Power and Light Co. (Waterford Steam Electnc
?i < Stanon, Umt 3), ALAB-732,17 NRC 1076,1096 (1983); Southern Cahforma Edison Co. (San
;,s / ^'i Onofre Nuclear Generaung Stanon, Umts 2 and 3), ALAB-673,15 NRC 688,697 & n.14, aff'd, i -i,C y Y.--ME ' ~ '
CLI-82 II,15 NRC 1383 (1982). It is now well-settled that the issuance of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's , . J W,J Qyg,hg +;. g -
- , I (FEMA) Gnal findmss on the adequacy of offste emergency plans and preparedness is not a pre. - f.C. 93l W Q . $ , '?.2, =
Mc W :6.-77 '- 2 9Ji ' requisite to the authonzauon of a full-power operstmg hcense. Rather, prehmmary FEMA reviews and intenm fmdmss are sufficient as long as such mformanon permits the Licenang Mid[.D jib,
. s w n :: flE'n ,.
v
*'.. Board to conclude that offsite emergency preparedness provides reasonable assurance that ade-
?g Q gh Kl'? ' y
(..
- quate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a radiologral emergency. Pacifs
,- i 1. - c, -WJc 4 ',f Gas and Electre Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Pknt, Umts I and 2), ALAB-775,19 NRC y;-) -f 41 -y P %.Q yy " Q.'
J' 1361, 1379 (1984), cmns Southern Cahforma Edison Co. (San Onofre Nuclear Generating Sta-
'Jj l'
- uon, Units 2 and 3), ALAB 717,17 NRC 346,380 n.57 (1983);Cinemnau Gas & Electnc Co.
g?6b7% MM C.M ,DS ,- (Wm. H. Zimmer Nuclear Power Stauon, Uma No.19 ALAB-727,17 NRC 760_, 775 n.20 (1983). See also Detroit Edison Co. (Ennco Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Uma 2), ALAB 730,17. > { d At d.O 3 m
^'
NRC 1057.1066-67 (1983). I E.ID I'M, . . ( ~ - A hcenang board is required to consider all Gwe factors specified 6n 10 C.F.R. NN:.:r[.f,Qt;p Q{- A ' {?. ? - , n, C-( , , 3 2.714(a)(1) before admittmg a late contenuon, even if the contenuon is bened on previously una-sailable mformauon. Duke Power Co. (Catawba Nuclear Station, Umts I and 2), CLI-8319,17 _ y&.] ? ,. y ; , NRC 1041,1045 (1933). 4f - 9.p1b/ c '. 4+J d J K Secuon 189a of the Atomic Energy Act does not provide members of the pubhc with an irj)!9Y;i.'.- ,
*~
unquahfied naht to a heanng. Rather, the Act permits the estabhshmem of reasonable threshold requirements for the admission of contenuons to NRC hcenang proceedmgs. Id. at 1045-47. M M 'T cA% VR L The Commission has provided by rule that nenher need.for-power nor fmancial quahfica-nons quesuons are to be explored m certam operstmg license proceedmss. See 10 C.F.R. _;Q.6 4 "
$1.106(c) (need for power); 10 C.F.R. 2.104(c)(4), as amended effecuve October 12, 1984, 49
, rn!
Fed. Res. 35,747, 35,752, as corrected. 49 Fed. Reg. 36,631 (1984) (financial quahrsanons). Jgy < , M In meeung factor three of 10 C.F.R. 2.714(a)(1) for late filed contenuont. a bare asser-a.* /... tion of the past effecuveness of a party's participanon in proceedmgs, unsupported by specinc in-
' ,((lh?L formanon from which a board could draw an informed inference that the party can and will
- make a valuable contnbution on a perucular issue m the proceeding, will not sufGce. See Wash-
' 2 '
meton Pubhc Power Supply System (WPPSS Nuclear Project No. 31. ALAB 747,18 NRC 1167,
" !!81 (1983); Mississippe Power & Light Co. (Grand Gulf Nuclear Stanon. Umts I and 2),
** ALAB-704,16 NRC 1725,1730 (1982).
,Q .M-m.
. rkk .
((, gg y-h
. .j
1 fa _ . . . _ _ . . .. A i R - . I i l
- b DIGESTS ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARDS i
N An appeal board is required on appeal of a licensing board decemon to apply the Commis-sion's regulanons m effect at the ume of the appeal. Potomac Electnc Power Co. (Douglas Pomt Nuclear Generstmg Stanon, Umts I and 2), ALAB.218,8 AEC 79,82 83 (1974). O The followmg technwat issue is discussed: Intergranular Stress Corrosion Crackms , (lGSCC). A LA B-814 PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY (Limenck Generstmg Stauon, Umts I and 2), Docket Nos. 50-352-OL, 50-353-OL; OPERATING LICENSE; August 13,1985; MEMO-RANDUM AND ORDER A The Appeal Board demes intervenors' monon for a stay of the LKensmg Board's parnal , imtsal decision rescimg the last contested issues m this operstmg Irense proceedmg and author-arms the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulanon to issue a full power hcet*se for the Limenck l facihty. I B The Arst entenon for a stay is a strong showmg that the movmg party is hkely to prevail ; on the ments. A stay monon must aiso address three other factors. whether the movant will be I arreparably harmed m the absence of a stay; whether the grant of a stay would harm any other i party; and where the pubhc interest hes.10 C.F R. { 2.788(ep. f C A party's failure to address the stay entens set out in 10 C.F.R. { 2.788(e) may result m summary demal of a stay monon. See Pubhc Servce Co. of indiana (Marble Hill Nuclear Generstmg Stanon, Umts I and 2), ALAB-493,8 NRC 253,270 71 (1978). D Under the "immediate effecteveness" ruie, unless the Commission otherwise directs, an immediate effecuveness determmanon by the Commissson is without prejudge to the Appeal Board's determmauon of a stay motion pursuant to 10 C.F.R. { 2.788(e) or an appeal on the ments pursuant to (( 2.762 and 2.785, or m any subsequent proceedmg.10 C.F.R. { 2.764(g). ' E An apphcanon for a stay must be Gled within ten days of servre of the decision for whrh a stay is requested.10 C F.R. { 2.788(a). F In a mohon for a stay, when attemptmg to show hkehhood of prevaihng on the ments,11 , is not sufTenent simply to state conGdence or an expectauon of ulumale success. Metropohtan Edison Co. (Three Mile Island Nuclear Sianon, Umt I), CLI-84-17,20NRC Sol, 804-05 (1984). G Irreparable harm es often the most important factor in determimns the need fer a stay; a party must reasonably demonstrate, not merely allege, such harm. Duke Power Co. (Catawba Nuclear Stauon, Umts i and 2), ALAB-794,20 NRC 1630,1633-35 (1984). " ' ' ALAB-815 METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, et al. (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station. Uma No.1) Docket No. 50-289 SP (Management Phase); SPECIAL PROCEEDING; August 29, 1985; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
- A The Appeal Board demes mtervenor's monon to reopen the record for further heanns in the management phase of this restart proceeding, concludmg that the motion es not timely and does not demonstrate that a different result might have been reached had the newly proffered matenal been considered imually. ! ' '
B in order to succeed, a monon to reopen a record must be umely and address a significant l safety or environmental issue. It must also show that a different result might have been reached ' s had the newly proffered matenal been considered manally. Louisiana Power & Light Co. (Water. ford Steam Electne Stauon, Umt 3), ALAB-786,20 NRC 1087,1089 (1984). C A year delay between the time mformahon was made available to the pernes and the ume of fihns a monon to reopen ordmanly renders such a motion unumely. See, e.g., Pacific Gas and Electre Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2), ALAB-775,19 NRC - 1361, 1369, afFd sub nom. San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace v. NRC,751 F.2d 1287 (D.C. " i m Cir.1984), vacated in part and reh's en banc granted on other grounds,760 F.2d 1320 (1985); Louisiana Power and Light Co. (Waterford Steam Electnc Stauon, Un i 3), ALAB-753,18 NRC 1321,1325 n.3 (1983). D In assessing the umchness requirement of a mohon to reopen the record, the question is s not whether a heensms board as suit receiving evidence on an issue to whrh the new'information relates at the ume the mformanon comes to the movant's attention, but rather, whether the en. formauon could have been submitted earlier. Metropohtan Edison Co. (Three Mile Istardi Nucle-at Stapon, Umi No.1), CLI-85 8,21 NRC till,18 84 & n.3 (1985); Vermont Yankee Nuclear
- Power Corp. (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Stanon), ALAB-138, 6 AEC 520, 523 n.12
*.i i (1973).
l l a ,I
,, y
$1 i
.. s y, m m . --ww *g e- , --.o+*
5
!, .t 3' I, 5 ' -
g
<+g.ff& ,
l ,*' {W e'
- ffx { ; %l&l%f e >
s.. .
2 y ' s . u _ ._ - _.x a .. . . . - _. .
- c. DIGESTS ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARDS
~.
ALAB-416 BOSTON EDISON COMPANY (Pilsnm Nuclear Power Stauon). Docket No. 50-293-OLA; OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; September 5.1985; DECISION
;' A The Appeal Board afHrms the Licensmg Board's demal of intervenor's unumely penuon to intervene in this operstmg hcense amendment proceedmg for failure to address the 10 C.F.R.
A
- i 2.714(a) lateness factors.
Under 10 C.F.R. ( 2.714(a), nonumely petitions to intervene wdl not be entertamed 8
,$ absent a determmauon by the Licensang Board that the petition should be granted based upon a A belancmg of five factors- (i) Good cause, if any, for failure to nie on ume; (ii) The availabihty of other means whereby the peuuoner's interest will be protected. (iii) The entent to which the
.y peuuoner's perucipation may reasonably be espected to assist in developing a scand record. (iv)
> The entent to which the petinoner's interest will be represented by entsams parties. (v) The entent to which the petinoner's participouon wdl broaden the issues or delay the proceedmg.
C When Ghng a late pehuon to intervene, it is the peuuoner's obhganon to address the Ave lateness factors of 10 C.F.R. l 2.714(a) in the penuon itself.10 C.F R. l 2.714(a).
- D When filing an untimely pettuon to intervene, the burden of persuasion on the lateness i factors of 10 C.F R j 2.714(a) is on the peuuoner.10 C.F R. { 2.714(a).
E When appeahng purety procedural points, appellants should explam in their papers pre.
! cisely what mjury to them was occasioned by the asserted error (s). Cf. Long Island Lightmg Co.
! (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Umt I). ALAB 788,20 NRC 1102,1851 (1984).
! AL AB-817 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (Braidwood Nuclear Power Stauon, Umts I
. ? and 2). Docket Nos. 50-456-OL, 50-457-OL; OPERATING LICENSE; September 6,1985; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A The Appeal Board demes a monon by apphcant for directed cernfication of a Licensmg
, Board ruhng that allowed intervenors to amend - after obtamms discovery from the NRC staff
' ' - a comention that the Board previously found to be insufficiently specinc.
O j
- ! B in decidmg whether to esercise its discretionary directed certification authority, appeal
- - ,, [ boards apply a two-part test. It considers whether a hcensing board ruhng either (1) threatens
. : ., i l the party adversely alTected by it with immediate and senous irreparaMe impact which, as a
. 7 j practical matter, could not be alleviatJd by a later appeal, or (2) affects the basic structure of the proceedmg in a pervawve or unusual manner. Pubhc Service Co. ofIndiana (Marble Hill Nuclear Generstmg Stanon. Umis I and 2), ALAB-405,5 NRC 1190,1192 (1977);see, e s., Metropoh.
. . r, ;, ,
l tan Edison Co. (Three Mile Island Nuclear Stanon, Unit I), ALA8 791, 20 NRC 1579,1582 5 %,.n , (1984). f Dh$ f I C Since the admiss on of one or more addinonal 6ssues into an onsoms case seldom has a p j pervasive or unusual effect on the basic structure of a proceedmg. aptical boards have traditional-
*4 ,
e ly dechned to review on an interlocutory basis rulings that empty admit another contention. See, t , e s., Cleveland Electnc illummaung Co. (Perry Nuclear Power Plant. Umts I and 2),
' ALA8 706,16 NRC 1754 (1992).
- 1 D The basec structure of an ongoiris adjudication is not changed samply because the admis-
^
! soon of a contenuon results from a hcensing board ruhng that is important or novel, Metropohtan
, Edison Co (Three Mile Island Nuclear Stanon. Umt 11, ALAB 791, 20 NRC 1579,1583
.i (1984), or may conflict with case law, pohey or Commission regulanons. C!eveland Elecine illu-
' mmsung Co (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2), ALAS 475.15 NRC 1105,111213 (1983); see siso Pennsylvama Power & Light Co (Susquehanna Steam Electne Stanon. Umts I and 21. ALAS 441,13 NRC 550,552 (1981). Similarly, the mere fact that a party must htigate an addsnonal issue, or that a matter will be subject to adversanal emptorsuon rather than NRC stafT review, does not alter the basic structure of the proceeding in a pervasave or unusual way so as to jusufy interlocutory reuew of a heensms board decision. See Antona Public Service Co.
(Palo Verde Nuclear Generstmg Stanon. Umts 2 and 3). ALAB-742,18 NRC 380. 384 (1983); Virgima Electne and Power Co. (North Anna Power 5tauon, Umts I and 2), ALAB 741,18 NRC 371. 378 (1983). E Although the general standard for interlocutory review is the same whether or not under-taken on ceruficas on or by referral, see Viramia Electne and Power Co. (North Anna Power Sta-uon, Umts I and 23. ALAB 741,18 NRC 371,375 a 6 (1983), an appeal board is more likely to intercede where a hcerising board bebeves that its ruhng has the type of overall impact on the proceeding that warrants the appeal board's immediate attennon, 12 D k
.e.,~.. - . . .
DIGESTS ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL TOARDS ALA B-818 LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY (Shoreham Nuclear Power stauon, Umt 1), '- Docket No. 50-322-OL-3 (Emergency Planmng); OPERATING LICENSE; October 18, 1985; DECISION , A The Appeal Board aflirms the Licensmg Board fmdmg an the emergency plannmg phase 1 of this operstmg hcense proceedmg that the apphcant lacks the legal authonty to implement . - matenal features of its proposed emergency response plan, and therefore, that such a plan t cannot be carned out m conformity with Commismon regulanons. ' B Under Commismon regulanons, no operaung Icense for a nuclear power reactor can r. issue unless the NRC Tmds that there is reasonable assurance that adequate protecuve measures ,
^
, s both on and off the facihty site can and will be taken in the event of a radiological emergency.
As a general rule, offsite emergency plans must be developed for a 10-mile rone surroundmg ? the plant (the plume esposure pathway emergency planmns zone) and a second zone of approsi. l w :, mately 50 nules (the meesuon pathway emergency plannmg zone). See 10 C.F.R. 4 50 47 and Part 50 Appendix E. , C The NRC is obhgated to consider a unhty-prepared ofTsite emergency plan submitted in i the absence of state and local governmem-approved plans, and has the ultimate authonty to determme whether such a submismon is sufficient to meet the prerequisites for the issuance of an operaung hcense. CLI-33-13,17 NRC 741 (1983). l . D State law can be preempted in either of two general ways. If Congress evidences an mtent to occupy a given field, any state law falhng withm that field is preempted. If Congress 5 gj has not entirely displaced state regulauon over the matter in quesuon, state law is sult preempted - to the estent it actually conthets with federal law, that is, when st is impossible to comply with f Y y
'e g
both state and federal law or where the state law stands as an obstacle to the accomphshment of .
., q ,,
the full purposes and objecuves of Congress. Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corp.,464 U.S. 238,248 (1934). f 5% I E The Atome Energy Act does not displace tradinonal enforcemeni of state tort law, mcludmg the state's nght to authorue pumuve damages for radiance injunes. Silkwood, 464
;i %[ ,
{ ,
..~
U.S 238. I F The Atomic Energy Act does not preclude a state from enacting a moratonum on nuclear , power plant construcuon based on econome rather than radiolossal health and safety consders- ~ hons. Pacific Gas & Elecinc Co. v. State Energy Resources Conservanon & Devetupment Comm'n,46I U.S.190 (1983).
- G The Atome Energy Act estabhshes a dual regulatory structure for nuclear-powered elec. '
n % Inc generation. The federal government mamtams complete control of the safety and " nuclear , , s L aspects of energy generauon; the states esercise their tradinonal authonty over the need for adds- l , nonal generstmg capacity, the type of generstmg facihtees to be hcensed, land use, ratemaking. ; y and the hke. Pacific Gas & Electnc,461 U.S. at 211 12; Brown v. Kerr-McGee Chemcal Corp., t 767 F.2d 1234,1241 n 4 (7ih Cir.1985). There es no bnght line dmding the areas of federal and ' , state responsibehty and they may at umes overlap. f * , H The Commission is involved m emergency planning pursuant to its health and sareiy i ' ' ' 3 Junsdicuon. ' I The management of vehrular traffic on pubhc roads, governmental response to pubhc + emergencies (mcludmg the implementateon of any necessary evacuauon), and control over the -
"o ,
achons of corporsuons operaung within the state, have nothms to do wnh radiologmal health -
. . i.-
, ' ~ *',,
* ~
and safety and fall well withm the category of scuvines rouunely subject to state supervision. ' J Although the Commission has recognized its own role in emergency planning oversight, 2 i s it has nonetheless observed that the state and heal governments have the primary responmbihty . -/*i, under their constituuonal polce powers to protect the pubhc. 44 Fed. Res. 75,167. 75,169 (1979).
*4 Yy K State laws that indicate the manner in which a utihty may or may not conduct cenam s
CQ nonradiologral acuvines within the state do not invade the federal domam simply because they ,
- 4 have a agmfcant effect on nuclear power issues or even foreclose the nuclear opuon entirely.
- y* ,
. Such laws are entitled to respect, absent an affirmative showmg that Congress intended to sup- ,
'C, i plant them. $sikwood,464 U.S. at 255. '
L in decidmg if state laws alTectmg nuclear power or emergency planmns for nuclear power
.- ?
, I plants are preempied by federal law, all that need be determined is whether there esists a non. '
'I P Tm
- [* ,
j
. <+ \
,3 l - 'l y - ~<
I l L 1
, , c ,ve,, y.e-..*
=
- h ,
, m +
p 4 g . *
- 1. d ,' 9 L 'S J ; ol M 'O ' g #/
- y ,. *
- ' 44. y ,
. W,...*
~. ,
. - . . ~ . , . - , . . .. . - z. x ,
i 1 DIGESTS ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARDS safety rauonale for the enactment or enforcement of the state laws See Pacific Gas & Electne, 461 U.S. at 213,216. M The reservanon of exclusive jurisdicuon by the federal government over radiological health and safety matters does not necessenly prevent a state from asserung its authonty over
' matters withan its own junadiction merely because its acuon coincidentally affects the area subject
- to federal control. Selkwood,464 U.S. 23s; Pacific Gas & Electnc, el U.S.190. See generally
- - Huron Portland Cement Co. v. City of Detroit 362 U.S. 440,447 (1960).
8 i
- 1. .
- N The Atomic Energy Act does not expressly require the states to construct or authonze
>d nuclear power plants or prohibit the state from deciding, as an absolute or condiuonal matter,
~
not to permit the construcuan of any further reactors. Pacific Gas and Electne, el U.S. at 205. O The Atomic Energy Act does not preempt state laws solely because they coincidentally prevent operstmn of a completed reactor. v P State law is not preempted in all circumstances where it interferes with the potennal ener-case of fed rally bcensed acuvines. See Radio Stauon WOW, Inc. v. Johnson, 325 U.S.120, i 129-33 (1945L Q The lack of an emergency plan officirily sponsored by a state or local government does not stand as an absolute barner to the grant of a hcense. The Commismon may consder a unhty plan m the absence of a state or local government sponsored plan. R The mere esistence of a unhty plan 6s not a sufficient basis for issuance of a hcense. The Commission must be able to conclude that the utility plan provides reasonable assurance that the pubhc heahh and safety will be protected. i 5 Federal law does not overnde enforcement of certam state statutes that impede or fore-close a utshty from presentmg a viable emergency plan to the Commismon for review.
,{ When choosms between alternauve construcuans of a statute, displacement of state laws T
esercieng histonc pohce powers should be avoided unless that was the clear and mamfest pur-r pose of Congress. Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.,331 U.S. 213,230 (1947), cited with approval n Fbnda Lime and Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul,373 U.S.132,146 (1%3L
- U The remarks of individual legislators are often an unrehable gauge of overall legisla'uve mient. In re Surface Mmms Regulanon Litigation,627 F.2d 1346,1362 (D C. Cir.1930).
- V The 1980 NRC Authonzation Act, Pub. L. No. 96-295,94 Stat. 780 (1930), accords a 4
utahty at least the opportumty to supplement an otherwise deficient governmental emergency plan. It also appears to foreclose the Commission from mandauns a state or local government-sponsored plan as a regulatory requirement for heensmg. W Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. i 50.47(c), an applicant is permitted to show that deficiencies in emergency plans are not segmficant for the plant m question, that adequate intenm compensatmg actions have been or will be taken promptly, or that there are other compelhng reasons to
, permet plant operation.
X Section 50 47(a)(1) of 10 C F R. requires that there be reasonable assurance that protec-
- use measures can and will be taken in the event of a radiological emergency.
Y Section 50.47(b)(10) of 10 C F R. requires that a range of protecuve scuons be devel-oped for the plume esposure pathway emergency planmng zone for emergency workers and the pubhc and that guidehnes for the choece of protective actions durms an emergency, consisient with federal guidanN, are developed and in place. 2 Descrete aspects of an evacuation plan may be subjected to adversanal evaluanon to determme the efficiency with which an evacuation can be accomphshed. See, e s , Cincinnau Gas & Electnc Co. (Wm. H. Zimmer Nuclear Power Stanon. Unit 11. ALAB 727,17 NRC 760, 770-71 (1933L
; AA Commnsion regulanons require the formulanon of sausfactory evacuation plans as a part ,
of the overall emergency preparedness effort. Id. at 774 n.19. ALAB 819 PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY (Limenck Genersung Station. Umts I and 2), Docket Nos. 50-352-OL, 50-353 0L; OPER ATING LICENSE; October 22,1985. DECISION A The Appeal Board affirms the second parual imual decision rendered by the Licensing , j Board in this opersims lecense proceed.ng, L8P.g4 31,20 NRC 446 (1934), with the encepuon of a matter relatmg to onsite emergency plan medical arrangements, which is remanded to the Licensing 8oord for further action. 5 a
\
l
$ .m- -
- s l
i l
. DIGESTS ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARDS .l i
B in pasang upon the adm.subehty of a contention, the proper mquiry is not whether the content on will ultimately be proven on the ments, but whether the bass and specificity require. ments of 10 C F R ( 2 714(b) have been met. Houston Lighung and Power Co. (Allens Creek + Nuclear Generstmg Stanon. Unn I). ALAB-590, il NRC 542,546-49 & n.80 (1930). t C The Commission pohey m effect at the time an adjudcatory decimon is rendered governs that decision. S.:e Potomac Elecine Power Co. (Douglas Pomi Nuclear Generating Stanon, Umts I and 28, ALAB-218,8 AEC 79,82-83 (1974). ~ D The Commission can hmn adjudicatory heanngs to tasues that si considers matenal to its hcenang decision. Umon of Concerned Scienusts v. NRC, 735 F.2d 1437,1444-51 (D C. Cir. - 1984), cert. denied _ U.S. "t' ( 105 S. Ct. 815 (1985); Siegel v. AEC,400 F.2d 778,783-85 - (D C. Cir.1%8). - ' q,' ' s, E Severe accident minganon measures, beyond any already esistmg Commismon require. - - , - ments, are not to tie " addressed m case-related safety heanngs " 50 Fed. Reg. 32,138, 32,145 '" (1985) t-F The Nauonal Environmental Pohey Act of 1%9 (NEPA),42 U.S.C. l 4321, could not lossally require more Inan the safety provisions of the Atomic Energy Act; further, these stat- [ C4 '. t utes, and the issues raised under each, are inherently mterrela:ed See Pubhc Servwe Electre , and Gas Co. (Hope Creek Generaung Stauon, Umts I and 2), ALAB 5IS, 9 NRC 14, 39 (1979n Courens for Safe Power, Inc. v. NRC,524 F.2d 1291,1299-1300 (D C. Cir.1975). ' G NEPA does not require the Commission to consder low probatnhty, severe (beyond
* " ,y .j design-bass) accidents at nuclear facihues. See San Luis Ooispo Mot %ers for Peace v. NRC, 751 < -
F.2d 1287,1301 (D C. Cir.1984), vacated in part and reh's en banc granted on other grounds, '
*i ., , -
760 F.2d 1320 (1985). ,
. .' ' +' '
H The Commission's recently adopted Severe Accident Poley Statement requires the issue b' 7%% ,. , of sabotage to be analyzed "to the extent practrable" in the desgn and opergung procedures for j g (, new nuclear plants Esistets plants, however, need only conform to the Commission's current '
' Ni regulatory requirements. 50 Fed. Reg at32,141, 32,144-45.
, - +
'.-(
t ' "+ l: " I All nuclear plants are reemred to have a detailed secunty plan to protect against esternal ' ' ~ and miernal sabotage. See 10 C.F.R. Part 73. The adequacy of such plans ar* subject to husation ' in bcenens heannss. See, e.g., Pacific Gas and Electre Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power ~ 'q", , m-' ' , Plant, Unns I and 2), ALAB-653, prmted as an Attachment to CLI-8219,16 NRC 53 (1982). *4-
- 3 ' '~
Generally, an appeal board will not entertam an issue raised for the first time on appeal. - ' Tennessee Valley Authoney (Hartsville Nuclear Plant Umts l A,2A,18, and 28), ALAB 443, .
,, , j ., [
7 NRC 341,348 (1978).
' " s; - , , -
4 K The Council on Environmental Quahty resulanon requinns a worsi. case analysis (40 '
' S,.
?- , ,
C F R. 6 !$02.22) is substanuve, rather than procedural; hence, the Commission - as an inde. , pendent regulatory agency - does not consder itself legally bound by t. 49 Fed. Reg 9352, , , s, - * - 9356 58 (1984) See Balumore Gas and Electne Co v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., ' ~ '
- 462 U.S. 87,99 n.12 (1983).
L , N . '
/'
An appeal board cannot give bindmg effect to another agency's regulauon esphculy es. - ' chewed by the Commismon nielf. , e, M The Commismon does not have any duty under NEPA to address *" remote and highly '
. ; 7.- ;
speculauwe consequences'" in ets environmental impact statements. See San Luis Obispo Mothers >s for Peace,751 F.2d at 1300 and cases cited.
- + . >>7. ; ,e N Under NRC regulauons and court precedent, a facihty's Final Environmental Statement
, 7. f
,,,' ,' , f' Q.
?y , 7* ,,*,:
can be amended by the adjudicatory heanns record and subsequent Leenang Board decimon. ,u
, ' ~ r .-
See 10 C F R. 6 51.52(b)(3) (1984); 10 C.F.R. ) 51.102 (1985); New England Coahuon on ^ Ai~Upd
- Nuclear Pollunon v. NRC,582 F.2d 87,93-94 (1st Cir.1978); Cnizens for Safe Power,524 F.2d Y.
-+1',,.,
O at i194 n.5. A party is bound by the hteral terms of its own contention.
- ', , . , d b-a. %,
,. d%[f:;,c cA ~, ,% %
P ". [ t '
? 't Vanous NRC documents (such as the NUREGs that elaborate on the generahmed regula-tory reqmrements of 10 C.F.R. Part 50) empty serve as suidance for the staft's review and do not presenbe regulatory requirements. Metropohten Edison Co. (Three Mile Island Nuclear Sta. '
. I e[
non, Umt No.1), ALAB-698,16 NRC 1290,1298-99 (1982), rev'd in part on other grounds, *
' t#'
m s SN
; ; - s t CLI-83-22,18 NRC 299 (1983). ' #
Q w' s'
'. .. ?
; ' y
*,", , 3 ,*
1 9 .#
$f 33 . > 1 a + c ,
b ' 4 3 f
,,,e-- -
dfP
- 1 9 g n
- e m s
$ 4 # 4, , ', j [, i1 I ,,
- p)
< ~
,,.a r y g'[; 7* , , ? <
, ,4
s
- 3. ,
. . .y)-
J, . . ~ .; n
.f.
'y
.' f
."** e
~ . - . ~M .&
l~ - i 4 t i I DIGESTS ISSUANCES OF THE ATOh81C SAFETY AND LICENSING AFFEAL BOARDS Q The Comnusson rehes on predictive findmss of adequacy in the emergency planning
- 6 eld more so than in other areas. The emergency plan itself need not even be final, so lo6s as it is sufficiently developed to permit a board to make the necessary " reasonable assurance" finding.
Louisiana Power and Light Co. (Waterford Steam Elecinc Stauon, Uma 3), ALAS 732,17 NRC . 4 1076, i103-04 (1983). R Post-heanns appraisal of an applicant's emergency facilines by the NRC staff is appropr6-
#, ate, ifits emergency plan is developed enough to warrant a hcenons board finding of adequacy.
- "* ' 5 Emergency plans must provide arrangements for medical services for " contaminated in-
- jured individuals." See 10 C.F.R.150.47(b)(12), and Part 50, Appendia E,i IV.E.
, T The medical arrangernents for contaminated iryured indsviduals required by 10 C.F.R.
l 50 47(b)(12) should include local and backup hospital and medical services having the capabih-ty for evaluation of radiauon esposure and uptake, includmg sasurance !>at persons providmg these services are adequately prepared to handle contaminated individuals. NUREG-0654, Rev. I, "Cntens for Preparauon and Evaluauon of Radiologmal Emergency Response Plans and Pre-paredness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants" (November 1980) at 69 (Plannmg Standard L.8). See Southern Cahforma Edison Co. (San Onofre Nucwar Generstms Sisuon, Umts 2 and 3), CLI-83-10,17 NRC 528, $35 n.9 (1983,, rev'd in part on other grounds, GU ARD v. NRC,753 F.2d 1144 (D C. Cir.1985). U The Commismon's emergency plannmg regulabons are premned on the assumpuon that a senous accident might occur and that evacuauon of the emergency planning zone might well be necessary. See id at 533. As a corollary, a poemble defseency in an emergency plan cannot properly be disregarded because of the low probabihty that action pursuant to the plan will ever be necessary. V The requerement that emergency response plans include "laltrangements , , for medical services for contammated iryured individuals" (10 C.F.R. l 50.47(b)(12)) is not sausfied by a ample list of existmg treatment facihties. GUARD,753 F.2d 1844. W *Prudency" is the proper standard by which to measure emergency provisions. See San Onofre, CLI-83-10,17 NRC at 533. X The Commismon's emergency plannmg regulauens do not require "entraordaary mess-
.l ures." GUARD,753 F.2d at 1150 n.7.
t Y Under 10 C F R. l 50 47(c)(D. failure to sau,fy the emergency planmns standards m see-
.j tion 50 47(b) "may result in the Commismont's! dechmng to issue an operaung hcense unless it is demonstrated "that deficiencies in the plans are not agmficant for the plant in question, j
I that adequate interim compensalms actions have been of will be taken promptly, or that there
! are other compelhng reasons to permit plant opersuon."
l An expert witness may tesufy about analyses performed by other emperts. See Wnconan Electnc Power Co. (Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 2), ALAB-78,5 AEC 319,332 (1972). AA Hearsay evidence is generally admissible m admmistranve proceedings, providmg its rehabihty can be determined - usually through quesuomng of the witness giving the hearsay. Id at 332 33. See Duke Power Co. (William B McGuire Nuclear Station, Umts I and 2), ALAS 469,15 NRC 453,477 (1982). BB la is well-settled that an appellate inbunal must judge appeals on the basis of the record developed at the heanns below. Puerto Rico Electnc Power Authonty (North Coast Nuclear t Plant Uma l), ALAB.648,14 NRC 34,36 (198D. l CC Empert tesumony is typically a measure of scienunc pnnciples (known to the expert through his or her trainmg and esperience), data denved from analyses or by percepuon, and the espert's opimons based on these pnnciples and data. See Fed. R. Evid. 702, McGuire,15 NRC at 475 DD The standard of proof that an applicant must meet m a heensms proceeding is a pre-ponderance of the evidence. See Commonwealth Edison Co. (Zion Stauon, Umts I and 2), ALAS 416,12 NRC 419,421 (1980). EE Disquahrying bias is not shown by unfavorable ruhnss, or by a judge's occasional use of strong language toward a party or the empression of his or her views on pendmg matters. Metro-pohtan Edison Co. (Three Mile Island Nuclear Stanon Unit I), CLI.85 5, 21 NRC 566, 569 (1985), afFd sue nom. Three Mile Island Alert, Inc. v. NRC,771 P 2d 120 Od Cir.1985). Dis-quahfyms bias must stem from an entrajudicial source - that is. It must be based on somethms le v
. s' DIGESTS I ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARDS i
other than what the adjudicator has learned from participalms en the case. Houston Laghtmg and . Power Co. (South Texas Project. Umts I & 2), CL1-82-9,15 NRC 1363,1365 (1982). FF NEPA requires the NRC to take a "hard look" at the environmental issues posed by a particular project. See Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Morton, 458 F.2d"827, 838 , (D.C. Cir 1972). i. .
'4 -'
GG The NRC requires an apphcant to have a quahty assurance program to ensure that a b plant and its parts are designed and constructed or fabncated m accordance with acceptable stand- [ .,, .: ards. The necessary elements of a quahty assurance program are set forth in 18 cntena speciGed [- ' HH in 10 C F.R. Part 50, Appendia B. in order for a contention to be admissible, the bases for it must be set forth with reasons-p. p
~
,t,
*9-ble specineny.10 C.F.R. I 2.714(b). i=
II Discrete weldmg denciencies identined in a few NRC inspection reports do not provide f , ,, c .- . enough of a bases to support a contention allegmg a complete breakdown in an apphcant's quahty ., assurance program. See generally Louimana Power & Light Co. (Waterford Steam Electnc Sta-tion, Umt 3), ALAB-812,22 NRC 5,16-44 (1985). 31 The conditional admission of any contention is unauthorued under the Commission's j ,
, C, - ,
rules. Duke Power Co. (Catawba Nuclear Station, Umts I and 2), ALAB-687,16 NRC 460,467 + ,, (1982). -' - ' KK The admission oflate-nled contentions is to be determmed by belancmg the nye factors in 10 C.F.R. I 2.714(a)(1). Duke Power Co (Catawba Nuclear Stauon, Units I and 2), O'
~'
CLI-8319,17 NRC 1041,1045 (1983). LL Sta# documents, if relevant and specinc enough, can be rehed on to support a contenuon. MM Cf. Waterford, ALAB-812,22 NRC at 14,17 & n.7. Inadvertent and poembly inaccurate statements do not estabhsh bias on the part of an - [ 6_, i M.
,j, -
adjudicator. 'V' - .A 1.> N.j' . ' - NN The Commismon's Rules of Pracuce provide hcenans boards with consderable neubihty ['-- + to regulate the course of a heanns and designate the order of procedure.10 C.F R. (( 2.718(e), I t, '
.s ,
2.731. See Metropohtan Edison Co. (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Uma 11. ALAB-772,19 <' s r ' ,, NRC 1193,1245-46 (1984), rev'd in pan on other grounds, CLI.85-2,21 NRC 282 (f 985). Al- ; , though the rules set forth a general achedule for the Ghng of proposed Gndings, hcenung boards * .f /
- are authonzed to alter that schedule or to dispense with it enurely. See 10 C.F.R. l 2.754(at N ,3 ' s' 00 Under 10 C.F.R. ( 2.760(c) of the Commission's Rules cf Pracuce, a licenang teerd is s "
required to put its iniual decision and it.a reasons or bases for the supporting Gndmst, conclu- # ,' y, ,
+
sions, and ruhngs in wnung. While the dectsson may mclude transenpt references to oral ruhnss ' + ,"d j ,' made from the bench m explanation of the decisson, this method of deomonmaking in comphcat- -
~y' .g . .-
ed NRC bcensing heannes is counterproductive to meamngful appellate review and should be - avoided. I. ~. . if N *-, ' PP Neither the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, nor the Commission's implement- ' M - *k^E .O *
- eng regulanons mandate a demonstrauon of error-free construchon. What they require is amply + '*b a nndmg of reasonable assurance that, as built, the facihty can and will be operated without en. -, 'd ' ' '
dangenng the pubhc health and safety. 42 U.S C. (( 2133(d), 2232(a); 10 C F R. > i 50.57(a)O)(t); Umon Electne Co. (Callaway Plant, Umt 1), ALAB-740,18 NRC 343, 346 's _
*'1 ,
(1983). The requiste reasonable assurance eusts if all ascertained construction errors have been - , c q; ccrrected, and there is no showmg of a pervasive breakdown in quality assurance to as to ratee *?' N i* ,[, m J," ,
~,
senous doubt about the overall safety of the plant. Ibid. , .
,' . 4. C .' y* . # '
QQ The fact that a party may have personal or other obhgations or possess fewer resources r'
.,. 'M"\
than others to devote to the proceeding does not relieve that party of its hearing obhgations. M 'ir ,. . , - , Statement of Pohey on Conduct of Licenans Proceedmss, CLI 88 8,13 NRC 452,454 0 981L f .4 -} M Q t W5 4 4- '.
**l W
i [ ' ,' e W.N RR A witness is quah6ed as an espert by knowledge, skill, empenence, traming, or education. ' NND' O"
- Fed. R. Evid. 702. See McGuire,15 NRC at 475. 'l - ; "^
SS Techmcal tenumony on matters such as pipehne location or accidents requires an esper witriess who can be enammed on the rehabihty of the factual assertions and soundness of the . '
. TT scienutic opimons o#ered. McGuire.15 NRC si 477.
Where an asserted espert witness can supply no scienunc bests for his statements (other <.' V- ' J' [f 4 than his behef) and disparages his own tesumony, a hcenans board would be remiss in 8sving ,
- 7. -
such tesumony any weight whatsoever. ,
- i + c .;
f g W 4 I 0 t 8
, "g, -
, k * , - p 6l p . ,
- 1,'. m.e g. y\
*.'i'*t.
*~ a
< g.
'v3;
s s e
+
p 3 4 - t
* ' - - ?'*
,i' +.G
# 7
. k ,k,s '
h6 e, al&,f v4K% igf &l' f ~
~
mi n
<G s
e 1. . . Ir ' , '[ o
,L [,, w., m$yh ' ,gg e' s
** . -y , j ' { &, .4 4 ?Q 4W.j 4fi %.. e4,
..s Oz , w N. .3 ,Ml., Mild.d2 l 1
.s DIGESTS ISSUANCIS OF THE ATOhtIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARDS
~
i l I UU The use of conservatism and marem for error in makmg technical calculaisons is neces-sary and demrable. but must be footed to some entent in reasonable, scienufic ground. Conserva. W' tism upon conservatism can distort techmcal data to the point where the mechanism at issue is no longer mesmngfully described. VV Regulatory guides and the like do not prescribe regulatory requirements. In general, they
- are treated mmply as evidence of legitimate means for complying enh regulatory requirements.
- and the staff is required to demonstrate the vahdity of its guidance if it is called into quesuon dunng the course oflitiganon. TMl 1 Restart ALAB 693,16 NRC at 1299.
+
3'.
~~
WW A hcenang Board's funcuon is to oversee the perues' development of the record on con. tested issues and to issue an imual decision contaming the board's nndings of fact and conclu-1
- sions of law on the matters in controversy. See 10 C.F.R. (( 2.718, 2.760,2.760s. This does not mean that a board must stand mute dunns the heanns and ignore deficiences in the tesumony.
It must sausfy itself that the conclusions espressed by espert witnesses on sigmGcant safety or environmental quesuons have a solid foundatton. South Carolma Electne and Gas Co. (Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Sianon Umt 1) ALAS 66),14 NRC 1140,1856 (1981), review dechned, CLI-8210,15 NRC 1377 (1982). XX Reasonable suurance that the plant will be operated safety and that pubhc health, safety, l and environmental concerns will be adequately protected is the standard by which a licenang l board is to measure an apphcanon; a nsk-free environment is not required. Carssens v. NRC, 742 F 2d 1546,1557 (D C Cir.1984), cert demed, _ U.S. 86 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1985). YY Alternauve site issues can be raised only at the construcuon permit stage and not in con. nectson with an operstmg license. See 10 C.F.R. (( 5 8.106(c), (d). 22 The followmg techmcal 6ssues are discussed: Severe Accident Matiganon, Probabilisue
- Risk Assessment (PR A), Sabotage /Secur.ty Plan, Worst Case Risk Analyss, Socsocconomic Im-pects, Onste Emergency Plan, Emergency Operanon Facihties. Techmcal Support Center, Opera-l tions Support Cemer, Aircraft Carburetor Icmg, Quahty Assurance, Pipeline Rupture, Overpres-sure Calculahons, Structural Intesnty.
ALA8 820 CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY, et al. (Perry Nuclear Power Plant Units 1 and 2), Docket Nos. 50-440 OL, 50-4410L; OPER ATING LICENSE; October
- 24, 1985; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A The Appeal Board demes intervenor's apphceuon for a stay pendeme lite of a Licenung Board decimon (L8P 85-35,22 NRC 514) in this operaung hcense proceeding.
.- 8 in pesens upon stay requests, the following criteria are to be apphed: whether the movant has made a strong showing that it is likely to prevset on the ments; whether the movent I will be irreparably harmed in the absence of a stay; whether the grantmg of a stay would harm other perbes; and where the pubhc interest bes.10 C.F R. ( 2.788(el. The same entena are ap-
, phed by the courts. See, e.g., Versima Petroleum Jobbers Ass'n v. FPC,259 F.2d 921 (D C. Cir.
. ! 1958); Washmenon Metropoluan Area Transe Comm'n v. Hohday Tours. Inc., 359 F 2d 841 1 (D C. Cir.1977).
' C The second of the 10 C.F R. I 2.788(el factors - whether the movant will be irreparably l
harmed in the absence of a stay - is chen the most important in deterrmnmg the need for a j stay. See, e s., Duke Power Co. (Catawbe Nuclear Stanon, Umts I and 27. ALAB-794, 20 NRC 1630, 1633 (1984), quotme Philadelphia Electne Co. (Limenck Generstmg Stauon, Umts I and 27, ALAB 789,20 NRC 144),1446 (1984). See also Pubhc Service Co. of Indiana (Marble Hill l Nuclear Generstmg Stanon. Umts 1 and 2), ALA8-437,6 NRC 630,632 (1977). D The strength or weakness of the showing by the movant on a perticular 10 C F.R. l 2.788(e) stay factor influences hrw strong the showmg on the other factors must be in order to [ [ Justify the sought rehef. Pubhc Service Co. of New Hampshire (Seabrook Stanon Unas I and
! 2), ALAS-338,4 NRC 10,14 (1976). See also Cuomo v. NRC, 772 F.2d 972,974 (D C. Car.
1985). I E A garty applyms for a sesy is required to demonstrate that the claimed irrepersbee iny ry is both certain and great." Cuomo, 772 F.2d al 976, quonng wreconan Oss Co v. FERC, ' F.2d 669, 674 (D C. Cir.1935). F 5pecutsuon about a nuclear accident does not, as a matter of law, consinute the in mi. nent, irreparable injury required for staying a heenmng decimon. Pacinc Gas and Electne Co (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Unns I and 2), CLI 84 5,19 NRC 95), 964 (1934), le l i
" =
74 . , , G l l i I
J A
*d 2
J
. DIGESTS
^
ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARDS . , i o cinng New York v. NRC,550 F.2d 745,756-57 (2d Cir.1977) and Virgima Sunshme Alhance v. 7," Hendne. 477 F. Supp. 68, 70 (D.D.C.1979).
~
~
AL AB-328 METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, et al. (Three Mile Island Nuclear Stauon, Umi No.1). Docket No. 50-289-5P (Restart), SPECIAL PROCEEDING; October 25, 1985, s [, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER fr. ,, ' t' ' "' A Acung on a referral by the Licensing Board of an miervenor's peuuon to reopen the pro- l , ceedmS, the Appeal Board (1) amrms the Licensmg Board's ruhng that that Board lacks Junsdic- 4
.j
- non to consder the peuuon and (2) declares its own lack of junsdection to consider it. . , , s s- ,
B If an appeal board has prenously consadered an issue and (by either the acuon or inacuon - of the Commission) the determmation amounts to Gnal agency acuon on that issue, the appeal , board has no junsdicuon over a subsequent attempt to raise that matter once asam. Such requests '
,, --N ,
.[e f ' ' ' f.i are, m general, more property directed to the Director, Nuclear Reactor Regulanon, even *
'h though other issues m the same proceedmg may sull be pending before the board. When an . IC g, b - , ,
issue sought to be considered anew, or to be reconsidered, has a reasonable nesus to a discrete '. matter sull pendmg before an appeal board, the board has Jurisdicuon over it. Loulmana Power i
'^
s
& Light Co. (Waterford Steam Elecinc Stanon. Umt 3), ALAB-792, 20 NRC 1585,1588 ,
(1914L See also Paonc Gas and Electnc Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plam, Unus I and 2), AL AB 782, 20 NRC 838, 841 (1984). The " reasonable nesus" test can be sausGed where 't the new issues overlap those pendmg before the board; a totalidenuty or commonahty of tssues .# es not necessary Lousmana Power & Light Co. (Waterford Sicam Elecinc Stanon, Uma 3), ALAB 797,21 NRC 6,8-9 (1985L -/ ALAB 322 VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY (North Ar.na Power Stauon, Umis 1 . and 27. Docket Nos. 50 3384LA 1,50-339-OLA 1; OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; November I,1985; MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER . - e
; A After conducting .ts sua sponte review, the Appeal Board afGrms the Leenung Board's }q ' ' '
1 emual deomon ILbP-85 34. 22 NRC 481 (19851) authonzmg the Director of Nuclear Reactor - - i Regulauon to issue a heense amendment for the North Anna nuclear facihty, Units I and 2, to , j permit the receipt and storage of 500 spent fuel assembhes from the Surry Power Stauon. -- A L A B-823 PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY (Limenck Genersung Stanon, Units I and . . . , , I 2), Docket Nos. 50 352-OL,50 353-OL; OPER ATING LICENSE; November 19,1985; MEMO- ?, , [t; l RANDUM AND ORDER ,s, e- ,y - A The Appeal Board, fmdmg that it does not have Jurisdicuon over entervenors' monon to ,'7 ';y reopen the record, refers the monon to the Commissson for its consedersuon. * ,1. '
- B Junediction to rule on a monon to reopen on certam assues, fbed after escepuans have , ,
been taken to a Licenang Board deomon on those issues, rests with the appeal board rather than 4 the hcensms board. Metropohtan Edison Co- (Three Mile Island Nuclear Sianon, Umt No l), + ALAB 699,16 NRC 1324 (1982). , ,_ ' c7 C Junsdction to rule on a monon to reopen on certa n issues, filed after pennons for , , review of an Appeal Board decimon on those issues have been Gled with the Commismon, no longer rests with the appeal board. s - ALAB-824 LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY (Shoreham Nuclear Power Stanon. Uma 11. ,
-e-Docket No. 50 322 OL; OPER ATING LICENSE, November 28,1985, DECislON , ,, 3 -
A The Appeal Board amrms the Licensing Board's perual iniusi decision (LDP 8518, 21 ' s >. NRC 1637 (19857) which determmed that, for the Arst fuel cycle, the three Transemence Dels- . r, f' i 4 . 5 -p #;
, ' ;[t ,
val, Inc. emergency diesel generators mstalled at the Shoreha'n nuclear facihty will sai'sfy the re- il * ,' i - - querements of General Demon Critenon 17,10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendia A. s E i , s B The General Demon Cniene for Nuclear Power Plants " establish mmemum requirements H , . \4 for the pnnopel denen entena for water cooled nuclear power plants someter 6n demon and loca- Mf ' , [ . . , non to p6sats for whech construction permits have been issued by the Commesmon " 10 C.F.R. 4? ' ' C Part 50, Appendis A. Both presounred weier and bo hng water reactors are equelly subject to the requirements W y f '. M.. *
.,' , {iy s
of General Demon Cntenon 17, and fulGil those requiremems in the same fashoon. 4; # ( D The heanns nght granted by section 189s. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amend. >
' .', p. m ed,42 U.5 C. ( 2239fa), carnes with it no heense to encumber the record with evidence ofleitle, i; '
f"
- sf any, intnnaic wonh on the theory that the essmansuon and cross enamensuon of other wet- * #' , ,'
,i g f 4 4 19 ' at >p 1 ew "-r- - + e $ g " ' " = , f *T-1 y.9'P* a . Joy - -he # * - p9
- w
*
- s o n O i g l' ; #
4 f 7 ,*fy .
- m.
- .~
. . ~
2 yi,z ,
x' , , , l
* ~
, , -9sgN Q ~%.-.; ,, ,j '
(d 5,,37, 1' ,jf'fM
- 1 yy 1
'R* y
~e ,, e
, ;jv w.,1.7'.511 w '
.n s-9- ~ - % ,
a %f. %
- :.L
' y}Wlx .. e MyR); : Q , #
" Y,$Y3.. )Y fN,.
._.a.m m..}Ei h.w h.,
's
- .-- 2 mm l 3
r - I DIGESTS ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARDS
'. { nesses might estabhsh the propomuon for which that evidence had been o#ered. See Abernathy
- i
-J v. Superior Hardwoorts,Inc. 704 F.2d 963. 968 (7th Cir.1983). See also 10 C.F.R. { 2.743(c).
- I ALAB-825 DUKE POWER COMPANY, et al. (Catawbe Nuclear Stanon, Units I and 23 Docket Nos. 50-413-OL, 50-414-OL; OPER ATING LICENSE; November 21.1945; DECISION A Followmg up on ALAB-813,22 NRC 59 (1985), the Appeal Board affirms the remamder of the Licenang Board's authontauon of a full power operaung license for the Catawba facihty
* - the recesps and morage at Catawba of spent fuel generated at the opphcants' Oconee and McGuire facdities.
B Adjudicatory boards do not have plenary sublect matter Junsdiction in Commismon pro-coedmas. See Wisconan Electne Power Co. (Point Beach Nuclear Plant. Units I and 2). ALAB 739,18 NRC 335. 339 (1983). C Undat the Atomic Energy Act, the Nuclear Regulatory Commismon is empowered to ad-mimster the licensme provemens of the Act,42 U.S.C. (( 2132,2133, and use leenung boards "to conduct such heannes as the Commission may direct." 42 U.S.C. ) 2241. The boards, there-fore, are delegates of the Commismon and, as such, they may esercise authonty over only those matters that the Commismon commits to them. See Carchna Power and Light Co. (Shearon Harns Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I 2,3, and 4), ALAB-577, il NRC 18,23 (1980); Northern Indiana Pubhc Service Co. (Bailly Generstmg Stanon, Nuclear 1), ALAB-249, 8 AEC 930. 937 l (1974). D Heanns notwes are the means by whwh the Commismon idenunes the subject matters of the heanngs and delegates to the hcensing boards the authonty to conduct proceedmgs. See 10 C.F R. l 2.700; Pacinc Gas and Electne Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant. Umts Nos. I and 2). CLi-76-1,3 NRC 73,74 n.1 (1976). E Licenmns boards can neither enlarge nor contract the Junsdiction conferred by the Com- { mismon." Consumers Power Co. (Midla.,d Plant, Umts I and 2), ALAB 235,8 AEC 645,647 (1974). F A hcenang board does not have the power to explore matters beyond those which are embraced by the nonce of heanns for the partcular proceedmg. Portland General Electnc Co. (Trojan Nuclear Plano. ALAB 534,9 NRC 287,289 n.6 (1979). G Proposals to store spent fuel generated at one facihty in the fuel pool of another facihty that does not quahry as an independent storage instalianon under 10 C.F.R. Part 72 should be trensed pursuant to 10 C.F R. Part 50. 45 Fed. Reg. 74.693, 74.698 (1980). H Under the Corimission's Rules of Practwe. an appellant is obligated to clearly idenury the errors of fact or law that are the subject of the appeal and, for each issue appealed, must idenufy the precise portion of the record rehed upon in support of the asseruon of error.10 C.F R.12.762(d)(ll. See Wisconan Electne Power Co. (Pomt Beach Nuclear Plani, Uma l), i ALAB-719.17 NRC 387,395 (1983); Pennsylvama Power and Light Co. (Susquehanna Steam
- Elecinc Stanon, Umts I and 2), ALAB-693.16 NRC 952,954-56 (1982); Conumers Power Co.
l (Midland Plant, Umts I and 2), ALAB-270,1 NRC 473. 476 (1975). j l Appeal boards are required to apply the regulanons in effect at the ume of the appeal to matters before them. ALAB-813,22 NRC 59,86 (1985). ALAB-826 METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, et al. (Three Mile island Nuclear Stanon,
' Uma No.1). Docket No. 50-299-SP (Management Phase); SPECIAL PROCEEDING. December 18.1985; DECISION A The Appeal Board affirms on sua spome review the Licenmng Board's Gnal two perusi omtial decimons in this special proceeding that resolved in the twensee's favor issues affecung the central quesuon of management competence and integnty.
8 In the absence of an appeal, an appeal board will rev6ew on its own initianve any Anal hcenang board decision (and pertment portions of the unds lpng records concermns segmncant safety or environmental 6ssues. Sacramento Mumcipal Uniuy Dist rt (Rancho Seco Nuclear Genersung Stanon), ALAB-655,14 NRC 799. 803 (1981). C An appeal board's affirmance on sua sponte review of a hcenans board's decimon accords 4 no stare decisis effect to any of the hcensing boerd's conclusions on purely legal matters. Consumer's Power Co. (Big Rock Point Plant) ALAB-795. 21 NRC l. 2 (1985). 20 P -.*t, + 4 , v 1 h' i
I l l l a . . I t ( i s DIGESTS j ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARDS .
~
! LBP-05-22 ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY, et al. (Chnton Power Station. Unit 2) Dockei No. , 50-462-OL; OPERATING LICENSE, July 11, 1985; MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER , , j A The Licenang Board grants Apphcants' monon to termmate the proceedmg for an operat- " mg hcense for Unit No. 2 of the Chnton Power Stauon, subject to ceriam conditions. x , LBP-OS 23 UNIVERSITY OF LOWELL (Traimns and Research Reactor). Docket No. 50-223-5P , . (ASLBP No. 85-509-02-SP); SPECI AL PROCEEDING, July 19, 1985; MEMOR ANDUM AND - ORDER ' LBP-05 24 BOSTON EDISON COMPANY (Pilgnm Nuclear Power Stanont Docket No.
- 50-2934LA (ASLBP No. 85-510-01 L A); OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; July 19, L 1985; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER j A In this Memorandum and Order, the Licensms Board distmsses a pennon to miervene - 4 for failure to show good cause, unumelmess.and lack of standing
, B A pennon to miervene in a heense amendmem case that ts late by 9 days and does not show good cause for late films will be d.smissed for untimchness.
C Although rendence 43 miles from a nuclear power plam may be adequate to estabbsh j standing with respect to appikanons for the construcuon or operanon of a nuclear power plant,
, this same distance es not adequate, without a further showmg, to estabhsh standing m a case in- ,
1 volvmg a change m allowable K-effecuve for a fuel pool. l LBP-85 25 PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY (Limerick Generstmg Stanon Umts I and L I 21 Docket Nos 50-3524L 50 3534L (A5LBP No. 81465 07-OL); OPER ATING LICENSE; July 22,1985. FOURTH PARTIAL INITIAL DECislON , h A in th!s Partial Imual Decision, the Board finds m favor of the Apphcant with respect to -
~
issues concernmg offste emergency plannmg for the State Correcuonal Insutunon al Oraterford, i 4 \ and authortres the issuance of a full power operaung hcense. . >- 8 Evacuauon ume estimates (ETE) need not melude an analyms of worst-case scenanos. , ! Such an analysis is not contemplated by either the NRC regulanons or NUREG-0654 ETEs are ' i miended to be representauve and reasonable so that any protective scuon decision band on * * ' them will reflect reshsuc condiuons. - a +- C i Neither NRC regulauons nor NUREG 0F4 estabhshes a standard for effectuaisne evacu-suons within a given time. An evacuauon ume esumate does not attempt to predict enact condi. M ; ,1
, T.
uons durms an evacuanon. Rather, it strempts to mdicate the senttivity of the analysis to a ', 4 A- J i number of commonly occurring events ' l L8P 85 26 ARI2ONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY, et al. (Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Sta- . tion, Umts 2 and 31, Docket Nos. STN 50 5294L, STN 50-5304L (ASLBP No. '
, ' e L ']
2 30-447 01 OL); OPER ATINO LICENSE; July 22,1985; ORDER DISMISSING PROCEEDING :' i- ' ' s
.J I ' ' ' , -
LBP-85-27 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (Braidwood Nuclear Power Station Umts I '
- . ~ '
and 2), Docket Nos. 50-456, 50-457; OPER ATING LICENSE; July 30, 1985; MEMORANDUM M ~I,W l DETAILING RATIONALE IN SUPPORT OF JUNE 28, 1985 ORDER ON ADMIS$lBILITY 4u ' ti, ? OF NEINER FARMS CONTENTION 4 (RAILROAD EXPLO510N)
* ' l 'w
" ', i.P .i ~ w 7 $.? G )
- i
! A The Lacensms Board rules on a three part contenuon alleging that the use of the !!hnois ~~
- . [ %7,;WM Central Railroad to transport emploseve matenals from a federal ammumuon plant creates a ' s [' ' -
"/llV" 'b JJ hatardous con 5stion due to the provimity of the railroad tracks to the nuclear facihty. The Board
'#
- Y rules the subpart of the contention alleging sabotage or a purposefully induced emptomon is precluded from the proceedmg under 10 C F R. ( $013(a). The other subsecuens of the conten.
4 '.f. '. 7'
, , ,iM .
. tion, addresang the nsk (probabihty and consequences) of an accidental railroad emploseca, were W. ' y, - C* -'5 e ,'*
4 found to be admiemble The Board ruled that those subparts do not involve "use or deployment -
% 9 4 y f4
, .- .n we l ,$ ltd I 't? .
I , - , "i , , ,', 1 ] # # e ! i . l . . - - - i -
! . ]
a i ,
.s
]
~
.I l
a < >+ 6 f
* ?
;' s
. * - d' y y [3'; p,; .
l* f,3 .r.ifg ,
~r u - .v 4 4
i'.,}.' $ ,, 3'. %q,.(,[h I 6,{ ( ' c,,; "*'y ' ~,
- y,?' , 4',. ,'
l SsY(~.M'W[3DQ % ^lf,%.g,
. - . _ . _ , -.2.L. _.s.5. iU *h .. . .)dG A..b . ~,
DIGESTS ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARDS of weapons incident to U.S. defense acuvines," consideraison of which would be precluded
. under 10 C F R.150.13(b).
. .' Part of the rationale behind { 50.13 was the AEC's recommuon of the procucal necessity
. ;" . B
, to exempt apphcants from protecting their facihtees agamst mihtary of paramihtary attacks threat.
emns the nauonal secunty, even of the attack is directed agamst a nuclear plant, because the
~
country's secunty is intended to be left enurely so the nation's defense estabhshment and securt. ty agencies. Flonde Poser and Light Co. (Turkey Pomt Nuclear Genersung Unns 3 and 4),4
' AEC 9,13 (1967),all'd, Seegel v. AEC,400 F 2d 778 (D.C. Cir.1968).
- C The AEC determmed that requinns an apphcant to demonstrate that us facility is protect.
ed against en enemy attack would " stifle utterfy the peaceful unbrahon of atomic energy in the Umted States." 5etsel v. AEC,400 F 2d 778,783 84 (1%8). .~ 4 D Two inquines must be made when determimps if a contenuon is barred under 10 C.F R. { 50.13(a). The first te whether the postulated sabotage is " directed against the facility" and the second is whether the saboieurs quahfy as an " enemy of the Unned States." E in determinmg whether an attack is " directed asamst the facihty," the subjective intent of the attackers is not material. The Board is not required to engage in an inquiry into the mmd of an attacker to determine whether the attack was intended to damage the nuclear facihty or whether the damage was merely incidental to some other hosule goal. See Cleveland Electne 11-lummanns Co. (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2), LBP.8142,14 NRC 842, 844 (1981). F The Appeal Board in the Indian Pomt case determmed that an apphcant is not required to take affirmative measures asamst an attack by an armed group which is not an enemy of the Umted States. Consohdated Edison Co. of New York (Indian Point Stanon, Una No. 2), ALAB.202,7 AEC 825,829 30 (1974). O A Board may determme whether an attackmg force is an " enemy of the United 5:stes* by applying the objecuve test set out in the Perry decimon. That test quesnons whether a hosule act was committed and whether the damaging result was cauerd by the hoeule act. If the answers to both questions are affirmative, the group or nanon perpetratmg the hostile act quahfles as an enemy of the Umted States. Cleveland Electnc litummaung Co. (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Omis I and 2), LBP.88 42,14 NRC 842,844 (1981). H When en enemy act is beyond the type of deman basis secunty threat encompassed by 10
- C.F R. i 73.l(s), then an applicant is entated to rely on the government's mihtary or law en.
forcement agencies to handle such an attack. I Section 72.lfa) of 10 C.F R. is to be read in pen matens wnh ( 50.13. Carohna Power & Light Co. (Sheeron Harns Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 27, LBP-82.lt9A,16 NRC 2069, 2090 (1982), but Part 73 refers to sabotage accomphshed with the use of small Weapons carned out by small bands of saboiturs, while { 50.13 addresses mihtary. style attacks, broeder in nature and employing heavier weapons. Part 73 contemplates sabotage on the plant site, and the secunty measures mandated under Part 73 are not to be entended beyond the vicinny of the plant's boundenes. Sa 10 C F R. (( 73.45 and 73.44 3 To determme whether a comennon is berred under i 50.13(b), the Board must decide whether the contenuon postulates a scenano causing damage to the stactor's integnty, whech re the result of"use or deployment of weapons metdent to U.S. defense actmues." K When arullery shells of espiouves are transported, their mere movement se not " deploy. ment" within the content of j 50.13(b) because hey are not being strategically arranged in locs. tions appropnate for their use, unkke nuclear maneiles in selos from which they can be launched, or convennonal weapons bems tactically placed in the field with a mahtary umt. It siretches the rationese on which 10 C F R. 6 50.13 6e premised to accept mere movement of raw meredients , for the manufacture of ammuniuon, or the ammunition etself, to or from a local ammunition plant, as deployment of weapone. L An esploton of a nuclear missile or other weapon would enher be an enemy act, or, if a U.5 nuclear device, would anse from the deployment of weapons by the U.5 See Philadelphia , Electne Co. (L6merick Genersung 5tauon, Units I and 2), LBP.42 43A 13 NRC 1423,1500 (1982) and Cleveland Electne Illuminaims Co. (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unns i and 21, LBP-8142,14 NRC 842,845 (1981). l I l i 22 1 t w, - - . . . , , , , , ,
-v3 e
r ---n < - e. -
a i _ . . _ .-. -a . DIGESTS T ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARDS k M la is erroneous to view 10 C F R 6 50.13(b) as precluding the Board from considenns :, anythms related to the mihiary that might intpact a nuclear facihiy, on the theory that such mili- , tary acuvity is necessarity "use or deployment of weapons incident to U.5 defense acteveues." I e., past egency pracuce has allowed Boards to consider the posable risks to a nuclear plang from crashes of mihiary airplanes. Consumers Power Co. (Big Rock Pomi Plans). LBP 84 32,20 h'
; [. 3 ' '
NRC 601,6t9-52 (1984). ! LBP-85-27A CAROLINA POWER A LIGHT COMPANY and NORTH CAROLIN A EASTERN T , MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY (Shearon Harns Nuclear Power Plant). Docket No. ' e 50 400-OL (A5LBP No. 82-4724)LOL); OPER ATING LICENSE. August 14. 1985, REASONS f- - ~
$UPPORTING $UMMARY DISPOSITION OF EMERGENCY PLANNING CONTENTIONS O This Memorandum supplies the reasons supportmg the Licensing Board's earher grant of several monons for summary disposinon on emergency plannmg contemions.
.'s , [' ,
LBP-85 28 CAROLINA POWER A LIGHT COMPANY and NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN ', 1' MUNICIPAL POW E R AGENCY (Shearon Harns Nuclear Power Plant). Docket No - . 50-400-OL ( ASLBP No. 82 472-03-OL); OPERATING LICEN5E. August 20. 1985. PARTIAL < - INITIAL DEC1510N ON 5AFETY CONTENTIONS ' Q in this Parnal Imual Decision. the Liceneng Board decides most of the contested safety < 'y' / i ' issues, including management capabilily issues, in the Applicanis' favor * -** ' 7 B The followmg techn cal issues are discussed Accuracy of Thermoluminesceni Domme- y-ters; Environmemal Quahricanon of Electncal Eeuipment. Iniegnty of Containment Concreie * ' ' LBP 85 29 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY (Turkey Pomt Nu6Iear Generaime Plant, si; - Umis J and 4). Doches Nos. 54250-OL A-l. 50 2510L A.I (A5LBP No 84-496 03 LA) (Vessel ' Flus Reducuen).OPER ATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; August 16,1985; ORDER ' A in thrs Order the Lacenang Board rules on Licensee's motions for summary dispomuon - . of Intervenors' two admitted contennons in this operating license amendment proceeding The ; monon for summary darestt:en of Intervenors' Comennon (b) is gramed The mouan for sum.
- C mary disposinon ofIntervenors' Contennon (d) is denied B Under 10 C F R. ( 2.749(d) a monon for summary disposinon eill be granied when the record shows that there is no genuine issue as to any matenal fact. and that the moving party is enutled to a favorable decision as e matter oflaw.
*] 4 ' -
'_ [,'r ".
. ' J jf . $._
C Summary disposauon 6s avadab6e m hearings on amendments to hcenses r s .A.. ' ', M ;; 8" ; D The followmg techmcal issues are discussed. ECC5 evaluanon model; peak claddmg
'. , ~f.l'P
./ )
lemperature; fuel demsn hmsts; heal transfer coefDcients Appendia K; cnucal heat flus, deper. ,6
%3 '
.lC W1*.' $ ' N E *! P ture frem nuclease boilms (DNBRs '
LBP 85 M METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, el al. (Three Mae Island Nuclear Stanon, s
- Unit No 11. Docket No. 50 289-SP (A5LBP No 79-429 09 5P) (Restart Remand on Manage- - 4' 6 '
menal, SPECIAL PROCEEDING, August 19, 1985. PARTIAL INITIAL DEcl5 TON ON THE *
- i REM ANL'ED l55UE OF THE DIECK AMP M AILGR AM VU NfY,;e '.C 1 hl [ca , 3 A in this Parnal Impel Decimon, the Licenens Board resolves the remanded "Dieckamp . ?.);*
k'l*! maderam issue"in favor of the Licensee. i : , ,'g ' .i iT* h. - ' '.v - */ ' LBP 85 38 LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY (Shoreham Nuclear Power Siauon. Unit it, ~.? 'Nt , ( *h
/, g. i N- M f%rf /'g.
Docket No 50 322 0L.) (Emergency Planning); OPER ATING LICENSE; August 26, 1985; ,
.y 's r2 A A
CONCLUDING PARTIAL INITIAL DECISION ON EMERGENCY PLANNING ,- . W, f 3 r in this concludmg Parual Insual Decimon, the Board finds no reasonable assurance thai , ?. %<
* ? A ; b r/c. % ' <l' M '%K h i . P.;// ".'.'b'M*
N ?M . adequate prosecuve measures can and edl be taken en the event of a radiological emergency at Org U.', , ' the Shoreham Nuclear Power Stanon. and therefore no operstmg license shall be assued h.1 B Lack of a plan for concer ed schon among the State, local governmem, and unhiy 6n re- , . ; i ' 'ff
,. ', MAM,\h.$.p'.'N M g 4 h. , O}((Q??/. 4,y d -
sponse to a radiological emergency creates a risk of release to the pubhc of confheting and con. funne informanon 6n the event of a rodeological emergency at Shoreham The Steie and local GD flA I g>/ e slq(.[O c, %p[* l Q governments have mdicated that, in an emergency, they would pursue a course of scuon inde. j ,' .6,y g.!.'/ 'l; - * !',',9y% d*,/},j/A .? r ~% *,W* ; q pendent of that of the unlity. The absence of a cooperanve efrort conmitutes a submanuel den.
- l,. p - . ;.e t l.? "' " f s , i.r* - !
' , - ^ ,. A Yr.
coency in the Shoreham emergency plan. r' '!' -'. ",2 4 ' C where State siatutes prohibit the uuhty from performms acuvines essenhal to the euc. w ' f '. J T% ' 4,.l I jVyM iY
- 1
,D Y :
cessful amp 6ementatson of the unhty emergency plan the Board finds that the unhty does not have an adequate plan to respond to an emergency at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Stanon. M' 'M'*hlbi.M'N ' 640 l 1 M; $g.y ; p. i
- Q .fy'h' .k l
D The tonowmg technical issues are discussed- Relocanon centers; Thyroid momformg , lJ
.s &s -
i, ' * , p ', ,'g*I lk ,c, d ; 4, . a f ,' e
. ~4{
- s
, , . . , A'A
- ;t ;t ,
l
,. ,gt d es n - . . ,, k(mil; 1 y , , i % Eb 6 .
n,* ,4g6,%- R ', L ;,, & w, r. l t (' r e')J-s ', ,f#-
, !P.
g b *8 #
,s w$ "l ,('
- A
- g. ef ' 3__
t
; ' y:*,, ,Q I
4 ), m.
-. , . -< .-...n.p e s,.- ~. ~.
- +
-- * *[ 4 , j
- o- o
) ;' ..,a..., l[ j'~ , 7 -
4 d p, g A.' d
. d'6 ,k{ 1 T ,, i
, e
* # , e
\ ,
> , 9 i
,. e a
5- % .
- 5. ., ,.
[4, . r, t,[ gg,[ l ,
~
q: Y p '. , s' , Qfe R
- Q, 9.u , ,
3 'l 1
' . p , .
^
w / :v. e.,1 m . , , / -
' ~ '. *i -r ,' =~
_ A .' , y h @,.Wm% W .Clti;r;;s y 4,y NN' ' 4
'. ' * ~,
, i, W . ;$ 4;;,& L s . -p,: ' ; -< ,
,. A u . .' . a ' A 5$ $ ,lI.A S$.; o L L.Y.. ':: i $.
t i DIGESTS ISSUANCES OF THE ATOhtlC SAFETY AND LICEN8lNG BOARDS LBP 85 32 TEXA5 UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY, et at (Comenche Peak Steam Electnc Ste-non. Umts I and 2), Docket Nos. 50445-OL&OL 2, 50446-OL&OL 2 (ASLBt' No.
- 79-430 06-OLh OPERATING LICENSE; August 29,1935; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
^ " - A in this Memorandum and Order, the Licenung Soard dechnes to adopt Applicants' Management Plan as the sole bens for conunued hissanon of this case, holding that a hesnne may be terminated and unresolved issues turned over to the Apphcants and Staff only when the tasks left to be done are merely conArmatory of plant safety.
. S Where Applicants sought to exclude hugation of pnor QA/QC and demgn precuces be-
.~ cause of a compreheneve program of reezaminsuon of the estety of the plant, it would not be proper to determme whether the study adequaiety resolves the issues until the results of the
, study are available for enemmanon and challenge.
C Where Intervenors sought an order to require Applicants to preserve plant components removed from the plant for design deGciencies but did not provide any authority for such an 1.
- order, the enteria for a stay are not met and Intervenors do not meet discovery entens because they are not seeking access to information.
D Where the 6nformanon being collected by Apphcants was suf6ciently 6mportant to warrant the delay, the Board granted Applicants an inde6 nite conunuance in their obhgation to respond to summary dispomuon monons bems addressed pursiaans to the Management rien. E Although a major study of plant safety may not be left solely for Staff enemmanon and be excluded from the heanng process when the study is relevant to an admitted contenuon, it may be posable to esclude the Gnal stages of the study after the eerher stages have dernonstrated its adequacy and only simdar tasks are left to be performed. L8P 85 33 CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMIN ATING COMPANY. et at (Perry Nuclear Power Plant. Umts I and 2). Docket Nos. 50-440-OL, 50 441 OL ( ASLSP No. Sl457 04-OLh OPERATING LICENSE; August 30,1985; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A in this Memorandum and Order, the Licensing soord demes Intervenor's motion to reopen the record and subm. a new contennon findens that Apphcants' request for enempoon was property Gled under the provimons of to C.F.R. I 50.12 and need not have been presented by petsuon pursuant to 10 CF.R. ( 2.758. 8 When a request for exemphon from a Commismon regulanon does not contend that ap-phcanon of the rule of regulanon would not serve the purpose for which it was adopted, but rather that its apphcanon would result in costly delays in opersuon, that request is property Gled under 10 CF R. t 50.12 and need not be the subsect of a peunon puriuent to 10 C F R.12.758. C When a request for exemption from a Commismen regulation is not directly retaied to a contenuon in the proceeding, and does not involve such serious safety, environmental, or common defense and security matters as to warrant the Board's rasens taeues on les own insus-uve, the request is property Gled pursuant to 10 CF R. l 50.12 and need not be the sublect of a pennon under 10 C.F.R. I 2.758. LBP.85 34 VIROINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY (North Anne Power 5 anon Umis I and 2), Docket Nos. 50 338 0LA l. 50 339 0LA 1 (ASLSP No. 8344101.LA4 OPER ATING i LICENSE AMENDMENT; September 3,19s5; INITIAL DECISION 4
- A The Licenang Board issues an Imiiel Decisan suihonsms the issuance of an amendment
! to the operaung hcenses of the North Anna Power Stanon, Umts I and 2, which permits the re-
! ceipt and storage of 500 spent fuel assembbes transehipped from the surry Power Stauon, Umts I and 2.
8 The values 6n TaNe S 4 redect the environnwntal nok of accidents involvmg the ship. ment of spent fuel in casts as well as accidents whsch might be caused by employee error in preparing the casks for shipment. C The record, m emphrying and supporuns the analyms in the Safety Evaluenon Report, es. . tablishes that the probebehty is remote of either a sabotage attack being undertaken or bems suc. cessful, and that, even of such an attack was successful, the impact upon the pubbe health and asfety and upon the environment would be very small D Pursuant to i 102(2)(E) of NEPA, the Env6ronmental Assessment must discuse whether a proposed scuon involves unresolved confhets concerning stiernauve uses of avadable resources E Conederanon of an alternauve based on economic supanonty land not environmental su-penority) 6s not the responsbehty of the NRC. 6 24 I i P p-
.a p - <= q.* * ,* -
a f
} h. I t
I r ,. s DIGESTS t-
- i ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOABDS p-a f- ,
F An ulumate NEPA judgment may properly be made on the bens of the enure record I'g, before adjudicatory tribunalt G The followmg technical issues are discussed: Table 5-4 values; Consderanon of sabo. r, , tage; Consdefauon of dry cask storage alternative. , - + L8P 85 35 CIEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMIN ATING COMPANY, et al. (Perry Nuclear Power J' - 6 , Plant, Umts 1 and 21 Dorket Nos. 50-440-OL. 50-441 OL ( ASLBP No 81457 04-OL); -
~
OPERATING LICENSE; September 3,1985, CONCLUDING PARTIAL INITIAL DECISION
,s ' ;. . . ON EMERGENCY PLANNING, HYDROGEN CONTROL AND DIESEL GENER ATOR5 . / ,
A The Licenens Soord issues a Parual and Concludmg iniual Decimon in en operstmg , % .- ,
'g
'i* -
hcense uroceedmg. Contenuons on emergency plannms, diesel generator rehabshty and hydrogen ', .
. w.
control are resolved in Apphcants' favor and. the Decision authorites tasuance of an operaung w hcense subpect to the comp 6enon of several condiuons. * - B Where NRC rules do not define the scope of a prehmmary analysis for a facehty's hydro- *
,'. ,. ~ g7 gen cretrol syssem. the board's standard of acceptance is whether a ressonable assurance of .
C safety has been demonstrated in the record Base quesuons that have to be answered m evalualms a preliminary analyses required by M* - ' 10 C F R. ( 50 44 for a hydrogen ignitor system are whether the symem has tieen mstalled. . whetner it will funcuon as demgned, and whether miegrity of contaeament and essent al equip-
*$i ' ' '
ment will be retamed , ' D Separate contennons should be proffered to challerse the adequacy of safety components . that are not a part of the primary hydrogen control system even though these components might , , ,3 ,a have a safe:y function in en accident that causes a release of hydrogen to contamment E The followmg technical issues are discussed Emergency pian requirements. Hydrogen .-
' ', [I ,"" '
igninon system; Contamment integnty, Weld quality; Dry well especity; Hydrogen combusuon, ' i States blackout; Contamment response modehns. Contammens spray opersuon. Suppression ' 1 pool bypass Equipment servicentnhir; Diffusion of flames. Decay heat removal. Secondary fires-. 3 D esel generator reliabihty; Revahdaison program for diesel generators Diesel component main-
- tenance and s,arveillance.
LBP 85 36 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY (Turkey Point Nuclear Generaung Plant, , [, .
.' , , . rp "
Units 3 and 4i. Docket Nos 50 250-OLA 2,50 2514LA 2 ( ASLDP No 84 304 07 LAs (5 pent ,'s ** W *O / b O % WD . i d,$ ',' Fuel Pool Espenmont, OPER ATING LICENSE AMENDMENT, September 16,1985 MEMO- v .
, ' . 5 ,, DK' T ' ' y RANDUM AND ORDER g
's,( g J A in this Order the Licenens Board rules on a nonumely amended pennon to intervene. ** g. < L (
grant 93 Petneoner s monon that the fihng date be estended, and admetung seven contentions
. C 9' y ,th.,
'- . i for trugauen
,4
- 1 ,
8 A late intervenuon pehuoner must address the five factors specified in 10 C F R. ' ' -
+ . Q ('[ .[ ' ,, ./ v,
( 2 714(a) and afrirmatively demonstrate that on balance, they favor has tardy admission mio the .'* proceedmg The burden is on the pennoner to make such a demonstrauen - i' **L
; y.j LBP 85 37 TEXA5 UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY. et al (Comanche Peak Steam Electrie Sea- 2v* 5t ' - < t 'l " " 4 tion, Units I and 21. Docket Not 50-445 0L. 50 446-OL ( A5L8P No 79 430464L); [ N ' , I > ', ~ ~,
** ,d*
2-
.M (" ~
OPER ATING LICEN5E; September 18, 1985, MEMOR ANDUM ,,. N ., , , .; i [ .l/
, A The Lacenang Board states concerns about the adequacy of the record wish respect to a
' ' ~
. Ji *WNr J Staff acuan esempung pomt from Appendia B eushty usurance requiremer,ts 5 {f[, f. , M'9 M ,'s*. ',hlC, f 'S ?,, . - t**,. N p'M
'6 8 The following technical issues are discussed Paine quakty; Core b6ackage by pams; Sump blockage by point; Operator error. ..
L8P 85 38 KERR McGEE CHEMICAL CORPOR ATION (West Chicago Rare Eartha Facehtyi, o[,MN' ' 3 ,' O[8,% . 'p ? hMPM W ' / 'I ' ., ,? - , Docket No 40 2061 ML (A5LDP No. 83 495 01.ML) and (Kress Creet Decontaminsuoni, L Docket No. 40 2061 SC (A5LSP No 84 $02 01 SCli MATERIALS LICEN5E; September 26, 1985; MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER Y{$h 'Q ([/N ? 9 4fvd. 17Mi. < 5 .4 $s, P h3{. j
.t ,
i A The Licenens Doord tvies on various discovery dispuies includmg requests for discovery of nonwitness esperta, and claims of attorney-chent and work product prmlege C 'L'8 b' p; 4;b T
- W,L - '
B NRC Rules of Pracuce do not contam a provesson similar to Rule 26(b)(4) of the Federal f.2
- Nl'E . . * '.:NM " M ';.
F' Rules of Cml Procedure, bus NRC decimons have applied Rule 26(b)(4). Pubhc Service Co of
.f,V'?b,Y[*f.,Q;'Q.h,"g.
,2[.' (( %
l New Hampshire (Seabrook Station Unets I and 21 LDP 8317,17 NRC 490,496 97 (190); r
- c 4 Carohna Power and Light Co (shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Units I and 21.
~
*g 'M f h ,[ [ ,
c.
?.
- .Q' f ,f f h t,. & l; l ',
+ 4; # - V N g @t ,,
.t1,,b,,.4 ,"..
o %g.p ., . /. .g 3 ,
, t ,
s i (p d . ,
}$
- yQ , i qt . ,", ' l g ,,f'< " . d,
+
=
J ,i wv, ~ ,, .,, d* ?.a* .
- o s.,,
,',,.q.f
,i'- g,- * ,
, , ;k
- y 3 8 ,7 e. , 6
% 3
, [4 e * \' /,1 . 33
, ,a i .>.,; ,u. , < 3 . +eq .
'I
~
, , 'y e s f* ; * , ,6 +_'q
. ..1 '
$ c,l.,%. ' , e a .0,ylT :y n.} ,
e
~ ,O ' ;yy gg .
r,., d
.;.5, ,
u q
' // i/' ^
')
4 .
# # / ,
, , e i ,
3 . s- ,
^* , /
W
. ,, , , ~.
o ., _ .. ~ . .
.: ..~
.os'
- me
~-f r x.s M v' v. f. ;, .
.n .V.
, , d -
w
<m...m. ;.w ,
. t s.,.
.. a, w:w m A a.?
m, - u - A. ~
~~
>,2% i;% @. , .;f .L e
' J
,, i
,f 'y,y W Qsyy ',,; [,h.,1.m , ,' ;., ,
l m@Mgid;tgw.,, _ ,n h; , , s;,J. , s s ,
, ~
>- DIGESTS ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARDS k h LBP.83 27A,17 NRC 971,976 30 (1933); Boston Edison Co. (Pilenm Nuclear Genetsung Sta- ,
tion, Uma 2), LBP 75-42, 2 NRC 159, lei (1975); see also Pubiac Service Co. of Indiana
,.- ;- (Marbie Hdi Nuclear Genersung Suuon, Units I and 2), ALAB.374, l$ NRC 417,421 (1977) t s
.; (additional views of Mr. Farrar, Jomed by the enure Board).
, , 'w C Rule 26(b)(4HB) only apphes so esperts who have been retened or specially employed F,,j in anticipouon of htissuon, and does not allow shielJms of esperts who des elop pertment knowl.
- - -;
- edge in other contents.
t '/*- r D whether a subpoenaed party ta an espert specially retened in anticipouon oflanganon 6a necessanly a factual determmenon. USM Corp. v. American Aeroenes, Inc., 631 F.2d 420, 424 25 (6th Cir.1980); Aset v. Jane C. Stormtrit Hospital and Tremns School 622 F.2d 496, ( '~", , N'?
- - ' ' ' ' $01 (10th Cir.1930), Healy v. Counts,100 P R D 49),496 (D. Colo 1934).
E An espert may weer two hats, i.e.. imually he may be an acior who engages in the trans-J ', J.) M. )' i actions at 6ssue and subsequently becomes a htigauon consultant. See Seiner v. Topsy Int'I, Inc.,
] g.?+",'
l , 69 F R D. 69. 72 7) A n.3 (D. Kan.1975); inspiration Consol. Copper Co. v. Lumbermen Mut.
,' s**- ' '
- Cas. Co ,60 F.R.D 205,210 (5 D.N11973).
, ,. F One means of deiermming whether an espert 6e retained for litiganon is to review the
# comractual agreements between the espert and the employer. It is reannab6e to enfer that en
+ espert was not retamed 6n anticipetson of htiganen W the work specified an the enploymem con.
l
'. tract is of a general nature, of shen an espert is hired to help his employer fulfill statutory i , .
,Q requirements.
O when an espert is tetened in anticipanon of hugation but is not espected to tenury, the l
.y' ademity and other collateral informauen related to the espert are not discoverable unlese encep.
.,(,
, s N, honal circumstances are snown, le., the party seeking discovery must demonstrate that H 6s im-
, , ,} , N W practicable to obtain facts or opinions on the same subsect by other means. Ager v. Jane C. Stor.
! y mont Hospital and Traimns School 622 F.2d 496 (10th Cir 1930). See also Carohna Power and [ c'. .$A .'4 *O i.i ~ Light Co. (5hearon Harns Nuclear Power Plans, Units 1 and 2), LbP 83 27A,17 NRC 971,
'" *' ',M&
H 976 80 (1983). A disperity in resources between the pernes le not sufGreens to demonstrale escepuonal circumstances under Rule 26(bH4HB).
, '. 1 The attorney chent and work product envileges are not necessarily waived if the pany I. t. ^t. holding those pnvileget reveals informauon on the subsect matter of the privdeged documents.
r d . Disclosure of the pnvileged coment of commumcarmas may produce a waver because the conn-a; C s 'x denual nature of the pelvdeged documents no longer esists. Partial disclosure of the pnvileged u( " content of a single document can waive pr6vdese as to the remainder of the document, Waiver may occur when specine pornons of a pnvdeged communication are disclosed e J
. The mere discussion of facts which are the subsect of a privateyed commumcation to meufHcient
_ [* to sonsuivie omver. 4 Moore's Federal Pracuce 126 60(21,26 20),126 64141,26 309 et see. K To be privileged under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(bH3) and NRC Rule of Prao l tice 10 C F R. I 2.7404bH2), a document must be prepered in anucipanon of hugation by a
> party, his attorney or another representauve of that party. Matenals developed m ordmary
, course of busmess or pursuant to pubhc regarements unrelaied to husanon are not given im.
munity under 26(b)()l. See Advisory Committee's Esplanatory Statemens Concernmg Amend. l ments of the Discovery Rules,48 P R D 487, $01 (1970) [ , L Inherent in the determinanon of whether a corporanon must specincally designate who composed the answer to each 6nterrogatory as the elemens of reasonableness
;"+' M Interrogatories may property enquire about legal conclumons and theones thee apply to
. the facts of Ihe case, but rney nnt enquire about legal Mentusions ohn h do not so relate, See 4 4 l '
, - Moore's Federal Practice 133.17(21 (1984 ed ). ,
[ '. . ,m' , 'O2- N la may be permissable to answer en mtertogatory by staung specifer references to pages of f ' other documents Aled en the case, but a blantet staternene that the answers are to be found j ,
,'*+ somewhers in the record is not seusfactory, i*' , , O Esecutsve pnvdese may be invoked in NRC proceedings Virgima Flecine and Power .
. Co. (North Anna Power Stauon, Umts 1 and 2), CLI.74 le, 7 AFC ll) (1974); Consumers Power Co (Midland Plant, Umts I and 2), AL AB.J). 4 AFC 701 (1971).
'j P Esecuuve pnvdese is Jesigned to prevent the "pubhe dmlosure loll governmental d<nu.
i '! ments refieturig advisory opensons, recommendauons and dehberauono semprising part of a proc. o ! , e i I , l 1
+. e
. . _ . . _ .m.- m- c o. m --.1. .
+
i t p_ DIGESTS U ' s - 0 ISSL'ANCES OF THE ATOhtIC $AFETY AND LICENSING BOARDS f~ - e i , ess by which governmental decimons and pohcies are formulated " Long Island Lighams Co. L ' ' (Shoreham Nuclear Power Stanon. Unit 17. AL AB.773,19 NRC 1333,1339 & n.l$ H934). t Q A government agency must properly claim the privilege by having the agency head assert t the pnydege providmg a speciGs descnpuon of the documents for which the pnvilege is sought y A and providing the reasons necesulating the con 6denuahty of the documenes. I* +* 7
,I~ , 3 R Esecuuve prmlege is a quahned pnvilege which may be overcome by a she*ing of need. I\, f ,Q ~ ' >" , ^" * (
To overcome the pnvilege, the Board must belance the pony's need for the documents against L,9( ,, ; , the government's need for conndenushly. O % . q, W -iy e , , 5 %siver af esecuute pnvilege does not occur merely because a governmental enuty has ,,' y,
- c 1.? s n . ,
iniuated the hogauen. #'
, , .g((,'4) 1 LSP-gi 39 TEXA5 UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY. et at (Comanche Pesh 5 team Electne Sia. .,
tion. Units I and 2). Docket Nos. 50-445-OL&OL.2. 50-446-OL&OL 2 ( ASLSP No. .J' ' ' ' *. ,N, ' ' 79-4)o 00-OLs, OPER 4 TING LICENSE. October 2,1935. MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER c '",.
- l . , ,.
. A la this Memorandum, the Board clannes its previous order in which it stated that it .<~ "
! mishi not " accept" evidence submitted by Apphcants bawd on the work of the Comanche Peak i3
# ' a Response Team, statmg that the degree of independence of that Team would aRect the weight of ?
~O ' t , ' , *, ~'i ' '
i the evidence and not whether it would be received mio evidence v >W *g , B Studies of riant quahty may be admitied mio evidence even if the study group was no , i* . irklerendent of plant management lack of mdependence of a study group may aRect whether s , e ,. - , 4 Board will " accept" the evidence because it aRects the weight to be accorded to the evidenre ((, 4*7 ,' ' C The essent to which management may noe have property comrolled plant eushey dunas *47 .N . - [, , . W' n%!/1 consiruction may affect the required intensity of review of the $mshed construchon en order to ,* demonsarate the adequacy of construcuen. . f , e
- b u .t J ? ? i e r ,
LBP g$.40 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (Braidwood Nuclear Power sianon. Units I ' Vd M <=> ' M ' N ,e i and 27. Docket Nos $0-456 0L. 50 451 OL ( A5LBP No 79-410-03 OL4 OPER ATING -p, a f )l, f - LICEN5E: October 4,1933. MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER o/ - j A The Licenwng Board grants a protective order providing for conndential treatment of the names and otherwiw idenufying information of Intervenors' evahey assurance witnesses to be
.',-y
,[y
[.s" *
; disclowd to the other pernes dunns discovery ' ; 8 The Board weighs the benent of encouraging conndenual depomuon tesumony upon the ,f'l-[4 e.' (iA'. ,, -** . ,' > '
pnma facie showmg of tes sigmGcance to the proceeding and the witnesses' reluctance to other-wist tesufy for supportable reasons, agamst the detriment of inhetNung pubhc access to the infur. edGh'yxW . -; [% i , , t .'( h ~q .~.,4.- ! manon and tre cumbersome procedures that a protecuve order necesestates, and Gnds the bal. /*% - C .>'..; 6 ~ \ ance in favor of issuing the protective order. '5h 4. N.i 4
- c ?;0 LDP.g5 44 TEX AS UTillitES ELECTRIC COMPANY, et si (Comanche Peak Siesm Elecinc Sta. N ' O. , , 2 i i 45
'.7 i C,
~
l unn. Units I and 21. Docket Nos. $0 445-OL&OL 2, 50-446 OL&OL 2 (ASLDP No. ~t 4 79 430-06 OL). OPFR ATING LICENSE October 31,1935. MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER
e'pw,[ ~c f- ;
A matters in this Memorandum and Order, the Licenwns Board rules on vanous procedurst .
... 'f i . gl ' O 7 4 . ) . e c '- -
B When two separate dockets for an operating hcenw case are interrelated, discovery hied 9.D I f / .
; in one docket should be conadered Aled in both and responws should be made unless the re- D') ,@ '
- s . *. e euest to irrelesant to both dockets.
l
$ In M[1 *4-s C When two seperate daseis for an operaung licene caw are enterretaied, evidence need en one docket should be considered 66ed in both and may be relied on in the other doche 6f it is y MM' ,Q ,' , '
4 ! re6evant. A$1% Mo.M JW
.- i 4 9. J" s %. b.y .
D Muluple reprtwntauves of a party should teordinate their cases. ,,,.L* E Wwn a cow to unfoiding graduany buauw or a m.,w siudy ihai is innwe way u is prornate for a party to request documents that have not yet been created, such documents i]m$A. p*w.;p,;.
,, ,A
- c. - D,p(
should be supphed as they become availabit.
. F Parties should eschenge informanon volunterdy Also, when a party believes thel discow.
g g,$Q$, &, l f,W
- i ,
ery requests made of it seem too brood, they should be narrowed by a rule of reason and re. sponded to in the narrowed form Q4 gig /O g/
;f' O Ettors in demen documents are an independent concern. regardiess of whether they may be corrected before the plant is completed Ahhough errors may be made, segmAcent errors Q.y~N FM.~*
' t, ,
@} / , 7,f i . t l should be promptly idenufed, dorumented, and corrected with reasonable speed. When Appt.- .L ',
ywp ( * , l ' Np ) . Q a I N ;. E '
. . . -i: s. e-t
. .g Ws e
11 4h ' ' i ! +
)
1 j \\ eo 9,,}s. n ..A
- gm ,
);
- 1 . f 5- , s . .
, 4.,
-.m .,., 9 y y ,
l ,
+ .
a 'y. , 1,
+
, , y%ytyny,'9yfg/6.p "s,
., :,- , ,,,~.d,, q, y.yf
,y p . , - y h
[ d n a( + ," . ' , 1 , l .
*Y.h'b 4...y ;;;:k.
L 9 , ,
. a. ,
i 4- .t - p ,-
- t - 4 e :e ,r V ,
-:qgmy. .
> s a, . e r "j,C- ? t ,
7'I, , . + {' 'y.
' [ Q' .
J. - i6 O i s .Ms A M.M.s * ,e u . , n .. s . aaL
. .a ._ m, :.,g,_ .& ,
, Li[, (s ,G..
.. a .
, i I
,V. . ? , l ' t-
' g ;[y .5+.
" - t v< gs.)vytc>, 9l*).
O M , 4h O' *
%JT3d J. d DIGESTS ISSUANCf.S OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING 90ARDS
.&[c /. N'" ", -
1]
. r 7p.h.<; ,'g ,; .g w '
\ t ly s t,Y jgll cants become aware of devianons from these principles, they should investigate the root cause of
'aS W ,7 p
$$' the deviations.
J ..,-Ry'g,f. M$ DMW i D ?,,^ I 4 - . H The followmg techmcal issue is discussed- Quehty Ainursace for Denien. L8P 83-42 HOU$ TON LIGHTING AND POWER COMPANY, et et (South Tesas Propect. UnHs 1 f t*n. M ' i ' .r*1 4 4i ~f/ ViG i N1';,t i 4>/s - and 27 Docket Nos. STN $0 498 OL. $TN $0-499-OL ( ASLBP No. 79 42147 OLl; OPER AT. ING LICENSE; November $.1983; MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
' 'v h'1 *M: M% ' , I .6 9 $
Q%.y' 51.,d1. A The Liceneng Board esplains its earher sumenery ruhng which granted en part and
.EtQ / demed in part an intervenor's monon to reopen the record. The Board permitted 6ncorporanon k h J,/
into the record of a document whwh inadvertently had not been supphed to the intervenot
'Q ,. J 'l M M .Ql.h'. U'( f DWh
- GdV.t. 9 i % 4, through discovery but dechned to reopen the record to mclude anceher document which the Board determined was not matenal to the issues under conssdereuen.
MM,',c je')'. .,",yq
,I : B Where a record as clowd and at least some proposed 6ndings have been Gled, but where
/
af,'; 4 ;$ 'A ~; g
=
'*# a decimon has not yet been rendered on a question, a motion to reopen the record must sensfy I,
' ' three entene. (a) the motion must be timely Gled; (bl 11 must address a signs 6 cant safety for
- r L-i C Qd.
- f/*'f* ..i h urj c: i. . ' - - environmental) sinue; and (cf the addinonal mformaten must potentially be susceptible of alter.
' p' A 7 i[ eng the result which would be reached m ets abunce.
e' s{. gi $h, l ,, 3( 1, $ %T5 C Where a pony seeks to reopen a record to include a new contention, H must demonstrale c"_ . = . ,.J' * - not only that the cruena for reopemng a record are sausned but etso that the factors for late Gled
. ' ,, O contentions m 10 C F R l 2.714(a) have tiren seus6ed.
i 'Is 3' D in evaluaung the sism6cance of newly proffered information for purpows of reopenmg a clowd record, a Licenwns Board may consider whether the informauen es new factual mforma-uon Differing anal tws of esperts of factualinformanon already in the record do not normally
, s.
.,,ny.
4 [9*c .
'., consutute the type of mformauon for which recremns of the record would be warramed y' s. , jlQ E Where a monon to reopen the record to conwder a late 6 led comenunn fails to deruss
. . - g .V "/p. .E'i I the factors bearms upon such contenuens we forth m 10 C P R. ( 2 714(a), the monon couki be f
~
,, 2:D < dismissed on that basis alone The McGuire doctnne requires advice to a L6cenwns Board of matters "selevant and
,. y ' 'f' F matenal" to issues pendmg before that Board LBP-854, 2e NRC 447,461 (1985), and cows i cHed O The sinngent standards for reopemns a record need not be oppued wHh full force in a set.
y , usuon where (I) the proponene of reopemns the record to en61ude e newly dewevered document
;;. was prevemed from offenns the document earhet, and (2) the new evidence can be recetved
,~',
with hule or no burden upon the peruet
, % L8P.85 4) COMMONWE ALTH EDISON COMPANY (Broadwood Nuclear Power Stauen. UnHe 1 and 27, Docket Nos $0-456, 50-437, OPE R ATING LICEN5E; Novemher 7,1983; MEMOR AN.
DUM OF lt ATlON ALE FOR SUMM ARY DISPOSITION OF NEINER PARMS CONTENTION
. < 1 i
A in this Memorandum and Order the Luei.ang Board rules that the Nanonal Environmen. 1 ' 3' . ' i
' ' ' tal Pohcy Act (NEPAL does not enutte the miervenor to hugale the pnsesbie effects of a pro.
,, powd transmismon hne to transport electricity from the Braulwood facihty The Board empows an operaung hcenw condition requinns notice m the event Applicant decides to budd and oper.
+ ate a 765 kV transmismon ime on rights of way to and from the Braidwond site.
- 8 There is no requirement to asws, she effects of an overall transmismon and system lone.
range plan when conwdering a prewntly proposed port of the transmiswon system Sierra Club e Hodel, $44 F 2d 1036.1040 40 (9ih Car 1976), see also indian Lookout Alhance v Volpe,4g4 r P 2d 11,19 Isth Cir.197)) (same reasomns apphed in the analogous factual wtung of an mde. ' pendently uwful highwayL C The three prong test to determine whether an agency may con 6ne ett envwonmenial anal. .,
- ytes under NFPA lo the Furt on of the plan for which approval is being sought it (D whether r the propnsed pothon has substanual endependent utshiy; (2) whether approval of the proposed j ' *' pnruon enhet foreclows the agency from laser wHhholdmg approval of subsequent pornons of d
the overall plan, or forecloses shernauves to subsequent portions of the plan, and, 0) of the pro. . powd poruon re part of a larger plan, whether that plan has become sufficiently dennue such i that there es a high probahihiy that the enure plan edt be implemented m the near future Swain
- v. Brmesar, $42 F 2J 364. 369 (fih Cir 1976) (en bancle we also Duke Power Co ( Amendment
, f.
9 6 +
, 13
, 4 A >
t 1 ,l h
^
e ,
- ,, ,. u-, . + . - . . . . .s. ., ~ ~
g. p i DIGESTS l-ISSUANCES OF THE ATOh8IC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 6 6 l' l . to SNM-1773 - Transportation of Spent Fuel from Oconee Nuclear Stauon for Storage at b' McGuire Nuclear 5:enon). ALAB-651, le NRC 307,31) (1981) {. LBP-85 44 METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, et al. (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station. ; Unit 27, Docket No. 50 320 OLA (ASLBP No. 80442-04-LA), OPER ATING LICENSE AMENDMENT; November 8.1985; ORDER A The Board's Order grants the perhes' joint motion to approve a supulauon, dismisses the lmervenor and dismisses the proceeding mvolvmg proposed techmcal specificauons for this plant. j B A supulanon is approved to further the pnnciples of settlement and compromise of NRC { htiganon. ,,;
's.[? .- TJ LBP 85 45 HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER COMP ANY, et al. (South Tesas Project, Umts 1 4i - o. -
and 2). Docket Nos. STN $0498 OL, STN 50-499-OL ( ASLBP No. 79-CI 07 OL); OPER AT. i* ING LICENSE; November 14,1985. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ~ ! . ' A The Licenons Board grants (in part) e monon to reopen the record, and permits with- s drawal of another such mosson B A mouon to reopen the record Sled pnot to decimon but subsequent to the Ahng of cer. -
- tain partees' proposed findings must sausfy the following cruens' (1) the monon must tie umely filed. (2s it must address a manificant issue, and (3) it must demonstrate that the mforma.
hon sought to be added to the record might potennally alter the result which would be reached , , m its absence- .. C Even 6f unumely, a monon to reopen a closed record may present a matter of such gravk ,~ ty that the mopon should be granted - D A party that attacks the integrity and professional responmbihty of an opposing party's counsel has an obhganon to assure that the charges have a bass and are accurately documented. 7'/. Lack of iesources es no escuse for baseless charges ',
- E Licensing boards have authonty to strike pleadings which do not hve up to the high ,
standards of practice espected before the Commisuon. LBP 85-46 KERR McGEE CHEMICAL CORPORATION (Wesi Chicago Rare Earths Facihty). +- Docket No. 40 2061 ML (A5LBP No. 83495 01 ML), MATERIALS LICEN5E, November 14, , 1985, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A The Licenang Board rules on intervenor's monon to stay the proceeding <- 3 - B When a party miervenes in en NRC proceeding, that party assumes all of the responsbeh- ,,3* ties sitendam to entervennon The pressures of other professional responsbehues are not a bass for alleviauns that burden. See Statement of Pohey on Conduct of Licenang Proceedmss. .i' ~ CLI.818,13 NRC 452,454 (1981), Commonwealth Edison Co. (Byron Nuclear Power Stauen, ~ .) Umts I and 21 ALAB 678,15 NRC 1400,1416 n.33 (19s2). C The esistence of Siate Court hugation between the same pernes as those before the NRC does not prevent the Licensing Board from carryms out Ms respongbihues under Fedefal , law See Philadelphia Electric Co. (Limenck Generaung Stauon, Umts I and 2), ALAB 785,20 NRC $48. 884 85 (19847. , LBP.89.47 TEM A5 UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY, et al (Comanche Peak Steam Electne sia- i ' e unn, Umts 1 and 2), Docket Nos 50 445 OL, 50-446 0L ( ASLBP No. 79 41046-OL); OPER ATING LICENSE; November 25. (135. MEMOR ANDUM AND ORDER - A The Licenang Board demes Apphcants' monon for reconsderanon of an earher Board ?<? ' order. M " LBP8548 KERR McOEE CHEMICAL CORPORATION (Kreis Creek Decontaminanon), Dockel No 40 2066 SC (ASLBP No 84 502 01 $C); SHOW CAUSE; November 29,1985 MEMO. RANDUM AND ORDER . A in this Memorandum and Order the Board denies Kert.McGee's request to postpone fur- - ther proceedings unut compieuon of related Siate Court hugaben between et and the People of .
. the State ofIlknois (Peoplet The Board also desmisses the People's Consenhons I and 6 for fel. '
ute to comply with Board ordered descovery. B An inability to complete prehearing preparauen because of demands of entenuve diwov. ery in related State Court htiganon is not adequate Jushficanon for postponement of the proceed-
, eng Counsers failure to ascertain that e e People's comennons did not add anything to the pro. ,
ceeding and that the People's discovery responses were not a precondenen to proceeding under , , 29 l
**1*' , ~w* rov s a y p y a prg yeMW twenw s o to * **_w
$ .' 50%
4 ly l1
% ; $ fy 3.,7, -
, s a n .u _
'n
. sp > ; ' o c .
' $\ ,f
. .e
*
- t g
8 h
--g ., , .a ; c 3y ;ec.a, .
; , a , ,.. 1., , ,
..bq s-
.g,
..,w. n ..j. ,e. ,.:c,., .. ; 3 - ,,, , -
m
,,t x? *. <-ru- %.3.
w .r
~.1.s ;
a
- . i s c % mw,q v.;x. '
s
-s
- g-n ,/,
; <h .aJ/,,..f > -.,- gM. v.h,! ,1,1/M.%v,nl m. ., y. ~ ^
F %' k NM l's ( * [.\ . p . *' * '
* 'g 44 /3- A.
74 r ai . ", y.
. p. : ;a.w['l. %.u . m. w ., . -. v;W:.y.. s ' .. -q,..,x
.s...
x o :.. v ,
-J" . s , .
.' ,.'. ~
n n. . .%gw 9.y F w,- o.g;.qg',.n w Q ,.t, ,2 L. q:.~ 4 s W * .
' '~~' ~ " +~* ~
~~~"+
,.~~= - " - * " -' . . . .
-= " -" ~~ " w d *--.**-...~~.--M-"-~.a.aw-.
.,v 4aA ~9 'f e ?i. p" ,
3 - . r~e
% w
,,u w eM,EWW. e /. m { %, ~
- a:,v.
. n : a, 3ca e, up. hls.mm n v. W+;rm't..J s u .-.p y.u,; -
- a d g.:,b&w >.
,n... @.y. s
'.,.l. .
0 5 .t .
..a. Ay..s R,4-
^
g:,,( h* i,%, :.vs ev.g.w. M.. W ..,.~ .m,d',;- : DIGESTS
.c M[p.y%f,;,.'QM;.p.m . .- c '. ; ,.;g ISSUANCES OF THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING 30ARDS Ag. v. ..n g'ty1.$,3,p* . /
v.y ,7,,. $;i., gy% t. f Ce. t.& 4.en.q' . y~.
^;s f g3 %. ye',g# j g.pg -f
+MXQh;.JP/M6
> 0 the estabhshed schedvie crossed a deley, and the Board will not grant rehef from the conse.
, 3 4 y%.hh.8,hPf N.Mkh.h y[ M P h 2T ,b,Q' #
[','s quences of a delay caused by counsel's own factual error. oe Where the People failed to respond to a discovery order and feeled to Ale an appropnate fv J.'.4Mh.he/vA-f
- K@. d4l 4., dl* b , Q._ t
*y
. . ' Af' C
monon seeking rehef from Ahng deles, the Board dismissed the Peop6e's coniennons aher con.
~ 7 %p e i.M Mv',y .,,4 udenne "the relative importante of the unmes obinganon,its poienual for harm to other pernes ,$(M[N$ JTSQW .,g.% ' %[.%W),h.y h.M.; fO ; < - ?
or the orderly conduct of the proceedens, whether its occurrence as an isolated incident or a port of a pattern of behavior, the importance of the safety or environmental concerns reened by the r).g6 h: *Mp/[$;b c.p, W,.4% * . a ;qfh.C pl Q.TN .'a.? ..'I party, and all of the circumwances." Commonwealth Edison Co. (Syron Nuclear Power Stenon,
, ykhd D; N*,, D (.';
M;r ,'Q 3 Umts I and 21, ALAS 478,15 NRC 1400.1416 20 (1982) quoung Statement of Pohey on Con-duct of L6cename Proceedings, CLl.818.13 NRC 412,454 (1991).
".? w$f .y .ti g fY,[-A, 4,
?;,p 1,*[M..f, at ,a.er, .- . r4 h . - L8P-85 49 CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY and NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN M.mwp.Wv k,N., s .
A. m'r4p 4, f. *ea ,m M .I% f ,,. C. a m,4.- MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY (Shenron Hams Nuclear Power Piano, Docket No. 50-400-OL (ASLSP No. 82-472 03 OL); OPERATING LICEN5E. December 18,1985. PAR. g#.WDC 54V'*Whyf'kgNM * ,,. [:A.dbs Mghi . $/ ' 4 'i TIAL INITIAL DECISION ON EMERGENCY PLANNING AND SAFETY CONTENTIONS
-y.p4t'T.S ' q(e,d
;.,g. A in this Parnal Imuel Decision, the Licenong Board decides several emergency plename
'$19#I. * ~/ h .U ,' 4.?! O;g ,
- and safety issues in the Apphcants' favor The Board also states no reasons for accepung and Md ;.h"T,k'i ! ". f'.
4
- j. , ip$]. .. -D,, r O! '
rejecung numerous contennons besei upon the emergency planni.*g esercise for the Shearon
*.7 4.-9 f ,
f.'
,g r 7.,p . r (' flarns fa ehty.
. f.y)j$ .7Ng ; y ,..s r~T g; .9f ,)/L., 't
,e 4
- Contenuons bened on an apphcant's emergency planning esercne should be conadered i
,'.", ' *.Q B
en light of the fact that they ense at the end of a lengthy pubhc evaluanon process and that the 9 ;4L#:;l. / A ;, ',* ' ' s y 'es,,'- ' esercise has been evaluated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Thus, only conten. c Q u. .f, , sYh ; ' ' ,f' tl ,. , , , * '. " ' v nons alleging fundamental flaws in planmng should be admmed, those allegmg minor or readily correctable problems should be rejected. t .. ; J Qt d < ,' / E k(Q*-l '. ((.' j , , . . C The following techmcal 6ssues are discussed. Effecuvenen of Sheltenne Fire Proiec. 7"y
'. ' Sh [ y .h7).h + ' < seU69,< , .
'3". . t4.s , d . . .,
- a' ! non, Pipe Hanger Weidmg. Steam Generator Tube Failure Analyss.
*,,.y
. A ,, -,,,,-4r*
6 . W** s ., <. f
.',& ., 3 jt,4
' .. y .'<,*3 ,,
,w. tS e.
,:.,7
,y *
, ,'ia *4. g y ,l w q e%. *
. f .I'.
~g*",/ ,4 ,
* ,4-
..'j*,. ...e
. % i's Q . .
s ae' :o %
-. a,. ,'[. .c...,.S d '. ,#..
. . . , ~p', *
* [.
'g 3 ,4 ..
m.4 s
."i.
, ,,, /.;;,
- a.s [ q% ..
- Ii , , e i* ,
. g. T. . ., - { i , s,.p ,i. , / .
d _,^*~ N ,4f of $*.
- 0 g ',
T**Y, d st y .
- a
, i p * } f'-= ,'* ;\
i,
- kE 5f .7 e 't Q. ,'.f,;
D 8 e .,g., -. [ p;
* - ,,, 4' .-
t
- 4
.A*
r s n .
.,g-
- , y<*' P.n. - +
- r. >" , l, (.
,d 8 g p e . .,.'I ,
% f ,a e, 8 4
{q $ e ef'l", c
, sY.
' . . 4 4 . ** 4 i
. 4 ' . ,
4 f
-4 m
9 4 4 , F
- p. i 6# l ,
o e i I
* . = +
**h e l 8 $ Q s
e I i
1 t i e i
. ~
l I 1 1 4 I . s t i a i J DIGESTS l ISSUANCES OF THE ADMINISTRATivt LAW JUDGES i-1 i ALJ 85-1 REICH GEO-PHYSICAL, INC., Docket No 30-1482) (A5LBP No. 85-50s 010T) { (Licenw Nos 2518304-01, EA 84 7tl CIVit PEN ALTY, December 11, 1985; INITIAL DECISION ! A in this insual Decision, the Administrative Law Judge sustains a civd penalty of $1600 00 j impcmed against the peuuoner by the Otrettor of Investiganon and Enforcement for possession, use, storage and transportauon of radioscuve matenal in ways not authonted by peuuoner's license B The Commission's General Sistemeni of Potwy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Ac-
)
Hans is, by its espress terms, imposed upon the Staff and the Commission's presiding officers l As a matter of fair nouce to hcensees. the Commission's presiding officers must apply the En. forcement Pohcy in civil penalty actions } C The conduct of hcensed acuvines by a techmcally unquahfied perwg is per se e Seventy l Level !!! violauon under the Commission's Enforcement Pohcy. { D Under the Commission's enforcement puhey, the authonty of an administrative law 1
' Judge is hmited to impnsing mitigaung or remittmg the civil penelly imposed by the Director, Ofrece oflospection and Enforcement E I The Commission's policy statemeni es silent as to the effect of aggresauon of violanons.
i I While many violations flowing from the same mistate may be aggregated mio a single violanon l I of the same seventy level, the violauoni en that case are sumunauve, demonstrating the absence of mistake and a pervaeve pottern of disregard for bcense requirements, and Justifying aggrega-l tion to a senous Seventy Level il
- F Cive penalue, will riormaily be esseswd for any wiuful veoistion of the Commission re-l querements re&ardless c(seventy level Even for Severity LevelIV violations, civil penslues may
( be imposed for violanons that are tamitar to preveous vetations for wtuch effecuve correcuon j was not taken
)
l G % hide adverw pubhcity resutung from an enforcement action may deter vioiauens of the , Commission's regulauons to some entent, it is not a reliable or necessenly effecute means of 3 assurms conunued compliance eith thnee regulauens, and 6n this case was enutled to no msiegat. ing weighs i A Lj-8 5-2 REICH Glo.PHt 51 CAL, INC., Docket No .10 l482) ( A5LBP No 85 5084107) i f (License hos 251810441 EA 44-188. CIVIL PENALTY December 20,1985, SUPPLEMENT TO INITI AL DECISION { A in this $wpp6emem to imust Decision, the Adminisstive Law Judge authorites peyment l of a civil penalty in mstallmems pursuant to stransemems teached between the Licensee and the 1 Director. Office of fnspecuan and Enforcement. ) I l \
. . . . -...-. -.~ - .
7 . , , , y.
/' '
9 s h l . l
) i I l l l l l
- t I
i l l DIGESTS } 1550ANCES OF DIRECTORS' DECISIONS i j DD 8410 COMMONWEALTH EDI5ON COMPANY AND ALL LIGHT % ATER RE ACTOR 5 i IZion Station, Uma D. Doches No $0 295. IMMEDI ATE ACTION REQUEST, July 2,1985. j DIRECTOR'S DECISION ONDFR 10 C F R l 2.206 i A The Director of N xlear Reactor Regulation demes a petition fi ed l by Zanovy E Rey 1blatt i seekmg an immediate postponement of all coritainment leak rate tesis performed for lishi eater reactors bawd on alleged errors in contamment leak ra.e measurement methodology Petitioner also alleged errors in computer software uwd to determme containment stak rates The Director j corwiuded that the current leak rate enethodology est adequate to determme contamment leak i rates Furthermore, the NRC Staff has reviteed data sets from tesis userig the allegedly irworrect j software and has found that the dais have been correctly processed in adj ten. NRC inspectors, i as a matter of course, mdependemiy venfy containment leak rate resuhs i B The equation uwd to takuiste conisenment air mass will produce *Nuste results if test-mg is dine under stahle conditions and sest data are properly evaluated Furiher, the likelihood l that weighting coefncients are manipulated to produce an acceptable test resull la small as NRC inspectors regularly obwrve the tesis conducted by inenwes and docum.rnt the results in inspec-tion Reports DD 84 ll PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY flimerick Generstmg Station. Umis I and ] 27 Docket Nos $0 392. 50 35). IMMEDI ATE ACTION RIOUEST, July 29,1983 DIREC- ] TOR'S DIC1510N UNDER 60 C F R 6 2.206 A The Director of the Ofnce of Nuclear Reactor Regulaimn denies the Petition of Robert L. Anthony and Friends of the Earth IPetitioners) seenmg the Directors' immediate instration of shoe sause proceedings to revote the opersims lectrese for the Limerick Generating Staimn Unit I of the Philadelphia Elecinc Company flicenwei The Petiimners argued that certain esemp-tions granted to the Licenwe were improperty grensed and that Licensee f vent Reports. Insoec-ison Reports and certain correspr.edence demonstrate that licenwd activities at the Limetak facility are heing conducted in an unsafe fashion and warrant twente revocation Finally, Petition-ers argue ihat the Independent Deegn Verification Program undertaken for the Limerick faciltty indicates that the deogn of the facility es inadequate In his decmon, the Director also considered the comments of Mr Frank Romano submitted on March 11, Ital, and the comments of Mr Marvin Leeis submitted on Fentuary 1S.1933, on issues related to the Limeruk facihiy B % here no specific factual bass is provided by the Petismners to support a claim that en-empisons were improvidently granted the Director of the Ofnce of Nuclear Reactor Regulaison need take no further action under 10 C F R l 2 206 enn respect to Petitioners
- alaims C NRC inspecten activnees may discover violations of NRC requirements both in the con-struction and operaison of facihties Such violaient are generatty of mmte ognifuance if truty maior deficiencies on the part of a licensee are identified, t%e agerary se authorited so issue orders, including slop oork orders, to assure appropriale remedial action D leolated deficiencies in a Ocensee's program of constructen or operaten do not necessaep j ly undermine the program to such an essent se to give rise to a signerwant safety concern what is required es a careful aswsoment of the mismficance of the deficiencett, and the corrective action taken to preclude recurrence E A request pursusM to i 2 206 for insiiivison of shee cause proceedings shalt sei forth the facts that connettute the bases fwt the requesi in the absence of the specific factual basis called for by the regulation, any inquiry must necessarily be limited F li is the NRC's rohey to pursue all specific sliegnienne enn Potent ai safety eigmfkance However, vague and unspecified 5f aims do not warrant further taquirt --
H I i
. . - . . ,,,.-~.n .. , - . . -
y, s o i 3
4
- + - _ . s --- n , -
b
~
, 5, ,.
tt M
,,+ . , . a+,
' - gyg7
- 3. .
'- ; eu-
. C r.
* - .X' .
. _.._.a.;._._._m.__ ._. .. _
, _m".a..~
) 1 DIGESTS
- '4 ISSUANCES OF DIRECTORS' DECISIONS "i. *
't O The remedy afforded by 6 2.206 should not be used as a means to reopen issues previous-ty adjudicated. In the abwnce of any seni6 cant new informauon. neither a party 10 a Commis-soon a4udicatory proceeding not a nonparty may raise issues previously a4udicated for considers-d ., 0 +- non under 6 2.206
+ . DD 4312 ARl/ON 4 PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY. et al. (Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Sia-tion. Umt li. Docket No. 50 52s; REQUEST FOR ACTION. August 9.1985. DIRECTOR'S
'['
, . : t .
,' ,,,,. DEC1560N UNDER 10 C.F R. ( 2.206 ,
; ~ v .
, ig A The Director of the Of5ce of Nuclear Rewior Regulaisen denies the pehuon of Mr.
q - .'M Myron L Scott of the Coahuon for Responsible Energy Educanon which requested delay in the j p. y .
. ,- issuance of the PVNOS Uma 1 license unni certain concerns were resolved. The Pennoner con.
. sended that the incennve regulanons adopted by the Antone Corporanon Commission and the fuel load bonus plan adopted by the Licensees had not been adequately reviewed for their poten-
,'s ,
' 5 hal safety impact and that emergency preparedness of Siale and local agencies for PVNOS was
,, i' . N- '
inadequaie due io underfunding.
< , DD 851) Tile DETRolf EDISON COMP ANY. et al. (Ennce Ferme Aiomic Power Plant. Umi
.N 21. Docket No. $0 341; REQUEST FOR ACTION. August 12.19g5; DIRECTOR 1 DECISION UNDER 10 C.F A ( 2.206
, A The Director of the Ofnce of Inspecuen and Enforcement demes the pennon of Mr. Stan-
~
ley Nietubist requesung lesal acuan to recufy an asserted lack of viable evacuauon rovies under nood condusons for certain areas around the Ferme 2 fmhty.
- DD g$.14 CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMIN ATI% COMPANY. et al. (Perry Nuclear Power Plant. Umis I and 28. Docket Not $0 440 $0-441 REQUEST FOR ACTION. September 12
- , 1983. DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 C F R. I 2 206 A The Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulanon denies a petinon under 10 C F R. ( 2.206 1 ,
- 6 Gled by the Oheo C6usens for Responsible Energy which requested that a number of acuens he
' - . taken in view of the alleged precanous Anancial condition of the Licensees of she Perry plant 4 8 Although the Commission has retained reviews of financial gustinesinone in some hcens-mg proceedin's t, insutuhon of enforcement proceedings is not required merely because a heenwe may he espenencing financial difDeutues Whether enforcement asuo-s should be taken turns on j ehether Gnancial conuraents have had an adverse impact on safety or are substantially hkely to i aIIect safety adverwly.
00-8$.1$
- ARl/0N A PUBLIC SERVICE COMP 4NY. et al. (Palo Verde Nuclear Genersung Sta.
! non. Umis i and 28. Docket Nos. $0 52g. $0 529. REQUEST FOR ACTION. September 16 1989. DlRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 C F R 6 2 206 A The Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulauen denies a peuhon flied by the
, Coahuan for Responuble Energy requeming suspenmon of the Uma 1 operating license and fur.
I ther licenang acuvines at Unit 2 unut the issue of microbiologically innuenced sorromon in the
! spray Pond piping system is resolved.
00-4516 OENER AL FLECTRIC COMP ANY (CE Morn
- 0peranon Spens Fuel Storage Faciuty).
, Doctet Nos 'O Ilog, 7215P; SPECIAL PROCEEDING. November 4.1991; DIRECTOR 1 i DECISION UNDER 10 C P R. t 2 206
-. A The Director of the Ofnce of Nestest Maienal Safety and Safeguards denies the Pennon submitted by Cathenne Thiel Quegg on behalf of the Ilhnois safe Energy Alhance The Petition requested that the Detector of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards prepare an environmental !
5
- sr=escs watement for the General Electne Morns Operanon and that the Comminion reconsider a decewan by the Usenens Board which authorised the Director to renew the license of the !
General Electrie Company to store spent ferradisiedt fuel at the facihey eithout requinas a
, Federal environmental 6mpact waiement 8 NEPA does not require that an environmental impact ossiement be prepared when an **
action does not direttly of indirectly bong about any change en the environmental status quo C Secten 2 206 prtwedures are not to be uwd as a vehicle for reconwderanon of issues pre. t
* * , viously decided D NEP A does not require lho Commission to reconwder environmental deosions whenever
- new enformanon developed subsequent to the acuan becomes avsetable Rather. it is unnecessary
- for en agency to reopen the NFPA record unless the new informanon would clearly mandate e
.. shange in result o
. 14 2
4 , . - I a 1
i l
. DIGESTS i ISSUANCES OF DIRECTORS' DECISIONS E The funcuon of an environmental impact appraisal is to supt.ly reasons why an acuon with poiennally significant environmental impacts does not require a detailed environmental impact statement Thus, to pass muster, the apprassai must empty reflect than a hard look was , taken at the prob 6cm, identify the relevant areas of concern, and make a convmcerig case that ! the impact is msegmfgant I
DD-8517 M AINE Y ANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY (Maine Yankee Atomic Power Sta- , soon) Dochei No $0 309. REQUEST FOR ACTION, November 12. 1985, DIRECTOR'S DECI- 1 SiON UNDER 10 C F R 4 2 206 A The Actms Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulanon denies the peuuan of i. the State of Mame sneertme that there were a number of alleged deficwnews at the Mame i
! Yankee Atomic Pooer $tauon of the Maine Yankee Aiomic Power Company associated with en. l veronmental quahrscanon of electrical equipment that represented a husrd to conunued safe op-l erstion of the facihty. i 8 The Licensee's program for environtnental quahficanon of electrical equipment comphes ;
with the requirements of 10 C F R ( 50 49 Proposed resolutions for each of the environmental deficenews identified ere acceptable Continued operauon of the facility until emplementauon of l the program ta comploe will not result in undue risk to the pubhc health and safety ,
! DD-8518 PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY (Limerich Genersung Stanon, Units I and 6 2), Docket Nos 50-332, 50 353. REQUEST FOR ACTION, November 12, 1995. DIR ECTOR'S DEC1510's UNDER 10 C F R 4 2.206 l ; A The Acung Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulanon denies a pennon under 10 C F R ,
( 2 206 which requested that the NRC stay the acuveties of the Delaware River Bamn Commes. soon unut the Licensee compbed enh certain environmental hcense condinons B The NRC has no autherny over the Delseste River Bean Commiseson (DROC) and, ' l consequendy, may not stay any of its acuvenes or cause any applicanons before the DRDC to be enhdrawn
; C Licensees are espected to adhere to all NRC requirements and license conditions How.
ever, NRC acuan is inapprornate en the obsence of any present violanon of a regulanon or lacense condit.on I DD 85 20 CENER AL PUBLIC UTILITIES NUCLEAR CORPOR ATION (Three Mile Island Nuclear $tanon. Unit 17. Docket No $0 289, SOUTHERN CALIFORNI A EDISON COMPANY (San Onofre Nuclear Generaung Stanon. Unit 18, Docket No $0 206. WISCON$lN PUBLIC
$ERvlCF CORPOR ATION IKeesunee Nuclear Power Plant), Docket No $0 30$; CONNECTI.
CUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY (Haddam Nech Ptem). Dochet No. 50 21), RE. ) QUEST FOR ACTION, December 23, 1985 DIRECTOR'S DECislON UNDER 10 C F R. i 2 206 l,
! A The Director of the Omce of Nuclear Reactor Regulanon dechnes to take action based I upon sileged equipment quahricanon deficiencies at specific riants 6denufied en the "Uman of Concerned ScionesW tomments on Proposed Rule" submmed on May 23, 1984 The Director l' concluded that the overall state of equipment qualificauon of the facihties is adequate to accure i protetuon of the public health and safety i I
i l i. s 1 [ D e
.es - 4
( l M i i n y yp- - : -p ~,- e y' . - - - '.
";% < * , , / w, ! ,
V
'_ ;.,p, . W4 s ,o 's. ,
- i e ,
} .# , J.
.; q 9 ; (
- r .
..r t
( s i[ $ ' ~ ' ., s
I DIG ESTS ISSU ANCE OF DENI AL OF PETITION FOR RL'LEM AKING DPRM 85 3 JOHN L. N ANTZ, Docket No Pit M.5045. RULEM AKINO DENIAL. July 26, 1985, DENI AL OF PETITION FOR RULEM AKING A The Nuclear Regulsiory Commismon demes a petition for rulemakins submittsd by John L. Nant The Petitioner requested that the commismon adopt resuissions to establish a formal I procedure for Commismon review of decimons to clow advisory committee meetings or portions j of those meetings The petition is beins demed on the grounds ihai eurrent procedures are ade- ' quate to sisure thal advisory committees' uw of esempteons from the requiremeni for egen meetings are adequately justined and because Commismon review would be an inefhcient and un-warranged uw of the Commession's resources B The Commisuon concludes that current procedures for rulinst on closure deierminanons . a for advisory committee meetings are adequate C in the abwnce of any staquiory prohibition, the Commission concludes that its delessiion of authorny to rule on closure determinations for advisory committee meetings se a proper eser-cine ofits authority pursuant to j 161n of the Atomie Energy Act of 1954 as amended D Establishment of a formal procedure for Commission review of advierity commit'ee clo-sures would deverge from a strong policy of the Commismon to entricate siwif from nonessential procedural matters to conwrve als resources for paramount responsbiln.es F 6 37
" % t* aspee - g o
4
i i e I l l 4
=
i . i LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX CA5LS I Abernainy v Supenor Hardwoods, Inc., 704 F.2d 963, 968 (7th Car 19.8 %) need to mctude evidence of htile intnnsic worth in a record, AL AB $24,22 NRC 782 n il (1983) Advisory Committee's Espiansiory Sistement Concerning Amendments of the Discovery Sales,48 F R D 48 7, 50) (1970) i delTiculty in determining esperts to whom Fed R Ce, P. 26(bH4HB) applies L8P 85 38,22 j NRC 61) (1985) l Aser v. Jane C. Stormont Hospital and Training School. 622 F 2d 496, Sol (10th Car 1980) 1 determenmg whether a subpoensed party is an espert specially retained m anticipation of j hogation, L8P-85 38,22 NRC el) (1985) , Alabama Power Co (Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant. Uniis I and 2), ALAB.182,7 ALC 210,217 a (1974i standards arrhed by Boards conedenns summary disposmon motions. LBP 85 27A,22 NRC 208 094!1, L8P 85 29,22 NRC 310 (1985) Amencen Form Lmes v Black Bait Freight service,197 U S $32,540 (1970) authority to te casider deciseon after the fihng of a petition for Judecial review, CL18$.14,22 NRC 179 n.) (1983) Antons Puhtw Servue Co (Palo Verde Nuclear Gen raties Staison, Units I,2 and 3), ALAB 78),17 NRC 83, 83 (1981) 4 scope of appeltase sua sponte review ALA8-822,22 N Af 771 n 1 (1985) ' l Ansona Pubhc Service Co (Paki Verde Nuclear Generaims haaan. L' nets 2 and 3), AL AS 742,18 i NRC 38d,384 0983) I effect t n a proceeding of admission of a engle additional comention for purpose of Justifying , amerheutory review, ALAB 817,22 NRC 47$ n 18 0981) 845 Dnlims Co e Hatht*u' ton Oil Well Cemennes Co ,24 F R D 1,411919) need to divulge sc,vese of answer to interrogatory, LBP 8s-38. 22 NRC 622 0985) Baka w B F Diamond Construction Co ,71 F R D 179, f 82 (D MJ 1976) showing necessary to consin discovery of espens retained m anticipaleon of heigation but not espected to sedy; L8P 85 J8. 22 NRC 617 n 16 (1985) Baltimore Gas and fie::*ie Co Natural Resnutces Defense Counut, far. 462 U S 87,99 e 12 (198)) apphcabihty of Council on invironmental Quality regulanons in NRf.iroceed nas, ALA8 819, 22 NRC 700 n 210983) aoston Edison Co (Pilgnm Nucitar Genersung Stahon, Unis II, AL AB l 'l. 7 AEC 417 (1974l summary disposetion m heense amendment heannpe L8P 85 29,22 flRC JIO 0981) Boston Edison Co. (Pilgnm Nuclear Generanns Station Unn 2), AL AB 4)2,13 NRC 91,9) n.2 0 981s appestabihty of decHeon whgh rives not authortre soeuance of a nee) si or resolve all pending saNty escues- L8P 45 28,22 NRC 298 n 21 r1985) Boston [d.sec 04 (Pilgnm Nuclear Generanns Stanon. Unie 2), LBP 71-42,2 NRC 1$9,1610973)
, arpNebihty cf Fed R Osv P 260pl(4) so NRf, prw eed e nas. L8F.8$ IS,22 NRC 609 (198$1 Boston Idison Co (Pilgnen Nuclear Generating Sia son, Unil 2). AL A8412,13 NRC 91. 9) n 2 098ll appealatnhty e f decimen ohich does not sulkorise issuante of a license or resolve allPending
, safety serws; LBP 85 28,22 NRC 298 n 310983) 8PI v AIC 50J F 2J 424 (D C. Car 1974) l
'hreshold esciumon of consennons LBP 85 49,22 NRC 910 n i U989) l 39
/
l . s l
tu ,1,. ' ,
- n. . .
[ "~ ~Q - ( 4., ippg,j g q[izjd M Q, ., ._ ( ,.
- M .
',> +. .. - .c f y [ q n f ij y n
,. - , e .
[ ,p y<,
. ;, , . ~. u - m e v- .
.c .
= %
- 7 g
- 4 ~. ;
'.~
..e -
. _ m
. c . _. . , , _ _
.I .
- ,- s < LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX i .
s . - - Casts
. . s
/ 4
* .<; i
~ Brown v. Kerr McGee Chemical Corp.,167 F.2d 1234,1241 n.4 (7th Cir.1985)
, , -* ' regulatory structurc for nuclear powered electne seneranon; ALA8-Sil,22 NRC 663 n.35 (1985) i N , <
Carohna Power and Light Co. (Shearon Harns Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2), LSP 82119A 16
,j , .Gq -
.- ' NRC 2069,2090 (1982)
* * ~
readms of 10 C.F R. ( $0.13 in pan materia with Part 73, LBP 43 27,22 NRC 137 (198$)
' Carohna Power and Lish Co. (Shearon Harns Nuclear Power Plant Unies I and 21, LSP 83 27A,17
~ rc -
,' l ', .,' ' NRC 971,976-80 (1983) 7m .
'" appHcatnhty of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(bH4) to NRC proceedmss; LSP 83 30,22 NRC 609,610
[**h"' ;b ' ( ' , i j ( '
)' (1985)
'Q ' JM -y ,.
' y'
.?
Carohna Power and Lish: Co. (Shearon Harns Nuclear Power Plant, Units I,2,3 and 4), CLI 74-9 "n_ . < 7 AEC 196 (1974)
'6 Licenans Board authonty to canader challenses to Commismon authoney to srant enemphons l'
' " ,f '- , ,
from regulauons: L8P 83 33,22 NRC 444 (1985)
,8.
4 Carchna Power and Light Co. (Shearon Horns Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I,2,3, and 4), CLI 74 9
' ,- 7 AEC 197,198 (1974)
Commismen authonty to direct Licenens Board to consider ments of 50.12 request; LBP 85 33, 22 NRC 444 (198$) Carohna Power and Lishi Co. (Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Umta I,2,3, and 4),CLI-4012,
- Il NRC $le, $1617 (1980) authonty of adNdicatory boards over NRC Staff; ALAB 812,22 NRC $60 (1985)
, . - ' Carolina Power and Lish Co. (Shearon Harns Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I,2,3, and 4),
ALAB $77, il NRC 18,25 (1980) scope of hcensins board authonly; ALA8 823,22 NRC 790 n 12 (1985) Carohna Power and Lisht Co. (Shearon Harns Nuclear Power Plant Umts 1,2,3, and 4), L8P 78 2,
' 7 NRC 83,85 (1978)
,J. _.
- circumstances under which standards for reopening a record need not be apphed with full force; L8P 85 42,22 NRC 803 (1985) ,
Carchna Power and Lisht Co. (Shearon Harns Nuclear Power Plant Umta I,2,3, and 4), L8P 7919, 10 NRC 37 (1979)
,. standard for determmins management competence; L8P 85 28,22 NRC 236 (1985)
< #r U.S. 86 L. Ed. 2d 694 Carstens v. NRC,742 P 2J 1$46,15$7 (D C. Cir 1984), cert. Jenied.
f, %, (1985) h ,' , . . . , standard for measurms an operating hcenae apphcanon; ALAB 819,22 NRC 741 (1983)
..., ' 'c% , _
Cmcinnau Gas and Electne Co. (Wilham H. Zimmer Nuclear Power Stanon) CLI 82 33,16 NRC
% 1489 (1982)
, [ d compenson of standards applied in Staff review of quality assurance deficiencies at other facihues; ALAB 882,22 NRC 2$ (1985) Cincmnati Gas and Electne Co. (Wilham H. Zimmer Nuclear Power sistion), LSP-80 le,11 NRC
$70, $76 (1980) weight seven to miervenor's etni,ty to conenbuis to sound record in deciding late meervention request; L8P 8$.36,22 NRC $94 (1985)
' Cinemnau Gas and Electnc Co. (Wilham H. Zimmer Nuctear Power Stauon, Unit 1), ALAB.727,17 NRC 760,170 71 (1983) 4 use of adversarial evaluauon to determine emciency with which an evacuahon can be accomphshed. ALAB-818,22 NRC 677 n 603 (198$) ,
'~ Cincinnau Gas and Electne Co (Witham H. Zimmer Nuclear Power Stanon, Umt 1), ALAB 727,17 5 '
NRC 760. 77$ n.20 (l983) FEM A findings sumcient for authoris.uon of full-power neerauns license; ALA8 813, !! NRC 78 n 91 (1985) Centens for Safe Power, Inc. v. NRC, $24 F.2d 1298,1294 a $ (D C. Cir.1975) amendment of Fme) Environmental Statement through the adjudicatory process; ALAB 819,22 e NRC 706 (1985) Citetens for Safe Power, Inc. v. N RC, $24 F 2d 1291,12991300 (D C. Cir.197$) , heisstwhty of severe accident mitisanon measures in NRC proceedings; ALAB 819,22 NRC 696 n 10 (1981) i es 9
#
- 9i ** .'$
- t ,p.p wpi y,
-g ,
s
# P
-w- . _ _ - - . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX
- CASES City of Rochester v. Umted States Postal Service,541 F.2d %7 (2d Or.1976) need to consider socioeconomic impacts oflow probabihty event in environmental impact statement; ALAB 819,22 NRC 704 n.29 (19851 Cleveland Electre Illummstmg Co. (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2), DD 84 23,20 NRC 1549, 1553 (1984) hazard to pubhc health and safety of slowdown or hais in construcuon of a nuclear plant; DD 85-14,22 NRC 641-42 (1985)
Cleveland Eutnc tilummaung Co. (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2), ALAB-443,6 NRC 741, 752 (1977) Boa-d authonty to request oral tesumony where record as insufficiem to allow summary dispomuon; LBP-85 29,22 NRC 307 (1985) , Cleveland Electnc illummatms Co. (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2), ALAB-443,6 NRC 741, 753-54 (1977) burden on movant for summary dnposinon; LBP-85-27A,22 NRC 208 (1985) Cleveland Electric filummaung Co. (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Umts 1 and 2), ALAB-443,6 NRC 741, 753-54 (1977) consequence of summary dispomuon opponent's failure to submit evidence; LBP 85 29,22 NRC 310 (1985) Cleveland Elecine Illummatms Co. (Perry Nuclear Power Plant Umts I and 2), ALAB-675,15 NRC , . 1105, 1112-13 (1983) efTect on a proceedmg of admission of a mngle addmonal contenuon; ALAB-817,22 NRC 474 n.17,478 n.12 (1985) s Cleveland Electnc illummaung Co. (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2) ALAB 706,16 NRC , _ 3, 1754 (1982) ' interlocutory review of decimons admitung one or more addmonal comenuons; AL AB-817,22 NRC 474 n.15 (1985) . Cleveland Electne Illummsung Co. f Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2), ALAB-736,18 NRC , 165, 166 (1983) appealabihty of order dismissing some but not all of mtervenor's contenuons; LBP-85-29,22 - SRC 331 (1985) Cleveland Electre lilummaung Co. (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2), LBP 8124,14 NRC e i< 175, 179 (1981) I residency requirements for standing to mtervene in operaung trense proceedmas; LBP-85 24,22 e NRC 99 n.7 (1985) Cleveland Electre Illummsung Co (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unns 1 and 2), LBP-81-42,14 NRC 842, 844 45 (1981) lansabihty of" enemy attack contenuons under 10 C.F.R. 5013; LBP 85-27,22 NRC 135,137, 140 (1985) Cleveland Electre Illummatmg Co. (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2), LBP-82 89,16 NRC 1355, 1356 (1982) obhsanons of tardy mtervennon peuuoners; ALAB 816,22 NRC 467 n.22 (1985) , Colurabea Bann Land Protecuon Ass'n v. Kleppe,417 F Supp 46,52 (E.D. Wash.1976), aTd in , part, rev'd in part on other grounds, sub nom, Columbia Baen Land Protecuon Ass'n v. Schlesmger,643 F.2d 585 (9th Cir.1981) need for environmental snelyms of future overall transmismon gnd system when conaderms a . proposed part of the transmission system; LBP-85-43,22 NRC Sil (1985) e Commonwealth Edison Co. (Byron Nuclear Power Station, Units I and 2), ALAB-678,15 NRC 1400, , I416 n.33 (1982) 4
. pressure of other profenmonal responsbihues as bass for failure to comply with NRC deadhne for _ f fihng ob,ecuens; LBP-85-46,22 NRC 832 n.8 (1985) ;.
Commonwedth E6 son Co. (Byron Nuclear Power Station, Units I and 2), ALAB-678,15 NRC 1400, I416-20 (1982)
. Licensms Board responsbahty to explam sancuon; LBP-85-48,22 NRC $49 (1985) ;-- ,
1
~
l l l 4l ' i i
- E l
' & T
~. , ,, ,
. M .v
;Q , jf.:
. . . . . . r , s
"{' r,;' 'w$p;;2:;W,Q*f. ' b,' . ,
' " J.
ll y . .
- ; (-
- .x ,
%wwA..gy;v tQ5&. 85 .
3;
+
r.
,' u.b,% W ~%. ?r .: ~ i q . ~
y . , . ,
- /,; *
*, , '\- , 3 4.- , ': i i r '. .,
- 1 ,
s*(t,
&n' . 'W. ,
N 2 k k .."..* _ :L .l.-.. . -.-L.-.-
.e N.
,c .,
. : 4.
i,1 7 . - m. LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX J ,t ' CASES Ur
,e 1 Commonwealth Edien Co. (Byron Nuclear Power Stanon Umts I and 2). ALAB-770,19 NRC 1163
' V, (1984) effect of fatal flaw in implementauon of emergency plans on operaung hcense issuance; r '.-'
- 4 LBP 85 31,22 NRC 431 (1985) s , . Commonwealth Edison Co. (Byron Nuclear Power Stauon, Umas I and 2). ALAB 793,20 NRC 1591 (1984) delay of proceedm8 by addinon of one quahey assurance contenuon; ALAB-417,22 NRC 478 6UN .* ' e~ n.Il(1985) . _77 ' Commonwealth Edison Co. (Byron Nuclear Power Stauon, Umts I and 21. ALAB 793. 20 NRC 1591, Of .
- 1598 (1984) deleganon o(quahiy assurance responmbihtees. ALAB-812,22 NRC 22 (1985)
- p
. v ,' . * , .- Commonwealth Edison Co. (Byron Nuclear Power Stanon, Umts I and 21, LSP-80 30,12 NRC 683, 7,5 .f's4 692 93 (1980) hugatmhey of contenuon challengmg 10 C.F.R. 5013. LBP-85 27,22 NRC 131 n.2 (1985) s -
) Commonwealta Edison Co. (Byron Nuclear Power Stauon, Umis I and 21. LBP 84 2,19 NRC 36
- 209 1341984) m , poss-heanns resoluuon of emergency plannms issues by NRC Staff; LBP 85-27A. 22 NRC 222
* ~ ; (1985)
Commonwealih Edsen Co. (Byron Nuclear Power Seauon, Umts I and 2) LBP-84 2,19 NRC 36,
! 262 4 ) (19541
! need for accuracy in evacuauon ome esumales. LBP-85 27A. 22 NRC 215 (1985)
Commonwealth Edien Co. (Byron Nuclear Power Seanon. Umts I and 21. LBP 84-41,20 NRC 1203,
.m 1 1 j 1216. affd. AL AB 793. 20 NRC 1591 (1984)
NRC Staff tesumony in another proceedeng as bases for contention; ALAB-817,22 NRC 472 n3 e '
>~ (1985)
Commonwealth Edison Co. (LaSalle County Stanon. Unns I and 21. DD-844,19 NRC 891 (1984)
- hieganon of concerns about containment leak rate testing methodology; DD 8510,22 NRC 145 n.1(1985)
,- Commonwealth Edison Co (hon Sianon. Umt 11,00-85 2,21 NRC 270 (1985) litiganon of concerns about contamment leak rate testing methodology; D0-8510,22 NRC 145
~
,~ . n1(1985) s Commonwealth Edison Co. (hon Stausn, Umts I and 21. ALAB416,12 NRC 419,421 (1980) standard of proof for measunns evidence; ALAB 819,22 NRC 720 (1985)
Commonwealih Edison Co. (bon 5 anon Umts I and 2). ALAB416,12 NRC 419,426 (1980) scope of Licensms Board lunsdiction conferred by nonce of opportunity for heanng; ALAB-825, 22 NRC 791 n 21 & 22 (1985) Consohdated Edison Co of New York (Indian Pomt Stanon Uma 21. ALAB-202,7 AEC 825,829 30 (1974) i need for prosecuon of nuclear power plant asamst band of armed saboteurs; LBP 85 27,22 NRC 136 (1985) Consnhdated Edison Co. of New York (Indian Pomt Stauon. Uma 2). CLl 74-23. 7 AEC 947. 954 (1974) termmanon of proceedmgs pnor to compleuon of safety analyses'. LBP-85 32,22 NRC 436 n 2 (1985)
~_ ,
Consohdated Edison Co. of New York (Indian Pomt. Uma 2), CLI-83-16,17 NRC 1006,1010 (1983) j right of States to uw emergency planning responsebeleues to prohibit reactor operauon on
, . . nonradiological health and safety grounds. ALAB-818,22 NRC 671 n.72. 672 n 74 (1985)
Consohdated Edison Co. of New York (Indian Pomt. Uma 2). CLI-854,21 NRC 8043,1057 (1985) --
- -
- use of probabihsuc nsk assessments by NRC; ALAB-819,22 NRC 697 n.83 (1985)
- Consohdated Edison Co of New York (Indian Point Uma 21 CLI 854,21 NRC 1043,1073 (1985)
,. hangabehty of severe accident metiganon measures m NRC proceedmgs; ALAB-Sl9. 22 NRC 606
; n.lt(1985) .
i Consohdated Edien Co of New York (Indian Pomt. Umts 1,2, and 3), CLl 75 8,2 NRC 173.176 (19756 circumstances apprnpnaie for issuance of show cause order. DD-85 II. 22 NRC 152 n.2 (1985) 4 42 i
.-.-,_,.._.,y_...,, .
- ( -- -
y 4
. P
. LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX CASES Consohdated Edison Co. of New York (Indian Point, Umts I,2, and 3), CLI-75 8,2 NRC 373,177 (1975) use of 2.206 procedures as a vehicle for reconsiderauon; DD-8516,22 NRC 855 (1985)
Consumers Power Co. (Big Rock Pom Plant), ALAB-636,13 NRC 312 (1981) acuens for which an environmental impact statement must be prepared, DD-8516,22 NRC 855 (1985) Consumers Power Co (Big Rock Pomt Plant), AL AB-636,13 NRC 312,332 (1981) need for Staff assessmeni of alternauves to spent fuel transshipments; LBP 85-34,22 NRC 491 (1985) Consumers Power Co. (Big Rock Pomt Plant), ALAB-725,17 NRC 562,564 n.2,567-68 (1983) explananon of K-effective concept; AL AB-816,22 NRC 463 n.2,468 n.29 (1985) Consumers Power Co (Big Rock Pome Plani), ALAB-795,21 NRC 1,2 (1985) i stare decisis effect accorded to Licensing Board conclusions on purely legal matters by Appeal ~ Board affirmance on sua spome reuew; ALAB-826,22 NRC 894 n 6 (1985) ! Consumers Power Co (Big Rock Pomt Plani) LBP-84 32,20 NRC 601,639 52 (1984) , litigabihty of nsk to nuclear power plants of mihtary airplane crashes; LBP 85-27,22 NRC 140 (1985) , Consumers Power Co (Midland Plant, Umts I and 2), ALAB 33,4 AEC 701 (1971)
.,*.:' r;. '
^
applicabihty of esecutne pnvilege to NRC g medings; LBP-85-38,22 NRC 626 (1985) " Consumers Power Co (Midland Plam, Umts I and 2), AL AB-106,6 AEC 182,184 (1973) " importance of managenal aiutude to an apphes si s quahiy assurance program; ALAB-812,22
- n'
,;,rs.
NRC 15 n.5 (1985) ' Consumers Power Co. (Midland Plam, Umts I and 2), ALAb 235,8 AEC 645,647 (1974) < i Licensms Board authonly to change the scope of its Junsdicuon; ALAB-825,22 NRC 790 n.15 .g ..
, (1985) i .rp . :_),]ry l
Consumers Power Co. (Midland Plant, Umts I and 27, AL AB 270,1 NRC 473,476 (1975) * ..\ 4-need for record support m appellate bnefs. ALAB-525,22 NRC 793 n.29 (1985) ' Consumers Power Co. (Midland Plant Umts I and 2) ALAB-315,3 NRC 101,103 (1976) ' j ' ,, ,, 4 burden of provmg enutlement to an operaurg hcense; AL AB-812,22 NRC 56 (19E5) - Consumers Power Co. (Midland Plam, Umts I and 2), ALAB-379. 5 NRC 565,568 n.13 (1977) ~
, ;W. e apphcabihty of Fed. R. Civ P. 26(bH4) to NRC Foceedings; LBP 85 38,22 NRC 610 (1985) 8" , "~U~
Consumers Power Co. (Midland Plant, Umts I and 2), LBP 83-50,18 NRC 242,248 (1983) . . . ~ ". apriscabihty of 10 C.F.R. 2.714(aHIHm) to notion to reopen record to admit new contenuon; ' LBP-85-42,22 NRC 799 (1985) Cuomo v. NRC,772 F.2d 972,974,976 (D.C. Cir.1985) importance of estabbshmg irreparable injury in justifymg stay request ALAB-820,22 NRC 746 n 8,747 n.13 (1985) Detroit Edison Co. (Ennco Fermi Atomic Power Plant. Umt 2), ALAB 730,17 NRC 1057,1066-67 ! (1983) . FEM A findings sufficiem for authonzauon of full-power operstmg hcense; ALAB-813,22 NRC 78 n 91 (1985) l Detron Edison Co. (Ennco Ferme Atome Power Plant Omt 27 ALAB 730,17 NRC 1057,1069 n.12 , (1983) - use of adversanal evaluauon to determme efficiency with which an evacuauon can be i .L~ - - accomphshed. ALAB-818,22 NRC 677 n.103 (1985) " Detroit Edison Co. (Ennco Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2), LBP-78 37,8 NRC 575,581 (1978) applicabihty of Fed R. Civ. P. 26(bH4) to NRC proceedmss; LBP 85-38,22 NRC 609 (1985) .t-Detroit Edison Co. (Greenwood Energy Center, Umts 2 and 3), ALAB 247,8 AEC 936,939 (1974) -
^4 test for segmemanon of a project for NEPA purposes; LBP-85 43,22 NRC 311 (1985) '
. Douglas v. Seacoast Products,Inc.,438 U.S. 265 (1977)
.T
- 5 '
Federal preemption of State laws because they comcidentally prevent reactor operation; i
~
ALAB-818,22 NRC 667 n.56 (1985)
- Duke Power Co. (Amendment to Matenals License SNM 1773 - Transportanon of Spem Fuel from g
. Oconee Nuclear Station for Swrage at McGuire Nuclear Stanon), ALAB-651,14 NRC 307 (1981) need for Staff analysis of dry cask storage alternauwe to spent fuel transshipment; LBP-85 34,22 I NRC 490 (1985) "
i ,
\-
[
-~.
( 4 e n a
, .. ,m ;pi, .. , ~
p c -
-./, f, ':.;;Ighh,W';h,4.fy.h, p. , . Wh
',y>,
y .
^
.(
.: ::,c, e w;~&. . ;,qn., ,<g
~ , ., . ._
- n. .y -..w
,, , ' ym, '
s n._
.~.. n-rs ,_ -r
,.g . '
, . - M.:.. m_...... 2. _ , __ _ _,
LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX
, ~
M ,
- CASES
,2 3 ' Duke Power Co. (Arnendment to SNM 1773 - Transportanon of Spent Fuel from Oconee Nuclear
%* Stauon for Storage at McGuire Nuclear Stauon). ALAB-651,14 NRC 307,313 (1981) test for segmentation of a project for NEPA purposes; L8P-85-43,22 NRC 810 (1985) - ;. Duke Power Co. (Amendment to Matenals License SNM 1773 - Transportauon of Spent Puel from
', ~
Oconee Nuclear Stanon for Storage at McGuire Nuclear Station). ALAS 451,14 NRC 307,3!?
,' (1981) function of an environmental impact appraisel; DD-8516,22 NRC 854-57 (1985)
' ' Duke Power Co. (Catawba Nuclear Stauon, Umts I and 2), ALAB-355,4 NRC 397,413 (1976) dispossuon ofimproperly briefed issues on appeal; ALAB-813,22 NRC 66 n.16 (1985)
L-
' Duke Power Co (Catawba Nuclear Station, Umts I and 2), ALAS 487,16 NRC 460,46547 (1982),
affd in perunent part, CLI-83-19,17 NRC 1041 (1983) exercise ofinterlocutory review where test is not stnctly sausned; ALA8-417,22 NRC 474 n.12 (1985) Duke Power Co. (Catawba Nuclear Stauon, Units I and 2), ALAB487,16 NRC 460,467 (1982) condinonal admission of contenuons; ALA8-819,22 NRC 725 (1985) Duke Power Co. (Catawba Nuclear Stauon, Umts I and 2), ALA8487,16 NRC 460,467 n.12 (1982) limits on discovery; LBP 85-42,22 NRC 803 (1985) Duke Power Co. (Catawba Nuclear Stauon, Units I and 2), ALA8487,16 NRC 460,468 (1982), afrd in perunent part, CLI-8319,17 NRC 104l (1983) specificity requirement for admisnon of contenuons; ALAS-Sl7,22 NRC 477 nn.6 A 10 (1985) Duke Power Co. (Catawba Nuclear Stanon Umts I and 27, ALAB-794,20 NRC 1630,1633,1635 ' ' * - (1984)
- most imponant entenon applied in determming need for a stay; ALAB-820,22 NRC 746 nn.7 &
" 8,749 n,22 (1985)
Duke Power Co. (Catawba Nuclear Station, Units i and 2), ALAS-794,20 NRC 1630,1633-35 (1984) 4
, .. ; 9
- specificity required of stay monons; ALAB 814,22 NRC 1% (1985)
' Duke Power Co. (Catawba Nuclear Station, Um s I and 2), ALAB-813,22 NRC 59,85 (1985) litigability of the adequacy of the ANSI Standard for determmms performance inden for O
? dommeters; LBP-85-28,22 NRC 260 n.17 (1985)
Duke Power Co. (Catawba Nuclear Station, Umts 1 and 2), ALAB 825,22 NRC 785,790 (1985) Licensms Board authonty to decide novellegal quesuons; LBP-85 49,22 NRC 910 n.1 (1985)
-* Duke Power Co. (Catawbe NutWr Steuan, Umts I and 21. CLI-8319,17 NRC 1041 (1983)
', rules applicable to late-filed emergency planning contenuons; LBP-85-49,22 NRC 909 (1985)
Duke Power Co. (Catawba Nuclear Stauon, Umts I and 21, CLI-8319,17 NRC 1041,1945 (1983)
- >' factors belanced for admismon oflate filed contentions; ALAB-819,22 NRC 725 (1985)
Duke Power Co. (Perkins Nuclear Stauon, Umts I,2 and 31 ALAB415,12 NRC 350,352 (1980) five factors to be addressed by pennoner films amended petinon to intervene; L8P-85-36,22 j ' , NRC 592 (1985) Duke o ower Co. (Perkms Nuclear Station Umts I,2 and 3), ALA8415,12 NRC 350,352 53 (1980) l burden of persuasion on lateness factors applied to unumely intervenuon petition; ALA8-816,22 i -, ' NRC 466 n.21 (1985) l' Duke Power Co. (William 8. McGuire Nuclear Stauon, Umts I and 2), ALA8-128,6 AEC 399,410 (1973) mdependence required of quahty assurance manager; ALAB-813,22 NRC 67 (1985) Duke Power Co. (William B. McGare Nuclear Stauon, Umts I and 2), ALAB-669,15 NRC 453,475 (1982) form of an expert witness's testimony; ALAB-819,22 NRC 720 (1985) standard for determimns a witness's qualifications as an expert; ALAS-Sl9,22 NRC 732 n.67 .- (1985)
^
Duke Power Co. (Wilham B. McGare Nuclear Stanon Umts I and 2), ALAB469,15 NRC 453,477 f1982) admissibility of hearsay evidence in admmistrauve proceedess; ALAB-819,22 NRC 718 (1985)
- Duke Power Co. v. NRC,770 P.2d 386,388 (4th Cir.1985)
' reason for NRC adopuon of post TMI emergency plannmg reemrements; ALA8-818,22 NRC
' 675 (1985)
T 4k i s d
, .1
. +- - r .m ,. . . , .
*O
.M' M
I b
h ., ,
. LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX : 4.j i CASES i n ' iv. ? -
t Ecology Action v. AEC,492 F.2d 998,100142 (2d Cer.1974) - amendment of Fmal Environmemal Sutement through the adjudicatory process; ALAB-819,22 - NRC 706 (1985) e Evans v Local Umon 2127, Int'l Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO,313 F, Supp.1354, , f , 4~ 1360 (1 % 9) t . . need to divulge source of answer to interrogatory; LBP-85-38,22 NRC 622-23 (1985) *? Flonda Lime and Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul,373 U.S.132,146 (1%3) importance of kgislauve mient m makmg statutory mterpretanons; ALAB-818,22 NRC 668 n.63 f' 3
'- %^
~>%,
(1985) L' . - Florida Power and Light Co. (St Lucie Nuclear Power Plant Unit 27. ALAB-553,10 NRC 12,14 n.7 - [q D,[ (1979) af J]J'NJy*- rate of NRC Staff m hcensms proceedmss; ALAB-812,22 NRC 56 (1985) -
' [ M.3 ,
Flonda Power and Light Co. (Turket Pomt Nuclear Generaims Sianon Umts 3 and 41,4 AEC 9. Il (1967), affd. Siegel v. AEC,400 F.2d 778 (D C Cir.1%8) { ,f W
-u need for special design features to protect nuclear facihty agamst attacks from enemies of the -
". J l
- Umted States, LBP-85 27,22 NRC 133 (1985) , i % a ,,f
~
Flonda Power and Light Co. (Turkey Pomi Nuclear Generatmg Stanon, Umts 3 and 4),4 AEC 9,13 (1%7), affd, Seesel v. AEC. 400 F.2d 778 783-84 (D C. Cir.1%8)
;A .
5
, J.[f ,1 . -
J, basis for Commession excluseon of hosule acts from hinganon, LBP 85-27,22 NRC 133-35 (1985)
*'{', W Flonda Power and Light Co. (Turkey Pomi Nuclear Generaims Station, Umts 3 and 4), LBP 79 21, 10 NRC 183,190 (1979) 6'?$ , ;- fg; .3 ( - I -
.,d; ,_., ' y ~ , J. -
weight given to good cause factor where late intervenuon peutioner is pro se hugant; LBP-85-36, _ '. 3 , p Q 7,. -( , f 22 NRC 594 n.3 t1985) . 3.~ rWe m General Electnc Co. (Vallecitos Nuclear Center, General Electnc Test Reactor), LBP 78 31,8 NRC ' 468 (1978)
- d Mo,h,. 7 -f.V
- Y%V-M '
4 < apphcabihty of Fed. R. Cav, P. 26(bH4) to NRC proceedmss; LBP-85 38,22 NRC 609 (1985) [*'.b ' l*T 79*2 '- V - W
~M' )M A ?Nk General Pubhc Ut hues Nuclear Corp. (Three Mile l= land Nuclear Stanon, Umts I and 27 CLI-85-4, -
21 NRC 561,563 (1985) M[ 'M..'-/ I use of 2.206 procedures as a vehicle for reconsideration; DD-85-II,22 NRC 159 (1985); -
" iD4 4 DD-8516,22 NRC 855 (19851 Georgia Power Co ( Alvm W. Vogtle Nuclear Plam, Umts I and 2), DD-79-4,9 NRC 582,584 85
:s .[ p!. ,j%Q, y'.6 M ? ^ ; >& , + y (1979) ,-;. ,
need to reconsider environmental decisions when new mformanon becomes available; DD-8516, ' '
, , ' !.Y '
22 NRC 855 (1985) ~ Grarms Fields Farm v. Goldschmidt. 626 F.2d 1068,1072 (1st Cir.1980) -
- amendment of Fmal Environmental Statement by the heanns record ALAB-819,22 NRC 706 n.33 (1985) '
r Greene County Plannmg Board v. FPC,559 F.2d 1227 (2d Cir.1976), cert. demed,434 U.S 4086
^
(1978) need to reconsider environmental decisions when new mformahon becomes available; DD-85-16, 22 NRC 855 (1985) Guard v. NRC,753 F.2d 1144 (D C.Cir.1985) - comphance with future emergency planmns requirements; L9"-85-35,22 NRC 525 (1985) scope of emergency plan medical arrangements; CLI-8515,22 NRC 186 (1985) - Haranmowicz v. McCalbster,78 F.R.D 319 (E.D. Pa 1978) emperts to whom Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4HB) apphes; LBP.85 38,22 NRC 612 (1985) - Healy v. Counts,100 F R.D. 493,4% (D. Colo.1984) determming whether a subpoenaed party is an espert specially retamed m anucipeuon of heisauon; LBP-8548,22 NRC 613 (1985) *" Houston Leshtmg and Power Co. (Allens Creek Nuclear Generaung Stauon. Umt 1). ALAB-535,9 NRC 377,384 (1979); ALAB 625,13 NRC 13 (1981); LBP-82 94,16 NRC 1399 (1982) standard for mtervention by mdividaal who has had pnot expenence in NRC proceedmgs; ALAB-816,22 NRC 467 n.25 (1985)
= Houston Lighung and Power Co. (Allens Creek Nuclear Generaung Station, Umt 1) ALAB 535,9 NRC 377,393 (1979) basis for demal o(monon for protective order; LBP 85-40,22 NRC 762 (1985) '
45 g= . g . -e ', -*E"'d' - h g.'@E F 0 9 s
, .n
. .v - ;
- yi'c:6 -
z W-f.k]Yh-k'f
- ,,7 u .ns m p?bk $* ,.&
- h< -W i>g. h - n .
.a
. mag . w* , s .a,,- "
!i; /1 ** t 4
. -/ 4 ,
W 1 ,
* , 1 1
, l 1
4 s .
, i
~
LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX CASES
- Houston Lighting and Power Co. (Allens Creek Nuclear Generstmg Stanon. Uma 1), ALAB-565,10 NRC 521,523 (1979); ALAB 574, il NRC 7,13 (1980) authonty of Licensms Boards to shorten time period for fihng contennons; LBP-85 36,22 NRC
$93 (1985)
Houston Lighung and Power Co. (Allens Creek Nuclear Generaung Station, Umt I), ALAB-565. J0
, . ; <'. NRC 521,525 (1979) s right of tardy intervenor to respond to Board action on c>ntennon; ALAB-816,22 NRC 466 n.22 (1985)
Houston Lighung and Power Co. (Allens Creek Nuclear Generaung Stauon, Unis 1), ALAB-590,11 NRC 542,546-49 & n.10 (1980)
~
- considerauon of a contennon's ments at admission stage; ALAB-819,22 NRC 694 (1985)
,yM. Houston Lightmg and Power Co. (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Umt 1). ALAB-609,12 y .
4
-- NRC 172,173 n.1 (1980) standard for miervenuon by pro se langants, ALAB-816,22 NRC 467 n 24 (1985)
'- , Houston Lightmg and Power Co. (South Texas Project, Umts I and 2), ALAB 799,21 NRC 360, 378-74 (1985) relationship between quahty assurance deficiencies and management competence and character; AL AB-812,22 NRC 15,48 (1985)
Houston Lighung and Power Co. (South Tenas Project Umts 1 and 2), ALAB-799,21 NRC 360,
- ?~ 376 77 (1985) y showmg necessary by party challengmg cross-exammanon ruhng; ALAB-813,22 NRC 76 n.78 (19851
,.~S?,4 Houston Lighung and Power Co (South Texas Project Umts I and 2), CLI-82-9,15 NRC 1363,1365 (1982)
.' 5 7.; source of disquahryms bias, ALAB-819,22 NRC 721 (1985) o> ,
- 45_ '
Houston Lightmg and Power Co. (South Texas Project, Umts I and 2), LBP-88 54,14 NRC 918. 922 23 & n.4 (1981) t 2 4'9 ^. need for Licensmg Boards to notify the Commisseon ofissues raised sua sponte; ALAB-819,22
,.4 ^ . .i'.a NRC 731 n.64 (1985)
-o Houston Lightmg and Power Co. (South Texas Project, Umts I and 2), LBP-84-13,19 NRC 659, .
Y Y. 669-98 (1984)
' ~ fla standard for determming management competence; LBP-85 28,22 NRC 237 (1985)
*' '*( ?... f) ' ' Huron Portland Cement Co. v. City of Detroit,362 U.i 440,447 (1960) efTect on State authonty of Federal government's reservation of exclusive junsdiction over
- radiological health and safety matters; ALAB-818,22 NRC 666 n.52 (1985) a - Indian Lookout Athance v. Volpe,484 F.2d it,19 (8th Cir.1973)
'h Y s segmentauon of a project for purpose of environmental considerations; LBP 85 43,22 NRC 812 (1985) inspiranon Consot Copper Co. v. Lumberman Mut. Cas. Co.,60 F R.D. 205,210 (S D N.Y.1973)
~M difficulty m determimng experts to whom Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(bH4)(B) apphes; LBP-85-38,22 NRC 613 n.i t (l985)
, Kansas Gas and Elecinc Co. (Wolf Creek Generating Station, Umt I), ALAB-327,3 NRC 408 (1976) standards for grant of protecute order; LBP-85 40,22 NRC 761 (1985)
Kansas Gas and Elecine Co. (Wolf Creek Generstmg Stauon, Umt 1), ALAB-462,7 NRC 320,338 (1978) burden for sausfying reqmrements for grant of monons to reopen; ALAB-Sl2,22 NRC 14 (1985) Kleppe v. Sierra Club,427 U.S. 390,40046 (1976) entent of environmental review needed for proposed transmission hne construction and , operation; LBP 85-43.22 NRC 812 (1985)
,'in
- Long Island Lighung Co. (Jamesport Nuclear Power Stanon, Umts I and 2), ALAS-292,2 NRC 631
^ if,- 650 & n.25 (1975)
< d; factors taken mio account in determamns delay and broademns o(issi.es that late mtervention .
- ' will cause; LBP-85-36,22 NRC 595 (1985)
Long Island Lighung Co. (Shoreham Nuclear Power Stanon Unit 1), ALAB-773,19 NRC 1333,1339
& n.15 (1984)
~
purpose of execuuve pnvilege; LBP 85 38,22 NRC 626 (1985) A
.i
; s
[
~
-i h
r
+
n
?s
- J, s
- 4. ,
d
. s[
, ' g LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX CASES j %'!
s 1 s u, Long Island Lightmg Co. (Shoreham Nuclear Power Stanon, Umt I), ALAB-788,20 NRC 1102. Il51 I g , (1984) ' responsibihties of parties appeshng procedural pomis; ALAB-816,22 NRC 468 n.28 (1985) , - . , - '. t Long Island Lightmg Co, (Shoreham Nuclear Power Stanon, Umt I), ALAB-800,21 NRC 386, ?.. ... , 5
- NJ 392-98 (1985); CLl-85-1,21 NRC 275 (l985)
, , a.
effect of Cor.6 mission immediate effecuveness determmanon on Appeal Board's determmation of " Ql ]:.1g i;;l,',t , a stay monon. ALAB-814,22 NRC 195 0985) , Long Island Lightmg Co. (Shoreham Nuclear Power Stauon, Unit 1), CLI 8313,17 NRC 74! (1983)
" - 3 L :,,, 4 e.- - '
[ , use of utshty-sponsored emergency plan u. stead of State and local government emergency plan; ; ,
' = yg']:;,',j - rg, - , A j . .
LBP-85-31,22 NRC 427 (1985) -
- 6 "W e " 4.P + -
Long Island Lightmg Co. (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit I), CLI-84-8,19 NRC 1854 U984) !- " O~.'-M -D Vs - 4 ' regulauon governmg request for enempuon from regulauon; LBP-85-33,22 NRC 446 (1985) Long Island Lightmg Co (Shoreham Nuclear Power $tauon, Umt II, LBP-82 Il5,16 NRC 1923, l $ N% ~g.' ,- r' - s : {: .' d-h. 1928 0 982) authonty of Licensng Boards to impose sanct ons; LBP-85-48,22 NRC 448 0985)
.fn Q3j / M'j;'[q i >'.
e Long Island Lightmg Co. (Shoreham Nuclear Power Stanon, Umi l), LBP-83 72,18 NRC 1221 d ,M'- 5 s.'e (1983); rev'd on other grounds ALAB-773,19 NRC 1333 0984) demonstration of esecuuve pnvilege; LBP 85-38,22 NRC 626 0985) N,' 7M'N[; ' .%,Q s d3i[
', ; D u 9, jf.d,7 q.; 6 ' ,
Long Island Lighung Co (Shoreham Nuclear Power Stanon Umt 1), LBP-8518,21 NRC 1637 s: 1643-44 0 985) > ?pj y. @c. . n 3g;'W.Dj f, yy ' conftst between NRC Office ofInvestiganons and adjudicatory boards, ALAB-!!2,22 NRC 47 n.53 (1985) ' g^+.g@O,* os WW : gQ , , .f,[,j pyy,4 ' Louisiana Power and Light Co (Waterford Steam Electrr Stapon, Uma 3), ALAB-220,8 AEC 93,94 g
,h'.h' $.2Mk{M ' -'.,$*{ t'- 4; 0974) nC' ; ; + :s % @- e.e-appealab;hty rf demal of motion for summary disposinon; LBP-85-29,22 NRC 3310985)
. .e
- c ' i., 'igy . -'
Louimana Power and Light Co (Waterford Steam Electnc Stanon, Umt 3), ALAB-732,17 NRC 1076, 1096 0 983)
~
4.5 2 w,..k;j ',% +e,
.. .r ,
"n.J' ,'7.' .]rQ, '. @,p
.3? % ' l-: e showing necessary by party challensms cross-esammanon ruhng; ALAB-813,22 NRC 76 n.78 %
[ %-% ,M'-Q'nA 7 " yy W 'S" ;,efW^ ;. 0985) . M ;W , i '@. .'. W - ' Y Louisana Power and L83ht Co. (Waterford Sicam Electrr Stanon, Umt 3), ALAB 732,17 NRC 1076, '? hD *M e ;' **$.h[ # ~ , M Y , 4*,.' ~ 1103-05 0 983) LXC3 #'
'9N [ ~ Q ,,',i[ ' '*'
propnety of post-heanns appraisal of emergency response facihues by NRC Staff, ALAB-819,22 . c ' Y " D- 4M ' N ,, NRC 710 (1985) " ' ' J ?(. (QC Z"i 1 ' ' n.1-Louisiana Power and Light Co. (Waterford Steam Electnc Stanon Umt 3), ALAB 732,17 NRC 1076, , , , i 1106 07 0 983) ' 4 -' nature and htigabahty of emergency plan implemenung procedures; LBP-85 27A,22 NRC 212 - n I,220 0985) ." ' ., l[
~
Louisiana Power and Light Co (Waterford Sicam Electnc Stauen, Umt 3), ALAB 75),18 NRC 1321, J 1325 n.3 0983) umchness of monons to reopen a record, ALAB-815,22 NRC 201 n.9 0985) Louisiana Power and Light Co. (Waterford Steam Electnc Stanon, Umt 3), ALAB-786,20 NRC 1087, l , . 1089 0 984) ,
, .~ '
test for reoremns a record; ALAB-815,22 NRC 200 n 4 0985)
. - t :> .
Louisiana Power and Light Co. (Waterford Steam Elecine Stanon, Umt 3), ALAB 792,20 NRC 1585,
- g 1588 09f 4)
,f .
Appeal Board junsdruon to consider issues raised in a petinon to reopen; ALAB-821,22 NRC - ', ', d. ' 752 n.5,753 n.12 0985) > Lousmana Power and Lsght Co. (Waterford Steam Electne Stauon, Umt 3), ALAB-797,21 NRC 6 , , ' 8-9 0985)
- r ,- -
"1g, ,
+
test for determming appellate junsdction to consider issues raised 'n i monon to reopen;
< V; ALAB-821,22 NRC 752 n 6,753 n.12 0985) ,
^
Louisiana Power and Light Co- (Waterford Sicam Electnc Stanon, Umt 3), ALAB-812,22 NRC 5,14 ' ~ 0985) factors to be addressed in motions to reopen a record to admit a new comennon; LBP-85-42,22 NRC 798,801 (1985) _ . N 9
,r.
% .e t
. . , . , . . .A-p pe-.=e - - -
h A e 9 g #
--e* * ,
) #
_L- . , , y
.o,
, .i- p' @
,'- ;. Y., w h ~& ., \ Q- l r$:". '
a
n ,
* ', _ <by f(y l-L '
Idhh kh,i h.? . -'$wh,bfy[ &,: w n~:n
,*, Ah . T P \ ; ;k .
m[* .' m. - , '- j o.s . - , qa+ -- , 9x . y.. , s.
- ~ > .
t . t 8 .<-- g
- LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX CASES Louisiana Power and Light Co. (Waterfc,rd Steam Electric Station, Unit 31, ALAB-812,22 NRC 5, 14,17 & n.7 (1985) acceptabihty of Staff documems as supportms evidence for monons to reopen on quahty
' assurance matters; ALAB-819,22 NRC 726 n.60 (1985)
Louimana Power and Light Co. (Waierford Steam Electnc Stauon, Una 3), ALAB-812,22 NRC $. a4c " 16-44 (1985)
. ;- bass required for admission of quahty assurance contentions; ALAB-819,22 NRC 725 (1985)
.g Lourmana Power and Light Co. (Waterford Steam Elecinc Station. Unit 3). ALAB-812,22 NRC 5,54 (1985) responability for providing record support for appellate bnefs; ALAB-813. 22 NRC 67 n.22 (1985)
Maine Yankee Atome Power Co. (Maine Yankee Atoms Power Stanon), CLI-83-21,18 NRC 157, 160 (1983), aff*g DD-83-3.17 NRC 327 (1983) determming whether financial constramts should lead to enforcement acuon; DD-85-14,22 NRC 637-38 (1985) Manume Cinema Service Corp. v. Movies En Route, Inc.,60 F.R.D. 587,591 (1973) need to identify persons assistmg m preparauon of answers to interrogatones; LBP 85 38,22 NRC 623 (1985)
' * " m Metropohtan Edison Co. (Three Mde Island Nuclear Station. Uma 1), ALAB-698,16 NRC 1290.
.m , * -
1298-99 (1982), rev'd in part on other grounds, CLI-83-22,18 NRC 299 (1983)
- ^' distmcuan between Regulatory Guides and regulauon; ALAB 819,22 NRC 710,737 (1985)
,,[ -
_ ~ 2 < q. legal force of NUREG cntena; LBP-85-27A 22 NRC 210 224 (1985)
- 5. , - V Metropohtan Edison Co. (Three Mile Island Nuclear Stauon. Umt I), ALAB-699,16 NRC 1324
- , m.-
cy h ','- n _ ' gre 3 (1982) junsdicuon to rule on monon to reopen; ALAB-823,22 NRC 775 (1985) s
,m NM.7. .P Metropohtan Edison Co. (Three Mile Island Nuclear Stauon, Umt II, ALAB 729,17 NRC $14 (1983)
. 4yJ 'i , ih / 7 use of post-heanns procedures; LBP-85 32,22 NRC 436 n.2 (1985)
, % 2,-Mc T.A Metropolitan Edison Co. (Three Mde Island Nuclear Stanon. Umt I), ALAB-772,19 NRC 1893.
K ~, M -, G:*W %*O ' 1206, 1208 (1984) 59*- I #2 M. , n ., N . i stand.rd for determming management competence; LBP 85-28,22 NRC 236 (1985) Metropohtan Edison Co. (Three Mde Island Nuclear Stauon, Umt 1). ALAS-772,19 NRC 1193. 1208 (1984), rev'd in part on other grounds, CLI-85-2. 21 NRC 282 0985); CLI-85-9,21 NRC M"%, 7 *;'_
' s yC ' Rf p@;3 s 4 ,W ;- 7; c; r4 . 1118. 1136-37 (1985)
,o".- candor as an element of management's character; ALAB 812,22 NRC 48 (1985)
- -- - y -{f .ryEj %
- Metropohtan Edison Co. (Three Mdc Island Nuclear Stanon, Unit 1), ALAB-772.19 NRC 1893.
1245-46 (1984), rev'd m part on other grounds, CLI-85-2. 21 NRC 282 (1985) 1 j d O? O.c 7 flembdity of Licensing Boards in regulating heannss; ALAB-819,22 NRC 727 (1985)
' % v; *
- i
- 5
'v' Metropohtan Ednon Co. tThree Mde Island Nuclear Stauon, Uma 1), ALAB-791,20 NRC 1579
;b",D N f?,; W 1582 (1984)
**3
( ]ig&, test for esercise of Appeal Board's discrenonary directed ceruficauon authontg ALAB-817. 22 y (. J. NRC 473 n.10 (1985)
" Metropohian Edison Co. (Three Mde Island Nuclear Stauon, Umt 1), ALAB-791,20 NRC 1579 V' ,a.;: W .' , 1583 (1984)
. 'g'[ U. ;,ci - effect on a proceeding of admission of a smgle additionalcontenuon; ALAB-817,22 NRC 474 y;,y%g.Q.y n.16 (1985)
^. 4-g
- Metropohtan Edison Co. (Three Mde Island Nuclear Stauon, Uma I). ALAB-807,21 NRC 1195,
< - - p'.m; . t 1200 n.12 (1985) **
', * , ~,
d.p
' "" ' f lC
' ds:
esplananon of"no sigmficaat hazards determmapon"; ALAB-816,22 NRC 463 n.4 (1985) Metropohtan Edison Co. (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1), CL1-80-5, il NRC 408,409-10 i (1980); LBP 81-32,14 NRC 381 (1982)
% '- ' standard for determmms management competence; LBP.85-28,22 NRC 236 (1985)
', 'i y , y' Metropohtan Edison Co. (Three Mde Island Nuclear Stanon. Uma 1), CL1-8016, il NRC 674 (1980)
' _ . cntens for submitimg hydrogen control contentions. LBP-45-35,22 NRC 529 (1985) t - ;{ Metropohtan Edison Co. (Three Mde Island Nuclear Stauon, Uma 1), CLI 80-16,11 NRC 674,675
-M
, , . 4 (1980) y I htigabihty of hydrogen generanon issuer. ALAB-813,22 NRC 85 n.I)6 (1985)
, s.
y ,
, y 3 .- ..
. ./
, .y .-rl 4., 4 t'.,< ,0Q
,- 4e 1A es, - _,.
Y 1 6
6
- h F
L LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX , CASES S - c F Metropohtan Edison Co. (Three Mile Island Nuclear Stanon. Umt I), CLI-84-17, 20 NRC 801, 804-05 (1984} spect6 city required of stay mouons; ALAB-814,22 NRC 190 (1985) Metropoht.n Edison Co. (Three Mile Island Nuclear Stanon Unit II, CLI 85-5,21 NRC $d,569 e (1985), afTd sub nom. Three Male Island Alert, Inc. v. NRC,771 F.2d 720 (3d Cir.1985) .J .;~ strong langua8e by presidmg oincer or unfavorable ruimss as basis for disquahiying bias; l' " ' ALAB-819,22 NRC 721 (1985) - Metropoletan Edison Co. (Three Mde Island Nuclear Stauon, Umt 1), CLI-85-7,21 NRC 1104,1106 .m ' (1985) .. burden for satisfymg requirements for grant of monons to reopen, ALAB-812,22 NRC 14 (1985) @ ('%[ ; Y,; Metropohian Edison Co. (Three Mdc Island Nuclear Stanon. Uma 1), CLi-85-8,21 NRC lill,18 84
& n.3 (1985) yy[ *s enucal factor in determimps umelmess of monon to reopen; ALAB-815,22 NRC 202 n.Il vf ' \ ,. f
*- 1 (1985)
Metropobtan Edison Co. (Three Mile Island Nuc! car Station, Umt 2), ALAB-456,7 NRC 63,65 K- ' (1978) $ < hogabihty of contenuon challenging 10 C.F R. 50.13; LBP 85-27,22 NRC 13! n.2 (1985) , , Metropohtan Edison Co (Three Mile Island Nuclear Stauon, Uma 2), ALAB-486,8 NRC 9,14, _ . , review demed, CLI-78-19,8 NRC 295 (1978) & , ,, N regulatory requerements for emergency planning pnor to Three Mile Island accident; ALAB Sil, v 72 NRC 669 n.64 (1985) !*l?O. /v, ,'- Missisappi Power and Light Co. (Grand Gulf Nuclear Stanon. Umts I and 21 ALAB-704,16 NRC .* *g_** W
- 1725. 1730 (1982) ac.i" ;- ,
demonstrauon oflate mtervemion petitioner's abshly to contnbute to a sound record, , - -
- ALAB-813,22 NRC 85 n.134 (1985) : LBP 85-36,22 NRC 594-95 (1985) W)/ ! " , C. . * # " >1 Nader v. Dunlop. 370 F. Supp.177 (D.D.C.1973) rM' > -
?" ' ' C ,, '
requirements for closure of advisory committee meeungt DPRM 85-3,22 NRC 175 (1985) s - " Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Morton,458 F.2d 827,838 (D.C. Car.1972) . ..
'i '
7 'f , exammanon of environmentalissues required by Nauonal Environmental Pohey Act; ALAB 819, y" ~,~r i $ ',- 22 NRC 722 (1985) .- New England Coahuon on Nuclear Pollunon v. NRC,582 F.2d 87,93-94 (1st Cir.1978) -
..k '
[^
- s amendment of Final Environmental Statement through the a4udicatory process; ALAB-819,22 *~,- '*j .'b. '
~>
NRC 706 (1985s e J < - New Ecstand Coahuon on Nuclear Pollunon v. NRC,727 F.2d 1127 (D.C.Cir. :984) htigabihty of financial quahficauons contenuons in operating hcense proceedmss; ALAB-81),22
- p ., .
" i"l$ Q' '
' ^
NRC 84 n 126 (1985) >d New York v. NRC,550 F.2d 745,756 57 (2d Cir.1977) -
~
speculauon about nuclear accidents as " irreparable m)ury" for purpose of staying a heenung decision; ALAB-820,22 NRC 748 n,20 (1985) , Northern Indiana Pubhc Service Co. (Badly Genersung Stuion, Nu, lear l), ALAB-249,8 AEC 980 - 's 957 (1974)
- s.: ope of hcenung board authonty; ALAB-825,22 NRC 790 n.12 (1985)
Northern States Power Co. (Monucello Nuclear Generstmg Plant, Uma 1), CLI-72-81,5 AEC 25,26 - (1972) nundard for grant of waiver or esempnon from regulauons; LBP-85 33,22 NRC 445 (1985) af' + Northern States Power Co (Praine Island Nuclear Generaung Plant, Units I and 2), ALAB-107,6 AEC 188,192, afrd, CLI-73-12,6 AEC 241 (1973), afrd sub nom. BPI v. AEC,502 F.2d 424 - (D.C. Cer.1974) '
, ~, , t-need for discovery to produce adequately specific contenuons; ALAB-817,22 NRC 477 n.3 .-
(1985)
- Northern States Power Co. (Tyrone Energy Park, Unit 1), LBP-77-37,5 NRC 1298 (1977) , 3 .
pressure of other professional responmbihues as basis for fadure to comply with NRC deadhne for , , fihng objecuans; LBP-85-46,22 NRC 832 (1985) { Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. (West Valley Reprocessing Plant), CLI 75-4, l NRC 273,275,276 (1975)
- l five factors to be addressed by peutioner fihns amended petition to intervene; LBP-85 36,22 j
NRC 592,595 (1985) ,
, t;
- 1 a
. ..- . _ , .. l 1
,e ;
( ,
' l i -, - . . . "
r
- j
~~
',, , 3 ,
- N. *
'Q 3, .
4
l f g W"' '% l g,. %se@' i q;.,lg'j,fz .. - ** - ~ , ,
~
s , ya . . qa ~ 1+ ,, G ' . , ,
- > p ; ,u( ;n a s *
. _ . ....2.. .. ._.
i . u j i LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX
' CASES Offshore Power Systems (Manufactunns License for Flosung Nuclear Power Plants), L8P-75-67,2 NRC 813 (1975) pressure of other professional responsibehties as basis for failure to comply with NRC deadhne for Gling objections; LBP-85 46,22 NRC $32 (1985)
Pacine Gas & Electre Co. v. State Energy Resources Conservauon & Development Comm'n,461
- U.S.190,204,205,222 (1983) eNect on State authonty of Federal government's reservauon of exclusve junsdicuon over radiological health and safety matters; ALAB-818,22 NRC 666 nn.53,54,55 (1985)
- Pacine Gas & Electre Co. v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development Comm'n,461 s
- U.S.190, 205, 207, 208 12, 222 (1983) authonty arxl responsbehues of NRC regardmg nuclear-powered electnc generapon; ALAB-818, 22 NRC 663 nn.35,36,37,39,40,664 n.45 (1985)
~
Pacinc Gas & Electne Co. v. State Ene gy Resources Conservanon & Development Comm*n,461 U.S.190,213 (1983) pnnciples regarding Federal preempuon of State laws in context of nuclear regulanon; ALAB-818,22 NRC 668,665 n.48 (1985) Pacinc Gas & Electne Co. v. State Energy Resources Conservauon & Development Comm'n,461 U.S.190, 216 (1983) applicauon of State laws to further rsdiological health and safety objectives; ALAB-818,22 NRC s: .,g" . 665 n.47 (1985) Pacinc Gas and Electre Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Umts I and 2), ALAB-334,3 hRC
, ,y
- 809,889 n.24 (1976)
^
explananon of K-eEccuve concept; ALA8-816,22 NRC 463 n.2 (1985)
- w. [ - ' %.. . Pacinc Gas and Electnc Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2), ALA8-644,13
~, 'Cf p t. :
.. < s y '<- '
5 NRC 903,994-95 (1981) I: 2 e type ofinformauon for whrh reopemng a record is warranted; LSP-85 42,22 NRC 799,808
-.Jg% N. ik;, c .
.^ A['46- q, ..
1, gg9g3,
. :- -l, 4gqv ,
Pacinc Gas and Electne Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2), ALAB-653, prmied
- . , ' . . , 9 -. } :N 4. QQ j
as an Attachment to CLI-82-19,16 NRC 53 (1982)
'L f 1 ;[.[k{ .T '
j ,
,j hogabihty of adequacy of secunty plans in NRC proceedings; ALAB-819,22 NRC 699 (1985)
-.% . 7 ..
Pacinc Gas and Electnc Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2), ALAB-728,17 7 ...?%* .; pdm N,, s.
; p . 7 N. ( , '
, " .. g . - t .; . NRC 777,807, review dechned, CLI-83-32,18 NRC 1309 (1983)
. .e , ' ' fe . - ,/ y.@f*)' y
- hugabahty of adequacy of StaN review oflicensms appirauon; ALAB-812,22 NRC 56 (1985) 7 a;. Pacinc Gas and Electne Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units I and 2), ALA8-756,18
+.
+
; ;, ? s-Q.,m W y , @g,tW r.i , ,' ,,e,3 . NRC 1340,1343 (1983)
. .j '. 7 y " , ' Wl- ,C p ,
Board authonty to request oral tesumony where record is msufficient to allow summary disposmon; LBP 85-29,22 NRC 307 (l985)
., c .; 7
.o .
.q.{ G' R] .(1(,4' c [r..
s ". ciPP
^- - Pacific Gas and Electre Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2), ALAB 756,18
~' ' - . , , NRC 1340,1344 (1983)
J, c' N, L,] - ' ;- focus of comennons deshng with uncorrected equipment deGciencies; L8P 85-49,22 NRC 929 e 90 ' 4* (1985)
. J> . #^ Y*/-* Pacinc Gas and Electne Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Umts I and 2), ALAB 756,18
% .1 % s NRC 1340,1344 45 (1983), afrd sub nom. San Lurs Obispo Mothers for Peace v. NRC,751 F.2d df 'hN _ .
1287 (D C. Cir.1984), vacated m part and reh's en banc granted on other grounds, 760 F.2d 1320
.; y
, .:.- ~ (1985); ALAB 775,19 NRC 1361,1367,1369 70 (1984) consderanons addressed m examimns claims of quahty assurance deficiencies m monons to
^;b 4.W.
, p +1? lC 9
reopen: ALA8-812,22 NRC 15,44,53 (1985) Pacinc Gas and Electne Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2), ALAB-763,19
- f -
NRC 571, review demed, CLi-8414,20 NRC 285 (1984) r
' ' . M, i-%F* li * -
A ,, % i -, erect on a proceeding of addmg one quahty assurance contenuon; ALA8-817,22 NRC 478 n.il l
,;; '113~?' '.g., W ' *
(1985) Pacific Gas and Elecine Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 21 ALAB-775,19
.~
- V; NRC 1361,1366-67, at'd sub nom. San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace v. NRC,751 F 2d 1287 '
,, + ,' ,
' (D C. Cir.1984), vacated in part and reh's en banc granted on other grounds. 760 F.2d 1320 (1985) paruculanty required of evidence supporting monons to reopen; ALAB-812,22 NRC 14,43 l
~
,c: - (1985) l
. - . ~
-a, 4 v u,b~, 58 y[.'..,p g '
O
\
, f
~
y e i I i I ,
t
.-- .G -.,,-n . m q.
I LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX b CASES Pacific Gas and Electnc Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I anJ 2), ALAB 775,19 i! NRC 1361,1368 n.22 (1984) format standard for evidence supportmg monons to reopen on quahty assurance contemion; AL AB-812,22 NRC 17 (1985) Pacific Gas and Electne Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units I and 2), ALAB-775,19 NRC 1361,1369, afrd sub nom. San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace v. NRC,751 F.2d 1287 (D.C. ,' Cir 1984), vacated m part and reh's en banc granted on other grounds,760 F.2d 1320 (1985) - timeliness of mouons to reopen a record, AL AB 815,22 NRC 201 n.9 (1985)
. Pacifs Gas and Elecinc Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Umts I and 2), ALAB-775,19 ,
NRC 1361,1379 (1984) FEM A findm',s sufLcient for authonzauon of full-power operstmg heense; ALAB-813,22 NRC 78 n 91 f 385) Pacific Gas and Electne Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Umts I and 27 ALAB-781,20 , NRC 819,833-34 (1984) - scope of medical servues arrangements to be made for contammated mjured mdividuals; ALAB-819,22 NRC 714 (1985) Pacific Gas and Elecine Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Umts a and 2), ALAB.782,20 NRC 838,841 (1984) Appeal Board Junsdicuon to coneder issues raised in a peuuon to reopen; ALAB-821,22 NRC ^ 752 n.5 (1985) Pacific Gas and Electnc Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 2), ALAB Sil,21 m NRC 1622 (1985) - c use of post-heanns procedures; LBP-85-32,22 NRC 436 n.2 (1985) r Pacife Gas and E ectric Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Umts I and 2), CLI-76-1,3 NRC - 73, 74 n.1 (1976) ., ' f , > purpose of heanns notres; ALAB-825,22 NRC 790 n.14 (1985) - Pacific Gas and Electnc Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 21, CLI 81-5,13 NRC -1 361, 363 (1981) . ,, cntens to be seusfied by monons so reopen; AL AB-812,22 NRC 14 (1985) +
- Pacific Gas and Electne Co (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units I and 2), CLI-815,13 NRC -
361, 364 (1981) .'/ ,.-. ' ,
, p -
Licenang Board responsibehty to demand compliance with lateness factors of 10 C.F.R. 2.714; '1 m LBP-85-36,22 NRC 592 93 (1985) ,.. 7-;i Pacific Gas and Electnc Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Umts I and 2), CL1-81-6,13 NRC , 443, 444 (1981)
.A .
use of 2.206 procedures as a vehicle for reconsiderauon; DD-85-16,22 NRC 855 (1985) - . _ , , Pacific Gas and Electne Co. (D6abio Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Umts -1 and 2), CLI-82 39,16 ;X .. NRC 1712,1714-15 (1982) ' standard for grant of monon to reopen that raises previously uncontested issues; ALAB-812,22 NRC 14 (1985) Pacific Gas and Elecinc Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Umts I and 21. CLI-84-5,19 NRC - 953, 964 (1984) speculahon about nuclear accidents as "arreparable injury" for purpose of staying a licensmg decision; ALAB-820,22 NRC 748 n.20 (1985) > s Pennsylvoma Power and Leght Co. (Susquehanna Steam Elecinc Station Umts I and 2), ALAB 648, - ' 13 NRC 550,552 (1981) effect on a proceedma of admisseon of a omgle addeuonal comention; ALAB-817,22 NRC 474 - n.17,478 n.12 (1984) ' Pennsylvama Power and Light Co. (Susquehanna Steam Electric Stauon, Units I and 2), ALAB-693, - 16 NRC 952,954-56 (1982) need for record support m appellaie bnefs; ALAB-825,22 NRC 793 n.29 (1985) * > Permian Bamn Area Rate Cases,390 U.S. 747,773 (1968)
- most important entenon apphed in determining need for a stay; ALAB-820,22 NRC 746 n.7 +
(1985) l-t-
,. 1 h*
[ . _ , _. .. ,. ,.,..,.t '
- s. g j k 4 . , ,
,. [ ' : ea
(' s 4,
, ,e
- M, f f 1 }j) , fT~
e , g . .
% ~.. ' ? l , . * '. L. .y , , a% '
- f" iiy q', C'O :yff;3!yj; , ' ,
< J
o, 9,1 f e -
'l LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX CASES s
Peution for Emergency and Remedial Action, CLI-78-6,7 NRC 400,405 (1978) safety significance ofisolated deficiencies in a licensee's operanonal activities; DD-85-il, 22 NRC 162 n.8 (1985)
' Y>, Peuuon for Emergency and Remedial Action, CLI 78-6,7 NRC 400,405-06 (1978) responabahty for abatmg adverse safety impacts caused by a licensee's financial dimcuities;
,W DD 8514,22 NRC 638 (1935)
Philadelphia Electne Co. (Limersk Generaung Station, Umts I and 2), ALAB-262,1 NRC 163,197
.m i,* n.54 (1975) bass for judgrnent of safety of spent fuel transshipments; L8P-85-34,22 NRC 493 (1985)
Philadelphia Electnc Co. (Limenck Generating Stanon Units I and 2), ALAB-785,20 NRC 848, "N 884-85 (1984) s elTect on NRC proceedings of State Court linganon; L8P 85-46,22 NRC 832 (1985)
< , Philadelphia Dectnc Co. (Limenck Generating Stauon, Umts I and 2), ALAS 789,20 NRC 144),
1446 (1984) most important enterion applied in deter:mnmg need for a stay; ALAB-820,22 NRC 746 n.7 (1985)
. -l Philadelphia Electne Co. (Limenck Geners*ms Stanon, Units I and 27 ALA8-804,21 NRC 587,592 i & n 6 (1985)
-l obhganon of parties to provide documentary support for allegations; At 48-812,22 NRC 54
^; (1985) responsibility for providmg record support for appellate bnefs; ALAB-813,22 NRC 67 n.22
- (1985)
Philadelphia Electnc Co. (Limenck Generstmg Stanon, Umts I and 2), ALAB-809,21 NRC 1605.
* ,, 1610 n.5 (1985)
.e,. . _
standards apphed in considenns requests for enempuons under 10 C.F.R. 50.12; LBP 85 33,22
. .% O Fy , 1.
- - NRC 445 (1985)
, , ' ' ' $7'; - ~
, s J Philadelphia Electne Co. (Limenck Generating Station. Umts I and 2) DD 82-13,16 NRC 2115
-gr -- W. - - , 2121 (1982)
- M 6.h,,,'9 , < responsibility of Director in considenns 2.206 requests; DD-85-II,22 NRC 154 n.4 (1935)
Philadelphia Electnc Co. (Limenck Generaung Station, Umts I and 2), L8P-82-43A,15 NRC 1423, N. . > e < [y*W W.,97
- 1 , 1473 (1982) t-T . test for segmentauon of a project for NEPA purposes, L8P-85-43,22 NRC 810 (1985)
; M W s,p ,?' n.
Philadelphia Electne Co (Limenck Generstmg Stanon, Umts I and 2), LBP-82-43A,15 NRC 1423,
%[19 A,'
.-e,.,
i ,5 m.'d". ? * . : 1500 (1982)
$?[?%
%l%N >l <
contentions postulatmg enemy attacks agamst nuclear plants that are litigable under to C.F.R. 5013; L8P-85-27,22 NRC 140 (1985) T.S C p " Philadelphia Electnc Co. (Peacb Bottom Atomic Power Stauon, Umts 2 and 3), ALA8 216,8 AEC
'AP .- - 13, 20 21 (1974)
E :th.~ ,. $ *
- rules apphcable to contennons; LBP-85-49,22 NRC 909 (1985)
'#'b ( ~N , Piedmont Heights Civsc Club, Inc. v. Moreland,637 F.2d 430,439 (5th Cir.1981) * "3 JfG, test for segmentation of a project for NEPA purposes; L8P-85-43,22 NRC 810 (1985)
Portland General Eiccinc Co. (Pebble Spnngs Nuclear Plant Units I and 2), CLI 76-27,4 NRC 610,
, ;y .
?y 614 (1976)
<c.1 , ^ standmg to intervene on basis of raiepayer status; ALAB 816,22 NRC 465 n.19 (1985);
LBP-85 24,22 NRC 98 n.5 (1985)
,.], f.,3;'
. Ponland General Electnc Co. (Trojan Nuclear Plant), ALAS 531,9 NRC 263 (1979) need for Staff analysis of dry cask storage alternative to spent fuel transshipment; L8P-85-34,22
( [ '" ' NRC 490 (1985) ** I'NE. Portland General Electnc Co. (Trojan Nuclear Plant), ALAB-534,9 NRC 287,289 n.6 (1979)
.A 7 scope of Licensing Board junsdiction conferred by nonce of opportumty for heanns, ALAB-825, m <- 22 NRC 790-91 nn.18 & 19 (1985)
Potomac Electnc Power Co. (Douglas Pome Nuclear Generaung Stanon, Umts I and 21, ALA8-218, C W' ., 8 AEC 79,82-83 (1974) Commission pokcy on severe accident minganon measures; ALAB-819,22 NRC 695 (1985) l f- j 7 7: - S 2 ; 52 1
-t. . l l
l l l 1 w-
. - - . = .- ~. -.
- t. -
i. LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX !; CASES Potomac Electnc Power Co. (Douglas Pomt Nuclear Generaung Stauon, Unns I and 2), ALAB-218, l 8 AEC 79,85 09741 laugabihty of hydrogen generanon issues that are the subject of ongoms rulemakmg; AL AB-813, 2 j 22 NRC 85 n.135 (1985) i Potomac Elecinc Power Co. (Douglas l'oim Nuclear Generaims Stauon, Units I and 2), ALAB-218, 'l
' l 8 AEC 79,89-90 (1974)
Licenang Board authonty to consider challenges to Commission authonty to grant exemptions from regulanons; LBP-85-33,22 NRC 444 (1985)
- Pubhc Servre Co. of Indiana (Marble Hill Nuclear Generaung Stanon, Umts I and 2), ALAB-316,3 NRC 167,170-78 0976) ;
J scope of Licenang Board Junsdicuon conferred by nouce of opportumty for hearing; ALAB $25, 22 NRC 790 nn I6 & 17 (1985) ' Puble Servre Co. of Indiana (Marble Hill Nuclear Generaung Stanon, Units I and 2), ALAB-374, 5 i ) NRC 417,421 (1977) { i l spplicauon of Federal rules and practres m the absence of analogous NRC rules; LBP-85-38,22 i l NRC 609 (1985) ! Pubic Servce Co. ofIndiana (Marble Hill Nuclear Generaung Stanon, Units 1 and 21, ALAB-405,5 [ NRC 1190, l192 0977) ! test for emercise of Appeal Board's discreuonary directed ceruficauon authonty; ALAB-817,22 NRC 473 n.10 0985) Pubic Servce Co. ofIndiana (Marble Hill Nuclear Generstmg Stauan, Umts I and 2), ALAB-437,6 NRC 630,632 0977) most important cnienon apphed m determimns need for a stay; ALAB-820,22 NRC 746 n.7 0985) Public Service Co. ofIndiana (Marble Hill Nuclear Generstmg Stauon, Umis I and 2), ALAB 459,7 NRC 179,188 0978) ' 5-appellate review of Licensms Board schedulms ruhngs, ALAB-813,22 NRC 74 n.68 0985) Public Service Co. ofIndiana (Marble Hill Nuclear Generaims Stat on, Umts I and 2), ALAB-493,8 NRC 253,270-710978) demal of stay monon for fadure to address entena, ALAB 814,22 NRC 193 n.1 (1985) - Public Servre Co. of Indana (Marbie Hill Nuclear Generatmg Stanon, Umts I and 2), DD-79-17,10 ' N RC 613,6210979) .
~
need to reconsider environmental decimons when new mformauon becomes available; DD-8516, 22 NRC 855 (1985) Pubhc Servce Co. of New Hampshire (Seabrook Stauon, Umts I and 2), ALAB-271,1 NRC 478, 482-83 (1975) motion for directed cerufsauon of ruhng allowmg intervenors to amend broad, nMspecific contention; ALAB-817,22 NRC 472 n.I 0985) Pubhc Servre Co. of New Hampshire (Seabrook Siation, Umts I and 2), ALAB-338,4 NRC 10,14 , " , , , ,1 U976) influence of a stay movant's showmg on one factor on the other factors; ALAB.820,22 NRC 746 i. n.8 0985) . . Pubhc Service Co. of New Hampshire (Seabrook Stauon, Units I and 2), ALAB 422,6 NRC 33, 42-44 (1977), aff'd, CLI 78-1,7 NRC I U978), afrd sub nom. New England Coahtion on Nuclear - Polluuon v. NRC,582 F.2d 87 Ust Cir.1978) * - regulatory requirements for emergency plannmg pnar to Three Mae Island accident; ALAB-SIS, ' ' 22 NRC 669 n.64 0985) ,
'~ -
- Pubhc Service Co. of New Hampshire (Seabrook Stauon, Units I and 2), DD-79-20,10 NRC 703, ' '
706 07 U979) , , , .
. determmenon of hcensee's fmancial qualifranons to complete piant construction; DD-8514,22 1 ,
NRC 639 0985) - , . Pubhc Service Co. of New Hampshire (Seabrook Stanon, Umts i and 21, DD 82-8,16 NRC 394,395 '- * ' 0982) #
. determimns whether fmancial constraints should lead to enforcement action: DD-8514,22 NRC 1 638 0 985) ;q s
53 , e en
- p ,. m* s"d- w- e e-M epy n. sp 4
- ~
h ,. l a p *
.f1 # ! #
^. ,. .
, , , y y .fJN ' a
, C
, <*hUA,> y[1 ',f, (*;f.j ' j'y.y j.[ " ' -
.r . ,. , . ,
1
-. , ~ .
w
- ? , i S
- - - - . . . . - .- -. . -. . .. . z . . . . . . .
LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX CASES Pubir Servre Co. of New Hampshire (Seabrook Stauon, Umts I and 2), LBP 74-36,7 AEC 877,897
# (1974)
< hght in whrh the record is viewed for purpose of determamns summary dispossuon mouon; L8P-85-27A,22 NRC 208 (1985); L8P-45-29,22 NRC 310 (1985) [
'. Pubhc Service Co. of New Hampshire (Seabrook Stauon Umts I and 2), L8P-8317,17 NRC 490,
(. = 496-97 (1983) appleabihty of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4) to NRC proceedmss; L8P-85 38,22 NRC 609 (1985)
- Pubisc Servre Co. of Oklahoma (Black Foz 5tauon, Units 1 and 2) ALA8-573,10 NRC 775,304
.E (1979), vacated in pen on other grounds, CLI-80 8,11 NRC 433 (1980) appleabehty of 10 C.F R. 2.714(a)(1)(nit to monons to reopen a record to admit a new
, contenuon; LSP 85-42,22 NRC 799 n.3 (1985) standard for gram of unumely motion to reopen, L8P 85-45,22 NRC 822 23 (1985) 4 Pubhc Service Electne and Gas Co. (Hope Creek Genermung Stanon, Umts I and 21 ALAB-518,9 l' NRC 14,39 (1979) hugabihty of severe accident mingation measures in NRC proceedmss; ALAB-819,22 NRC 696 n.10 (1985)
Pueno Rro Elecinc Power Authonty (North Coast Nuclear Plant Uma II ALA8448,14 NRC 34, 36 (1981) l basis for Judgmg appeals; ALAB-819,22 NRC 720 n.51 (1985) Radio Stauon WOW, Inc. v. Johnson,326 U.S.120,129-33 (1945) circumstance mappropnate for Federal preempuon of $ tate law; ALAB-818,22 NRC 667 n.56 (1985)
' Regents of the Umvers ty of Cahforma (UCLA Research Reactor), L8P-84-22 and attachtnent,19 3 NRC 1383 (1984) 4 consequence of error by counsel m making factual representauon; L8P-85-48,22 NRC 847 - (1985)
Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.,331 U.S. 218,230 (1947) basis for preempuon of a State's tradiuonal police powers; ALAB-813,22 NRC 662 n.32 (1985) importance of Ngislauve intent in makmg statutory interpretsuons; ALA8-818,22 NRC 668 n 63 (1985)
~,
R ckford League of Women Voters v. NRC,679 F.2d 1218 (7th Cir.1982) 6'- use of 2.206 procedures as a vehicle for reconsiderauon; DD-8516,22 NRC 855 (1985) yl~lg; - Sacramemo Munripal Utahiy Disinct (Rancho Seco Nuclear Generatmg Stanon), ALAB-655,14 ~,i- t NRC 799,803 (1981) appellate revew of Licenung Board daciseons m the absence of an appeal; ALAB-826,22 NRC
. 894 n.5 (1985)
San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace v. NRC,751 F 2d 1287 (D C. Cir.1984), vacated m pan and
~
- reh's en banc granted on other grounds,760 F.2d 1320 (1985) f* need for lengthy Board discussion of contennons devoid of ment; ALAB-812,22 NRC 42 (1985)
San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace v NRC,758 F.2d 1287,1300 (D C, Cir.1984), vacated in part J. and reh's en bene gramed on other grounds,760 F.2d 1320 (1985)
! need to consider cost of compenseuon of nuclear power plant accident victims m environmemal impact statement; ALAB 819,22 NRC 703 (1985)
San Luis OtMspo Mothers for Peace v NRC,751 F.2d 1287,1301,1302 n.77 (D C. Cir.1984), vocated in part and reh's en banc granted on other grounds, 760 F 2d 1320 (1985) need to consider low-probability, severe accidents at nuclear facilaues, ALAB-819,22 NRC 697, 698,701 n.~4,707 (1985) Scaled Case,676 F 2d 793,818 (D C. Cir.1982) waiver of atto ney chent and work product pnvileges by disclosure of content of pnvileged a. commume mons; L8P-85-38,22 NRC 689 n 23 (1985) Ses(fer v. Topsy's pt't,Inc.,69 F R.D 69,72 73 & n 3 (D Kan.1975) difTrufty m . etermmme espens to whom Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4HB) applees; L8P 85 38, 22 NRC 613 (1985) Shoppmg Cans A itstrust Linganon,95 F R.D. 299,306-08 (5 D N.Y.1982) use of very road enterrogatones m NRC proceedings; LBP 85-38,22 NRC 630 (1985) 54 l l v I
. zw ~. .. . - ~ ..
LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX CASES Siegel v AEC,400 F.2d 778, 782 (D C. Or.19681 need for prosecuon of nuclear power plant agamst band of armed saboteurs; LBP 85 27,22 NRC 136 (1985) Siegel v. AEC,400 F.2d 778,783-85 (D C. Or.1968) esclusion of severe accident mitigation issue from NRC adjudscaiory proceedmss. ALAB-819,22 , NRC 695 n 9 (1985) t. - Sierra Cub v. Callaway 499 F.2d 982,987 (5th Cir.1974) i. need for environmental analysis of future overall transmission gnd system when considenng a ! -' I
. proposed part of the transmisson system; LBP 85-43,22 NRC Sll, 812 (1985) 3 Sierra Cub v. Frochite, $34 F.2d 1239,1297-98 (8th Cir 1976) .
i test for segmentanon of a project for NEPA purposes LBP 85-43,22 NRC 310 (1985) 4 Sierra Club v. Hodel,544 F.2d 1036,1040-41 (9th Cir.1976) . need for environmental analysis of future overall transmission and system when considenns a "
+
proposed part of the transmisson system. LBP-85-43,22 NRC 811,812 (1985) '
- Sierra Cub v. Sigler,695 F.2d 957,97172,974 (5th Or 1983)
- need for "worsi-case" analyms of sabotage nsk; ALAB-819,22 NRC 701 (1985) i .'.
Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corp.,464 U.S. 238,248. 250,255,26042. 274-78 (19847 pnnciples regardmg Federal preempuon of State laws m content of nuclear regulanon; _ ALAB-Sil,22 NRC 661,663 n.38,664 n 44,665 n 47 (1985) Smkms of the Barge -Ranger I, 92 F.R.D. 486 (S.D. Ten.1981) i experts to whom Fed. R. Ov. P. 26(b)(4)(B) apphes. LBP 85 38,22 NRC 612 (1985) , Smkms of the Barge.-Ranger I," 92 F R.D. 486,489 ($ D. Ten.1981) , , distmcuon between emperts whose mformauon was not acquired m preparauon for anal and those speci6cally employed m anucipanon of htiganon; LBP-85-38,22 NRC 614 (1985) [. ' ! j , ;; South Carolina Electrs and Gas Co. (Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Stauon, Unit I) ALAB-642,13 NRC ~ - ' ~ 881, 892 93, 895 (1981) - weight given to factors (ii), (m) and (iv) of 10 C.F.R. 2.714(a)(1) in determming admissibihty of late-Gled contentions. LBP 85 36,22 NRC 594 (1985) , South Carohna Electnc and Gas Co. (Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit 1), ALAB-663,14 NRC ' t 1140,1156 (1981), review declined, CLI 82-10,15 NRC 1377 (1982) ~ Licenens Board responsbehty m hght of deficiencies in tesumony; ALAB-819,22 NRC 741 i (1985) . e role of NRC Staffin heeneng proceedmas; AL AB-812,22 NRC 56 (1985) - T ' Southern Cahforma Edison Co (San Onofre Nuclear Generstmg Stauon, Units 2 and 3), AL AB 212, ~ 7 AEC 986,991 (1974) latetude of Licensms Boards in ccnducting proceedings, ALAB-Sl3,22 NRC 74 n.67 (1985) ; . Southern Cahforma Edison Co (San Onofre Nuclear Generatmg Stanon, Umts 2 and 3), ALAB473, t 15 NRC 688,697 & n 14, aff'd, CLi-82 ll,15 NRC 1383 (1982) f , " - - ~ showmg necessary by party challengmg cross-enammanon ruhng; ALAB 813,22 NRC 76 n 78 t (1985) ', l Southern Cahforma Edison Co. (San Onofre Nuclear Generstmg Stauon, Umts 2 and 3), ALAB480, [ 16 NRC 127,137 (1982) i s scope of medical services arrangements to be made for contammated mjured individuals; ~ ALAB-Sl9,22 NRC 714 n.44 (1985) ( - t
- Southern Cahforma Edison Co. (San Onofre Nuclear Genersung Stanon, Units 2 and 31, ALAB-787 17 NRC 346,380 n.57 (1983)
- y. '
f f' 1,
~
FEM A findangs sufficient for authonzanon of full-power operaung hcense; ALAB-813,22 NRC , g,,
^
~ 2,( ?
78 n.91 (1985) 2 Ii. ,i Southern Cahforn a Edison Co. (San Onofre Nuclear Genersung Stanon, Units 2 and 3), CLt-83-10, 17 NRC 528,533 (1983), rev'd in part on other grounds, GUARD v. NRC,753 F.2d 1844,1150 [Q '.'3 . 1*'* s.7 (D.C. Cir.1985) [, , standard for measunns adequacy of provisions for contammated iryured individuals; ALAB-819, ': " :' 22 NRC 715 (1985) '
, ji 4 e ,I' , ,.
', * ^
. . ,*G gt g #
j .L, : ^* 4
, .j l i
._ ., ._s *
. ~ . . .
I i
.?
> i , , & l
.i s
E :c E us g F. 4 ,
'l
'in*l ', \.;[,: ' ' p f a
- y,
. s -
~ - ' ,-
C,. , ,
,t
+
y,- LEG AL CITATIONS INDEX CASES 4 Southern Cahforma Edison Co. (San Onofre Nuclear Generating $tation, Umts 2 and 3), CLt 8310 17 NRC 528,533,535 n.9 (1983), rev'd in part on other grounds, GUARD v. NRC,753 F.2d i144,1846,1849 50 (D C. Cir 1985) scope of medical services arrangements to be made for contammated injured individuals; ALAB-819,22 NRC 711 n.40,713,714 n.45 (1985) Southern Cahforma Edison Co. (San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Umts 2 and 3), LSP-82 39,
' 15 NRC 1163,1216-17 (1982)
~
Licenang Board delegation to NRC Staff of post-hearing resolution of emergency planning issues; {' , LBP-85-27A,22 NRC 222 (1985)
' Sperry v. Flonda,373 U.S. 379 (1%3) 1 Federal preemption of State laws because they coincidentally prevent reactor operation; ALAB-818,22 NRC 667 n.56 (1985)
Statement of Pohcy on Conduct of Licenang Proceedings, CLI 88 8,13 NRC 452,454 (1981) authonty of Licensing Boards to impose sancuons; LBP-85-48,22 NRC 848 n.6,849 (l985)
' heartig obligations of pro se intervenors; ALAB-819,22 NRC 730 (1985) pressure of other professional responsibihues as basis for failure to comply with NRC deadline for fihng objections; LBP-85-46,22 NRC 832 n.8 (1985) result of a party's failure to meet deadline for filing objecuons; LBP-85-46,22 NRC 830 (1985)
Surface Mimas Regulation Litiganon,627 F.2d 1346,1362 (D.C. Cir.1980) weight given to remarks of individual legislators in determming legislative intent; ALAB-818,22 NRC 670 n.67 (1985) Swain v. Snnegar,542 F.2d 364,369,370 (7th Cir.1976) test for segmentauon of a project for NEPA purposes; LBP-85 43,22 NRC 310,812 (1985) Tennessee Valley Authority (Hartsville Nuclear Plant, Umts I A,2A, IB, and 28), ALAB 463,7 NRC 341,348 (1978) treatment ofissues addressed for first time on appeal; ALAB-819,22 NRC 699 n.20 (1985) Tennessee Valley Auttionty (Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Umts I and 2), ALAB-413,5 NRC 1418,1421 n.4 (1977) rendency requirements for standing to intervene in operaung hcense proceedings; LSP 85-24,22 NRC 99 n.7 (1985) Texas Utahties Generstmg Co. (Comanche Peak Steam Elecinc Stanon, Umts I and 2), DD 83-ll,18 NRC 293,295 (1983) authonty of Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulauon over presiding Licenang Board to suspend an operaung bcense proceedms; D0-85-14,22 NRC 642 n.4 (1985) Thomas Organ Co. v. Jadranska Slobodna Plovidbe,54 F R.D. 367 (N D.111.1972)
' determimns whether a subpoenaed party is an espert ~specially retamed in anucipauon of htigation; LBP-85-38,22 NRC 613 (1985)
Tnmiy Episcopal School Corp. v. Romney,523 F 2J 88 (2d Cir.1975) I need to consder socioeconomic impacts oflow-probatnlity event m environmental impact
' statement; ALAB-819,22 NRC 704 n.29 (1985)
Trout Unhmited v. Morton,509 F.2d 1276,1285 (9th Cir.1974) test for segmentauon of a project for NEPA purposes; LSP.85 43,22 NRC 310, til (1985) Umon Electnc Co. (Callaway Plant, Umt 1), ALAB-740,18 NRC 343,346 (1983) quahty of construcuon required for plant hcenens; ALAB-812,22 NRC 14,44 (1985); ALAB-813,22 NRC 65 n.10 (1985); ALAB-819,22 NRC 729 (1985) focus of contentions deshng with uncorrected equipment deficiencies; LBP-85 49,22 NRC 929 e (1985) standard of comphance with NRC requirements expected for facihty operauon; DD-85-II,22 l' NRC 161 n.7 (1985) . . Umon Electne Co. (Callaway Plant, Uma l), ALAB-750,18 NRC 1205,120918 (19831 conaderanons addressed in esamimns claims of quality assurance deficiencies in motions to reopen; ALAB-812,22 NRC 15 (1985) Union of Concerned Scienusts v. NRC,735 F.2d 1437,1444-51 (D C. Cir.1984), cert. demed, _ . U.S. 105 5. Ct. 815 (1985) esclumon of severe accident minganon issue from NRC adjudicatory proceedmas; ALAB 819,22 NRC 695 n.9 (1985) I i
' 56 t
i D
4 e c.- . a. . ..a , , t LEG AL CITATIONS INDEX CASES Umon of Concerned scienusis v. NRC,735 F.2d 1437,1448,1449 (D.C. Cir.1984) > hugabihty of adequacy of emergency planmns esercises; LBP-85-49,22 NRC 909-10 & n 1 (1985) USM Corp. v. Amerwan Aerosols, Inc.,631 F 2d 420,424-25 (6th Cir.1980) determimns whether a subpoenaed party is an espert specially retamed m anucipaten of , huganon; LBP-85-38,22 NRC 613 (1985)
- V1rmont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Statum), AL AB 138,6 AEC ,
s 520, 523 (1973) . . , . standard for grant of unt mely mouon to reopen; LBP-85 45,22 NRC 822 (1985) , 1 Vermont Yankee Nuclear Pcwer Corp. (Vermont Yar:kee Nuclear Power Stanon). ALAB 138,6 AEC '1 * '< ' 520,523 n.12 (1973) ( 2 , , c cnutill factor m determmmg umchness of monon to reopen; ALAB-815,22 NRC 202 n.ll y ', -, (1985) ' Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc 435 U.S $19,553 f- - ~l (1978) { pressure of other professional responsibihues as basis for failure to comply with NRC dudhne for '[ filing objections; LBP 85 46,22 NRC 832 (1985) Virgima Electnc and Power Co. (North Anna Power Stanon, Units I and 2), ALAB-584, il NRC 451, 456 (1980) i need for Staff consderauon of alternauves to spent fuel shipment; LBP-85-14. 22 NRC 490,492 , (1985) ; , j Virgmia Electne ane Power Co, (North Anna Power Stauon, Umts I and 27, ALAB-741,18 NRC 373,376 78 (198J) ' effect on a proceedmg of admission of a single addinonal contenuon, for purpose of jusufyms f % iI ', t. mierlocutory review; AL AB-817,22 NRC 475 nn.18 & 19 (1985) i l 9;E., , -E Viramia Electnc and Power Co. (North Anna Power Stanon Umts I and 2), CL1-7416,7 A EC 113 < A r. - / , (19741 ,- 's apphcabihty of esecuuve pnvilege to NRC proceedmss; LBP 85 38,22 NRC 626 0985) , ; N ' ~ Virgmia Electnc and Power Co. (North Anna Power Sianon, Umts I and 2), LBP 75 70,2 NRC 879. ~!
- 891 (1975); LBP-76-1,3 NRC 37 (1976) '
hugabihty of need to cicar transmiseson hne rights-of-way; LSP 85-43,22 NRC 807 n 3 (19858 .' , Virgmia Petrok um Jobbers Ass'n v FPC,259 F.2d 921 (D C. Cir 1958)
. g ,
cntena apphed m pasmns on stay requests. ALAB-820,22 NRC 746 n.$ (1985) . .. , Virgmea Sunshine Athance v. Hendne,477 F. Supp. 68,70 (D D C.1979) speculanon about nuclear accidems as " irreparable mJury' for purpose of staying a hcensing ; 7. -
.41
- y'y-'
9 decimon. ALAB-820,22 NRC 748 n.20 (1985) , u-Washington Metropohtan Area Tranet Comm'n v. Hohday Tours. Inc.,559 F.2d 841 (D C, Cir.1977) . j3, cntena apphed in passng on stay requests. ALAB-820,22 NRC 746 n.5 (1985) ' , -i V. .' - Washmston Pubhc Pow!r Supply System iWNP Nos 4 & 5), DD 82-6,15 NRC 1761 (1982) , , j' '
+
hazard to puohc heahh and safety of slowdown or halt m construction of a nuclear plant; e
.>1 . DD-85-14,22 NRC 642 (1985) '
Washmston Pubhc Power Supply System (WPP55 Nuclear Proect No.11, LBP 81-66,18 NRC 780, , 1 783 (1983) . hugabihty of contenuons postulaung enemy attacks s2a:As* r.achar facibues; LBP 8027,22 NRC ,
', * ~
,s 135, 140 (1985)
Washmston Pubhc Power Supply System (WPP55 Nucicar Project No. 2), DD 84-7,19 NitC 899,906
- ' .%.'v .,. Ji aj. .y' <
y-(1984)
> ,~ , , + 2 *-
I standard of comphance with NRC requirements espected for facihty operation; DD-85-ll,22 > .. .
- I NRC 163 n.7 (1985) .' c." 9(*^\-
- ' ~, . , g ' p ,i L'c T . ~ S . . ~ > ' 3 Washmston Pubhc Power Supply System (WPP55 Nuclear Project No. 21 DD-84-7,19 NitC 899,923 'Y: i
~
- 9 .i' I
(1984)
'
- g
- 1 . "/ ,Mr'$ ,k[ U circumstances appropnate for issuance of show cause order; DD-85 II,22 NRC 152 n.2 (1985) +D =
' ."i '
i
- Washmston Pubhe Power Supply System (WPP55 Nuclear Project No. 3), ALAB-747,18 NP.C 1167, ,
1875 (1983) - t , showmg necessary in late-filed contenuons to demonstrate peutioner's abihty to contnbute to the j.* ,
- d proceedmg; LBP-85-49,22 NRC 914 (1985) ,
< 1 9
% ) >
.g j
-, d 57 *
, t s
1
, m . . . . . . . , . . - . . . . ,
_j
, 'f, '
- 1 %
, .\ 8 .
,, *'f . ,,
, ';. . X , s g ",j,
- k. '(., ,,(f" ' t
?i5 yY / if) D %. , %d, # '
i<. *
> s )
~ < .; if , ,
iD +
..c, 1
'E;
, . ,. ji '
- 12. c
. 17; ,
, J... , ..;
_ .%. . .. , _ w_s . w .h , wh, i LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX CASES Washmston Public Power Supply System (WPPSS Nuclear Propet No. 3), ALAB-747,18 NRC 1167, 1877 (1983)
- abihty of FEM A to represent an intervenor's mterests LSP 85 49,22 NRC 914 (1985)
Washension Pubhc Power Supply System (WPPSS Nuclear Propct No 3), ALAB-747,18 NRC 1167,
~'
1881 (1983) showmg necesesty for a party to demonstrate its abihty to coninbute to the record of a s y' proceedms; ALAB-813,22 NRC 33 n.134 (1985)
~
+
Washmeton Pubhc Power Supply System (WPPSS Nuclear Project Nos. 3 and 5), CL177 II,5 NRC e 719, 723 (1977) circumstances appropnaie for pennomns for waiver or esemphon from regulanons; LSP 85-33, 22 NRC 445 (1985) Wisconsen Elecine Power Co. (Pomt Beach Nu. lear Plant, Uma 1), ALAB 719,17 NRC 387,395 (1983) need for record support in appeHaie briefs, ALAB-825,22 NRC 793 n.29 (1985) Wiwonsin Electnc Power Co. (Pomt Beach Nuclear Plant, Uma 2), ALAB-78,5 AEC 319,332 (1972) rehance by espert wunesws en analyses performed by other esperts; ALAB-819,22 NRC 718 (1985) Wisconsin Elecinc Power Co. (Pom Beach Nuclear Plant Uma 23, CLI,73 4,6 AEC 6 (1973) terminanon of proceedings pnor to completion of safety analyses; LBP 85 32,22 NRC 436 n.2 (1985) Wisconsm Electnc Power Co. (Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Umts I and 27 ALAB 739,18 NRC 335, 339 (1983) plenary subject matterJunsdiction of NRC Boards; ALAB-825,22 NRC 790 n.9,791 n.22 (l985) Wisconsm Electnc Power Co. (Poim Beach Nuclear Plant, Umts I and 2), DD-83 l),18 NRC 721, 722 (1983) safety segmficance of isolated deficiencies m a licensee's operanonal actmues; 0 0-85 11, 22 NRC 161 n 8 (1985) Wwonsin Gas Co. v. FERC, 758 F.2d 669,674 (D C. Cir.1985) showmg necessary for estabhshing irreparable injury in stay monons; ALAB-820,22 NRC 747 n 13 (1985) i h 4 a l l 4 I
) . i 1 i 58 I
l i I l
i e
~.n, l
, = l . l } .i i LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX , , REGULATIONS .. . c ,
.--g 7 *
{ ',, 4 C.F.R.102.11 y ,d , authonzauon for payment of cml penalues m mstallments; ALJ 85 2,22 NRC %9 n.1 (1985) . ./. d .: 10 C.F.R. 2.104(c)(4) '. ' * ~ D
~
hugabahty of fmar.m' quahfgations contentions in operaung license proceedmgs; ALAB-813. 22 S' s NRC 84 n.126 (1985) .s. ( ' 10 C.F R. 2.105(b)(1) , - hugabihty of adeq2acy of nonce of heanng; AL AB-825. 22 NRC 791 n.23 (1985) , 10 C.F R. 2.201 NRC Staff treatment of heensee violanons of NRC requirements. DD 85-il,22 NRC 161 n 7 f (19851 c ., n 1 10 C.F.R. 2.205(D hmits on authonty of administranve law judge presiding over emi penalty proceedmg. ALJ-85-1,22 .- f. P , * > NRC 947,959 (1985)
, , *. 3 r C
. .e ,2 - - 'f ~ ] . ,
10 C.F R. 2.206 4 . ;%4 i e c, .- . demal of request for acuon because of heensees' alleged precanous financial condiuon; DD-8514 -
';3. , .'. / .. s s .M'
! 22 NRC 636 (1985) '
+ 16 + / .' -
' d-i demal of request for acuon for alleged equipme:tt quahfication defriencies; DD-85-17,22 NRC 860 j
j (1985); DD-85 20,22 NRC 972-82 (1985) demal of request for delay m Irense issuance pendmg review of meenuve regulanons and M F ' Z- ~[]'* 1.. . emergency preparedness, DD-85-12,22 NRC 449 (1985) -
;, Q; s demal of request for legal action to recury an asserted lack of evacumuon routes under flood .
% .R ,
condsuons. DD-8513,22 NRC 454 (1985) ,. .s ,
=
l demal of request for postponement of contamment leak rate tests pendmg correction of alleged '
- g. g - _- 's 'I
- , ', O,', [ .
1 errors m measurement methodology; DD 85-10,22 NRC 144 (1985) ' '-' ', .
- demal of request for preparauon of environmental impact statement for renemal of hcense to store ~. ,
. - , i ,
spent fuel DD-8516,22 NRC 852 (1985) ' ' J ~^ l demal of request for show-cause proceedmss and revocanon of operstmg hcenses on basis that ' ' ' ' ' . , j esempnons mere improperly granted to Licensee; DD 85 il,22 NRC 151 (1985) * > > M.' j demal of request for suspension of operaung hcenses pendmg resolunon of corrosion in spray pond - ,' *
- pipmg system; DD-85-15,22 NRC 643 (1985) ,
demal request that NRC stay Delamare River Bawn Commission actmues; DD 85-18,22 NRC 871 ' '. e ' e. [W (1985) .
**N- -
., . * . 4 forum for fihns peupons for heense amendment suspensson or revocanon; LBP-85 29,22 NRC 322
., [.- a 4:/1- ' ,, ffG, ?
l (1985) t ,e , , W. . . j'y ? l procedure for challengmg hcensee's comphance with heense condinons; L8P-85-35,22 NRC 533 7 4M *' P5., (1985) ,
* ,f? '
10 C.F R. Part 2, Subpart O i =. ?"[ y*. ' /, l, '.i w "
^
i apphcabihty of, to legistauve format-type heanng; CLI-8518,22 NRC 882 (1985)
- 7,';&M W %. )' E.
Mb -,- 10 C.F.R. 2.700 Kf'? ' W?* . ?;
- l N s ' m. u{.
- purpose of heanns nouces; ALA8-825,22 NRC 790 n.13 (1985) .
+' '
' J "U.h gn 10 C.F.R. 2.701 -' ' %
i documents that are not port of offcial record of a proceedms; ALAB-819,22 NRC 724 n 58 (1985) ' * ' ' 10 C.F.R. 2.704(c) ; .. s support for disquahficanon monons. CLI-8515,22 NRC 185 n.3 (1985) 2
-d ', '-
0 C.F.R. 2.708(b) , ., > rejecuon of stay monon because ofillegibihty; ALAB-820,22 NRC 746 n.4 (1985) * ' f
, l- ,
, m. ,.
r 'y i u .. ' y ~ f l
.. , c.- . , , s... . . - --
1 . i
- v. -
f _
;.n ,
* $ ., ,' 4 .
t , }f *^'1 ,f o',. I l, * ,
'* . f.
t l 'f j,
, M.
( , r Y <,,;,3 ; g ; N , \ e.g yy.m n :t j
* ,- { . n ,,
- a. n, lb! C.,.
- .;- t sf.ln w &.
f g5& \ i N*$ i . , v;N.
./
-(O' F4 l
4 . .r.o y 4;v;;p 6 mg.e.a,. _i]9 .,
~ - - - ~ -. . , ,wa- - ^ > %,wugump ,
e-LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX REGI)LATIONS c
- 10 C.F.R. 2.708(c). 2.7 83(a)
Licenens Board authonty to sinke pleadmss; LBP-85-45,22 NRC 828 (1985)
' - 10 C.F.R. 2.7 3 8(a)
- authonty of L cenang Boards to shorten ume penod for Ghng contenuons; L8P 85-36,22 NRC 593
~
-- (1985)
- 10 C.F.R. 2.714
< f' o
.*-- - ' Soerd entens for evaluauon oflaie-Gled contenuons; ALAB-8 87,22 NRC 472 (l985)
- > deedhne for Ghns petmons to intervene; L8P-35 24,22 NRC 98 n.1 (1985)
Licenens Board responsbehty to demand comphance with lateness factors; L8P 85 36,22 NRC 592
, (1985) speculauon by Appeal Board masonty on Licensmg Board apphcahon of Gwe-factor test to
' hypotheticallate contention; ALAB-817,22 NRC 478 n.fi (1985) 10 C.F.R. 2.714(a) e
' factors belanced for unumely intervenuon; ALAB 816,22 NRC 465 n.14,44 (19s5) s factors to be addressed in monons to reopen a record to admit a new contenuon; LBP45 42,22 NRC 798 (1985)
Gwe factors to be addressed by peunoner Ghng amended peuuon to micrvene; L8P-85 36. 22 NRC 591-92, 594 (1985) showmg necessary for unumely intervention; ALAB-816,22 NRC 43 (1985) IO C.F.R. 2.7 84(a)(l) admissitnhty oflate Gled contention based on issue raised by Scard and dismissed on appest; ALAB-813,22 NRC 80 (1985)
- apphcabihty of Gwe-factor test to late-Gled diesel generator content'on; ALAS?ll). 22 NRC 42 (1985)
Gwe-factor test for admission oflate Gled contentions; ALAB-813,22 NBC 79 (1985): ALAB 819 22 NRC 725 (1985); L8P 85-24,22 NRC 98 n.3 (1985) need for lateness of an emerventson peuuon to be challeflged by anothee party to insger apphcauon of Gwe factor ter; ALAB-Sl6,22 NRC 46 (1985) penalty for failure to address Gwe factors for admission oflate-Gled centenunns; AL AB-416,22 NRC 48 (1945)
' rejection of conteriuon allegmg madequate correttion of control roem Jesyn defsiencies; y
ALAB-813,21 NRC 54 (1985) rules applic 9 oc to late-Gled emergency planning contenteons; L'8PU 49,22 NRC 909 (1985) standard for grant of mouon to reopen that raises previously unconsested assues; ALA8-812,22 NRC 14 n.4 (1985) 10 C.F.R. 2.714(b) basis and speciGcity requcreunts for admissaan of contenuens, CLI.85-f f,22 NRC 187 (1985)
- failure of contennon to aa:isfy bets and specincity regaremects for admission; ALAB-419,22 NRC 693. 725 (1985) paruculaney required V eviderve supporung motmns w reopLn; ALAB-El2. 22 NRC 14 (1o85) teecuon of nonspecific come.non; ALA8-811,22 NRC d) n 5 (let5)
"vicanous advwe of cotescl" as cause for late f hng of 0;mennons. L9645-16,22 NRC 593 f1981) 10 C.F R. 2.714a appeal of denial of late mtetvenbon; ALAS-Sl6. 22 NRC 45 (1985) appestabihty of summary dispossuon of contention where achon terwMes party's panicipanon.
LBP 85-43. 22 NRC 814 (1985) 10 C.F R. 2.718 alleganons of prejudicial rulings by a Licenmns Board; CLi-85-l$. 22 NRC 185 n.) (19451 .. funcuan of Licenang Boards; ALAB-819,22 NRC 740(1985) ' 10 C.F R. 2.718(a), ft), (f), th). fal,(J) and (k) powers of Board presiding over legislauve format-type heanns.CLi-8518,22 NRC 882 (19858 10 C.F R. 2.718(e)
. flesibility of Licensing Boardsin r*gulaims henness; ALA8-819.22 NRC 727 (1981)
Lrensms Board authnt:ty to sankt pleadmss; LBP 85-45,22 NRC 828 (1985) i I l l [ U
a i l l i . . .
._ _ . _ . .f 6 + !
t h i LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX REGULATIONS , 10 CJ R. 2.7186) . mouon for directed ceruncation of ruhng allowmg intervenors to amend broad, nonspecine i contenuon ALAB-817,22 NRC 472 n I (1983) 10 C.F.R. 2.720(h)(2)h) and (hs) use of discovery to Desh out nonspeci6c contenoons ALA%817,22 NRC 477 an.8 & 9 (1985) . - U
.'^
10 C.F.R. 2.722(a)(1) and (W Board author *ty to appoint techn. cal mterrogator and mformal asustant; LBP-85-26,22 NRC I20 (1985) -y 10 C.F.R. 2.730(c) ~ Ghng of anseers in suppon of mobons; ALAB-817,22 NRC 479 n.12 (1985) < monon to sinks as rerly to answer to sumrnary dispomuon mo: ion; LSP-85 29,22 NRC 304 n.1 - (1o85, v' - 10 C.F.R. 2.731 i~ NT'...~ ,~'5 Demibikty of Licenang Boards et regulaung heannss; ALAB-819,22 NRC 727 (1985) ' ,' '; - .'";
- 10 C.F.R. 2.732 ; J '
,^C burden of proofin cml penal y proceedess; AL3-85 l,22 NRC 947 (1985) % -
10 C.F.R. 2.740(b)(1) - f' ,L .- Irmits on discovery; LBP 85-42,22 NRC 803 (1985# '
-t i use of discovery to flesh out nonspecifs contenuons; ALAB-817,22 NRC 477 n.7 (1985) . ,
10 C.F R. 2.740(t6)(2) claim of work product pnvilege for documents relaMg to decontammanon costs; LBP-85-38,22 l NRC 620 (1985) - cnteria for claimms week product prmlege; LBP-85-38,22 NRC 621 (1985) t 10 C.F R. 2.740(e)(3) + p['k, - 1. responses to disscvery requests for docs.ments not yet in eminence; LSP-85-41,22 NRC 768 (1985) -
-. J'M ' C .- ,
10 Cf R. 2 742 W. -$ *' , deadhne for servce of discovery responses; LBP-85 38,22 NRC 631,632 (1985) 10 C.F,R 2.743(t) s' conwquence of pony's fadure to tender witness's quahrications or resumony; ALAB 819,22 NRC 729-30 (1985) < ! 10 C.F.R. 2.743(c) need to include evaderte of httle mtrriac worth in a record; ALAB-524,22 NRC 782 n.18 (1985) M. -
- partnutanty reemred of evidence supportms monons to reopen, ALAB-812,22 NRC 14 (1985) ^a ,
* - as
- 10 C F.R. 2.749 apphcabihty of, en operanns hcense amer.dment proceedmps; LBP 85-34,22 NRC 485 (1985) 4 *
'T. '
standards appl ed by Boards considennt summary dispostion mouont; LBP.45-27A,22 NRC 208
- - 'H ~
i
. J, ,, .
(19857, LSP 85-29,22 NRC 310 (1985) ' 'W.,
- 10 C.F R. 2.749(a) '
-df ,3, '
documents to tie nied wn% summary dispos:non monons, LBP 85-29. 22 NRC 302 (1985) ' u ,- , , , Ghns reemrements for opponents of summary dispostion mouans; LBP-85-29,22 NRC 302,305 - -*
', 7 (1985) **
10 C.F R. 2.749(b) .
.Y '
Soard authonty to reevest orai sestimony where record is insufncient to ellow summary disposten;
'4- 'a M _ , '
~,
-~*/* ', i : .
LBP-85-29,22 NBC 307 si.3 (1985) s ',D burden en pony oppesca motion for summary dispomuon. LBP-85 27A 22 NRC 229,231 (1983); LSP45-29,22 NRC X3 G985) M;N M .:N V ~_
'i ' y~ -
s ;." Q ~ v ,. j 10 Cf.R. 2.749(d) '
'T.)if,g&
~- -
} standsrd foi grant of m.mmary despowuon in hcense amendment proceedmps; LBP-85 29,22 NRC >s'[ ',,M ' , - . -i 3 : 0 (1 9:15) ,' .[f? M l ,v , - Mi standard hr grant of summary dispomuon motiort LBP 85 27A,22 NRC 205 (1985)
- 4-".b'sfi,['). a u ; $ Q ' 1, s'E% W . ,
10 C F.A 2 751std> -
' 'f - r 2 ohecuon so admismon of amended quahty assurance consenuon; ALAS-817,22 NRC 476 n 2 (1985) ' +
10 Cf.R. 2 752(c) . *
*
- N* '
fadure to comply with deadhne for f, ling chect4ns to Preheanns Conference Order; L BP-85-4f,22 F ' t [ -/,[ ' 6 ? Jl
- NAC 432 (1983) -
,, I f.J, ,,
5
?.-
g 5
- i g ,
gg *%--. e- G f I %*
}
; -w ; y 1. ,w. ,. e~ ~p ..; er e . p.,v, e w , ?
P
? s
- j h , , ,
,'y y z ; & 7 f. " ' ' a-
,. . ,,,y ,
.;.% w n c.n s , > > >
e' h. ,'
, b. r, **/.
.w , - -,_
4 .- y n ? " r[(
- s % , - - ,
v , ,4, .,3 t , , V , ', ,],;f,Y i ,, .p . . .L g j.7. l:
. ..y
. M,dhb i = I.fbF ! F Qy([*t. -*
9.r > ,
,!6 N g. .
4%.f.} . 'g.f.M'N : [ .g'g
. q,. ,
qti v:~m, &e. A . . -Qf :* b. 4 >..i . r- Ma
- k. . -- : ud , L c '3 ' w k,'.
r ,-4
. 1 . _ m. m i ssjk@?&,ne % M M E d id I
L LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX
't REGULATIONS j
i
.j
- i 10 C.F.R. 2.754(a)
-' flexibehty of Licenang Boards in scheduling the Gling of proposed Gndmss; ALA8-819,22 NRC 727
; (1985)
, 10 C.F.R. 2.754(b) nature of Board's authonty to dismass contenuons; L8P-85 35,22 NRC 521 (1985)
- 10 C.F.R. 2.754 niing of esempoon from 10 C.F R. Part 50, Appendia 3, Ill.D.2(b)(ii); L8P-85 33,22 NRC 444
~
(1985) lisigatnlity of hydrogen control contentions; ALAB-813,22 NRC 36 n.142 (1985)
- means for changmg regulatory limits of worker espesure to radiation; L8P 85 28,22 NRC 266 (1985) peutions for waiver or esempuon from 10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendit J Ill D 2(b)(ii); LBP 85 33, t 22 NRC 445-46 (1985)
I 10 C.F.R. 2.758(a)
' scope ofissues to be considered by a Licensing Board; LBP 85 33,22 NRC 444 (1985) 10 CF R. 2.758(b) litigabiisty of need-for-power and Anancial quabGcanons issues in operstmg hcense proceedings; ALAB-813,22 NRC 84 n.127 (1985)
' 10 C.F.R. 2.758a l hugatiiliey of contention challenging 10 C.F.R. 50.13. L8P 85-27. 22 NRC 13I n.2 (1985) 10 C.F R. 2 760 functen of Licensing Boards; ALAB-819,22 NRC 740 (1985) 10 C.F R. 2.760(a)
} appeald from partial insusi decisson granting summary dispossuon of comennons; LBP 85-49, 22 NRC 935 (1985) limits on Board jurisdichon; L8P 85 35,22 NRC 518 (1985) scope of issues litigable in licenans proceedings; L8P-85 33,22 NRC 446 (1985) a 10 C.F.R. 2.760(c)
I form requered far issuence ofiniti.i decisions; ALAB-819,22 NRC 727 n.61 (1985) 10 C.F R. 2.760s
. Board authority to raise essues sua sponte; ALAB-813,22 NRC 80 (1985)
I contentions hable for summary dispostion; L8P-45-49,22 NRC 915 (1985) , function of Licensms Boards; ALAB 819,22 NRC 740 (1985) limitauon on safety matters hugable in management capabihty proceedms; L8P 85 28,22 NRC 298
; (l985)
, sua sponte authonty of Licensing Boards to raise safety issues; ALAS-819,22 NRC 731 n.64 (1985)
- 10 C.F R. 2.762 i' appealabihty of summary dispossuon of contennon where action termmate? party's participation; L8P-85-43, 22 NRC Sie (1985) appeals from partial imtial decision grantmg summary dispostion of contenuons; L8P 85-49, 22 i NRC 935 (1985) i 10 C.F.R. 2.762(d)(1) need for record citatons is appellate bnefs; AL AS 813,22 NRC 66 n.16 (1985); ALA8-825,22
- j*
, NRC 793 n.29 (1985) 10 C.F.R. 2.764(0(2) 4 j cntena for euthonranon of facthty operanon above 5 percent power levels; ALAB 420,22 NRC 745 I n.2 (1985) 9
- effect of Commtemon immedeste effectiveness determination on Appeal Board's determmauem of a *,
! stay monon; ALAB-8to,22 NRC 195 (1985) lp C.F R. 2.764(0(2)
- scope of Commesmon reuew of pernal imtial decision; CLl-8515,22 NRC 185 (1985) a , 10 CF R. 2.764(0(2)(i) .
entena appbed in sneductmg emediate effectiveness review; CLI-8513. 22 NRC 2-3 (1985) 10 C F.R. 2364(s) effect of Coromission authorizauon for full-power license on pendmg motions to reopen;
- ALA8-812,22 NRC 13 n.3 (1985) b 62 0
e a ,
.p., , , , , , , , , , g p.
~
C s , e , , . e , 0 e
- - .s Ia e
e i4; g'* l
. i5 LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX '
REGULATIONS 4 , effeci of Commission mimedsate effecuveness determinaten on Appeal Board's determmanon of a stay mobon. ALAB 814,22 NRC 195 (1985) ! . 3 10 C.F R. 2.785(bl6)
- i s .e monon for directed ceruncauon of ruhns allommg miervenors to amend broad, nonspecinc '
Ee . ; ,p ( ( :. , 3 . contemmn. ALAB-817,22 NRC 472 n.1 (19851 10 C.F.R 2.788(al
/ , '
;u N~*
deadime for films stay applicauon; ALAB-814,22 NRC 195 (1985> '4 ';'
~ab
. 10 C.F R. 2.788(b) s A,' "
hmit on lengin of stay applicapons; ALAB-820,22 NRC 748 n.16 (1985) ~ 10 C.F R. 2.788(el
^'
- P =.
h
- l cntena apphed m passing on stay 'equests. ALAB-820,22 NRC 746 n.5 (1985) *D . '"
P'
, "i ,
l denial of stay monon for failure to address centena of. ALAB-814,22 NRC 193 n.1 (1985) L ~ faciors considered m determimes stay requests. CLI-8514,22 NRC 178 n.1 (1985) W >_f>; - o, '"
'. j. .
4 forum for Gimg pennons for heense amendmens suspension or revocanon; LBP 85-29,22 NRC 322 ' (19851 "
.j
, ,. ./' N ,
most important cntenon apphed m determmms need for a stay; ALAB 820,22 NRC 746 (1985) 10 C F R. 2 788(eHI) C
,[_
- need for Board Andings pnor to heense issuance as ground for stay request; ALAB-814. 22 NRC -
193 (198 4 L., , 10 C F R. 2.788(eH2). (3). (4s , factors to be addresned by stay monons. ALAB-814. 22 NRC 194 (1985) , 10 C F.R. Part 2. Appendia C apphcanon of NRC Enforcement Pohey 10 unauthonted handimg of byproduct matenals; AW 85-1, " [ f- "3 g J, , - 22 NRC 946 (1985) desenpurus of Systemauc Assessment of Licensee Performance process; DD-85 il,22 NRC 165 3, n
~
(1985) > j 10 C.F.R. Part 2 Appendan C 's i hmitauons on ctvil penalty authonty of admemstrative law judge; AW.85-1,22 NRC 959 (1985)
,1 ' f .(
f
. - ,' - 1 10 CF R Part 2, Appendia C,I standard of comphance with NRC requaremems espected for facihty operanon; DD 85 II. 22 NRC
." * < ,.7 j
[ D' ' .,' 161 n.7 (1985) 1; :' .*,
, g,p 4 V' - (" L -
,- 1) y ; , ,
-l
- 10 C.F R. Part 2. Appendia C, til -
aggreganon of violaisons to a higher severity level; AU-85-l. 22 NRC 960 (1985) ' ' ' conuderanon of bcensee asuivde m assessmg cml penalty; AW 851,22 NRC 962 (1985) f:y descnpeion of seventy levels of violanons ALJ-85-1,22 NRC 959 (1985) '
~ i ~'
l ,
'i
,.:i determining safety segm6cance of seventy level 1 and 11 violanons for purpose of determmmg ' O/ ' .
- v' amount of cml penalty; AW-851,22 NRC %I (1985) e +
10 C F.R Part 2. Appendia C. V B o'> a consideranon of a heensee's abehty to pay m imposms a penalty; AW 85-2,22 NRC 969 a.1 (1985) - ,' i level of vioiauens resultms in cml penslues, AU 851,22 NRC 959. %) (1985) circumstances appropnaie for minganon of cml penalues; AU 85-1,22 NRC 965 (1985)
. ?+.,* ." ,
i 10 C.F R. Part 2, Appendes C. V B.3-V.B.5 - Ii 3 I.-j !^; .,%
'D.
y[Uas/ ;; s , standards for mereaans or decreaang a cml penaaty for a seventy level 11 violanon; AW 851,22 i NRC 964 (1985) /.] ,} *j.[, < q< ,j [?
+
7e ,7Qpq 10 C.F.R. Part 2, Appendia C Supp. VI C.2
. a' N I % - / s -
". J' .s ' 4 i?. * :(,V;.N .
^
-M safety segm6cance of unauthortred possessson and use of two sealed sources of americium-241; a
- i.' Y ~- ~e j. . lif AW-851,22 NRC 950 (1985) 10 C.F R. Part 2. Appendia C Supp. VIC 4
< -* ^lN""..v 5 < ~ _',i' '*'j t
'+1y D'$ :
N* ,T'
- Uh
, violation level of conduct of hcensed actmtees by technically unquahned person; AW-85-1,22 NRC 952 (1985)
_ ','1J/.i% ' ** M, UN < ;e T%
"*?"~?
, 10 C.F.R. 20.202(a) 1 adequacy of Shearon Harns personnet mon torms system; LBP-85 28,22 NRC 265 (1985)
. ., ! -iA.-N *' ' ' ,[
,*',T. ' ' 7, ' .$.W H 10 C.F R. Part 21
$ .N i.t.. E ~'
s adequacy of Perry sueveillance and mamienance program for diesel generator ensmes; LBP 85 35, 22 NRC 554 (1985) ' ' IJ ' , ' W Y-[ * , * ' ' ' i
. ~-
a
, V-, .' '
; i J.[ ,
., o a . y ,.
[7. ,
. -f *-((
s
, '; i - <
F
,.y,.,;._
.. . _ - - .-. --y- ~ <.~ - 2.r. e ~ r , ,
n-en.b. ,
.,. s. s . i U.
. - 8 i
.t' 3 Vj( s . ,. 3r
, , >r ,
'L
'" r 4 J 6 .
,['..4'
, )
4 d t-7 ( l
*l ."[ ,
j , i
, > s ~
t
-1'
,(
x :. , ,
, ,1
., f c + ' ,4y 4
.j se. m ,j
_ ,,...-..ha -
~
...'.t, '
; e G y'
, . - 3 7 ' i .'.' ~ $-Q:..
<, i l
{ v_ ; %_ 4 .p c.Q[ , ,- GQ:y*de 3, - t *y _ -= ^ p ,- > k t , %a[.9$ , [ -
. .[... .. b NN3[bg[bNJ, .gjkh,hQ ,
i *
' LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX REGULATIONS l
reportabihty of crankshaft od plus defect; L8P-85 35,22 NRC 554,582 (1985) reportabdity of nonconformances to NRC; ALAB 812,22 NRC 29 (1985) 10 C.F.R. 30.70,30.71 applicabihty of, to cemum-137 and amencium-241; ALJ-85-i. 22 NRC 944 (1985) 10 C.F.R. 31.8 acuvines involving une of americium 24l covered by a general heense; ALJ-85-1,22 NRC 944 n.1 (1985) 10 C.F R. Part 50 storage of spent fuel in facihty other than where it was generated; ALAS-825,22 NRC 792 (1985) f- 10 C.F.R. 50.12 Licenang Board authority to conader challeriges to Commismon authonty to grant exempuons from regulanons; L8P 85 33,22 NRC 444 (1985)
- 10 C.F R. 50.12(a) request for esempnon from 10 C.F.R Part 50, Appendas J,Ill.D 2(bl6i); L8P-85-33,22 NRC 44)
(1985) 10 C.F.R. 50.13 hugabihty of railroad explosion contention; L8P-85-27,22 NRC 131-33 (1985) ranocale behind regulation; LSP-85-27,22 NRC 133 34,139-40 (1985) 10 C.F R. 50.13(a) interpretanon of re8ulanon; LBP-85 27,22 NRC 135-37 (1985) 10 C.F R. 50.13(b) interpretauon of the word " deploy"; LBP 85-27,22 NRC 138-40 (1985) 10 C.F R. 50.33(f) determmanon of hcensee's financial quahficauons to complete plant construchon; DD 4514, 22 NRC 641 (1985) 10 C.F R. 50.40(b) origin of the terms " management competence" and " management capabihty"; LSP-85-28,22 NRC 236 n.2 (1985)
' 10 C.F R. 30.44 comphance of Perry hydrogen control system with; LSP 85 35,22 NRC 530 (1985) desenpuon of hydrogen control systems at Perry plant; LSP-85-35,22 NRC 568 (1985) 30 C.F.R. 50.44(c)(3) adequacy of analyms of Perry hydrogen ismuon synar.i. LSP-85 35,22 NRC 551 (l985) litigabihty of hydrogen control comentions; ALA8-813,22 NRC 86 n.141 (1985) 10 C.F.R. 50 44(c)(3)(iv), (v), (vi) content of analyus of hydrogen control systems; L8P 85-35,22 NRC 530 (1985) 10 C.F.R. 50.44(c)(3)(vii)( A), (B) deadhne for submismon of analyms of hydrogen control system; LSP-85-35,22 NRC 530 (1985) 10 C.F R. 50 46(a)(l) cntena for computer models used to calculate peak cladding temperatures; L8P-85-29,22 NRC 311
' (1985) ' 10 C.F.R. 50 46f b)(l) adequacy of computer models used to predict peak cladding temperatures. L8P-85 29,22 NRC 315, l 316, 321 (1985)
, 10 C.F.R. 50 47 area to be encompensed by offste emergency plans; ALAB-818,22 NRC 658 n.) (1985) need for inclumon of evacuauen time esumate for special facihty m emergency response plan; LSP-85-25,22 NRC 181.116 (1985) **
standard for determimns adequacy of emergency response traimng; L8P-85 25,22 NRC 107 (1985) 10 C.F R. 50 47(a) and (b) vacanon of decimons addressing esempoon from; CLI-85-16,22 NRC 459 (1985)
' 10 C.F R. 50.47(a)(1)
- demal of operatrns licenses because of deficiencies in unlity-sponsored emergency plan; LSP-85-31, 22 NRC 427,428,431,432 (1985) scope of protective measures to be taken during radiological emergencies; ALAB $lt,22 NRC 676 (1985) 64 e
* " ' ' ' * .-~.s- - . , , + , , , ,
e e
ms . . . m ..- ' - . . .' , s . LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX ' r3, , . , , . . REGULATIONS .
, w , .
1 10 C.F.R. 50 47(a)(2) weight gwen to FEM A tesumony on adequacy of emergency plannmg esercises; L8P-85-49,22 4 9 . NRC 908,910 (1985) , 10 C F.R. 50 47(b) ,
' , . . ic .
consequence of failure to sans r emergency plannmg standards; ALAB-819,22 NRC 715 (1985) ' np 10 C.F R. 50 47(b)(2) b -) Q(* adequacy of emergency respor ne umes for onsite emergency staff at Shearon Harns; L8P-85-27A, ,. - [ , 22 NRC 211 (1955) ,
, /4 y
. mimmum onsite stafling requi ed of Lacensee for radiologral emergency; LBP-85-27A,22 NRC 208 , . . . . . , , ,, r, , (
(1985) - : . _ I 10 C.F R. 50 47(b)(8) . - + ?>h _ disuncuon between Regulatory (.mdes and regulanons; ALAB-819,22 NRC 710 (1985) V ^ % .J-p.,f,a.O , c, - y,e-nesd to desenbe emergency respoi se faciliues and equipment in emergency plans; ALAB-819,22 * 'c ' ; , C NRC 709 (1985)
"';%* a; ";- N ,- ,y ;
legal force of NUREG cnsena. LBP-85-27A,22 NRC 210 (1985) . ;_ s V-10 C.F R. 50.47(b)(10) -
. 1 O l;' Y d <,
consideranon of adverse weather condinons m evacuanon ume esumates; LBP-85-27A,22 NRC ,- . p 2 > t, s 226 (1985) effect of conservausms m evacuauon time study on protecuve action decisions dunns a radiologgai .
, .~ .- _3.
t
'U<
[ ,'- , emergency; LDP 85-27A 22 NRC 213 (1985) . . ,, f g;; ' F need to provide potassum iodide to emergency workers; LBP.85 27 A. 22 NRC 223 (1985) < J -
.(
/ 'P 4.f d ; t-requirement for Apphcams to make and maintam current evacuauon ume esumates; L8P 85-27A. ,
22 NRC 214-15 (1985) , c'- scope of protecuve measures to be taken dunns radiologral emergencies. ALAB 818,22 NRC 676 - (1985) 10 C F R. 50.47(b)(ll) means for controlhng radiauon exposures to emergency workers; LBP-85-35,22 NRC 567 (1985) . 10 C.F.R. 50 47(b)(12) i4,,) y
~ '
consequence of failure to sausfy emergency planmns standards of AL AB 819,22 NRC 716 n 48 ' l (1985) ;g :'Z... '
, ., .- _ 'Q ,gQ scope of medical services arrangements to be made for contammated injured mdividuals. *
. y *a '
ALAB-839,22 NRC 711,714 n 45 (1985); LDP-35 35,22 NRC 524,525 (1985) J ' (V
- : - m[';.$,'
10 C.F R. 50 47(b)(15) '
.'s' 3 . /-y t l g mdividuals for whom radiolossal emergency response traimns is required. LBP 35-25,22 NRC 104 .. .,; - fyt';< '
(1985) '
'?J J 10 C.F R. 50 47(b)(16) '2 ' ', . i O" 'S f. b ,
deadhne for submission of emergency plan implemenung procedures. L8P-85-27A,22 NRC 221 T E .' s> , ,,,_ (1985) .,,',',"~" '
+, , (' g.; JW
10 C.F R. 50 47(c)(1) 'N4
~
s
. ( ,
classerranon of utshty-sponsored offsne emergency plan as "mienm compenseung scuon"; ,M
, ~.'l[.,E,'y %'-c.[M AL AB-818,22 NRC 676 n 94 (1985) .
consequence of fadure in sausfy emergency planmns standards of 50 47(b); ALAB-819,22 NRC 715,716 n 48 (1985) 4
;g,
~,.".' - , ,. , ' 3)O 'h. ) '
,! / k effect oflegal empediments to unhty sponsored emergency plan; LBP 85-31,22 NRC 428 (1985) . " .Q ? , N, . L, 2.M4f
. N.. t,f N. , ;
10 C F.R. 50.48 ~b'/'-
$- W - [ y (, J s .%y Q p ,f($'M*,M regulanons and guidance for nuclear plant fire protection protecuon programs. LBP-85 49,22 NRC 917 (1985) m? -Q.,. ~{ . - ^ , O J, %. ** %; .,
M*@h";
- ,s 10 C.F.R. 50.49 adequacy of environmental quahncanon programs at TMI-1, San Onofre Uma 1. Kewaunee, and
.s, k,
s y O i S W" -M . Q &.- Mg
~ . M,'> .. - ~,. --l # . n ., 6 Haddam Neck piams. DD-85-20,22 NRC 972 82 (1985) M., s ,?. . s 4
.t i
kV v. elecincal equipment that must be quahned. DD-45-20,22 NRC 980 (1985) c.M - 1 > ,# F f.dyd4 ~':' *4 3 ,l' .; s*da p? equipment required to be en-onmentally quahned; L8P-85 28,22 NRC 268 (1985) ~ j~ l~ scope of; DD-85-17,22 NRC 860,862-6) (19851 d, f. % ' . ' ' A[N i d;. h.J.% . '
*f," My;g3 . p S'O g, s, a 10 C.F R. 50.49(c)(4) calculauon of dose for a radiauon environment for purpose of environmemal quahncanon of . .
1}
;f.%/;nj._ ' ; -t .,'-
equipment; LBP-85-28. 22 NRC 285 (1985) , o " ** , s 9., .#.fMl .N, s A oi M. , R.'. 2;'/
. J . .:
, y,U/.
O
, #. Q . . . . ,. [ L' 4.
+s ., h ..h
,4
.,,.. . s s r
, +.s.f .- * ., Q . ., .. . ,. et %.+<, <
..% f' O $
l~
* ;g
$NyD. M 9,,~-
m:gy',r
.. ~",
. d?w..
,1. g j ~I 4 4 7 ..
, o
^#
- n. 9 , .' h q y rs , - * ,
9 i e
,.p., <
. ...;, m...~., .-,......p.rm,
. m ---..w,. ., g 8'
,en '
'. c ,
.t( (
8 , ,n' ,
* )
4 ' [h 6- '
, - ,,, , s y?
J *U , r
, r - e
.g. e t 1
e a l
i
,s w ,< < c g ,'
.r , , , . s ., .
3;w . 4
, W ',' r, g, g.3 * ,/gh.3,J.gl j.~ , , ', '
, } ,
,t L , (- 7
- : - . N .aQ.. y..q s;.
Y Wy. 3QWny
,s 7
?- ,
.4 -,
- a. ;: , c.,.'
- % %e : :,.,;,. .py.,v p~,
l2,~,q.
;s Qwm %'WD y,m-v.w
, ' W. ,.=.,, -.- .
~
' '. ?hh'[e sw.. .s c $tk'
/, tem Ms-: mw 2 q 'l ,,'
,>e
~
s..,
^i
,.. ~
4 w.w;@F .W.
- v. . .
.u.aa ms e.Lew M.saJ.W. . .-
w'4 , p&'. .~,~_ -.--- - .
,, ?,
.-a-
, j--n . L' s. -...*s-.w LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX REGULATIONS
- 10 C.F.R. 50.49(g)
. entension of equipment quahlicanon deadhnes; DD-85 20,22 NRC 978-79 (198$)
~
10 C.F.R. 50.49(i)
~ requirements for quahrying hydrogen ismtion systems; L8P-85-35,22 NRC 544 (1985)
- ' 10 C.F.R. 50.54(m)(2)(i) and (iii) control room staffing requirements: L8P 85 28,22 NRC 2% (1985) 10 C.F.R. 50.55(e) adequacy of Perry surveillance and maintenance program for diesel generator engmes; L8P 85 35,
, 22 NRC 554 (1985)
<-- u" need for disclosure of apphcant's internal audits to NRC; ALAB-812,22 NRC 21 n.15 (1985)
, reportatnhty of contractor reports on quakty assurance; L8P-85-42,22 NRC 800 (1985)
- reportatnhty of Nonconformance Reports to NRC; ALAS-812,22 NRC 29 (1985) 10 C.F.R. 50.57(a) -
. F findings necessary for issuance of operstmg licenses; ALAB-813,22 NRC 64 n.7 (1985);
,; ALAB-820,22 NRC 745 n.2 (1985) 10 C.F R. 50.57(a)(3)(i) 0 - if) '
quahey of construcuon required for plant heensing; ALAB-812,22 NRC 15 (1985); ALAB 813,22 NRC 65 (1985); ALA8 819,22 NRC 729 (1985)
- 16 C.F.R. 50 59 responsitnlity for decision as to whether a matter consututes an unreviewed safety quesuon; LBP.85 36,22 NRC 598 (1985) 10 C.F R. 50.72 operstmg record of Diablo Canyon Umt 2 durms first 2 months of operauon; CL185-14,22 NRC l i.- t 82 (1985) i , , , ,
scope ofindependent review of reportable events at Limench facihty; DD-85 II,22 NRC 166 I i< (1985)
, '3 10 C.F R. 50.73
'. deadimes for licensee event reports; DD-85-il,22 NRC 165 (1985) s scope of review to discover esistence of personnel error trend at Limerick facihty; DD-85 il,22 N RC 167 (1985) 10 C.F R. 50 Il issuance of operstmg license condiuon hmiung control over heensees by new facihty owner or lessor. CLl 85-17,22 NRC 876 (1985)
- M# . -
10 C.F R. 50.91(a)(4) t .) need for hearing on proposed operstmg license amendments; LBP-85-29,22 NRC 302 (1985) T , 10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendia A e mterpretauon of the terms " fuel design limit," "anucipated operauonal occurrence
- and
%- " appropriate marsm*; L8P 85 29,22 NRC 311 (1985) i 10 C.F R. Part 50, Appendis A. GDC 1,2,4 and 23 4 ~~'~ equipment required to be environmentally quahfied under; LBP 85 28,22 NRC 268 (1985) j' 10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendia A, GDC l.17 adequacy of Perry comphance wnh; LBP-85 35,22 NRC 553 (1985)
- - 10 C F.R. Part 50, Appendia A GDC 3 regulanons and swdance for nuclear plant fire protection programs, L8P-85-49,22 NRC 917 (1985) 10 C F.R. Part 50, Appendia A, GDC 17 adequacy of emergency diesel generators to sausfy requirements for onsite emergency electrical
- ~ > ' power; ALAB-824,22 NRC 778-82 (1985)
, y* need for onsite electnc power system for nuclear power plants; ALAB-813,22 NRC 79 n.9e (1985)
[ + j, . purpose of emergency diesel generators; LBP-85-35, 22 NRC 551 (1985) .. j, ~; ' 10 C F.R. Part 50 Appendia A GDC 62
.& : , potennal ofincreased spent fuel pool storage capacity for crincahty accident; L8P-85 36,22 NRC 1 $99 (1985)
"','. 10 C.F.R. Part 50. Appenden B ,
adequacy of Limerick quahty assurance program: ALAB-819,22 NRC 722 (1985) adequacy of Perry comphance with; LBP 85-35,22 NRC 553 (1985)
;4 a 1 7, gj allegauons of deficiencies m Waterford quahey assurance program; ALAB-812,22 NRC 16 (1985)
^ ,
]
h b g e S l J t 1' a d
,yu . r -. y - ,
m-e~ , I
-/
4 5 '
A _ .
, ;I--:
L
. v; a ,
o? a. . , _ o_. .. .m .. ._. & . .m,.,,. .e . . . . , ,
/ e g . i, 3 , , ,
s _
. s:3
- ,, g. ,-
t 4 1 I J l LEG AL CITATIONS INDEX .
, , .p>O. '
j
=
REGULATIONS 6 . s . 4
- y. .>
P. y. r exemption of paint coatmss inside containment from quahty assurance requirements of; LBP-85-37 s
+1 4
22 NRC 602 (l%85) 'E s; I' funcuon of quah:3 assurance programs.. ALAB Al2. 22 NRC 18 (19851 s ,-
','~
I independence required of quahey assurance rArnager; ALAB.813. 22 NRC 67 (1985) N 3 q s .. , 4 quahty assurance requirements for environmemal cuahricanon test facihtees. LBP.85-28,22 NRC p q... N ~ N, ' p.3 ' j/;ic,j p, .f, } . $ , . C ' y K , 288 (1985) & M *+in,
/ qly3 d. '- -
L j scope of program for quahricanons testmg. LBP.85-47,22 NRC 840 (1985) j ;.f , y - -
' fj .p.. i,Q . .
- structural mdependence' of Shearon Harns construcuos- mspecuon; LDP-45-28,22 NRC 283 y ,, - ( s 3, - ;;,d s p.
. 1 ' ';; . ,
! (1985) " . ". ' [ , . g~ .- i , ~ ' W. d s. ' V '4 , , 10 C.F.R Part 50. Appendia 8. Introduchon .. Q, t U . f " 7.7 , i ? * . : ' , r dermilion of quahiy control *; ALAB-812. 22 NRC 18 n 9 (1985h ALAB 813. 22 NRC e3 n.l - -y oN. i (1985) e ., . . < 3 DP 3,;6 Sc.3.'
- f * % ^:st -
means of providmg reasonable assurance of a plant's pro $er construction; alp 313,22 NRC 64 n8(1985) / N'Q,W* , ( p* N, . , . , , ;y/Q{f , e:.
,Y,,* .
*r: T i ;O<.jp,Q:;.p ,, ( ab, '.
r , . . , 10 C F R. Part 50. Appendit B.1
- vW . ,.,
4 adequacy of Owners Group requahficaten of diesel pensrators. LBP 85 35,22 NRC 553 (1985) .t .,- M . W M M4,J ./ CM , '~ ~ ^; delegaimn of quahty assurance responsibihues; ALA8-812. 22 NRC 22 (1985)
,' a . . y $ d%./ , V.L- 'l ' % .t pnmary function of quakes assurance- LBP 85-49,22 N AC 930 (1985)
. s
~; . ' < N i M ',4,7 O : - ~ T; 0 M -
10 C F.R Pan 50. Appendia 8.11 h * ,, , P Y5 .Y,@ ! 2 l penalty for madequaie comrol of actmues affectmg quahty; ALAB-812,22 NRC 18 (1985) { J Q.z.4'.y, Q ' ([ { ,,*;' b-10 CER. Part 50. Appendia .8.111 and XI s e4uipment required to be environmentally quahrera under; L8P.85 28. 22 NRC 268 (1985) I 4 ' 'f-CM 7;' ? " % T .
, ' , W n #
A e 10 C.F R Part 50. Appendit B. V XVil
' I[ ' ' k C- ' "
M' ', ( meant of complymg with documentauon requiremests of. ALAB-81122 NRC 68 (1985) 10 C F.R. Part 50. Aprendia 8. XV. XVI f- ^ > r N'" ' d ,. q / i a,(
. l.# a
'* A importance of disposinoning of Nonconformance Repons; ALAB-812,22 NRC 29 (1985) '
, *',;,.+ , . , , .
10 C F R. Part 50. Appendit B. XVill + f ,, .ly 'y importance of arphcast's audits m provedm8 assurance of construction tsuahiy; ALAB-812,22 NRC .'*:. yM* C' q. n .;jf..A, , ,.,, . 28 (1985) ' 3 %[< q j 10 CF.R. Part 50. Appendia E y ,.. j,Mg*.Q,$Tg, jN#Ng .. 1 07 1 area encompassed by offsite emergency plans. ALAS 818,22 NRC 658 n.3 (1985) '
- W *M
;$d.h.
need for irclusion of evacuauon ume esumate for special facihty in emergency response plan; 4.[ Y,W.e .> 'd= *',h 2- JG ep%.Nh'&. W%((O~ 1 L8P 85-25,22 NRC 115.116 (1985) 10 C.F.R P.rt 50. Appendit E. IV * .';*
;wl.s. ipC..f;f,N;7 f e;f
-}N, .Q' .T # D' k.T4XIN o l.' ' ' Df.S P
.5
- consideranon of adverse scather condancas m evacuanon ume esumater LBP.85 27A. 22 NRC
- O Y 'MFah' 226 (1985) requirement for Apphcants to make and mamiam current evacuauon ume enumates; LBP-85-27( " ~
'A [f N #f.' M - W 1h M E M 'f D.; d,i;f 2. hh. ' % h
' ^
, d %
22 NRC 214 (1985) 10 C F.R. Part 50. Appendia E. IV C
~
i"SMMMT
^
S
- A :.i y'!'.
' N M$rYd L.N' '7 N' d;'DM
+ - .
catesones of emergencies. ALAB 819,22 NRC 711 n 42 (1985) I Nf;' N.4 10 C F R. Part 50. Appendia E. IV D.2 [s '. / 4. ,
o.'4/ N@ %hU / '-MNb . '. 42
%?
.-~
i responsibehty for acusatmg public nouticanon sysiem durms radiological emergency; LBP.85 31,22 '. ,. iYN i NRC 427 n 2 (1985) 10 C F R. Part 50. Appendia E. IV.E d.k ih%.h['f'85fMgh f need to desenbe emergency response faciht es and equbment m emergency plans. AL Aft.819. 22 .gb$jn$/*;h.hM.N'7.2~O
,. fi U EM,*d ,Wh.'eOs
-,;& 4 *"
- P., py"" n' t e*wn b ***4.ff *m.,5+
NRC 709 (1985) a-scope of medical services arrangements to lie made for contammated iryured mdmduals;
- i p 4 s .*t,' ..-
mg N, ALAB-819. 22 NRC 711 (1985) 10 C.F R. Part 50. Appendix E. V desdhne for submisseon of emergency plan implementmg procedures; LSP 85 27A. 22 NRC 220 gp
,, My
& $pgf p % g.C p
,[>y'y;fc I h.' ggJ A.,Q(fh.f Q'. d b 4 5.-Q % 1 *f
[ . "f'; Q (l985) 10 C F R. Part 50, Appendia 3 i'h,%qlM.ffh'yh,'hy,'^..$[.
, ' y.'.
8).hf
- appropnateness of grant of esempnon from, for Limerd facehty; DD 85.ll,22 NRC 153.15$
(1985)
, 4 Te 4MM{.,p,Q Mc,{' -
'.M/l j 0 83,, , . . I ;~ t S 4%dev& M .u n .: n7 M M *"~
vahdity of methodos egy for contamment leak rate tests, DD 8510,22 NRC 144 (1985) /.'n.
. a<-
. M.Sp n. q;c. Mc.7 W,
.r.., m y y. .~. , ygn;&m r,.;. y .z,r. -p.M
..~.y n.gj.4 V. wn
*Je . '.
- ..x.wme' m.p.h" :g
. g ., s. *% -
m 7j;Wtq.M W rQ N iU g.Q %w ." 67
^'
M$bhdhbbh% bs.L
. Why
~, w.
? %. ?m :: $
G&,.#:kw&,.
% 8 m: f.. v$?f; n 9., .u. ~p *I
- r. .m .n:4,- v . . . %. w .
s s, u.
~ A ag.we l 'i - .
- gl.. g -
3 i' r f t. , ,
*t c%'Q s ;r ",,%Wte ^ J;
*; h,f/g'.g y4. .
*3 t;'6 ,
.Qj y ',r [s ,. Q
~
- ,, - 3 . y. y,. m . 3 - n . ,m, e w. e 7. y..- p . n . ;; y . .m --.e ---..-m. .,, )
~
.bm_p. .., tg,~'n.w :.m.i (fm uspf L;l-c. g.j m es.
[;g!yk
, , t- *
.#A,
~..
y ' M, '. ' g, m_
*P. <.a .
.; .n a ,>
- g: . w w1 . , . . = .,2
,. -' 2
- es -
,f". "
..% ,, Q, J n l C, '_"~4h : : r .*, . ,
..a.*
n 'nI */ -
~~
.r, s a ,
~. J8-," ,:u(,;
~ ( D *'.
g *
'j$ 0
.fN g , $
, f'T . ?
.d I
- f
,'* .j .
3 & q
,-}s
*, f
- 4
- e. ; '4h.
g - .,t ./, , , , *-
$ ' 8' e
< ~
e
~
. - - ,; !+, <
7.; . " .[ ^ ../.[.: . 7[l ',.'
..c, y ~ ,, 's ; r , .
,r - r s ;,2;v:. , , i s. *y -
f-- - :.L;;;
' .,.t' s (2 L : .,
., ;j
- r. .
,. - ..- x ; s.a. +..e, = .. .r 9 ,a s
e %,
' V: ,.p nh*3 u. ; ;.
, ?' s ,
..r ' M g 4 s.V , x;% g. s , . . ,
+ 2 3 C ' h u! J ! :.Wi.' L W ., % 4 .;.. Yi.J L ,;,,A: . +
. . L L . m. .us , . .;.k u ;l
.d -
- . - LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX i
REGULATIONS
.y '
- 10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendix J III D.2(b)(iil
, ' ' i
- .r requirements for fihns of exempoon from; LBP 85 33,22 NRC 443,444 (1985)
. 4- 1>- 10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendia 3, Ill.D.2(b)(iii) l N testing of airlock seals in heu of testing of entire airlock; L BP-35-33,22 NRC 443 (1985)
- f Y' '..
10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendia K entena for computer models used to cal 6ulate peak claddmg temperatures; LBP-85 29,22 NRC 311,
" 'f,l. ". , 316, 317 (1985)
" *. ]y'-
- 10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendsz R .
applicabihty of, to plants not operstma pnot to January 1,1979; LBP 85-49,22 NRC 918 n.5 (1985)
.6
^
- 2. *,j 10 C.F R. Part $1
.;c .; M
'# - apphcability of Couned on Environmental Quahty regulations in NRC proceedings; ALAB-Sl9,22 V7 d~.wN
.M.- NRC 700 (1985) fN 10 C.F.R. S t.14(a) function of an environmental impact appraisal; DD-85-16,22 NRC 856 (1985)
,y.h Q,%'
, . E. y 10 C.F.R. 51.20 (1984)
-3y?* need for environmental ampact analyses of transshipment of spent fuel from one reactor to another, Z ALAB-825,22 NRC 792 (1985)
+
A~ 10 C.F R. 51.20(8)(1) (1984)
" .' apphcabihty of Table S-4 to transshipment of spent fuel from one reactor to another; ALAB-825. 22 M 'k NRC 793 (1985)
,',Vf 10 C.F R. 51.35
'* , . . .
- Staff assessments and findings required to obtain exemption from regulations; LBP-85 33,22 NRC
. s. O - 444 (1985)
, f $4 '[O/9 10 C.F R. 51.52(b)(3) (1984) amendment of Final Environmental Staiement by adjudicatory heanns recors and Licensing Board
*. b**. [ s..f M S y; decimon; ALAB-819,22 NRC 705,706 (1985)
Iv ; 3 .,
" . ~.< : . J 'M 't 10 C.F.R. 51.52, Tab 6e S-4 apphcabehty of, in operating license amendment proceedmss, LBP 85 34,22 NRC 484 (1985)
~
N 4 10 C.F R. S t.7)(a) recirculation of amended Final Environmental Statement; ALAB-819,22 NRC 707 (1985) 10 C.F R. 51.102 (1985)
~
g , ;N, need for recirculation of amended Final Environmental Statement; ALAB 819,22 NRC 705,706
', ec~ ._ '~t-
' A 'j * , (1985)
* - , 10 C.F R. St.102(c)
' - /, . '
~'s recirculation of amended Final Environmental Statement; ALAB-819,22 NRC 707 (1985) g'",- M- -
10 C.F.R. 51.103 need to consider design alternauves for miusanon of severe accidents; ALAB-819,22 NRC 693 n.3
- '_ (1985)
' a >
10 C.F R. 51.106(c) htigabihty of need-for power issues m operstmg hcense proceedings; ALAB-813,22 NRC 84 n.126 s ',M~ (1985) m E , 10 C.F.R. 51.106(c), (d) htigabihty of alternauve sie issues at operstmg hcense stage; ALAB-819,22 NRC 741 n 83 (1985)
.f . 10 C F.R. Part 5)
".ye; Federal storage of utihues' spent fuel; LBP 85 34,22 NRC 509 (1985)
- ' necessity for maintamms full core reserve in spent fuel pool, LBP-85-34,22 NRC 505 (l985)
. sy , , :. , . 10 C.F R. Part 70
, M .4 l , premise for Commission's issuance of a license to procure and store nuclear fuel; DD-85-14,22 ,,
NRC 639 (1985) C'
'.M- * . P'ft" 7 -
10 C.F R. Part 78
, ' ?**[ ' accident condiuons that spent fuel casks should be desegned to withstand; LBP 85-34,22 NRC 501 W= (1985) *
'*E ,', employee error in prepanns sperit fuel casks for shipment; LBP-85 34,22 NRC 494 (1985) r ,,, 10 C F.R. fl.5(a)
" mode of transport of sealed sources of amencium-241 and cesium-137 AL).85-l,22 NRC 957 i
(1985) A % => F. 4s
'. J i
[
- i s
- 1D*91 p p /9 P Ng i . & - .# , , .
., I #.
e e w
h
- - .2 .: 1- .
.Q' ,
p
. b.
I. ~ g
. LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX .
REGULATIONS : 10 C.F.R. 71.73 ; 5-- '
- c. , J design requirements for spent fuel shipping casks, LBP-85 34,22 NRC 497 (1985) =
10 C.F.R Part 72 - , - ' ' storage of spent fuel m facihty other than where it was generated; ALAB-825,22 NRC 792 (1985) {, ,, 10 C F.R. Parts 72 and 73 secunty requirements for storage of spent fuel; DD-85-16,22 NRC 857 (1985) aJ
? ,,
,4 c ,, y"Q .;^-
-*f, 'p' 10 C.F.R. 72.35 ' MN( g: * , %* ;QLh,,J q- .,.;
need for NRC review and approval of dry storage cask expenment; DD-85-16,22 NRC 857 n.4 **7 : ,. , , i d, ' ; p. ; , (1985) - D; . ,.{.M *
,.,,".,7' >
D 10 C.F.R. Part 73 2C ' - - ' htigabahty of nsk of sabotage in NRC proceedings; ALAB-819,22 NRC 699 (1985) 12' j , y,
. [' W readmg of 50.13 m pan matena with; LBP 85-27,22 NRC 137 (1985) < s - .
scope of contentions htigable under; LBP 85 27,22 NRC 138 (1985)
, M. ;.-' i, ,4+)$','D.q g'J/ .;1 df
^>
10 C.F.R. 73.l(a) W i
.t,
' M'. .., . , ,
y scope of secunty threats encompassed by; LBP 85-27,22 NRC 137 (1985) p.yf p ; ?, ;g- - 10 C.F.R. 73.l(a)(lland (b) W ,. . '~ >- .' W', , -a scope of threats encompassed by; LBP 85-27,22 NRC 137-38 (1985) % y 'f[
- l J. a f ' ._% ,
10 C.F.R. 73.37 -
^' " h :- r '. 3[ ,. Q S f .4 ' V ',,
prevention of sabotage of spent fuel transshipments. LBP-85-34,22 NRC 502 (1985) probabihty of success of sabotage attack against spent fuel shipment; LBP.85-34,22 NRC 439 (1985) 'T .' k I y% f {n" ,' >n.. i c e.
~ ^ ' " ' M' 10 C F.R. 73.45 and 73 46 extent of plant vicinity requinns secunty protection; LBP 85 27,22 NRC 138 (1985)
'~C/ td. 5' .
- a-A " '~. Y~ #
10 C.F.R. Part 100 ) ' 4- s " . 'N (() f .M ".'1.
~
/
L need for wntten procedures for operation of hydrogen ignition system to be scrutmized m heanng; LBP-85-35,22 NRC $32 (1985)
-.? . , S-f. v. ' ." ' fp;v -
potential of meressed spent fuel pool storage capacity for enticahty accident LBP-85-36,22 NRC ; , 599 (1985) . ' . j .- *
~
4' radioactive releases postulated for single double-ended break m a steam generator tube; LBP 85-49, .. 'I > ' . r Fa . $ W 22 NRC 932 (1985) 10 C.F.R. Part 100, A[pendia A, Ill(c) 4 ,';g.j fjn y[t.f g h j,f-I.j.'ig j " MQ..j.,. gly %, :. N.'" ~. J. use of safe shutdown earthquake demsn bass as means for determmme structure's resistance to
/l;p.M.;W/g;, -A M - , 4; U J 7' Q,f[T' O ^ L ?,i.1 :.k;@j de.Qd i6>= ';Q postulated pipehne explossons; ALAB-819,22 NRC 739 (1985) -
10 C.F.R.150.20 ; DffD'%,, type of heense necessary to conduct hcensed activities in non-Agreement States; ALj-851,22 NRC 7 y( g,"p Qg i - Q^h/%' l-g#.y 4' ' 944 (1985) 40 C.F.R.1502.22 qy' ,;,j~: e.?'~-
'N1 *1'SC i J-.g. N $.
- p"*' '
need to consder sabotage as part of worst-case" analyss; AL AB-819,22 NRC 698,699. 701 n.24 % Jd ; ' h --]'y p , / ( p.D fedg~*; h [ (1985) , 40 C.F R.1502.22(b) .'Mi: , M W* t J' . .. YN O MT e. A M.[N;;
- k' f '
apphcatshty of Council on Environmental Quahty regulations in NRC proceedmss; AL AB-819,22
."' .ff NRC 700 (1985) ,k: ME % s $'c[S g pl,C C.:/C 4 44 C.F R. Part 350 DM. Qt.fc- py;% 7fid" N,5 % q* ' O '
guidehnes for fulfillment of requiremems of FEM A's *egulations. ALAB-Sl3,22 NRC 77 n.86 fhN.dE M' Ni51MQ. ,4. , .. Mh. h Tf %J i. J i ' t (1985) 44 C.F R. 350 7(b)
~7 j[k(h'}" ?.
M i?s<~i e ew t need to conceder size and configuraison of emergency planmng zone in penial smtsal decisions; ^, aV.; ',,Q a,g- < rWdg%'N.N,Y, ,9.d-ss;f g' g/ s ALAB-814,22 NRC 194,195 (1985) Od y A'T./5p MA @Qy% 'p9 49 C.F.R. Parts 170 189 Ap. P'ihs " . ' kp f,y.T4, J.'WJ40 d.M yNj ri 311' i
~ C L. '.i .
mode of transport of sealed sources of amencium-241 and cesum-137; AL3-851,22 NRC 957 (1985) NMrd. 9 N- 4 WF ' Wv , ,.- '.>.n'.- it s s-49 C.F.R.172 403 , A,f if-J. '+Gy.c:9 4 g'4f.,. 8~"4.g *'n < J , -> . labehng necessary for sealed sources of amencium-241 and cemum-137; AtJ-85-I,22 NRC 957 g (1985) g /~ f'm,e"mgt*g . y
- 3. ,. d. . - M/, fCY . .; N. $ ,4g g' . fi;,p %. '. .
49 C F.R.178 350-3 : ,( r >
's,'iw& * - J.
. 3
'e a .. 5 met- : i
.' *y - .QO.O. . .M. .q -... P.'. - tF, s . , --
tabehng necessary for transport of sealed sources of amencium-241 and cesium-137; AL3 851,22 NJy, . NRC 957 (1985) .# iM,Q:-% NN!MMil' r. 'i; ' C.h. %r&.Mu.$.g.W1 L,A. s i a. e s/ -
->W .
$ .f.fRe .,*[.
a wl', ; %gyf-l,fg sply;. s e, .;.
. W.%, W.m .'O f w an M !.
.e n-& >
.~
Wry ,\;yg.l* m G,rq.w',.
.,. s e - ,, ;2*Wp% u. 3' , l
". .A, .,
- N g.*,S . *L a . d
.,. ^f
- N . ,j ) t l
'('. .c,? W'u<
~ , , %q:s . %.'?, V:p.p t- -
-l
- n - . m ~. .~ e.,.-._.,, . .- -
. - , n , , , . - - . . - - . . .- - ,. . ; ,.l
. ,. ;'s ,'.m;'},g . . :J. - q:2:;4L . . - e. 9. ,.
.- /,;w: s . . y. g,. ,e.
',c.., s
( s ,
;m%.,,,P' o- y 42 % s ..y- ,
~ +
>,*1
*e'..tp 'y ..O ' 'f'&ljfj' i ,
, t ,
y,
; -> . h. ,.
w .. .-, .x \
*. - 6 ' W. a . - w.x. g .
* , e m ,%g.. ,+'
* * ~
j( 8I # f.
.,e ' ., .a , .y '. .M. j*i[ %, :
, ,* ., + i ) [
.4 ., - e- > .i g r,,. ;y, , .- ' p . j.s:. - - , t
. ~
, ' . , *. ~
'e ,
f
-e.
1 1 1
, . -. > a ~. r -
4 i --
~
I LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX 9. -
- 1. .<
STATUTES ._ y; ~ ~~ , , . , c g.g < n
,( [ ;.N ' . -'
a ZA , ~ , c
yt
?.*'
, 28 U.S.C. 2462 'y- * - { statute of hmitations bar on NRC enforcement proceedmg; CL1-85-18,22 NRC 884 n.3 (1985) '" I M ~' Admmistrative Procedure Act. 5 U.S.C. 554 J.~ ,, t hugabihty of adequacy of notice of hearmg. AL AB-825. 22 NRC 791 n.23 (1985) ,Sy j Admmistranve Procedure Act. 5, 7,5 U.S C. 554. 556 post-heanns resoluuon of emergency plannmg de6ciencies by NRC Staff. AL AB-819,22 NRC 708
. W. ' " ,
(19851 a ~; *7' , Atomic Energy Act, lic ' d I - U ~. * -
, classi6 canon of cesium-137 and amencium-241 for hcensing purrows; ALJ 85-1,22 NRC 944 *;,ft y :
l (1985) i % .: " ' f " I Atomic Energy Act,8I ' ' Z ' \ : .~ ;- ' I .'" - I transfer and possession of cesium 137 and amermium-241; ALJ-85-1,22 NRC 944,950 n.6 (1985) / ! ..i . ', d ,W , , te-
~#
j" ~ l Atomic Energy Act,161n r .. - %Z J :"
, i i Commission authonty to delegate function of decidmg meetmg closures; DPRM-85-3,22 NRC 174 $,
(1985)
/ 'v %' e p$'.;/s[ .c, s h- > j I
Atomic Energy Act,182(a),42 U.S C. 2232 ', -
~
<q * - ~
l ongm of the terms management competence" and " management capabihty"; LBP-85-28,22 NRC 7 .. .,
'* 3-236 n.2 (1985) -
4 .,' J '- ..v T
~
Atomic Energy Act,189a,42 U.5 C. 2239(a) '
.((, , p[M 'y 7 ,
right of mtervenor to heanns on heense condiuons, CLI-85-13. 22 NRC 3 (1985) 7
?" i~
t r'sht of pubhc to a heanng; ALAB-813,22 NRC 82 (1985) scope of heanos nghts under; AL AB-824,22 NRC 782 n.17 (1985) T.F,.gy.
, 7
,Q ~ '3 .,,.,
,~'
j Atomic Energy Act,189a 42 U.S C. 2239a & ' ?W< j post-heanng resoluuon of emergency plannmg de6ciencies by NRC Staff ALAB-819,22 NRC 708 . [MW[&'.l.9.;7. y%[d - .[.f;"/ , %- ' j. (1985) Atomic Energy Act,189af t). 42 U.S C. 2239tal(l)
?r"._.
1J i
. ':@ y;, ~'3 - i need for Board to await fmal FEM A fmdmss before approvmg emergency response plans. lr Cpf;.<g
, p;g; * '~
ALAB.813. 22 NRC 78 (1985) Atomic Energy Act. 234 {y.O s.X. r 1+. 4.1 ' , ' 1 apphcabihty of penalues for use of amencium-241 for other than igenwd actmties. ALJ-85-1,22 ,if.%i'D i ' i NRC 950 n 6 (1985) /?M ; . j manmum cml penalty imposed for unauthonzed handhng of byproduct matenals. ALJ-85-1,22 -:v. g;./ D';M '. m; j NRC 958 (1985) Atomic Energy Act, 271,274(c) 274(k). 42 U S.C 2018,2021(c)(ll,2021(k) (1982) -4*"[W*);ja U if%*,',V/,. .' '- 4 y; ;
*U WM , e ..;, ' '
) authonty and responsabihues of NRC regardmg nuclear-powered elecinc generanon. ALAB-818,22 5/6.4 k j h ,$ " i NRC 663 n.35 (1985) ',a O'F.M., 4 x ., vm# 1' # U -.c. ' 4 Atomac Energy Act. 274b 7, *.. - 5.p; ,* @W@- *b 'C. f .^1 NRC authonty to transfer byproduct regulatory authority to states. ALJ-851,22 NRC 944 (1985) ? ' j Atomic Energy Act 42 U.S.C. 2132,2133 4),ih !M49 7 * ' scope of NRC authonly; ALAB-825,22 NRC 790 n.10 (1985) C, WN -e.6, m ,., 4 i s t y , , Atomic Energy Act. 42 U.S C. 2133(d),2232(a) / D.1. ./+: "d;c- ~. . -
' i
! quahty of construcuon required for plant hcensing; ALAB-812,22 NRC 15 (1985); ALAB 813,22 o. % ,ar< <-
- s= , ,
] , NRC 65 (1985); ALAB-819,12 NRC 729 (1985) Atomic Energy Act,42 U.S.C. 2L9 [ $ ' U.} Y .'i-W.',J@.G f.<1 y '
.. i
'l htigabihty of adequacy of nouce of heanng. ALAB 825,22 NRC 791 n.23 (1985) J g.'% -s .
% AM i z "
i NV' ,k. xc
- C.h -5 i'? s I
{- $ ,)f, 'O ' 4 ."
. ;. ju , ~ '
i aiff-8 s 4 71 , qlp#@Qfk N *' , } ; e - $ < gg :[.. s ( - ' p I 1 (a *
' )} :' ,* e' l
, .. .m_,-- . _- , . - _ . _ _ . . . . _ . . , . - . . gg _
.l y <m. . ,n y! M, u.s.
- m..u i
%,,;pa ,
( ,
'N.$>:f:ll-M*W-M:;.'l.h l'..% ' lq _
,,y, ".<y' .
- a ,~y,e v , f;,, . t ,
. _5 ' ,'. ,
- g , -( f j - .a.,s + ,'afe ,
s s
. . , - - . . . . - . . . - - - , , . - ~ . _ , _ , - , . - - . . , . ~ - . . , , , - . . .- - m i -% r
u _s
..n . -
25 w. . -
- n; .. : 9 .~c . . , yj '*, ~y '.r s , .w r -
+ , , , .
', W& ;e' w nu iz in
, ,";4 f M. ' %' .m. 3 ,r' .H, &;7- ,xe J;. ' o. - c
'V' r ,
* ~
ga - - n .,
..e n. :~
y s;m gy.:.1.. w - , ngy;a.. .Q:y.c.m Nn.
< = < ,
' s
.w e.a .r f,2 w m.m ,, ,
s
- e. .
~
" A " M A " G"
~&d;fi.$@; Wy.3 wb Q '~ f , l , ,. ,
.mn.n m,. :. . ;- :n ,.,y:3 < ,w
'ma a f,q><. ' '.,~f, , G.. ,:; w.% !_ - ~. l * <
i u Dn
- w. 'm.
- 1. ..
, .s w. ,c .= .
,r.. e, ,mu., v ,m.g,,~,
- a . .e,
.s.A v ,-: . m ,,. eu\ ,
LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX
?. -f.. n%,.nC WMP.c.m.O 4/ A%,. . %yW. . o s U. , . , ~
f.,TO MO,,'b .W. .
- . n.
STATUTES
.I. d e$
$, A s*W;' $, , c-Mk, - Qn . a,Y. . M?in
. y , , >
. c*m ,j. J MX.a.; q f GQN%' g-khO'16%G;Nb 1M ' 'U. . W+(-? $ w' % G < ' .. . Atomic Energy Act,42 U.S.C. 2241 M':1~' scope oflicensing board authonty; ALA8 825,22 NRC 790 n.Il (1985)
;f g,-ps QQ E-b8Mby- 4. i%.,'$yi3 - Energy Reorsamzauon Act of 1974,42 U.S C St4l(f) and (s)
.Jef;. gis %@MNN Mh?.,Y NDy S S ,,itt ,,
- transfer of regulatory funcuons fron AEC to NRC; ALAB-825,22 NRC 790 n.10 (1985)
Energy Reorsamzauon Act of 1974,42 U.5 C. $851
'. .7.M4J. PNITV #; Wgg. ,J j j%'C #
f;. f.)6.r. ."W.#. %' ? .
. Findmg of disenminauon by U.S. Depenment of Labor director as bas.a for intervenor's monon for
- fip.h khYY'N k geAi % o U N; Q, k M prosecuve order; LBP-85 40,22 NRC 761 (1985)
W,D;'g. 'N
*d .
W%
/je.iD@N NhN hN,d'9MQ.
, nature of confidentiahty and nsks imposed by protecuve orders; L8P-85-40,22 NRC 763 (1985)
Federal Advisory Committee Act. 8(b)
%4 $h f, authonty for ruling on appeals of closure determinations for meeungs of advisory committees; / ' Q&p @,j[. .
DPRM.85-3,22 NRC 174 n.1 (1985) f '%,ff.%b %$$$MM@dqvM%.l5"j-J%y *Q12 y W3 g - Federal Advisory Committee Act. 5 U.S.C. Appendis I,10(d)
+@TfjG% %l requirements for closure of advisory committee meeungs; DPRM 85-3,22 NRC 175 (1985)
".f ,.jN,7([W bW '
S.;. t
.N/I .iS*fly. @N.S. Freedom ofInformahon Act,5 U.S.C. 552
'/*Y '.. , o-M.hg . [ /JJ.
c means for producing specific contentions wahout resorung to discovery; ALA8-817,22 NRC 477 4%ri .df WE?.*., ; N, ; p g3 ;9 ".F ' n.5(1985) Nanonal Environmental Pohey Act 102(2)(E),42 U.S C. 4332(2)(E) i;; need for preparauon of environmental impact statement to cover proposed receipt, storage, and
'.;g[,%+ 7 W 'TC 7 ' \j6-f?
;%y ^ d.,1:Y'",
J.c .g 3.m -f.Jlh,.@' ?
' . transahipment of spent fuel assembhes; L8P-85 34,22 NRC 490 (1985) -
need to consider alternatives to shipment of spent fuel; LBP-85-34,22 NRC 485,491-93 (1985)
'. . y , T "I -
'E %.lh .y Nanonal Environmental Pohey Act. 42 U.S.C. 4321
. ~r
.p'C 7j U, p ,o.y
, / ,
c . d'A-,,- hu,
. need to consider design alterna**ves for mitigauon of severe accdecit ALA8-819, 22 NRC 69)
(3933)
,g ? "-7 s ,,
Nanonal Environmental Pohcy Act. 42 U.S.C. 4332
.. % .g Q %. J. h(,d need for environmental impact statement for storage of spent fuel it a facilny; DD-8516,22 NRC
. [.- 9., t.@;q7 p =
v 3 %,g.d,' g9 gm, , q;g>qq" -; u p.,M .: . (i 352, 854-55 (1985) N.C. Gen. Stat. { ll5C-242(6) use of students as bus dnvers dunns radiological emergency; LBP 85 27A,22 NRC 229 (1985) Yj , ? ~i h Q N5- , :-- _) NRC Authorizauon Act 5. Pub. L No. 97-415, % Stat. 2067,2069 (1983) E4 - use of unlity-sponsored offsite emergency plan as substuuie for State and local emergency plans; v ALA8-818,22 NRC 667 n.6L (1985) NRC Authorization Act.108 Pub. L. No. 98 553,98 Stat. 2825,2827 (1984)
.r* '
use of unhty-sponsored offsste emergency plan as substitute for State and local emergency plans. 14',2 ,- ~ ALAB-818,22 NRC 667 n.61 (1985)
-%. 5 NRC Authonzation Act, t09fa), Pub. L. No. 96 295,109,94 Stat. 780 (1980)
. , , 6" D'.' .;
- S( '
7' M use of utihty-sponsored offsne emergency plan as subsutute for State and local emergency plans; ALAB 818,22 NRC 667,678-80 (1985)
;<,N ,.
.,.,," N ' -
Nuclear Waste Pohey Act of 1982, lil(s)(5),42 U.5 C.10.151(a)(1) _*h.*,, # 7
# * ' responsibilny of uuht es for storage of spent fuel; LBP-85-34. 22 NRC $09 (1985)
'S o '
Nuclear Waste Pohey Act of 1982.135(b)(2),42 U.5 C.10,155(b)(2) Sf 7 N ' g
<- necessity for mamtamstig full core reserve m spent fuel pool, LBP-85 34,22 NRC 505 (1985)
's
> ~f~,
~, "ijQ ;" ?
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. 218(a),42 U3 C.10,198(a) content of dry cask ssorage demonstrauon program; LBP-85 34,22 NRC 508 (1985)
.;. , t < g6 ,
Nuclear Waste Pohey Act of 1982,42 U.S.C.10.155(b)(1)(A). (8) (1982) s
%- n m-
"" ;' Federal storage of uuhties' spent fuel, L8P 85-34. 22 NRC 509 (1985)
~
'.X
^
-y- , Pnce-Anderson Act. 42 U.S C. 2210 compensauon of nuclear power plant accident victims; ALAB-819,22 NRC 702 n 26 (1985)
, *' - 3 '; .
1,
- Uranium Mill Taihnss Radianon Control Act, Pub. L 95-604,42 U.S C. 2113 s , ,s .,. -
requirement for waste disposal pnot to termmauon of hcense; LBP 85 38,22 NRC 614 (1985)
, . ,, ,7 ~ -"
1 : .. .. e .,
!'f . .e " .
t, ? - *, . 7- - . s $ -s 1
/ .
, t 1
-1 p 4
- 72 w, . ,
~
- .1 l
- < - '. 1
\
s I a L l i
i l s q
- - ... . . ;... t_ _.
'I I l i . q , i LEGAL CITATIONS INDEX ' OTHERS
, i ,j e *l ']'U , .
~
- q. -
f ' Fed. R. Civ. P.12(h) waver of objecuons to subject matter junsdicuon of Licensmg Board; LBP-85 27,22 NRC 131 n.7 J~.?
, (1985) 7#
Fed R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4) apphcability of, to NRC proceedmss; LBP-85 38,22 NRC 60917 (1985) - i Fed. R. Civ. P 26(b)(4)(B) 1 ' discovery of experts in NRC proceedmss; LBP-85-38,22 NRC 610 (1985) / i l red. R. Civ. P. 52(a) *
' y-general considerauons in determimns mai 3 dement competence; LBP-85-28,22 NRC 237 n.4 (1985) , ,'
Fed R. Civ. P 56 ~ .M * , standards apphed by Boards conadenna summary disposinon motions. LBP 85-27/ ,22 NRC 208 ' j (1985); LBP-85-29,22 NRC 310 (1985) 'e<* i Federal Rules of Evidence 702 , , form of an expert witness's testimony; ALAB-819,22 NRC 720 (1985) '
! standaru for determming a witness's quahncauons as an espert; ALAB-819,22 NRC 732 n.67 5 '4 (1985) i .'3-H.R. Rep. No.1070, %th Cong.,2d Sess. 27, repnnied in 1980 U S Code Cong. & Ad. News 2260, '; ~l>
2270-71 --
.' "+
~ '
legislauwe mient m promulgaung emergency planning requiremer.ts, ALAB-818,22 NRC 670 n 65 y (1985) T ..@.,. McCormick on Evidence (( 339,341,357 (3d ed.1984) f_M standard of proof for measunns evidence; AL AB-819,22 NRC 720 n 53 (1985)
*- * ,' 9; O' i 4 Moore's Federal Prxtce126.60[21,26 203,126.64l41,26-390 et seq- (1984) _.
' ,'$ . ?
I waiver of pnvilege through discussion of facts that are the subject of a pnvileged communication; ' 1 LBP-85 38,22 NRC 619 (1985) - i cA Moore's Federal Pracuce i 33.13 (1984 ed.) . ! refusal to answer mterrogatory on ground that mformauon is known to meerrogatory party; ' LBP-85-38,22 NRC 625,629 (1985) < J dA Moore's Federal Pracuce i 33.17!2) (1984 ed1 ' ? 1 legal conctumons about which mterrogatones may enquire; LBP 45-38,22 NRC 625 (1985) ,
; 6 Moore's Fedeial Pracuse,156 Illi.61 , .?
l Board authonty to request oral testimony where record is insufGcient to allow summary dispostion, -, f.- i LBP-85-29,22 NRC 307 (1985) G.Ns, . + 8 Wnsht & Miller, Federal Pracuce and Procedure i 2024, at 209 (1970) - Opphcability of pnvilege to documents contammg subject matter smilar to that m disclosed R7- ? documents; LBP-85-38,22 NRC 621 (1985) ,,f" 8 Wnght & Miller, Feders! Pracuce and Procedure { 2172, at $38-39 (1970) lc 7. x - r need to identify persons asmsung in preparanon of answers to mterrogatones; LBP 85-38,22 NRC $' .
~
622 (1985) . P , 3 s 'l I ! 73
. M e g- .W" --*,ey* M -wn.,.e,-3e. y%,.i , .p, , , , . , . ,
' * ' '/ , *
, .- , y; , . ,
d y, ' }.Hv . .i
, , , y . ;;
, -* e- /t b d t b g
e
. _ _ , . , . _ _ ,_ _.._.-_ . _ . . . . . . - . , , , .. . , . - - . , , _ _ . . . . . _ _ . - . _ _ , _ , - _ , _ _ _ _ , _m-.__.-_ , . . _
l l . l i i ( l e i SUBJECT INDEX iCCIDENT(S) , at Three Mde Island, hydrogen emplosion dunng; LBP 85-30,22 NRC 332 (1985) cask drop, adequacy of dose calculanons for; LBP-85-36,22 NRC 590 (1985) der"ded core, contamment spray availabihty durms; LBP-85-35,22 NRC 514 (1985) degraded core, possibihty of diffusen flames occurrms m; LBP-85-35,22 NPC 564 (1985) scenano involvmg rupture of diesel fuel day tanks; LBP 85-49,22 NRC 899 (1985) (
\CCIDENT(S), SEVERE considerauon of design ahernauves for minganon of; ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985) ,
menusion of deman antern uses to mingate, m Fmal Environmental Statement; CLI-8513,22 NRC ) I(1985) l mitigation measures, htigabihty of; ALAB 819,22 NRC 681 (1985) ' need to coneder, m environmental impact statements ALAB-419,22 NRC 681 (1985) 1 ADJUDICATORY BOARDS , I authonty of, over NRC Staff, ALAB-812,22 NRC 5 (1985) c obhganon of, to do a party's research for it; ALAB-812,22 NRC 5 (1985) i standard for disquahficanon of; ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985) ADJUDICATORY HEARINGS Commission authonty to hmit. ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985) on quahty assurance deficiencies, scope of. ALAB-812,22 NRC 5 (1985) , scope of review of claims of quahty assurance deficiencies m. ALAB 813,22 NRC $9 (1985) 1 ADMINISTR ATIVE LAW JUDGE l hmitauons on civd penalty authonty o(i ALJ-85 l,22 NRC 941 (1985)
- ADVISORY COMM;1 TEE MEETINGS
, authonty to rule on closure determmanons for, DPRM-85 3,22 NRC 173 (1985) i AFFIANTS ' burden on mtervenors to demonstrate competence of LBP-85 29,22 NRC 300 (1985) AIRCRAFT carburetor icmg cauwd by water vapor emissions from Limench coolms towers, potential for, j ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985) crash nsk, consideration of, under 10 C.F.R. 50.13(b); LBP 85 27,22 NRC 126 (1985) ALCOHOL ABUSE ! at Waterford site, treatment of. ALAB 812,22 NRC 5 (1985) I ALLEGATIONS { with potenual safety significance NRC pokey concerning pursuit of, DD-85-1l. 22 NRC 149 (1985) ) ALTERNATIVES l to spent fuel transshipment, need for considerauon of, LBP-85 34,22 NRC 481 (1985) I I AMENDMENT ! of Environmental Assessment; LBP-85 34,22 NRC 481 (1985) i of Fmal Environmental Statements, by ad iudicatory licanns record and Licensn$ Board decimon; i . ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985) > i See also Operaung License Amendment Proceeding (s); Operaung Licease Amendmem(s) AMERICIUM-241 imposition of civd penalty for unauthortred possession, use, storage and transportanon of,
, ALJ 851,22 NRC 941 (1985)
ANSI STANDARDS for determinmg tolerance hmits of thermolummescent dommeters, hugabehty of adequacy of; LBP 85 28,22 NRC 232 (1985) 75 j _ . _ . - - y _ ., .m. _ y . , ,.-.r->-----.-- \
~
~
j b!c
- j
(.. e' s' I -
- A l j i s
__--,--,_n.-,n.-n-,.
1
-) m ,
-t. v
,',", ,.+* ', ,,
~.f;%; , l 4
- < o +, f.: ,
> ,~
, g '. ' ~ K'M;,
('- 3 .~'
., j
- % * , .i,3 c.y., q m, - m' ,
g s
.- l
, .A
- .,,s
- (. '
M Q,.. . , . . i.,g,,, g, , m, , . , ;c;, -
"b ' , uu , I.a J.>. , , ,_
I 1
.[-
'~
~ '
SUBJECT INDEX l
+
o, ( - 6 a y....- . e
, , e ANTICIPATED TRANSIENTS WITHOUT SCRAM need for automated standby liquid control system to mitigate consequences of; ALAB-520,22 NRC
;" ^ * -r 743 (1985)
' f 7 .y, APPEAL BOARD ($)
My- . C,' - M ',
.J .J_'
, $ ', authonty to give bmding effect to another agency's regulauons; ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985) jurisdiction where it has previously considered an issue, resulung in Gnal agency acuen; ALAB-821,
+ ' 22 NRC 750 (1985) review of Licensms Board deciseons,in the absence of an appeal; ALAB-826,22 NRC 893 (1985)
^
7 _- . .y , _g qj e 7, C ,-(
, ~. ^^;^ scope of review by; ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985)
, . Jo-t'-*,
[ APPEAL ($)
- E' _ ' fi; , ' . ' " -
M '# appellate review of Licensms Board decisions in the absence of; ALAB-826,22 NRC 893 (1985) apphcabihey of new regulations to issues on; ALAB.813,22 NRC 59 (1985)
. l t
; u. '
basis for Appeal Board judgment of; ALAB-819,22 NRC 641 (1985)
* ' - ~~
J~ x.' ',* ,-; ,,e - 4- interlocutory, of Licensms Board rukng admittmg contention previously found insufUciently
' * - specific; ALAB-817,22 NRC 470 (1985)
' ~~
'!# % y _'
of demals of summary disposinon monons; LBP 85 29,22 NRC 300 (1985)
, of purely procedural points, content of; ALAB-816,22 NRC 461 (1985) treatment ofissues raised for first ume on; ALAB-819,22 NRC 688 (1985)
- J.
'- , APPLICANTS
- e for operstmg hcenses, standard of proof to be met by; ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985) responsbihues of, concerning technical Andmas; LBP-85 47,22 NRC 833 (1985) r < ,
responsibility of, for nuclear power plant physical secunty; LBP-85-27,22 NRC 126 (1985) ATOMIC ENERGY ACT etTect of, on nshe of States to authon:e punitive damages for radisuon injunes; ALAB 8f 8,22 NRC 658 (1985)
- N pubhe's heanns nghts under; ALAB 813,22 NRC 59 (1985)
? '. %
s
,N
- regulanons govermns facihty sale and leaseback Anancing; CLi-85-17,22 NRC 875 (1985) regulatory structure of; ALAB.818,22 NRC 651 (1985)
. d . safety Gndings required by, for nuclear power plant licensng; ALAB 813,22 NRC 59 (1985);
, 1 ", ALAB 819,22 NRC 681 (l985) scope of heanns nshts under; ALAB 824,22 NRC 776 (1985)
AUDIT 5 TG of construcuon work, weight given by Licensms Board to effecuveness of; ALAB-812,22 NRC 5
* (1985)
AUTHORITY
~' legal, of uuhty to implement offsite emer8ency response plans; ALAB-Sil,22 NRC 651 (1985)
, 6 AUTOM ATED STANDBY LlQUID CONTROL SYSTEM to minsaie consequences of ATWS, need for; ALAB-820,22 NRC 743 (1985)
.. BIAS disquahfying, showing necessary to estabhsh; ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985) e BOARDS f* see Adjudicatory Boards; Appeal Board (ss; Licensing Board; Presides Board
' ~ BOLTS, HILT 1
, /
allesanons ofimproper instalianon of, at Werford; ALAB-812,22 NRC 5 (1985) BRIEFS, APPELLATE
. . c, ' - , , , :q content of; ALAB-413,22 NRC 59 (1985) i
.- i-'. record support for; ALAB 825,22 NRC 785 (1985)
T<,,r ^^
' ' + ,
BURDEN
~
of persuasion on lateness factors of 10 C.F R. 2.714(a); ALAB-816,22 NRC 461 (1985)
- of proof on movant for summary disposanon; LBP 85 27A,22 NRC 207 (1985) .
of sausfying requirements of me: ion to reopen; ALAB 812,22 NRC 5 (1985) m on pentioner seekms unumely intervention; ALAB 816,22 NRC 461 (1985)
~-
.y- , CABLES coavial,inasial and twman, environmental quahncanon of; LBP 85 28,22 NRC 232 (1985) ,
. 'i, ,
mstrument, leakage currents from; LBP 85 28,22 NRC 232 (1985)
'
- CANCER
- nsk to pubhc from routme, nonnatural radioactive emissions; ALAB 820,22 NRC 743 (1985) 1 1
16 k
+-e--o--- , ,-.,
e h
+
, : : & C. ;s* % ,.: , ; .. L 2 L ,a .
6, e SUBJECT INDEX i CASKS See Dry Cask. Spent Fuel Cask (s) CERTIFICATION See Directed Certification CE510M 137 : j
- imposition of cml perialty for unauthonzed possession, use, storage, and transportanon of;
- ALJ 851,22 NRC 941 (1985) '
CH AR ACTER , and competence, renect on of apphcant's remedial quality assurance efforts on; ALAB-812,22 NRC , 'i - 5 (1985) apphcants', renecuan of applicants' failure to advise Board of contractor report on; LBP 85-45,22 NRC 819 (1985) licenwe, elements of. ALAB-812,22 NRC 5 (1985); ALAB 815. 22 NRC 198 (1985) ' See also Management Caratiehty; Management Competence CHEATING on hcenwd operator enams, determination of management competence and character on basis of management's responw to; ALAB-815. 22 NRC 198 (19851 CIVIL PEN ALTIES ' for unauthonted poswsmon, use. storage and transportanon of cesum 137 and amencium-241; ,~ AL3-851. 22 NRC 941 (1985) t largest levied by NRC; LBP-85-28. 22 NRC 232 (1985) mitigauon of AL3-851,22 NRC 941 (1985) payment of, m mstallments. ALJ-85 2,22 NRC 968 (1985) s See also Penalty' Sanction (s) CLADDING integnty of. durms reflood of the core after a loss-of-coolant accident, durms normal operation, and ' dunns other occurrences other than LOCAs; LBP-85-29,22 NRC 300 (1985) temperature, peak, calculation of. LBP-45-29, 22 NRC 300 (1985) . CLO5URE of advisory committee meetmas, authoney to rule on. DPRM 85 3,22 NRC 173 (1985) COMBUSTIBLE LOADINGS d greater than 240.000 BTU /sq fL fire protecuon m areas havms. LBP-85-49,22 NRC 899 (1985) COMMUNICATIONS See En Parte Commumcanons COMPUTER MODELS for predictmg peak cladding temperatures; LBP 85-29,22 NRC 300 (1985) CONCR ETE contamment. meegnty of. LBP-85 28. 22 NRC 232 (1985) CONDITION of ste redress required for dismmal of proceeding: LBP 85-22,22 NRC 89 (1985) requinns GPU Nuclear so notify NRC of certam personnel assegnments. estatihshment of procedures for determming whether to hft; CLI 85-19. 22 NRC 886 (1985) See also License Condinons; Operating License Condinon CONSERVATISMS une of, m makms technical calculauons; ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985) - CONSTRUCTION . finished, of nuclear power plants. factors affectmg review of, LDP 85 39,22 NRC 755 (1985) , i quakty required for operaung hcense issuance; ALAB-812,22 NRC 5 (1985); ALAB-813,22 NRC ' 4 59 (1985) < CONTAINMENT I f , concrete,insegnty of; LBP 85 24,22 NRC 232 (1985)
- integnty at Perry plant, analyms of; LBP-85-35,22 NRC 514 (1985) j- isolanon valves and leak rate testmg program, propnety of NRC grant of esempuon from .
requirements for; DD-85 il 22 NRC 149 (1985) ,
, leak rate tests, vahdity of methodology for measuremens of, DD 8510,22 NRC I43 (1985) > -
b t
~
r, -3 , u, , . r p.my'*ysyyy *=~cipmy y ** v- ~~ - - ,
; , y r: e ;,. ..e
, , . , +
(,
, , o:- ' ; p :s s;V .m . . a! ... ,
g ',8
- f ,
-(' '
+
,, Jf.;. ' Q .Q . '. . &,
. , , * * '< y - p p ( f. "".gry -
- 7, ' 6y 3;;*
a n , .,,7
- r> ;, , , - , s
.>- ,, ;:x -
3x, , 3* . a3% ~ . q u .l+,. 7 M,4 - ' ' .le.; . f
^
o, > ;# M m Y
'V
' q L, . , l,hg[k!$ff
. ~ *,
g u y.U; VQ ~ m q i ,.y S';p $$q ,, ; #, 7p}.' 'l
,,+J t*:r../
~, .
n: o _ q% ,
, 1 , > e ,
4 ., m
~
i ~ , .2 a. 2 s.. n . .. -L.* : & -- C
- j SUBW INDEX
- ..1
$ leaktightness, challenge to uso of ASME sernce level C hmits to ensure; L8P 85 35,22 NRC 514 w %,. , ,.N _
f'
. (1983)
N spray availabshty dunns degraded core accident, challenge to; LBP 85 35,22 NRC 514 (1985)
*. , . . * ~~~;' ' ' CONTAINMENT LEAK RATE TESTING
'Q.- .. a methodology for; DD-8510,22 NRC 143 (1985)
# M
;. .' -(,
t J' * ' propnety of NRC grant of exemption from requirements for; DD-85-il,22 NRC 149 (1985) d1
' . iM "
. CONTENTION (5) g-. M~ :, . .
%; '. 's '. 3 i*y% ,. \ .. %e addresams Daws m emergency planmns esercises, standard for admission of. LSP-85 49,22 NRC 899 (1985)
.M
, s'Q, Yb, QMt. ' ' ' ." .@- challensms adequacy of Staff reucw of operatmg hcense apphcation, htigabihty of. ALAS-812,22 NRC 5 (1985)
~.
%.-l Ci 4' l(' ' i
'4, e J
concermns deployment of U.S. weapons, admissibehty of; LBP.85 27,22 NRC 126 (1985) conditional admismon of; ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985)
'j " , ', h ,- ' ? hydrogen generation, heigabihty of; ALAB-813,22 NRC 59 (1985)
=> . , -M Q ,.'/* '( c heigabihty ofissues outside the bounds of; ALAB 819,22 NRC 681 (1985)
@ C/O~ + M ,, new, standard for reopemns a record to melude; L8P-85 42,22 NRC 795 (1985)
' 9., -
;< e - on sabotage, entena for determmms admissibihty of L8P-85 27,22 NRC 126 (1985) g'hy,_,
previously found insufficiently specific, mterlocutory appeal of ruhng admittms; ALAB-817,22 NRC 470 (1985) c., '. .- ) ,
- quahty assurance, bases for support of ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985) q~ -
% ' C y- , ". I quahty assurance, effect on a proceedmg of admisseon of, ALAB-817,22 NRC 470 (1985)
. .. Y;.' . rules apphcable to; L8P 85-49,22 NRC 899 (1985)
~ ,/ y A'. ',
,' Staff documents as support for; ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985)
,',s 6 standard for determming admiswbehty of; ALAB-8 89,22 NRC 68111985) use of discovery to nesh out; ALAB 857,22 NRC 470 (1985) 3 , f-- ,
f ^ 7 * ,' , y CON TENTION(5). LATE-FILED
?
,,' , . _ , factors balanced to determme admissibihty of; AL A8-819,22 NRC 681 (1985)
L, , in motion to reopen, result of failure to address 2.714(a) cntene for admission of, L8P-85-42,22 g
"f u , gl s NRC 795 (1985) 4 s # means for party to demonstrate its abshty to coninbute to the record on issue submitted m; i, ,
'a .
, ALAB-813,22 NRC 59 (1985)
' ' d-, : test for admisseon of; ALA8-813,22 NRC 59 (1985)
.- /," ' . 2 ~.' i m CONTINUANCE
, . . M i [
- _ y. [ .f mdeGmte, m obhgation to respond to summary disposition motions, grant of LBP-85 32,22 NRC w i"*#c.) 3 ,' ;, 434 (1985)
?,
* , CONTROL ROO41 5
dewsn deficiencies, correction of, at Catawba; ALAB-813,22 NRC 59 (1985) staffms. regulatory requirements for; LBP 85-28,22 NRC 232 (1985)
' ^
, COOLING SYSTE%f
*, see Emergency Core Cochns System. Emergency Feedwater System. Reactor Coolant System
, , COOLING TOW ER
. - basin break with resultmg Hoodmg of Limenck control structure, potential for; ALAB-523,22 NRC
+
'. . ~M ,, 773 (1985) e dnft, effect of salt depoution from; L8P-85 26,22 NRC 118 (1985) 4
[ emistons, potennat for aircraft carburetor scmg from; ALAB-819,. 22 NRC 681 (1995) CORE
~J ,' < insegnty of fuel claddmg dunns renood of LBP-85 29,22 NRC 300 (1985) spray system at Limenck, adequacy of dewsn of,0D-8518,22 NRC 149 (19851 See also Emergency Core Conhng System; Reastor Core
~
. COR RESPONDENCE
, :. between NRC StatT and Licensee as bases for alleged safety concerns. DD-85-II,22 NRC 149 (1985)
CORRO$lON microbiologically influenced, m spray pond piping system DD-85 l5. 22 NRC 643 (1985) i . - + See algo Intergranular Strew Corromon Crackmg '
- 4. COST-BENEFIT AN ALY5is of alternatives to spent fuel shipments, need for; LBP 85 34,22 NRC 481 (1985) 4
~
n f I , i , i i 1 I'. 1 . I 1
i; * -
. : s '. '.w. a: -. , , ' - / ,u . w. , a ; . . . - SUBJECT INDEX !
l COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY regulauons. bmdmg nature of, on NRC, ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985) , COUNSEL consequence of error by, m making factual representauon; LBP-85-48,22 NRC 843 (1985) , responsibehty of,in attackmg miegnty of opposing counsel; LBP-8545,22 NRC 819 (1985) , CRITICAL HEAT FLUX , techmcal discussion of, LBP-85 29,22 NRC 300 (1985) CRITICALITY CONSTANT explanation of concept of. AL AB-816,22 NRC 461 (1985) , of 0.95, operation of spent fuel pool with; LBP 85 24,22 NRC 97 (1985) CROSS-EXAMINATION ruhnss, appellate review of; ALAB-813,22 NRC 59 (1985) D AM AGES pumtive, for radiauon tryunes. effect of Atomic Energy Act on nght of States to impose; ALAB-818,22 NRC 651 (1985) DECAY HEAT REMOVAL i from suppression pool durms degraded core accident, adequacy of means for; LBP-85 35,22 NRC { 514 (1985) t. DECISIONES) }- . addressng exemption from requirements of 10 C F R. 50.47(a) and (b), vacation of, on montness grounds'. LBP-85459,22 NRC 459 (19s5) Commismon pohey statements afTecung; ALAB-819,22 NRC 686 (1985) environmental, need for reconederanon of, when new information becomes available; DD-8516, r ? '
*2 NRC 851 (19856 imhal, need for submission of, m wntmg, ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985) , . , , -
Licenang Board, appellate sua sponte review of, ALAB-826,22 NRC 893 (19858 ?' , riot authonzmg hcense issuance or resolvmg all pendmg safety issues, appealabihty of; LBP 85 28, , 22 NRC 232 (1985) - parnal minal, scope of Commismon review of; CLI-85-15,22 NRC 184 (1985) 3-DECONTAMINATION ' of property m recepuon centers; LBP-85-35,22 NRC $14 (1985) . protecuon for bus dnvers dunns an emergency, need for; LBP 85-35,22 NRC 514 (1985) . DEFICIENCIES , disposmomns of reports on; ALAP 812,22 NRC 5 (1985) emergency planmns, cited by FEM A, adequacy of offsite emergency plans m hght of, LBP 85-35, 22 NRC 514 (1985) emergency planmng, post heanns resoluuon of. by NRC Staff, ALAB 819,22 NRC 681 (1985) in comrol rnom design at Catawbs, correction of, ALAB 813,22 NRC $9 (1985) in desegn, construction, and operanon of Diablo Canyon, treatment of alleganons of; CLI 85-14,22 NRC 177 (1985) m environmental quahrsanon of electncal equipment at Mame Yankee, allegations of, DD-85-17, 22 NRC 859 (1985) See also Quahiy Assurance Dericiencies DEPARTURE FROM NUCLEATE BOILING techmcal discusson of; LBP-85 29,22 NRC 300 (1985) DESIGN alternauves for mingauon of severe accidents, need for consideration of; ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 - (1985) alternauves to mangage severe accident noks, inclusion on,in Final Environmental Sistement: fx ,
'. J/. '
CLI-8513.22 NRC 1 (1985) , a deficiencies, control room, correction of, at Catawbe; ALAB-813,22 NRC 59 (1985) - documents, Manuricauon of errors in; LBP 8541,22 NRC 765 (1985) , e of spent fuel s' upping casks, esfety-related features of, LBP-85-34,22 NRC 481 (1985) i /. . . spent fuel poo,, high<lensty rerack, safety of; LBP 85 36,22 NRC 590 (1985) , DIESEL FUEL , .'~~ e day tanks, accident scenano mvolvmg rupture of, LBP-8549,22 NRC 899 (1985) I 79 f - i .
^
I l 1 I h , [O[ W' '
' f '. ** * *=-- "
(" f
- l
. s SIffdfO '
I
- .j[M;E kC$M/,$(W,c ij.! >h }O, )
s~ s
- c. w ,..es,v, - ,
3.e , ,m.. e,eg,a..l.v <
-.w
. ,9 j c S. {Qi r 4 f ,
, , , . i- ,
)
s ,w -
,Y l> 9 ;t -
- A p.w p c , , ' / .j .y. . ; t ' , 'i;~
,e , ,
+ .
; s. ,
W
.,y p p p w .< n
- W
+
- ;. y , ,
7'.g , ,
. ,,y'. p ,.jlfi, j -jf.Q. g & f,._ g ;,: ,
-: /- , ,
.; u,,. p _,y p ;, Q N y ;,y yy y n Q ~ , , N s _
n ,s, ,
- Ns,y' .0 , ,, N e - w. .
. 5.
_ A , w. *
; .. >+ -
s p.; v of u n . ,. , '.st: W . - - _- y . * - ss ~ 3, .,
.x',
Tp" 4.. ( , , , s G -
- D
.. p v m .% _ >_ .
- 4. . G ca e. ut -.- - a 1 d--
, a, .
r T -
- , a> ]
, f, -f '
~Cv- -
/ SUBJECT INDEX
!y 4 ,_ - -
l- ,. m
, si ,- * . . ' ~ , w : , r,y ,. #
D ~; M-A C DIESEL GENERATORS p '; . ' -; Mg -
'(- at Perry plant, rehatnhty of L8P 85-35,22 NRC Si4 (1985)
<c - ..< Transemenca Delaval, at Catawbe, rehabihty ofL ALAB-813,22 NRC 59 (1985)
, , ' ,; , '- '"[/, jg 2.;t '
ci f DIRECTED CERTIFICATION
,. ' -.Af ,fI authonty, discrenonary, test for esercise of; ALAB-817,22 NRC 470 (1985)
]y'.-) *y ; g ts .'C-%,l
.- ..... .y u . DISCLOSURE D/(- waiver of attorney-chent and work product pnvdeses through; LBP 85-38,22 NRC 604 (1985)
" .'?,
1 - [' y /. DISCOVERY y . , M 9,t/2, N i ,. A t Q, ' g' access to plant components removed for design denciencies as; LBP-85-32,22 NRC 434 (1985)
^ ' h *;..' ' ;,.o
$fi : @"Yh .. - . ' . Gled in one docket when two wperate dockets for a case are interrelated, treatmem of; L8P 85-41, Q@N7
- v. b, e .;L.E ; dd 9%-
- C,. 22 NRC 765 (1985) 94 .T q , ,. 'h '
<-p,
, 7' %' ;' , f .C " ' ,
c; N! J sf f imphcanons of misrepresentauon order; L8P-85-47,22 NRC 835 (1985) minngement ofintervenor's heanns nghts because of espedsted schedule for; CLi-85-15,22 NRC
? D ., . , ~i f <M'- 'A ' .,.O i<. 184 (1985)
.;. c ~r of documems not yet m existence; LBP 85 41,22 NRC 765 (1985) fg
$. ycf,'.+ , . m_ .f7 7 4 "'; ~.? - of nonweiness experts; L8P 85 38,22 NRC 604 (1985) 4+ s ", , requests. broad, treatment of; LBP 85 41,22 NRC 765 (1985)
M.*,
- .,g , , "P ' ,
.jl e sancuon for failure to comply with order for; L8P-85 48,22 NRC 84) (1985) r .1, 2
.- ' use of, to Oesh out contenuons. ALA8-817,22 NRC 470 t1985)
'. J iS. tG.
~
i
- A; ~
DISQUALIFICATION of adjud catory boards, standard for; AL AB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985)
.g[y iy ,1 s ,' ,.*',J.. /7' ,' h', ~- ' .f
- of Licenwns Board, support of monon for; CLi-8! 15,22 NRC 184 (1985)
.w/P ',- m, "^' DOCKET 5 ?., -
t p 4 '. .' , 'e ,c separate but interrelated treatment of discovery and evidence Gled in: LBP-85 41,22 NRC 765
, O h. .,' - ,
. r2 y .c ar', ; , ' ,; i (1985l
'-t
^ " ' '
t . O q.* , DOCUMENTATION
". Y a , o(equipmens quahrei;anun at Kewaunee, adequacy of, DD 85 20,22 NRC 971 (1985)
+" 4 M-.'"' DOCUMENTS s EO ' ' . design,6denu6 canon of errors in: L8P 85 41,22 NRC 765 (1985) t1 5tatT. as support for conterinons; ALAB-819. 22 NRC 681 (1985)
, '~3 y , _, * ,,'
,.a, '.,, ,u,, DO$E p.
,, _ f. ' ~*= g g , { ' assessments dunns radiological emergency, trammg necessary to perform; LBP-85-27A. 22 NRC
- - . ...c . ~ , 207 (1985)
- p _t TW.
,,. 3 '
calculanons for cask drop acculent; LBP 85-36, 22 NRC 590 (1985)
- 9. .. g.,; .. J DO5IMETERS e (-Q 1Q; _ p eV3
- p f, *
..5~ thermolummescent. accuracy of; L8P 85 28, 22 NRC 232 (1985)
< . .%- DRUG ABU$E D'
_i< at Waterford site, treatment of. ALAB 812,22 NRC 5 (1985) DRY CASK
' : f .. ,
storage as alternauve to spem fuel transshipments; LBP 85-34,22 NRC 481 n.985) g DRYWELL POOL { loads from hydrogen combusuon; LBP 85 35,22 NRC 514 (1985) n ., (w EFFECTIVENESS
]* f" - s
{ _ of authonranon for operaung hcense, demal of request for stay of. CLl 8514. 22 NRC 177 (1985) 5ee also immediate Effecuveneu
' ' c c, ,; . ELECTRIC GENERATION
,' ~
, 7i^d nuclear powered. regulatory structure for; AL AB 818,22 NRC 651 (1985)
( .- , ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT at Mame Yankee, adequacy of environmental quahncanan of. DD 45.lf. 22 NRC 859 (1985)
, .,~
;* at TMI 1, San Onofre IJme 1. Kewaunee. and Haddam Neck plants. adequacy of environmental
,', quahncanon of; DD-8f 20,22 NRC 971 (1985)
- ~, at Waterford. Good damage to; ALA8-812,22 NRC 5 (1985) environmemal quahGcanon of; L8P.85 28,22 NRC 232 (1985)
ELECTROM AGNETIC PUL5E
- caused by nuclear mtuile or other weapon, need to protect nuclear plants 48ainst effects of; L8P 85 27,22 NRC 126 (1985)
+
f i; .. , 08 i s e f I* A
4
= - . . . . -
O SUBJECT IN DEX !
- I 4
EMERGENCY ACTION LEVEL . l 4 indicaiors, mcomplete, m emergency plan, LBP 85 35,22 NRC 514 (1985) . EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEM l evaluaton models, adequacy of. l BP-85 29,22 NRC 300 (1985) EMERGENC) FEEDW ATER SYSTEM at TMI 1, adequacy of environmental quahrwatu,n of; DD-85 20. 22 NRC 971 (19858 l EMERGENCY PLAN (57 consent of, regardmg mmemum staftmg a Licensee should have dunns an emergency; LBP 85 27A. I , 22 NRC 207 (1985)
. content of, regardmg ons.te and offsite preparedsiess; ALAB-888. 22 NRC 651 (19856 ,
deGciencies in, with respect to hospital designanons and medical services. LBP-85-35,22 NRC 514 (1985# effect of State statutes prohitutmg unhty from implementms; LBP 85-31,22 NRC 410 (1985) emplemenung procedures. hingsbility of, LBP 85 27 A. 22 NRC 207 (1985) terigth of. LBP 85-27A,22 NRC 207 (1985) Lamenck. onsste. adequacy of facehty and equipment desenpuons in. ALAB 819,22 NRC 681 (1985) need for completion of emergency action leselindicators in; LBP-85 35,22 NRC 514 (1985) , nucicar power plam operation m hsht of deGeiencies in; ALAB-8IS. 22 NRC 651 (1985) l, l offsite. adequacy of, m hsht of planmns de6ciencies cited by FEM 4; LBP 85 35,22 NRC 514 , (1985) ! offsite, legal authonty of unhty to smriement, AL AB-818,22 NRC 651 (1985) . - - scope of medical services arrangements to be mcluded m2CLI-8515,22 NRC 184 (1985) , standard for judging sufGciency of content of. ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985)
- j unlity sponsored, as subsutute for 5 tait and local government plans; ALAB-818,22 NRC 651
- gg9g3, . M s .- ,
EMERGENCY PLANNING dcGciencies. post-heanns resolunon of. by NRC Staff. ALAB 819,22 NRC 681 (1985) ' 1 effect of lack of State and local government parucipanon m; LBP 85 31,22 NRC 410 (1985) , esercine , standard for admissaan of contentions on; LBP 85-49,22 NRC 899 (1985) i need for Gnal FEM 4 fmdings on. as prerequisne to hcensms. ALAB-813,22 NRC 59 (1985) i regulanons premise for; ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985) , requirements' scope of medical services arrangements to be made for contammated mJured mdmduals; ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985) standards of 10 C F.R. 50.471bl. result of failure to satisfy; ALAB-819. 22 NRC 681 (1985) I EMERGENCY PLANNING ZONE need for mstalianon of mdependent data monstonne systems m; LBP-45-35,22 NRC $14 (1985) { protecuon factors of siructures m. LBP 85-49. 22 NRC 899 (1985) protecuve actions to be developed for; ALAB-818,22 NRC 651 (1985) EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS of State and local agencies, adequacy of. m light of underfunding; DD 8512,22 NRC 449 (1985) , EMERGENCY WORKER $ d provision of potassium sodide to; LBP 85 27A,22 NRC 207 (1985) '
- reau rements for tramms of. LBP 85-25,22 NRC 101 (19851 1
ENFORCEMENT , actions, msutunon of, on basis of heensee's fmancial constramts; DD-8514,22 NRC 635 (1985) ; , history of Brunswick nuclear plant. LBP 85 28,22 NRC 232 (1985) pohey on civil penalty acuens. ALJ 85-1,22 NRC 941 (1985) ' ' *- proceedmss, her on, because of statute c,f hmitsuons. CLl 8518, 22 NRC 877 (1985) + ENVIRONMENT + -
. 5 ; N , '. -
radiauon. calculanon of done for; LDP.85-28,22 NRC 232 (1985) - ' 4 U ./'C ENVIRONMENTAL AN ALY5is .
^ ,c test for determmms whether to segment LBP-85-43,22 NRC 805 (1985) -
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
* ~
content of, concermns aliernauve uses of available resources; LBP.8514. 22 NRC est (1985) / , . . , f. + of method for site redress, need for; LBP 85 22,22 NRC 49 (1985) - t ,
, 1 9 #
5 Si j . . ((T
- 7YY O*iD*87 8M " i" * ** ** " V 7 ** '
i V !,
)*s;' $ kry,x -v%l -;fe
. p.y ? A.;T h., . f,'
- p' 1, 3 W, =? -G , e . *- "'i. -
i , di f* 7 ' * ,. . f 8 [/. } [y'; r i. g -
- s.*
@ L+ w '.. q ,
I h ~~ , y N ' Mr ,,'1
, i p4 .
Y f
e
. , @..d p ,e, p ',-'_t.
'i, ,,
1 f.%l\[c ) , ' * .,3l '$ &j%%f. k. JyQ.W.&$..f<f;-Q;nyf, m
- y. w - .- <,,s .- w.a p,g . 'Q. ,,.w p o, - , s yy c, . ,
4' ', y
./
~
~. . , < .
3 ...
,y
, i 5
, e .p
/ " .. , ' r Q ' '- WJ ,
. g.; 7'f'4f , s.
7 .- , , d, '
- W<. J *5, .,
n:
' .f :; , ,
4-1,, . : v_ .
,);, -.
.~_
~.-' n_ ,
9 , .
, .{} ,_ ,
, i ,
- 4
- s. !
- , v. . . 4
- ' .s;. >
- o. -
N'%; ' j SUBJECT INDEX j - 'M. -
.x. j
-' "C Q - r
+
, .y
' ; ' ', M $M '
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS y"'@Q - M -n h -w( of transehapment of spent fuel casks vs. construction of dry cask storage facihty; LDP-85-34,22 gj;~M
, . ,- g NRC 481 (1985)
*fe. jQ .- d., %
- ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPRAISAL
'%,., .;4 ' - s. ' ,,'y , , .. 'n
- function of; DD-8516,22 NRC 851 (1985)
*". j { ' $ 3 : ,' . V '1 ] ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 1 ' ,- i
_ ,, need for mclumon of remote and highly speculative consequences in; ALAS-419,22 NRC 681
- s. ,
- , < ~ - s .r'. (1985) ys g j.J. , - . /1 ' '
need for preparation of, for spent fuel pool expansion; L8P 85-36,22 NRC 590 (1985)
$[,.[a[f,Nd[y[,:
U [N9 3 . LM} y.)
* ','. h . need for, to store spent fuel at a facihty: DD-8516,22 NRC 851 (1985) need to conader low-probotnhty, severe accidents in; ALAB-819,22 NRC 641 (1985) e
- f. . Q ,
vf.% w a . ,e6 d pf r - See also Fmal Environmental Statement
- /.p g F; ; :. g ., ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION
'>s
. I. ! .DS, 9 adequacy of documentauon of, at Kewaunee; DD-85-20,22 NRC 971 (1985) ci, + ' ,.p.. ,r d-. ' effect of physical onentation of equipment on; LBP-85 28. 22 NRC 232 (1985)
- -- ~
.- j ~ s . -
of elecincal equipment at Maine Yankee, adequacy of. DD-8517,22 NRC 859 (1985) . g% * '.V , S., -
' [_.
T f of electnca! equipment at TMI 1, San Onofre Uma I, Kewaunee, and Haddam Neck plants, , , M. ~ 3. ~'
~
s
; adequacy of; DD-85 20,22 NRC 971 (1985)
$; mm5 of electncal equipment; L8P 85-28,22 NRC 232 (19858 J?.4* *4
s , ..,
t f EQUIPMENT elTect of physical onentation of, on environmental quahfication; LSP-8$-28,22 NRC 232 (1985)
* .-,4. [ -
'[' E.e' h safety-related, lack of visualinspecuon of, at Waterford. ALA8 812,22 NRC 5 (1985) 5 survivabehty, adequacy of analysis of. LBP-85-35,22 NRC 514 (1985)
'. $';$.y %,
- e
, n . .
e' See also Electncal Equipment; Safety Equipment EV ACU ATION
'*2*j, '*
~
j adversanal evaluation to determme efficiency in accomphshing; ALAB-818,22 NRC 658 (1985)
.y .
- p .%. of schools dunns radiological emergency, use of students as bus dnvers for- . LBP 85 27A,22 NRC e* *'3 207 (1985) routes through flood areas, denial of 2.206 pennon requestmg legal acuan to rectify; DD 85-13,22
~-- "t- -
;b- '
NRC 454 (1985)
-; n- .- ' .- EV ACUA TION TIME ESTIM ATES
' . c
- F- 4 'G accuracy of methodology for compshng; CLl 8515,22 NRC 184 (1985)
~;y- ;** J6 *"
9 factors consdered m making; L8P 85 27A,22 NRC 207 (19851 V' O@p' ;- g T-C i l need for analysis of worst. case scenanos for; LBP-85-25,22 NRC 101 (1985) need for review of, by State or local orgamranons; LBP.85 35,22 NRC 514 (1985) 1:S:- ,'
- t
^,
- 2. ;
requirements for making and maintasmns current; LSP 85 27A 22 NRC 207 (1985) 3 " M ,M .1 ! use of conservausms in; L8P-85-27A,22 NRC 207 (1985)
' ' - f ,"? EVIDENCE =
J" '.' p' . ' , admissibihty of studies of plant quahty as, where study group was not endependent of management;
. LBP.85-39,22 NRC 755 (1985) filed m one docket when two separate dockets for a case are mterrelated, treatment of; L8P-85 41,
^
22 NRC 765 (1985) hearsay, admissibehty of,in admamstraute proceedmss; ALAB 819,22 NRC 681 (1985)
' , .. e of httle mtnnsee value, need to mctude in a record; ALA8-824,22 NRC 776 (1985) supporung, for reopenmg of record, nature of ALAB-412,22 NRC 5 (1985)
- - ' %' y.4
,~
-S t EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS from Office ofInvesugations, Board rehance on,in makms heensms decimons; ALA8-8 82,22 NRC
+
- < ; s, -
. J t 5 (1985) 4 EXEMPTION (5) , . . 'v '., > '
frotn regulauons, filing of pennons for; LBP 85 33,22 NRC 442 (1985) ,,
,-+,C..~ _
i from regulanons, standards apphed by Commismon in considenne requests for; LBP 85 33,22 NRC
-' ' ;. f .c 442 (1985) from requirements of 10 C F R. 50 47(a) and (bi, vacanon of decimon addressms, on mooiness grounds; LBP-85 459,22 NRC 459 (1985) ,
improvidently granted, support for claim of. D0 8511,22 NRC 149 (1985) of pams coannes m contamment from quahty assurance requirements; L8P 85 37,22 NRC 601 (1985) m 82 W
-= , f.e y. e. e . ' g . e 4. e 9 m
- g4y i
a-s. a f b
-, z a.
. . s -
1 i
- t a
. SUBJECT INDEX f
EXPERTS I nonwitness, discovery of, LBP-85 38,22 NRC 604 (1985) [ i in whom Fed. R. Civ. ft 26(b)(48 is apptwable; LBP 85 38. 22 NRC 604 (1985) ; EXPLOSIVES e*Tect of, on spent fuel shipping cans. LBP-85-34,22 NRC 481 (1985) from Federal ammuniton plant, hazard to Braidwood facihty from railroad transport of. LBP-85-27, 22 NRC 126 (1985) , FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY final findings on emergency planmns, need for, as prerequimte to lecensing; ALAB-813,22 NRC 59 (1985) FIN AL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT amendment of, by adl udicatory heanns record and Licensing Board decision; AL AB-819,22 NRC l 688 (1985) }_ scope of design alternauses to mitigate severe accidents to be meluded in: CL18$ 13,22 NRC I (1943) See also Environmental Impact Statement ' - FIN ANCIAL QUALIFICATIONS issues. htigabihty of,in operaung license proceedmgs. ALAB-813,22 NRC 59 (1985) e of heenseen. insutunon of enforcement actens on bass of DD-8514,22 NRC 635 (1985) FINANCIAL RESOURCES *
, dispanty in, as demonstrahon of escepuonal circumstances under Fed. R. Cn P. 26(b)(4HB);
I LBP 45 38. 22 NRC 604 0985) FINDINGS safety, required by Atomic Enefsy Act for operaung hcense issuance. ALAB Sl2,22 NRC 5 * ' ' (1985); ALAB-813,22 NRC 59 (1985) .m. >
' ~
safety, requt*wl for nuclear power plant hcenang. ALAB-819,22 NRC 6810985) 4 i techmcal, scope of; LBP-85-47,22 NRC 835 (1985) ' ' ' FIRE B 4RRIERS ' cable tray, qualtesuon of. LBP-45 49,22 NRC 899 (1985) ' factors controlhns locanon of. LDP 85-49,22 NRC 899 (1985) - FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM ' at Harns Plant, adequacy ofi LDP 85-49,22 NRC 899 (1985) ' FIRES ' accondary, in contamment, emusted by hydrogen burmns, poienual for; LBP 85 35,22 NRC 514 0985) FLOOD damage to electncal equipment at Waterford AL AB 812. 22 NRC 5 (1985) FLOODING of evacuation routes; DD 85-13,22 NRC 454 0985) ! of Limerick control structure resulung from coohng tower been break, potenual for; ALAB 823,22 NRC 773 0985) {' FUEL design hmits, enterpretsuon of; LBP 85 29,22 NRC 300 (1985) See also Diesel Fuel, Spent Fuel FUEL LOAD ' r
- bonus plan, safety impact of. DD 8512,22 NRC 449 (1985) '
GALLIONELLA i
-w. > -4 corrosion in spray pond piping system innuenced by; DD 8515,22 NRC 643 0985) .*, , ,
, u . .
GENERATOR 5 ,; ' N,~ emergency, capacity / power demand margens for; ALAB 824,22 NRC 776 (1985) See also Diesel Generators; Steam Generator Tube
, ' . , . /.'. 3 ~%-
HEALTH
- ' 'is 2 '
impacts, human, of a severe accident, scope of Final Environmental Statement consideranon of, * * - ' ALAB-819,22 NRC 6810985) . . HEALTH AND SAFETY . ' j ' L '_ . , responsebehues of Nuclear Regulatory Commission; ALAB 818,22 NRC 6510985) a,' ,'g. I
*ff f
- u t+
's k ,
Au
, ,y . , . y .' , . ;3 . - - -
-l , )
t' e l . f - p., y 4 , E' , l -Q,[ - ,
%+
.. 3 .
, i. .
,
- I f
'4
f . f1d(Mj'.>,=7[ -)
,34- ,
j ^ D
' '. .y rn%.7. ;_r ,.QlQ..x;,;:f.ml@p.m.w&,,.iQQ :l 9,.. .
i c
- _ : , . . ,. .m
,, ; ,. - ; e ~ ~ . c > .
. .s
, 2 +
,w- . .r;-
q..1 y, u.w;;
+ '
r s; - , r w
,'r.,'
' 4 -
, ,y r M. $ 9 . * ,
,f ,
ol( y
- E pill L w~a..s . .. _. . .. .- d .; .
t SUBJECT INDEX
,g
- . O I,' >
HEARING RIGHT5
* ' granted by Atomic Energy Act, scope of; ALAB 824,22 NRC 776 (l983) ; V.j ;
ininnsement of, through adverse procedural ruhnss; CL185 lj. 22 NRC 184 (198$)
-".' ' of members of the pubhc under Atomic Energy Act; ALAB-81) 22 NRC $9 (1985)
M~ s on heense conditions; CLI-851) 22 NRC I (1985)
'l
- l'_ ;
HEARING (5) Apphcant's Management Plan as a proper focus for; LBP 85-32,22 NRC 434 (1985) legislative format, estabhshment of procedures to govern; CLI-8518,22 NRC 877 (1985) need for, pnor to issuance of spent fuel poollicense amendments; LBP 85 36,22 NRC $90 (1985)
.^ .
See also Adjudicatory Heannst; Licensmg Hearmas; Nonce of Hennns Y' -
- HEAT TRANSFER COEFFICIENT 5
, ) '~i .i calculanon of; LBP-85 29,22 NRC 300 (1985)
HYDROGEN detonauon in Three Mile Island conuinment; LBP 85 30. 22 NRC 332 (1985)
, . -7
- HY DROGEN CONTROL SYSTEM 5 standard of acceptance of. Lisp 85-)$. 22 NRC $14 (198$1 HYDROGEN GENER ATION contenuons. litigabihty of. ALAB 81). 22 NRC $9 (1983)
HYDROGEN IGNITOR 515 FEM r * ' euesuons to be answered in evaluating prehmmary analysis of. LBP 85-)$. 22 NRC $14 (1985)
' - IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVENESS determinanon, effect of, on Appeal Board's determinanon of a stay motion; ALAB-414. 22 NRC 198 (1985)
IN M A TE.5 s at State correctional msutuhon, evacuauon of dunns radiological emergency; LBP 85 2$. 22 NRC
' 101 (1985)
^
. , . - INSPECTION PROGR AM N RC Staff, objecuves of,0D 8511,22 NRC 149 (1985)
- INSPECTOR 5 Q A/QC, at Waterford adequacy of quahncanons of; ALAB-812,22 NRC $ (1985)
INTERGR ANULAR STRESS CORROSION CR ACKING caused by high interpass temperatures on welds. potentral for. ALAB.81) 22 NRC $9 (1983) INTER PR ET A TION
- of 10 C F R. Part 50. Appendis A; ALAB 824,22 NRC 776 (19e$1 of the phrases and terms directed agamst the facihty."
- enemy of the Umied States." and
-deployment"; LBP 85 27. 22 NRC 126 (1985) statutory. weight given to legislauwe entent in; ALAB-818. 22 NRC 651 (1985)
IN TF RROG ATORIES need to designate who compowd answer to; LBP 8$ 38,22 NRC 604 (198$1 scope of; LBP.83-J8. 22 NRC 604 (1985) INTERVENOR5
;j cntens for esubhshing standing of. in operarang hcense amendment proceedings; LBP 8$ 24. 22 NRC 97 (1983) f pro se. heanns obhganons of. ALAB-419,22 NRC 681 (1985) 8 IN TE RVE.NTION i in operaung heense amendment proceedings, standmg for; ALAB.816,22 NRC 461 (1985)
! peupon, etTect of withdrawal of. LBP 85-23. 22 NRC 95 (198$)
peupon, tale-filed in operaung hcense amendment proceeding, dismisul of. LBP-85 24. 22 NRC 97 (1985) responsibehues attendant to; LBP 45-46,22 N RC $30 (1985) ,, unumely, by pro se tinsant, five factor test for; LBP 83 36,22 NRC $90 (1985) unumely, five factor test for; ALAB 816. 22 NRC 46111985) JURISDICTION appellate, where the Appeal Board has previously considered an tuue, resulung en Gnal agency , acnon; ALAB 821,22 NRC 750 (1985)
'{ enlargement of by hcensing bnerds. ALAB-825,22 NRC 783 (198$p NRC, over Delaware River Basin Commission; DD 85 It. 22 NRC 870 (1985) 9 I
I
# B4
. El
.i
!,.. ~ , , . 7 . q - . ,,~
l a I b
L i
- i I .
l l, SUBJECT INDEX j er ! I f plenary subject master, m NRC proceedmss; ALAB 425,22 NRC 785 (1985) F to rule on monon so reopen; AL AB 823,22 NRC 773 (1985) ' l l LAWS i l State, esercisms histore pohce powers. Federal preemption of. AL AB-818,22 NRC 658 (1985)
- j LEAK R ATEt5) data falsi6 cations et TMi-2, heanns to idenufy persons mvolved sn; CLI-8518,22 NRC 877 (1985) '
testmg. propnety of NRC grant of esemption from requirements for; DD-85-il,22 NRC 149 (1985) ' vahdity of methodology for measurement of; DD 8510,22 NRC 143 (1985) LETTER 5 0F AGREEMENT ! l - regardmg availability of school buses, need for; LBP 85-35,22 NRC 514 (1985) ' LICENSE CONDITIONS r appropnaieness of NRC acnon m the absence of; DD 8518,22 NRC 870 (1985) LICENSED OPER ATOR tramms at TMI. adequacy or, ALAB-826,22 NILC 39311985) j LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS as basis for allegation of madequate denen and poor plant performance; DD 85 II,22 NRC 149 (1985i = LICENSEEl5s # character, elements of. ALAB-812,22 NRC 5 (1985) , control over, by new facehty owner or lessor; CLI.8517,22 NRC 875 (19856 ' LICEN5ING i *' for spent fuel storage at a facehty other than where it was generated. AL AB-825,22 NRC 785 (1985) LICEN5lNG BOARDIS) , authoney to impose sanctions. LBP 85 48,22 NRC 84) (1989 J y authonty to sinke pleadmes LBP 85 45. 22 NRC 819 (1985) enlargement of junsdiction by; ALAB-825,22 NRC 785 (1985) A i ,r- ,
; 4. i flesibshty of, to regulate heanngs and designate order of procedure; ALAB-819,22 NRC 68) (1985) (, '
- Junediction. scope of,in NRC proceedmss. ALAB-825,22 NRC 785 (19858 7 * '
rehance on en perte mformanon from OfDce of invenusauons m matmg heensing decisions; i V j AL AB-812,22 NRC 5 (1985) responsibehties en light of the enestence of State Court huganon between the some pernes as those e < [#
'g. u l before the NRC; LBP-85-46,22 NRC 830 (1985)
- responubihty of. to submit minal decisions m wnting. ALAB 819. 22 NRC 648 (1985) '
scope of authoney of. ALAB 525,22 NRC 785 (1985) ' 1 scope of sua sponte authonty of; LBP.85-49,22 NRC 899 (1985) i ( LICEN51NG HEARINGS , esclusion of rmal stages of major safety study from, LDP 85-32,22 NRC 434 (1985) LOGGING OPER ATIONS - well and coal mme, unauthonfed handhng of byproduct materials m. AL2 821,22 NRC 941 (1985) M A N AGEM ENT C APABILITY of Shearon f(arns apphcanis. LBP-85 28. 22 NRC 232 (1985) , l relesance of appbcants' management o(one facihty to its capabshty for managing another facihty; + i LBP-45-28. 22 NRC 232 (1985) , 4 M AN AGEMENT COMPETENCE 9 ' factors determining, ALAB-815,22 NRC 198 (1985)
~3+
s . MANAGEMENT PLAN " * - Apphcant's, as sole boos for conunued htigauon m operaung license proceedms; LDP 85 32,22 NRC 434 (1985) 4 4
- k. ' , )lI 7 i r M ATERIAL FALSE STATEMENT -2, V. p.~ k
by GPU Nuclear management, esiabhshment of proceeding to resolve issue of, CLI 8519,22 NRC , -~ ~ ' 'E [ 886 (1985) l.
.. , l,, . '
l mailgram by Licensee management staung erroneous mformanon as LBP 85 30,22 NRC 332
. ," ,.Q
[ (1985) a ^ I MEDICAL SERVICE $ 6* e
- l j
, arrangements for conismmated injured individuals, scope of emergency plannms requirenwnts for; ALAB 819,22 NRC 641 (1985); CLI-85-15,22 NRC 184 (1985) [m-5% Os ,
, k ,
s l
' ]' f- ,
f I g. j 4 f %.
'T I
' a i < , ,
, 'J"
/
l.
** +
I r e, 4
+ .~t'- ,s-1, e
"',T
>k b w ,. ' .
ha ! q'&,%; &4l N , ' h-?;;$$ .v' - '
~ p, M. .
'.f' ry$@Gh ) .- . .i' ,'
r
*. r;-
7 ' d Q';S% iY i, R.l/ '. , , '-~~M ',' s s a
- ..] , , y- -
- te :K ,-
~
.1 m e , ,
, n9:c:.v- ,
1 4
> ~ ~ - > . a. . . . . . . - . . . . . . , ~ . . . .
l b
. .b SUBJECT INDEX to be provided dunns radiological emergency, need for agreement with Red Cross for, LBP-85-31, 22 NRC 410 (1985)
MI5 REPRESENTATION ORDER discovery implicauons of; L8P-85-47,22 NRC 833 (1985)
, MODELS See Computer Models MONITORING e equipment, thyroid, at relocanon centers, adequacy of; L8P 85 31,22 NRC 410 (1985) of impact of salt deposition from coolms tower dnft on agricultural lands, program for, LSP 85 26,
' ' 22 NRC lit (1985)
~> MONITORING SYSTEMS
' mc'ependent data, need for instalianon of,in Emergency Planning Zone; LSP 85 35,22 NRC $14
- e. (1985)
MOUTNESS vacanon of decimon addressms esempteon from requirements of 10 C.F.R. 50 47(a) and (b) on a grounds of; LBP 85-459,22 NRC 459 (19115)
-l MOTION TO REOPEN j burden of sausfying requirements of; ALAB 812,22 NRC 5 (1985) cntens to be sausned by, where record is closed, some propowd Andings have been Gled, but no
.j decision has been rendered; L8P 8542,22 NRC 795 (1985) i j Aled pnor to decision but subsequent to the niing of proposed Andings, critens to be sausned by; L8P 8545,22 NRC 819 (1985)
-1 Junsdicuon to rule on; ALA8 823,22 NRC 773 (1985) particulanty required of matenal supporung; ALA8-812,22 NRC 5 (1985)
, result of failure to address 2.714(a) cntena for admission of late nied comennons m; L8P-8542,22 NRC 795 (1985)
'
- that raises previously uncontested issues, entens for acceptance of; ALAB-812,22 NRC 5 (1985)
.j unumely, grant of; L8P 8545,22 NRC 819 (1985) ,
See also Reoperung; Reopenmg a Record MOTION TO 5TRIKE 1 summary disposinon responw and accompanyms aindavits; L8P 85 29,22 N RC 300 (1985) _." N ATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT # estent of safety measures required by; ALA8-819,22 NRC 641 (1985) 4, need for assessment of effects of overall transmission gnd system when considenne proposed transmission ime; L8P-8543,22 NRC 805 (1985) requirements for environmentalimpact statemems for storage of spent fuel at a facility; DD 8516, 22 NRC 851 (1985) NEED FOR POWER issues, litigability of, in operstmg license proceed #ngs; ALAB 81),22 NRC 59 (1985) a NONCONFORM ANCE REPORTS disposinomns of, at Waterford; ALAB 812,22 NRC 5 (1985) NOTICE OF HEARING
' purpose of, ALA8-825,22 NRC 785 (19851 8
NOTIFICATION 3 of NRC by GPU Nuclear of certain personnel assignments, establistiment of procedures for determming whether to lift requirement for; CLl 8519,22 NRC $$6 (1985) NRC POLICY concerning deleganon of authonty to rule on nonessennal procedural matters; DPRM 85 3,22 NRC 173 (1985) ** a concermrs prosecuan of plants agamst an enemy attad; L8P 85 27,22 NRC 126 (1985) 3 on lit gation of severe accident minganon measures; ALA8-819,22 NRC 681 (1985) to pursue allegations with potennal safety signincance; DD 85 il,22 NRC 649 (1985) See also Policy Statements , NRC PROCEEDINGS applicatson of Fed. R. C6v. P. 26(b)(4) m; L8P 85 38,22 NRC 604 (1985)
> effect on. of State Court proceedmg mvolving the same parues as thow before the NRC; L8P.85-46,22 NRC 830 (1985) og
.i..,,..m...w,,-.- .
i , 6 6
I i l l t SUBJECT INDEX ; i intensne discosery m related State Court heigation as jushficauon for postponement of. LBP 85-48, 22 NRC 843 41983) See also Operatmg Licens$ Proceedmss; Opersims License Amendment Proceedmss; Show Cause Proceedmg , NRC STAFF j authonty of NRC achudscato* r oards over; AL AB 812. 22 NRC $ (1983) ! documents as surport for cot . Dns ALAB-Sl9,22 NRC 681 (1985) mspecuon program, obsectives .. DD-83.II,22 NRC I49 (198$) '
. post-heanns resolution of emes.es y plannmg denciencies by; ALAB-819,22 NRC 68) (1983) l post heanns resolution of hcer .. ndiuons by; CLI-8513,22 NRC 1 (1983) responmbihues. AL AB-812,24 .RL $ (1983) review of operstmg hcense apphcation hergabihty of consennon challentmg adequacy of. , AL AB 812. 22 NRC $ (1985i NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (St construcuon legahty of 5taie enactment of woratorium on; AL AB 818,22 NRC 631 (1985) twensing requirements for protection of, aga. 'st attacks by an enemy of the United States; LBP-83-27,22 NRC 126 (1983) '
j responsbehty for handhng beyond-design-bses . rests against; LBP 85 27,22 NRC 126 (1985) water cooled. apphcabihty of General Demsn Crr,*rmn 17 to; AL AB-524,22 NRC 776 (1985) NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION * .- ' authonty to direct Board to conseder ments of reque ' for esempnon from re8uianons. LDP-85 33 '
- t 22 NRC 442 (1985) ' '
4 authonry to hmit adjudicatory heannss. ALAB 819,22.IRC 681 (1983) , i bmdmg nature of Council on Environmental Quahty's resdations on. ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 ' ' (1985)
- i , -
{ challenges to authonty of; LDP 85-33,22 NRC 442 (1985) - delesahon of authonty by, to rule on closure deiermmanons for advisory committee meetmas. , DPRM 8$-3. 22 NRC 173 (1985) 'i health and safety respenatuhues of, ALAB-818. 22 NRC 651 (1983) A *' junsdiction over Delaeare Rner Basin Commismon. DD 8518. 22 NRC 870 (1983) 3 ' responsibehnes of, under NEPA; ALAB 819,22 NRC ell (1983) review of partial mitial decimons, scope of. CLI-8515,22 NRC 184 (1985)
.b. . . ' . -j 5ee also NRC Pohey; NRC Proceedmst. NRC Staff 1:
- OFFICE OF INVESTIG ATION5 Board rehance on es parte information en makms beensing decissons. ALAB-812,22 NRC $ (1983)
OPER ATING LICENSE [ I applicauon, htigabihty of conteniaon challensms adequacy of NRC Staff review of. ALAB 812. 22 - NRC $ (l98$1 ' authonraison, need for final FEM 4 findmgs on adequacy of emergency response plans as prerequisne to; AL AB 813,22 NRC $9 (198$) I condinons, heanns nghts on; CLI 8513,22 NRC i (198$) demal of request for stay of effecuveness of authonranon for issuance of; CLI-85-14,22 NRC 177 (1985) emergency plannmg requirements necessary for obtaming; ALAB-418,22 NRC 6$1 (198$) ensuance, safety Gndmg necessary for, ALAB 412,22 NRC $ (1985) ' OPERATING LICENSE AMENDMENT PROCLEDING(5) i availatnhty of summary disposinon in. LDP-83 29,22 NRC 300 (198$) I
- bass for standing to meervene in; ALAB-816,22 NRC 461 (l985) '*,
residency requirements to estabhsh standing to intervene m. LDP 83 24,22 NRC 97 (198$1 treatment oflate filed entervenuon petihons m; LDP 43-24,22 NRC 97 (1983)
* ' 9 ! , OPER ATING LICENSE AMENDMENT (5) # '
for spent fuel pool espanmon, need for heanns pnor to issuance of. LDP 85 36,22 NRC $90 (1985) ' permitung receipt and storage of spent fuel assemblies transnhapped from enother nuclear facehty'.
- LBP.83 34,22 NRC 481 (1985) <
suspension or revocanon of; LDP-8$ 29,22 NRC $0 (1983) to permit receipt and storage of spent fuel assembhes, affirmance of deerseon authorismg; , . ALAB-822,22 NRC 771 (1985) 4. i 37
+,- , , -e- -
4 O r
, p ,-;7~.y .
Q h blq l,$.f&i-l( - *
*c 3;q ,#i/ y y/,y a
<, r, g} % u - -J,
- 7 ,
4?, ,,
~
y, e * .
\ g
,- - -- w e .. . , , ,_ ,, _v.
4 s .
- , a e SUBJECT INDEX
; OPERATING LICENSE APPLICATIONS standard for measunng; ALAB-419,22 NRC 681 (1985) r
! OPERATING LICENSE CONDITION prohibiting control over hcensees by new facihty owner or lesact; CLI 8517. 22 NRC $75 (1985) l requanns notice of construcuan and operanon of tranwnismon hne; LBP 85-43,22 NRC 805 (19851
!' OPERATING LICENSE PROCEEDINGS
! Apphcant's Management Plan as sole basis for comenued hugauon in. LSP-85 32,22 NRC 434 i ' ' (1985)
. l heigainhty of adequacy of sesunty plans in; ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1989)
'l htigatnhty of sherneuve one issues in; ALAB 819,22 NRC 688 (1985) hugathhty of need for power and Gnancial quahncanons issues in. ALAB-81). 22 NRC 59 (1985) terminanon of, when there are analyses to be completed. LDP 85 32,22 NRC 434 (l'785)
OPERATING RECORD
- ',.' ~
for Diab 6o Canyon Unn 2; CLI 8514,22 NRC 177 (1985)
., OPERATORS 5ee Licensed Operator; Valve Operators
- {
i ORDER See Misrepresent 4uon Order; Protective Order
'e ORIENTATION physical, of equipment, effect on environmental quahncahon of. L8P 85-28,22 NRC 232 (19851
+ ,
, , ,, OW NERSHIP facigny, crednor regulations governing; CLI 85 If,22 NRC 875 (1985) 1' ,
' ..', P AIN T S core and sump blockage by; L8P 85 37,22 NRC 601 (l985) i
',,l'e__ '
in containment, esemption of, from quahty assurance requiremenis; LSP 85 37,22 Netc 60f (1985)
.~
. ' ,'6 , . PENALTY for fadure to provide adequate support for issues on appeal; ALAB 813,22 NRC 59 (19458
, .j . O.'[ , f5 See also Civil Penalues; Sancuon(s)
'S.* * , ,4'f > ,'5 O. ;) PHYSICAL 5f CURITY
](*e -
of nuclear plants, responsituhty for handling beyond-design-benis threats to; LBP-85 27. 22 NRC
' '. 1 ~
q b';+, , [ ' - ' jyf 4 126 (1985)
. ' , .6 s l i, .~.2'. .) f.d 1 PIPE l( ANGE RISA G. ' . . . ; c % ufety related, fabncation of; ALAB-882,22 NRC 5 (1985) wek's at Harns Plant, adequacy of remedial measures taken to correct defects in; LBP 45 49, 22
, ,,3.. ' 4lf
.. //[,
' y, * ,
fi%'s.
,. - Zw' NRC 899 (1985)
PIPE SUPPORT 5
' ' ~
,* ,. 3,@ ,* f[, at Diablo Canyon, scope of NRC review of; CLl-8514,22 NRC 177 (19851 J, b .-j w . 3 temporary, use of, at Waterford; ALAS-$l2,22 NRC 5 (1985)
W 6 - X PIPELINE rupture, natural gas, effects of, on Limench nuclear plant; ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 (1985)
~ f6*'.-)'. '*$ %'V Il', ', PIPING SYSTEMS M ,b.,, at Diablo Canyon. scope of NRC review of. CLI 8514,22 NRC 177 (1985) c g', .
PLEADINGS e M.'?- .y, Licenwng Board autherny to senke; LBP 85 d5,22 NRC 819 (1985)
.u' POLICY ST ATEMENT5
~
Commission, affecung a dectwon; ALAS 819,22 NRC 681 (19858
' ;,I' ,
;4 y ,, -
. 3 ' .*# Ei See also NRC Pohcy
- jr ;p I iph',
POPULATIONS transport depermient, to be evacuated dunns radiological emergency, means for 6denurymg.
. H ,9 y (- ,
9 i . '?
- . CLI-85 l). 22 NRC 1 (1985)
, 'Y' U, POSTPONEMENT M ' i ,; c > k 7,: of NRC proceeding, intensive discovery in related State Court litigauen at juguncahon for;
' ,' f L8P-85 48,22 NRC 84) (l985)
' !* -f '
'$C POTA55104 IODIDE provmon of, to emergency workers. L8P 45 27A. 22 NRC 207 (1985p
POW F R i- See Need for Power N$~ e, *'I y, ,j t 8 A a ,y 88
- , , , , 5,'y.il '
- y. l ' ' , ,
i
, i e
e
. i
<4 t i e SUBJECT INDEX ,
. .e
{ PREEMPTION . Federal, of state statutes; ALAB 818. 22 NRC 6$11198$) ,
' +
PREJUDICE to intersenors from adverse procedural ruhngs; CLI-83 l$. 22 NRC 184 098$1 .* PRESIDING BOARD g . , for tegniatne format heanns. authonzauon of appomtment of CL1-8318,22 NRC 877 09838 , Q ;,,Q PRIVILEGE < , l * % attorney chens or work product, maner of, through disclosure. LBP.83 38,22 NRC 6041898$) g esecuuve. mvocanon of, m NRC proceedmss. LBP-83 38. 22 NRC 604 0985p .-^ r l l work product. apphcanon of. LBP-85 38,22 NRC 604 0983) l .,1 ' [ PROB ABILISTIC RISK ASSESSMENT - ..., _.,p j'
, g ,
, of the effects of sabotage, hugatnhty of need for; ALAB-Sl9,22 NRC 68111983) i
- ' ;j, f ' ,
j PROOF l
$%3 3
standard concermns the completeness and persuasneness of. LBP 83 47,22 NRC 835 0985) j , x . , standard of. that apphcants for operstmg hcenses must meet; ALAB-819,22 NRC 681 U985)
- I.
See also Burden . .; PROTECTION -
, @Qqr.
l of nuclear rower plants agamst attacks by an enemy of the Umted States, heensms requirements l l ';,, . ' m.. P,3 di j for; LBP 83 27,22 NRC 126 498$t J <
," ' ? < Q s ' yd ;
. c,j + , , - +
{ 5ee aho Fire Protecunn .s f. , . , y vf PROTECTION F ACTORS ', .
^ ^ ! - y 3 ; * ;#fM j of emergency plannmg sone structures. LBP-85 49,22 NRC $99 0985)
, p 7 Of ",,"Q C
~
+- ' it o f --
PROTECTi% E ACTIONS use of radeoprotecuve drugs as. LBP-8$-27 A. 22 NRC 207 09851 r
~
' T ~ I.,dj @
! PROTECTIVE ORDER factori meished m determming need for; LBP 85 40,22 NRC 739 0985)
,j -
[. , - lt (", -[ q . gp,,j Q+; N'? d),
? 7py, ' @'Q' ! pl., .; '
QU A LIFIC ATIONIS) e .', , CQ j as espert moness, bees for; AL AB-819,22 NRC 68109851 . .
, i Cs y -. v1.'..w
.- Q 7sL.
> of cable tray fire barners. LBP-85 49 22 NRC 899 0983) .O ,
-w- "3 - ?f'4n#
l of Q4 TOC mspectors at Waterford, adequacy of. AL AB 812. 22 NRC $ 09837 15r ." '
; y -[ ,;Zif * {-k.C'!,
I of welders at % aserford, adequacy % AL AB412,22 NRC $ 0983# 3 'O.. -
. *' / '4
. ?
- 7. ' 't
.d' *'W.* W .te Yn
- 1 tesimg. scope of program for. LDP 8$.47,22 NRC 83$ 0985) , L.
f See ahn Enviro'imental Quahficauan, Fmancial Qualificanons
~
i 9? ~ d '. J' '. (@.? " " ';' ' s QU ALITY A550R ANCE i ' . a ff 3t j breakdown at % aterford. entent of. ALAB 812,22 NRC $ 0985) p '
. n- ' N.'. M
- contennon, effect on a proceeding of admission of. AL AB-817,22 NRC 470 0983) , .
#' ,6 conientens. bases for support of. ALAB-819. 22 NRC 683 0983) ' '
) remedies apphed by apphcant, reflecuan of, on Apphcant's character and competence, AL AB 812, , , , ( 22 NRC $ 09858 . ,. I requirements esempnon of paint coeungs in contamment from. LBP-83 37,22 NRC 601 H983) + QUALITY ASSUR ANCE DEFICIENCIE5 f . resolunon of, ALAB-812,22 NRC $ 0985) I scope of adrudicatory hearmes on, AL 48-812. 22 NRC $ 0983) [- , j scope of review of claims of. AL A8-812,22 NRC $9 098$1 .2 - ' standard for reopemnt reentd on, ALAB 812. 22 NRC $ 4983) -t .f, , r , QUALITY A$50R ANCE PROGR AMS e ' ' at Waterford, adequacy of, ALAB 812,22 NRC $ 0985) itF- *
' importance of managenal annude to. ALAB 812,22 NRC $ 090$) . ,
scope of. regered for nuclear pnwer plant hcenant, AL AB 819,22 NRC 648 096$) [%, . *'
,Q QUALITY ASSUR ANCDQUALITY CONTROL .t*', . .
4
. relevance of entent of, to imensny of review of finished construcuon, LBP 83 29,22 NRC 7$$ 'r -r*- '\ 'L , ! 0 983) 'C RADIATION ' / / ,
effects on tuaicants and seals, LBP 83 28. 22 NRC 232 0985p ,
. environment calculanon of dose for; LBP 85 24,22 NRC 232 l1983) , ,
mjuries, effect of Atomic Energy Act on Siste's right to imcoes pumute damages for; ALAB Sit, ' t i 22 NRC ell H985) '. t s
? .e y 4
g. 8' .e
- N, ' s I L
$ * . +- , s .
t 4 4' L &
..
- i , 'p,-
o
K ' ; .Q (. '. 1 u < , . . , , . i k?h. y;',n nq,l0* + .l ' W ~ 't.> l lldy " % t '*
~
3 . *: , f' f,, %, >-(,
? ~ 'O e
' ,' o l
;. . .1 - . . . . - - . . . i
- l. ,
i t j SUBJECT INDEX . , RADIOACTIVE BYPRODUCT M 4TER14L1 , impossuon of civil pensity for uneushoriand possest on, use, potage and transperianon of; ALJ-85-1. 22 NRC 941090$8 RADIOACTIVE EMi$410N5 canter risk to putig froen rouuns, nonnaaral; /.LAt-420,22 NRC 743 UM$1 RATEPAYER
, s status se besse for esandais to ipiervens; LDP $$-24, J2 NkC 97 (lW3)
, REACTOR COOLANT SY5 TEM
,, - lost rase dass faimficassons as TMI-2, heanns to identry persons 6nvolved in:CLI 4510,22 NAC s
,, . 877 0 905) .
- REACTOR CORE u- , enmese following Three M.4e Isiand scendent. LSP43 30,22 NRC 332 0903)
See seen Care REACTOR $ ; o , modug weier, capacity / power demand arergins for emergency generators in; ALAB 824,22 NRC 776 U903) . RECEPTION CENTERS I
- , handhne of contemenaind property in; LAP-8$.lf 22 NAC $14 090$6 See aise Relocation Ceneers RECON 5IDERATiOas of envwonmental decewone when new enfasmance beromes eveslable, need for. DD-4516,22 NRC 458 0905) of meerepresentanon memorendum, densai of mouen far. L tr.43-4t,22 NRC 335 090$)
,' # use of 2.206 pennons as vehicles fer DD 4519,22 NBC 81109tSt
., , , RECORDISI Q '
c managemens symem se weaefford, adeguacp of. ALAS 412,22 NRC 518989
' ,!, seed is enctede endence e(Isale insnnent value in. AI. AN-824,22 NSC 776 098$1
." 'Y M ~ . .'i' '
See seno Operaung Record
, ? ( ':c, ? ,
, f 1 Q - /2 t ' h REGULAflONS
. .' c- <Di; [ D,/dha ,
apphcaele to appedate proceedines; ALAS 82$ 22 NRC 78$ 09e$)
<?(- f-f ,s y y ,,;p f- apphcatse to enemy stucts un nactear plance: Lar 81-27,22 NRC 124 0945)
- % ,. * , . t- ' : ' i'
- c , * . challenges so, en operskng hcense proceadener, L8P45-27. 22 NRC 124 0949 j "! ,M' e , ;> E comphance of pro se hugents enh procedieral requesememe of, i BP 8514,23 Nhc $90 098$p 6'3 ; ;;
. 1
> =b
'7. f ;- destinstman between Regu6etory 44edes and; ALAb 849,22 NPC til 09C3) emergency planrang prenues fs,r; ALAS.819. 22 NRC 6fl 0909 l , y j,.k , E J f.@4. # '. $r t. .y'. ! Q ', ' filing of pepigine int esempuone from, or wavers of. Lt* 45 3),22 NPC 462 0989
^' Q , A; kl ;Mi4' 7 [ )...,pN ,. 4 _
T powrens new owner or knape of a fenhiy; CL145 lf. 22 NRC 873 Ute$) incentive, peten%al eefety irneset 6f, f)D 8512,22 NRC 449 f1999 Y
/ ,; - enterpretas.on of 10 C.P R. Part 30. Appendis A; AL AS424. 22 NRC 7f4 0903.1 g ,
f.2"; ), Q*' ;, . ~ P'n . " (3 ,' ,, enterpretation of LDP f 5.J4,22 NRC sat f19 esp
' d > *
'.31 *M
- not in e#fect untd ofne of appeel of a dec6eson, asphastdaty of, ALAS.41). 22 NRC $9 He83) '
SJ G f'.R s ' ( .' t 1. '. of Councd on f avoronmental Qud y, effect of, en NRC: ALAB-819,22 NRC 6Al f190H See aho NRC Pegveanens s 'N ' REGUL ATORY GUlOES > destrienen t'ereden reewiat one ar.d. ALA&-469,22 NBC 641 UNH
,'4\ ' ,, ' i , p flOCATION CENTE RS
^ L.
- for evacuees, siennfkat.on, locat.no ami adequacy of, LS* 8131. 22 NRC 410 t'949 (
!+ . ,'
,/
- See slao Recephen Centers 1
, / '[. <
,4 REMOTF SHUTDOWN 5YSTt M RET)UND4NCY b y '.J, ' i
- propnety of N AC sesni r,f esempoon froen seguirements far; 0D 8318,22 NRC 149 0981)
. <g
- r.. RIOPENnNO e*
- 1 ;,
s.( N f' of neues prenovely adsmhested. use of 2 206 pencedures for; DO43.jl,22 NRC 149 U ND Rf0PENING A AIJY)RD P >b etreumosances et which eiendards far. need not be sethed ett% full force; LDP45 42,22 NRC 793
- t. '. i p,.,' , 4 094H * >
tritena for, 4LA3 812,22 NRC f (1945s; AL Ap 41),22 NRC 194 flu $s , s , determaning siemficanse e.f new enfurniasson for purpose of LOP 41-42,12 NBC 79$ 094H r y +'s ; i- , .. [ r bf *
- e. g ,
ef ,,.s bl% l
- i
- i. ,
3 , , e t a
I y 9, e l
+
) i- ,
, . b.
, _ l
!, f SUBJECT INDEX J ,.
. ,'* M
+ , s' '
* .+
nature of suprwtmg evvierne far; AL A8.412. 22 NitC $ 0989 'f.;}}