|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20210B8491999-07-21021 July 1999 Exemption from Certain Requirements of 10CFR50.54(w),for Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit 2 to Reduce Amount of Insurance for Unit to $50 Million for Onsite Property Damage Coverage ML20206D4141999-04-20020 April 1999 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR50,App R,Section III.G.2 Re Enclosure of Cable & Equipment & Associated non-safety Related Circuits of One Redundant Train in Fire Barrier Having 1-hour Rating ML20206T7211999-02-11011 February 1999 Memorandum & Order (CLI-99-02).* Denies C George Request for Intervention & Dismisses Subpart M License Transfer Proceeding.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 990211 ML20198A5111998-12-11011 December 1998 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50.65 Re Requirements for Monitoring Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power Plants.Proposed Rulemaking Details Collaborative Efforts in That Rule Interjects Change ML20154G2941998-09-17017 September 1998 Transcript of 980917 Public Meeting in Rockville,Md Re License Transfer of TMI-1 from Gpu Nuclear,Inc to Amergen. Pp 1-41 ML20199J0121997-11-20020 November 1997 Comment on Pr 10CFR50 Re Financial Assurance Requirements for Decommisioning Nuclear Power Reactors.Three Mile Island Alert Invokes Comments of P Bradford,Former NRC Member ML20148R7581997-06-30030 June 1997 Comment on NRC Proposed Bulletin 96-001,suppl 1, Control Rod Insertion Problems. Licensee References Proposed Generic Communication, Control Rod Insertion, & Ltrs & 961022 from B&W Owners Group ML20078H0431995-02-0101 February 1995 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Shutdown & Lowpower Operations for Nuclear Reactors ML20077E8231994-12-0808 December 1994 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR2,51 & 54 Re Rev to NRC NPP License Renewal Rule ML20149E2021994-04-20020 April 1994 R Gary Statement Re 10 Mile Rule Under Director'S Decision DD-94-03,dtd 940331 for Tmi.Urges Commissioners to Engage in Reconsideration of Author Petition ML20065Q0671994-04-0707 April 1994 Principal Deficiencies in Director'S Decision 94-03 Re Pica Request Under 10CFR2.206 ML20058A5491993-11-17017 November 1993 Exemption from Requirements in 10CFR50.120 to Establish, Implement & Maintain Training Programs,Using Sys Approach to Training,For Catorgories of Personnel Listed in 10CFR50.120 ML20059J5171993-09-30030 September 1993 Transcript of 930923 Meeting of Advisory Panel for Decontamination of TMI-2 in Harrisburg,Pa.Pp 1-130.Related Documentation Encl ML20065J3461992-12-30030 December 1992 Responds to Petition of R Gary Alleging Discrepancies in RERP for Dauphin County,Pa ML20065J3731992-12-18018 December 1992 Affidavit of Gj Giangi Responding to of R Gary Requesting Action by NRC Per 10CFR2.206 ML20198E5581992-12-0101 December 1992 Transcript of Briefing by TMI-2 Advisory Panel on 921201 in Rockville,Md ML20210D7291992-06-15015 June 1992 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR70.24 Re Criticality Accident Requirements for SNM Storage Areas at Facility Containing U Enriched to Less than 3% in U-235 Isotope ML20079E2181991-09-30030 September 1991 Submits Comments on NRC Proposed Resolution of Generic Issue 23, Reactor Coolant Pump Seal Failure. Informs That Util Endorses Comments Submitted by NUMARC ML20066J3031991-01-28028 January 1991 Comment Supporting SECY-90-347, Regulatory Impact Survey Rept ML20059P0531990-10-15015 October 1990 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 54 Re Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal ML20059N5941990-10-0404 October 1990 Transcript of 900928 Public Meeting in Rockville,Md Re Studies of Cancer in Populations Near Nuclear Facilities, Including TMI ML20055F4411990-06-28028 June 1990 Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-55 Re Revs to FSAR ML20248J1891989-10-0606 October 1989 Order.* Grants Intervenors 891004 Motion for Permission for Opportunity to Respond to Staff Correspondence.Response Requested No Later That 891020.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 891006 ML20248J1881989-10-0303 October 1989 Motion for Permission for Opportunity to Respond to Staff Correspondence in Response to Board Order of 890913.* Svc List Encl ML20248J0301989-09-29029 September 1989 NRC Staff Response to Appeal Board Order.* Matters Evaluated in Environ Assessment Involved Subjs Known by Parties During Proceeding & Appear in Hearing Record & Reflect Board Final Initial Decision LBP-89-7.W/Certificate of Svc ML20247E9181989-09-13013 September 1989 Order.* Requests NRC to Explain Purpose of 890911 Fr Notice on Proposed Amend to Applicant License,Revising Tech Specs Re Disposal of Accident Generated Water & Effects on ASLB Findings,By 890929.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 890913 ML20247G0361989-07-26026 July 1989 Transcript of Oral Argument on 890726 in Bethesda,Md Re Disposal of accident-generated Water.Pp 1-65.Supporting Info Encl ML20247B7781989-07-18018 July 1989 Certificate of Svc.* Certifies Svc of Encl Gpu 890607 & 0628 Ltrs to NRC & Commonwealth of Pa,Respectively.W/Svc List ML20245D3651989-06-20020 June 1989 Notice of Oral Argument.* Oral Argument on Appeal of Susquehanna Valley Alliance & TMI Alert from ASLB 890202 Initial Decision Authorizing OL Amend,Will Be Heard on 890726 in Bethesda,Md.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 890620 ML20245A5621989-06-14014 June 1989 Order.* Advises That Oral Argument on Appeal of Susquehanna Valley Alliance & TMI Alert from Board 890202 Initial Decision LBP-89-07 Authorizing OL Amend Will Be Heard on 890726 in Bethesda,Md.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 890614 ML20247F3151989-05-22022 May 1989 NRC Staff Response to Appeal by Joint Intervenors Susquehanna Valley Alliance/Tmi Alert.* Appeal Should Be Denied Based on Failure to Identify Errors in Fact & Law Subj to Appeal.W/Certificate of Svc ML20246Q2971989-05-15015 May 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20246J6081989-05-12012 May 1989 Licensee Brief in Reply to Joint Intervenors Appeal from Final Initial Decision.* ASLB 890203 Final Initial Decision LBP-89-07 Re Deleting Prohibition on Disposal of accident- Generated Water Should Be Affirmed.W/Certificate of Svc ML20247D2761989-04-20020 April 1989 Transcript of 890420 Briefing in Rockville,Md on Status of TMI-2 Cleanup Activities.Pp 1-51.Related Info Encl ML20244C0361989-04-13013 April 1989 Order.* Commission Finds That ASLB Decision Resolving All Relevant Matters in Favor of Licensee & Granting Application for OL Amend,Should Become Effective Immediately.Certificate of Svc Encl.Served on 890413 ML20245A8381989-04-13013 April 1989 Transcript of Advisory Panel for Decontamination of TMI-2 890413 Meeting in Harrisburg,Pa.Pp 1-79.Supporting Info Encl ML20245A2961989-04-13013 April 1989 Transcript of 890413 Meeting in Rockville,Md Re Affirmation/Discussion & Vote ML20248H1811989-04-0606 April 1989 Valley Alliance/Tmi Alert Motion for Leave to File Appeal Brief out-of-time.* W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 890411.Granted for Aslab on 890410 ML20248G0151989-04-0606 April 1989 Valley Alliance/Tmi Alert Motion for Leave to File Appeal Brief out-of-time.* Requests to File Appeal Brief 1 Day Late Due to Person Typing Document Having Schedule Problems ML20248G0261989-04-0606 April 1989 Susguehanna Valley Alliance/Tmi Alert Brief in Support of Notification to File Appeal & Request for Oral Argument Re Appeal.* Certificate of Svc Encl ML20248D7211989-04-0404 April 1989 Memorandum & Order.* Intervenors Application for Stay Denied Due to Failure to Lack of Demonstrated Irreparable Injury & Any Showing of Certainty That Intervenors Will Prevail on Merits of Appeal.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 890404 ML20247A4671989-03-23023 March 1989 Correction Notice.* Advises That Date of 891203 Appearing in Text of Commission 890322 Order Incorrect.Date Should Be 871203.Certificate of Svc Encl.Served on 890323 ML20246M2611989-03-22022 March 1989 Order.* Advises That Commission Currently Considering Question of Effectiveness,Pending Appellate Review of Final Initial Decision in Case Issued by ASLB in LBP-89-07. Certificate of Svc Encl.Served on 890322 ML20236D3821989-03-16016 March 1989 Valley Alliance & TMI Alert Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief in Support of Request for Appeal in Matter of 2.3 Million Gallons Of....* Certificate of Svc Encl.Served on 890316.Granted for Aslab on 890316 ML20236D3121989-03-15015 March 1989 Licensee Answer to Joint Intervenors Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief on Appeal.* Motion Opposed Based on Failure to Demonstrate Good Cause.W/Certificate of Svc ML20236D2901989-03-11011 March 1989 Valley Alliance/Tmi Alert Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief in Support of Request for Appeal in Matter of Disposal of 2.3 Million Gallons of Radioactive Water at Tmi,Unit 2.* Svc List Encl ML20236A3761989-03-0808 March 1989 Licensee Answer Opposing Joint Intervenors Motion for Stay.* Stay of Licensing Board Decision Pending Appeal Unwarranted Under NRC Stds.Stay Could Delay Safe,Expeditious Cleanup of Facility.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20236C2441989-03-0808 March 1989 NRC Staff Response in Opposition to Application for Stay Filed by Joint Intervenors.* Application for Stay of Effectiveness of Final Initial Decision LBP-89-07,dtd 890202 Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20235V2641989-03-0202 March 1989 Notice of Aslab Reconstitution.* TS Moore,Chairman,Cn Kohl & Ha Wilber,Members.Served on 890303.W/Certificate of Svc ML20235V2161989-02-25025 February 1989 Changes & Corrections to Susquehanna Valley Alliance/Three Mile Island Alert Documents Submitted on 890221.* Certificate of Svc Encl 1999-07-21
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20065J3461992-12-30030 December 1992 Responds to Petition of R Gary Alleging Discrepancies in RERP for Dauphin County,Pa ML20248J1881989-10-0303 October 1989 Motion for Permission for Opportunity to Respond to Staff Correspondence in Response to Board Order of 890913.* Svc List Encl ML20248J0301989-09-29029 September 1989 NRC Staff Response to Appeal Board Order.* Matters Evaluated in Environ Assessment Involved Subjs Known by Parties During Proceeding & Appear in Hearing Record & Reflect Board Final Initial Decision LBP-89-7.W/Certificate of Svc ML20248H1811989-04-0606 April 1989 Valley Alliance/Tmi Alert Motion for Leave to File Appeal Brief out-of-time.* W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 890411.Granted for Aslab on 890410 ML20248G0261989-04-0606 April 1989 Susguehanna Valley Alliance/Tmi Alert Brief in Support of Notification to File Appeal & Request for Oral Argument Re Appeal.* Certificate of Svc Encl ML20248G0151989-04-0606 April 1989 Valley Alliance/Tmi Alert Motion for Leave to File Appeal Brief out-of-time.* Requests to File Appeal Brief 1 Day Late Due to Person Typing Document Having Schedule Problems ML20236D3821989-03-16016 March 1989 Valley Alliance & TMI Alert Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief in Support of Request for Appeal in Matter of 2.3 Million Gallons Of....* Certificate of Svc Encl.Served on 890316.Granted for Aslab on 890316 ML20236D3121989-03-15015 March 1989 Licensee Answer to Joint Intervenors Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief on Appeal.* Motion Opposed Based on Failure to Demonstrate Good Cause.W/Certificate of Svc ML20236D2901989-03-11011 March 1989 Valley Alliance/Tmi Alert Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief in Support of Request for Appeal in Matter of Disposal of 2.3 Million Gallons of Radioactive Water at Tmi,Unit 2.* Svc List Encl ML20236A3761989-03-0808 March 1989 Licensee Answer Opposing Joint Intervenors Motion for Stay.* Stay of Licensing Board Decision Pending Appeal Unwarranted Under NRC Stds.Stay Could Delay Safe,Expeditious Cleanup of Facility.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20236C2441989-03-0808 March 1989 NRC Staff Response in Opposition to Application for Stay Filed by Joint Intervenors.* Application for Stay of Effectiveness of Final Initial Decision LBP-89-07,dtd 890202 Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20235N1621989-02-20020 February 1989 Application for Stay of Effectiveness of Final Initial Decision LBP-89-07 Dtd 890202.* Licensee Would Not Be Harmed by Granting of Stay ML20205D8451988-10-24024 October 1988 Licensee Motion to Strike Portions of Proposed Testimony of Kz Morgan.* Proposed Testimony Should Be Ruled to Be Not Admissible as Evidence in Upcoming Hearing.Supporting Info & Certificate of Svc Encl.W/Copyrighted Matl ML20205D6801988-10-20020 October 1988 Valley Alliance/Tmi Alert Notification to Parties That Kz Morgan Apps to Testimony Should Be Accepted as Exhibits.* Apps Listed.Svc List Encl.Related Correspondence ML20155G9981988-10-0404 October 1988 Valley Alliance/Tmi Alert Motion for Reconsideration of Part of Judge Order (880927) Re Limited Appearance Statements by Public.* Certificate of Svc Encl ML20155G9921988-10-0404 October 1988 Valley Alliance/Tmi Alert Motion to Submit Witness Testimony as Evidence W/O cross-exam at Hearing in Lancaster.* Requests That Cw Huver Testimony Be Accepted as Evidence ML20151S0261988-07-28028 July 1988 Valley Alliance/Tmi Alert Response to Licensee Notification of Typo in Bid Procurement Document.* Explanation for Change in Document Inadequate.W/Svc List ML20196G7801988-06-23023 June 1988 Motion of NRC Staff for Leave to File Response Out of Time.* Encl NRC Response in Support of Licensee Motion for Summary Disposition Delayed Due to Equipment Problems ML20196G9051988-06-23023 June 1988 NRC Staff Response in Support of Licensee Motion for Summary Disposition.* Motion Should Be Granted on Basis That No Genuine Issue Before ASLB or to Be Litigated.Supporting Documentation & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20196B5091988-06-20020 June 1988 Valley Alliance/Tmi Alert Response to Licensee Motion or Summary Disposition on Contentions 1-4,5d,6 & 8.* Affidavits of Kz Morgan,R Piccioni,L Kosarek & C Huver & Supporting Documentation Encl ML20154E2301988-05-16016 May 1988 Licensee Statement of Matl Facts as to Which There Is No Genuine Issue to Be Heard (Contentions 1,2,3 & 8).* ML20154E2081988-05-16016 May 1988 Licensee Motion for Summary Disposition on Alternatives (Contentions 1,2,3 & 8).* Motion Should Be Granted Based on Licensee Meeting Burden of Showing That Alternatives Not Superior to Licensee Proposal ML20154E3491988-05-16016 May 1988 Licensee Statement of Matl Facts as to Which There Is No Genuine Issue to Be Heard (Contention 5d).* ML20154E2851988-05-16016 May 1988 Licensee Statement of Matl Facts as to Which There Is No Genuine Issue to Be Heard (Contentions 4b in Part & 6 on Chemicals).* ML20154E3251988-05-16016 May 1988 Licensee Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 5d.* Motion Should Be Granted in Licensee Favor ML20154E2681988-05-16016 May 1988 Licensee Motion for Summary Disposition of Contentions 4b in Part & 6 (Chemicals).* Licensee Entitled to Decision in Favor on Contentions & Motion Should Be Granted ML20154E1631988-05-0909 May 1988 Licensee Statement of Matl Facts as to Which No Genuine Issue to Be Heard (Contentions 4b in part,4c & 4d).* Lists Matl Facts for Which No Genuine Issue Exists ML20154E1281988-05-0909 May 1988 Licensee Motion for Summary Disposition of Contentions 4b (in part),4c & 4d.* Requests That Motion for Summary Disposition Be Granted on Basis That No Genuine Issue of Matl Fact Exists to Be Heard Re Contentions ML20154E1761988-05-0909 May 1988 Licensee Memorandum of Law in Support of Motions for Summary Disposition.* Requests Ample Notice Should Board Decide to Deny Summary in Part or in Whole ML20151E9491988-04-0707 April 1988 Licensee Answer to Intervenor Motion for Order on Production of Info on Disposal Sys Installation & Testing.* Intervenor 880330 Motion Should Be Denied Due to Insufficient Legal Basis.W/Certificate of Svc ML20150F9821988-04-0101 April 1988 Licensee Answer to Intervenors Motion to Compel Discovery.* Motion Should Be Denied on Basis That Licensee Responded Fully to Discovery Request.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20148P3931988-03-30030 March 1988 Valley Alliance & TMI Alert Motion to Request That Presiding Judge Order Gpu Nuclear to Provide Addl Info & Clarify Intentions to Install Test & Conduct Experiments W/Evaporator Prior to Hearings.* ML20196D2801988-02-12012 February 1988 NRC Staff Response to Motion by TMI Alert/Susquehanna Valley Alliance for Extension of Discovery.* Motion Should Be Denied.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20196D3541988-02-10010 February 1988 Licensee Response Opposing Susquehanna Valley Alliance/Tmi Alert Intervenor Motion for Extension of Time for Discovery.* Joint Intervenors Failed to Show Good Cause for Extension of Time for Discovery.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20148D4661988-01-19019 January 1988 Licensee Objection to Special Prehearing Conference Order.* Board Requested to Clarify 880105 Order Consistent W/ Discussed Description of Board Jurisdiction & Scope of Proceeding.W/Certificate of Svc ML20236N9081987-11-0505 November 1987 Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement Agreement & for Termination of Proceeding.* Termination of Proceeding Should Be Granted ML20235F3651987-09-23023 September 1987 Util Response Opposing NRC Staff Motion to Rescind Protective Order.* Response Opposing Protective Order Guarding Confidentiality of Document Re Methodology of Bechtel Internal Audit Group ML20235B3911987-09-18018 September 1987 NRC Staff Motion for Extension of Time.* Staff Requests Short Extension of Time Until 870925 to File Responses to Pending Petitions.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20235F4401987-09-18018 September 1987 Util Supplemental Response to NRC Staff First Request for Admissions.* Util Objects to Request as Vague in Not Specifying Time Frame or Defining Proprietary, Pecuniary.... W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20238E6001987-09-0404 September 1987 NRC Staff Motion to Rescind Protective Order.* Protective Order Should Be Rescinded & Presiding Officer Should Take Further Action as Deemed Appropriate.W/ Certificate of Svc ML20238E6391987-09-0303 September 1987 Commonwealth of PA Statement in Support of Request for Hearing & Petition to Participate as Interested State.* Susquehanna Valley Alliance 870728 Request for Hearing, Notice of Appearance & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20237J9931987-08-12012 August 1987 Joint Gpu & NRC Staff Motion for Protective Order.* Order Will Resolve Discovery Dispute ML20237K0431987-08-11011 August 1987 Gpu Response Opposing Parks Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum.* Exhibits & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20236P1871987-08-0505 August 1987 Formal Response of Rd Parks to Subpoena Duces Tecum of Gpu &/Or,In Alternative,Motion to Quash/Modify Subpoena Due to Privileged Info.* Documents Are Communications Protected by Atty/Client Privilege.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20236E7101987-07-28028 July 1987 Joint General Public Utils Nuclear Corp & NRC Staff Motion for Protective Order.* Adoption & Signature of Encl Proposed Order Requested ML20216J7871987-06-29029 June 1987 Opposition of Gpu Nuclear Corp to Aamodt Motion for Reconsideration.* Motion Asserts Board Did Not Consider Important Evidence on Leakage at TMI-2.W/Certificate of Svc ML20216D2311987-06-23023 June 1987 Response of Jg Herbein to Aamodt Request for Review & Motion for Reconsideration.* Opportunity for Comment Should Come After NRC Has Made Recommendations to Commission.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20215J8981987-06-19019 June 1987 Response of Numerous Employees to Aamodt Request to File Comments on Recommended Decision.* Numerous Employees Do Not Agree W/Aamodt That Recommended Decision Is Greatly in Error.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20215K2121987-06-17017 June 1987 (Motion for reconsideration,870610).* Corrections to Pages 3 & 4 Listed ML20215J7551987-06-15015 June 1987 Gpu Response to Motion to Quash Subpoena.* Dept of Labor 870601 Motion to Quash Subpoena Served on D Feinberg Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc 1992-12-30
[Table view] |
Text
,
5754 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA COCMETED fCCLEAR REGJLA'IORY C0ff!ISSION 'J3?AC BEFORE THE PRESIDING BOARD 17 APR 20 All:11
) 0FFL:. J ..
In the Matter of y CCCPU":
2 '
) Docket No. LRP INQUIRY IN'IO 'IEREE MILE ISLAND UNIT 2 LEAK RATE DATA FALSIFICATION )
) April 15, 1987
)
AAMOI7T RESPONSE 'IO VOIGT LETTER OF APRIL 3,1987 By letter of April 3,1987, Harry H. Voigt, one of the counsel of the Numerous Employees, responded to the Aamodts' motion of March 27, 1987. The Aamodts had asserted in their motion that counsel for the Numerous Employees deceived the Board concerning the effectiveness of an NRC order. As a result the Board ruled against a question the Aamodts had submitted for James Floyd, a witness. Voigt, in responding, made various unwarranted attacks on the Aamodts. Voigt also argued that the Aamodts bear the burden of proving that the NRC order is no longer in effect. Although the Aamodts believe that Voigt's response does not warrant their consideration, they, nevertheless, are providing the following evidence and arguments which should establish once and for all the soundness of their motion.
- 1. The NRC order in question was one which put into effect a stipulation among the parties and counsel in the 'IMI-1 Restart Proceeding to protect the identity of employees under investigation for cheating on
- NRC licensing examinations. Judge Gary L.Milho111n, the Special Master who presided over the Reopened Proceeding on cheating, stated as follows in the order putting the Stipulation in effect:
8704230076 870415 4 PDR ADOCK 05000320 hj v
G PDR
s 0
It is hereby ordered by Gary L. Milho111n, Administrative Judge and Special Master that for the duration of these proceedings all parties signatory to the attached Stipulation will be bound thereby and subject thereto. Any violations of said Stipulation should be reported to Judge Milhollin, and may be dealt with in ;
any manner by Judge Milhollin pursuant to the enforcement powers invested in him by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.
This order, which was provided as Attachment 1 to the Aamodt motion, showed on its face that the Stipulation was only in effect "for the duration of these proceedings".and identified "these proceedings" as Docket No. 5--289, (Restart), (Reopened Proceeding). The case could be made, since the order was specially addressed to the " Reopened Proceeding" on cheating and since Judge Milho111n presided over that single hearing in the Restart Proceeding and is the only judge named in the order, that the order simply provided the Stipulation for the duration of the " Reopened Proceeding" on cheating.
In any event, the Restart Proceeding was formally closed in February of 1986, as stated in the Aamodt motion.
Therefore, the Stipulation providing confidentiality to employees under investigation in the Restart Proceeding was no longer in force after February 1986, at the very latest.
Voigt's arguments that the present hearing -- the Leak rate hearing --
is a part of the Restart Proceeding (because "the Aamodts themselves repeatedly urged that an inquiry into leak rate practirms be conducted prior to the restart of 'INI-1" and because "the Comission insittuted this proceeding as a collateral follow-on to the restart proceedings") are utter nonsense. The Aamodts lost their battle to keepthe leak rate hearing in the Restart Proceeding. The Comission instituted the l'eak rate proceeding as an entirely separate proceeding:
...The Comission hasaiso decided to institute a separate proceeding .
on the Hartman allegations...CLI-85-2, p. 93. Also see CLI-85-18.
+
'D Voigt was one who had expressly acknowledged the separateness of the leak rate proceeding and who, over a year ago, attempted to use this fact to his advantage in opposing the petition of the Aamodts to intervene in this proceeding. Voigt stated in a document he signed and served on behalf of the Numerous Employees on February 25, 1986:
'Ihe interest of the Petitioner (Aamodt) in this proceeding is merely that of an intervenor in the 'IMI-1 restart proceeding.
Such an interest is an insufficient basis for intervention in an inquiry of a historical nature.
.......... the Comission ultimately reversed the Appeal Board and decided to institute the present proceeding separate and apart from the 'IMI-1 restart proceeding. CLI-85-2, N.R.C. at 305.
Voigt stated the above on pp. 3 and 4 of " Response of Numerous 1978-9 Employees of Metropolitan Edison Company to Aamodt Petition for Leave to Intervene", February 25, 1986. Thus, Voigt's arguments are not only incorrect, they are also insincere. (The insincerity of Voigt's arguments is troubling in view of his role as counsel to the employees who testified in this proceeding)
Voigt's argument, that the stipulation "does not say that the stipulation is not binding after the proceedings have been completed",
is strained. Voigt is reaching. Voigt has apparently forgotten (or chooses to forget) that the stipulation was negotiated,* allegedly,'to protect the innocent during the lengthy period of the hearing and subsequent deliberations. To continue the Stipulation past that point only protects the guilty. In fact, the continuation harms the innocent:
As long as they are not separated from the guilty, the aura of guilt remains. The Aamodts were fully in agreement with GPU counsel that w
reputations could be " smeared" and comunity ridicule could unfairly affect the innocent without protection of the identities of those under .
investigation. On this basis, the Aamodts supported the stipulation and
_4_
signed it. They never supported a continuation of the stipulation to shield the guilty.
- 2. Voigt's demand for the Board's action to expunge the Aamodts' motion of an attachment containing two newspaper articles is ridiculous.
The Board has no authority to protect the identity of "0" since the NRC order is no longer in effect. Voigt's attack of the Aamodts for providing the newspaper articles was not warranted. The newspaper articles are in the public domain and were provided to demonstrate that "O's" identity became known prior to the time the NRC order was no longer effective.
(Hence, in the case of "0", as in the case of the other person named in the Aamodt question, James Floyd, the question of protection of identity was, in fact, moot.)
The Aamodts had nothing whatsoever to do with placing "O's" name in public view prior to the time the NRC order was no longer effective. While Voigt cannot know that, he cannot presume otherwise.
Voigt is aware of the Aamodts' consistent regard for the dignity of the employees and their predicament as employees of a company that either does not have its act together or does not want to have its act together. The Aamodts opposed the criminal prosecution of "0" proposed by the Special Master unless the company would stand for trial on the same charge (since the company permitted and may have encouraged and condoned cheating on company tests). The Aamodts opposed the Commonwealth's demand for the resignations of several operators and an instructor as a resolution to the cheating episode. See Aamodt Filings, Docket 50-289, January 15, 18, March 3, May 24, August, 1982. Voigt acknowledged, in his coments concerning the Aamodts participation in this hearing during the first pre-hearing conference,'that the Aamodts have little interest
O
\
- in blaming the employees where there is evidence of the culpability of the ccupany.
'Ihere is no justification for Voigt's attack on the Aamodts for providing newspaper articles to this Board.
- 3. Voigt's characterization of the Aamodts' motion as "a scurrilous attack" on Mr. McBride, another counsel of the Numerous Employees, is nothing more than disappointment that the Aamodts are not willing to accept McBride's charade concerning the NRC order and the character assassination of the Aamodts he condt;ted with the charade. McBride's flamboyant attack on the Aamodts would, in and of itself, deserve address. Clearly, the Aamodts' address of the matter of McBride's stifling of justice through deception of the Board is not a scurrilous attack.
- 4. Voigt's filing of a personal letter in response to the Aamodts' motion is improper. It should be rejected.
- 5. Voigt's provision of an answer to a question which was posed for an employee is not proper. Floyd must respond.
Furthe Voigt's response is stated as his opinion not facts he ascertained. Where Voigt appears to state facts, he is not truthful.
Contrary to Voigt's statement that the NRC did not find Floyd guilty of anything, Floyd pleaded guilty to subnitting someone else's work to requalify for an NRC license. This is a matter of public record.
The Comission fined GPUN management for certification of Floyd with the knowledge that Floyd had cheated. _S_e_e_ Attachment 1, ppy 60-1 of CLI-85-2.
C 0
_ __ . . _ . _ _ . _ _. _ = _.
W
- 6. The Aamodts request the Board to order Voigt or his firm to reimburse the Aamodts for the costs of this filing which was only made necessary because of false information provided by Voigt in his letter of April 3, 1987.
pectfully subnitted, e ~
l % , 44N Marjorie'M. Aamodt ,
Norman O. Aamodt t 0. Yb'W
- April 15,1987 t
1 i
I 1
I W
6 i
i
?
l-
A1TACHMENT 1 60 a
change of position to the extent it was based on this issue is not now significant.
- 2. Certification of Floyd Staff stated that "while the false certification of Floyd was addressed in the restart proceeding, it was not until after the close of the hearing that the Staff determined that Licensee management knew of, and subsequently covered up, Floyd's cheating, and that the licensee made a false certification to the NRC." Staff Comments, Appendix at 10.
The false certification of Floyd was litigated before the Licensing Board. The Board concluded that Gary Miller (former Station Manager),
with John Herbein's (former Vice President, Met. Ed.) knowledge and assent, made a false certification to the NRC. The Board also found that the evidence raised questions about Miller's competence, and directed that until the matter was further resolved any involvement of Miller in TMI-1 operations must be under the direct supervision of an appropriately qualified licensee official. The Board further noted there was no evidence of improper conduct at any level higher than Herbein's, and that Herbein was no longer employed by GPU Nuclear.42 16 NRC at 354-55.
421f staff is implying there is now evidence of involvement of others in management, e.g., Arnold, our review has disclosed no evidence beyond that available to the Licensing Board, and staff has cited none.
The Licensing Board knew of Arnold's involvement in licensee's personnel action regarding Floyd. In addition, Arnold was the individual who -
brought this matter to the NRC's attention, and, regardless, he is no longer associated with THI-1 operati,ons.
Thus, the Licensing Board clearly recognized the significance of
- this matter, and, in fact, expressed concern regarding staff's position on this matter. 16 NRC at 353.43 Floyd, Herbein and Miller are no i
longer employed by GPUN, and, as a result of the OI investigation, the 4
Comission has issued a Proposed Notice of Civil Penalty of $100,000 against GPUN (held in abeyance at D0J's request).44 Since there is no new evidence implicating other individuals at TMI-1 in this incident and the Board did not rely on staff's judgment here in the first place, we do not believe staff's likely change of position might have changed the Licensing Board's decision. Under these circumstances, staff's likely change of position because of this issue has minimal or no significance.
- 3. Pre-accident Training Irregularities and Post-accioent Cheating l
Staff's position on new information concerning preaccident training irregularities and postaccident cheating is as follows. " Staff was aware during the TMI-1 restart proceeding that the Licensee had problems r
I 43The Licensing Board found that "[t]he NRC Staff takes a surprisingly mild position on the August 1979 certification issue ....
at no place in the Staff's testimony or in the proposed findings and coments before us does the Staff discuss the untrue representation in the [ certification] letter ... We do not understand this silence....
We recommend that the Comission direct the s'taff to conduct an investigation ... We are somewhat disconcerted, however, because no component of the NRC Staff protested in this proceeding the false information in the certification to the NRC... Perhaps [the
^
Comission's Office of Inspector and Auditor] should be enlisted to participate in any such investigation." 16 NRC at 353.
44The Comission notes in this regard that Floyd on November 16, ,
a 1984 was convicted in the District Court for the Middle District of a
Pennsylvania because of this incident.
-l l
)
a
UNITES STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGUTATORY COMMISSION
- 0j! n-up c BEFORE THE PRESIDING BOARD 17 APR 20 21
- 11
)
) 0FFIL-;. . , , . -
In the Matter of Docket No. LRP 00CKE Nm . ';tuvc
) 3%EH INQUIRY INTO THREE MILE ISLAND UNIT 2 )
) ASLBP No. 86-519-02 SP LEAK RATE DATA FALSIFICATION
)
'Ihis is to certify that copies of AAMOIyr RESPONSE 'ID VOIGT LETPER OF APRIL 3, 1987 were served on the Service List by deposit in U.S. Mail, First Class, postage prepaid, on April 16, 1987 M $h ~
Marjorie M. Aamodt April 16, 1987 Service List The Honorables Judges James L. Kelley (Chairman) Harry H. Voigt. Esq.
James H. Carpenter Michael F. McBride, Esq.
Glenn O. Bright Robert St. John Roper, Esq.
Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Holly S. Boast, Esq.
James W. Moeller, Esq.
U.S. Nucicar Regulatory Commission Marlene L. Stein, Esq.
- Washington, D. C. 20555 C. Christopher Sprague. Esq.
LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby & MacRae Docketing & Service Branch U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Suite 1100 1333 New Hampshire Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20036 Jack Goldberg, Esq.
Smith B. Cephart, Esq.
Mary Wagner, Esq. Jane G. Penny, Esq.
Of fice of Legal Staf f Terrence G. McGowan Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Killian & Cephart Washington, D.C. 20555 216-18 Pine Street Harrisburg, PA 17108 Ernest L. Blake, Jr., Esq.
John H. Nassikas , III, Esq.
Michael W. Maupin, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge Maria C. Hensicy, Esq.
2300 N Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20037 Hunton & Williams P.O. Box 1535 Richmond, VA 23212 Isham, Lincoln & Beale Three First National Plaza
- Suite 5200 Chicago, IL 60602
- - _ - . _ , _ , - , - - . . - - , _ _ _ , . - .