ML22230A107
| ML22230A107 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/07/1979 |
| From: | NRC/OCM |
| To: | |
| References | |
| Tran-M790807 | |
| Download: ML22230A107 (66) | |
Text
RETURN TO SECRET,4RfAT RECORDS NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF:
PUBLIC MEETING CONTINUATION OF DISCUSSION OF ISSUES IN RESTART OF TMI-1 Piece -
Washington, D. C.
Date -
Tuesday, 7 August 1979 ACE - FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
Offici.21 Reporters 444 North Capitol Street Washington, 0.C. 20001 NATIONWIDE COVERAGE *DAILY Pages 1 -
62 Telephone:
(202) 347-3700
CR6326 1
D'ISCLAIMER This is an unofficial transcript 0£ a meeting of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on Tuesday, 7 August-1979 in the Commissions's offices at 1717 H Street,-N._W., Washington,, D. C.
The meeting was open to public attendance and observation.
This transcript has not been reviewed, corrected, or edited, and it may contain inaccuracles.
The transcript is intended solely for general informational purposes.
As provided by 10 CFR 9.103, it is not part of the formal or informal record of decision of the matters discussed.
Expressions of opinion in this transcript do not necessarily reflect final determinations or beliefs~
No pleading or other paper may be filed with the Commission in any proceeding as the result of or addressed to any statement or argument contai"ned herein, except as the Commission may authorize.
7
i CR6326 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A
24 Ac-eral Reporters, Inc.
25 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING CONTINUATION OF DISCUSSION OF ISSUES IN RESTART OF TMI-1 Room 1130 1717 H Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C.
Tuesday, 7 August 1979 The Commission met, pursuant to notice, at 3:50 p.m.
BEFORE:
DR. JOSEPH M. HENDRIE, Chairman VICTOR GILINSKY, Commissioner RICHARDT. KENNEDY, Commissioner PETER A. BRADFORD, Commissioner JOHN F. AHEARNE, Commissioner PRESENT:
L. Bickwit, S. Ostrach.
2
I CR6326.20 RMG 1 -
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A
24 A-deral Reporters, Inc.
25 3
P R O C E E D I N G S CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
May we come to order.
I apologize for all this carrying-on.
The Commissio tends to become a little punchy when we deal with the budget, and**that 's what we have been up to now for a week and a half.
We meet this afternoon to continue our discussion, the order and issues and restart of Three Mile Island Unit No.
Len, you have accomplished your assigned mission of producing a collection draft which collects the items previously argued over.,
and at least marginally agreed to.by a majority.
However, they may have occasionally been misguided.
I must say, as I thumbed it, it seemed to me to reflect where we had gone in previous discussion.
I found a few typos on page 6 -- Steve has those in hand --
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Len, is the version today the same in substance as the version yesterday?
MR. BICKWIT:
Exactly.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I takei.it the so-called clean copy is simply a clean copy of the annotated copy, identically, I trust.
MR. OSTRACH:
Just taking out the underlinings.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Barring inadvertencies, I guess, COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I read the first one.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I haven't even looked at the
RMG 2 -
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Ac eral Reporters, Inc.
25 4
clean copy; I have been working off'*the other one, too.
Let's see.
I kept scanning along someplace in here I had a question mark I got clear back to page 11.
Whati..i:s 2.:762,; : may appeal directly to the Commission, in accordance with provisions of 2,:/Z62-- is that compatible -- and 2.-rviO *--
is that language fully compatible with the thing at the end where it says 10 days, 7 days, and 35 inclusive?
We'll let you know.
MR. BICKWIT:
Yes, this is the appeal.
Yes.
The rule says that you can prescribe other dates.
And what you would be doing back at the end would be prescribin other days.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I *see.
Okay.
And the 762 and the 770 set out certain other features of the review and so on?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Since you have jumped past some of the early pages --
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Everybody is going to have a chance to go right back to zero; I just wanted to ask about that one.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I am not sure I understood the point; I missed something.
I'm sorry.
On the point about 2.762 -- what was the point you were making, Len?
MR. BICKWIT:
The point is that on motion practice you have a certain number of days that are required.
What you
RMG 3 -
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 5
are talking about here is the procedures leading to appellate decisions.
The motion practice rule sets out days:which can be altered by the secretary under the rule.
And the Commission is altering those days.
CHAIRMAN HENRIE:
Right here in the order.
MR. BICKWIT:
Here'in the order, yes.
I think the motion is 10 and 10.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
The key answer for me is that this is not incompatible with the later discussion of specific days for Commission review of their partial initial decision.
MR. BICKWIT:
One deals with filing briefs, :*.the othe deals with some motions.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yes, I would like a new time to come to the tentative or target schedule matter and some related things, but I don't have anything else in the body of the order.
Why don't I offer the floor from left to right.
Peter, why don't 1 start at your end?
(Commissioner Gilinsky arrives at 3:55 p.m.}
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
You have aided us materially on the budget.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Okay.
I would, on page 1, 23 take the if it is to be operated at all thought that appears A
24 at the end, and put it at the end of the sentence that begins -
A-deral Reporters, Inc.
25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Peter, I missed it, I'm sorry.
r RMG 4 -
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A
24 Ac.era! Reporters, Inc.
25 6
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
The last sentence of sen-tence 2.
"On the basis of that hearing, the Commission will determine whether further cooperation will be permitted" and so on, and what conditions.
I would like to capture that thought a little earlie and do it by up to the end of that third sentence, and just inserting there the phrase if it is to operate at all.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I have lost you completely.
You are on page --
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
You are on page 1.
MR. BICKWIT:
After the word operate?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
After the word public?
MR. BICKWIT:
I see.
COMMISS.IONER BRADFORD:
Nine lines down, in II.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
It's the sentence for reasons later set forth?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
That's right.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
What were the proposed changes?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I would just add after the word public at the end of the sentence, I would just add if it is to operate at all.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
That thought is in "here someplac.
Len, where is it?
MR. BICKWIT:
It s on page 2, as Peter says, at the end of --
l
RMG 5 -
A-deral Reporters, 7
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
But at page 2.
2 MR. BICKWIT:
But at the end of the same paragraph.
3 Ieter is just proposing moving it up.
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Inc.
25 right.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
No, no, that's not quite I think it's a good deal more than moving it up.
First, the*.1anguage is different.
And secondly, where it is on page 2, it seems to me it is fully appropriate.
That is whether further operation will be permitted, and if so, under what conditions, will be the subject of that hearing.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I don't think that what I have suggested changes that.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
What you have suggested I think says that regardless of the completion of short-term actions and a resolution of concerns, et cetera, required to provide reasonable assurance that the facility can be operated without endangering the health and safety of the public --
Even if that is determined, it is not clear that'the plant should operate in any event.
That is what I think the new language would say.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Just move the entire last sentence?
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
No, because it taiks about the hearing and developing the hearing.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
You could take the whole last sentence and make it the second sentence of No. 2.
RMG 6 -
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A
24 A-deral Reporters, Inc.
25 8
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
~es.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
That would be fine.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
That's okay.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I would be willing to do that.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Take the entire last sentence and move it as the isecond sentence.
And then there would be no addition after the third sentence.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Right.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
That's fine.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
That's fine.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okay, sold.
Next.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
On page 2, the paragraph beginning:
Accordingly, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board designated to conduct this proceeding should give priority to consideration of those issues which are related directly to suspension of operation.
Is that intended to say, wh~~h are, in the view of the Board, related?
MR. BICKWIT:
It is intended to incorporate the concept that-**.the Commission now has an idea of what those issue are,* and obviously if the Board were to modify that idea, then the Board's concept would prevail.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
And the same in the next sentence?
You said the Board should defer full review of the
RMG 7' ;: '*.
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A-deral Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 9
issues related to longer term actions.
Again, if the Board still wanted the longer term actions, is related in some way directly to the suspension is the Board's view, that will prevail?
MR. BICKWIT:
Yes.
Given that one of the issues in the hearing is the necessary and sufficient concept.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Would it do any harm to put in'the phrase which it considered to be related_..:. in both of those sentences, to makelth~t blearer?
MR. BICKWIT:
No.
I mean, the change you. would be making is you would get rid of the idea that the Commission now has an idea which it knows can be modified by the Board.
If you.change it to that, then are saying that whatever the Commission thinks is not relevant.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
All that concerns me is the Board reading this may feel it is completely constrained by the Commission.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Doesn't the necessary and suf-ficient aspect on the eight items COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Where are you now?
MR. BICKWIT:
The issues in the hearing?
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
The issues in the hearing are laid out, eight items, in addition, there are some short-term items for short-term items.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
Page 12.
RM:G 8 -
2 3
4 s
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A
deral Reporters, Inc.
25 10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yes, page 12, where the short-ter actions, et cetera, are necessary and sufficient to provide reasonable assurance.
The same sort of finding in II under long-term actions.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
As long as we are all clear that it means the,:same thing, I guess it doesn't matter to me.
a lot whether we change the language or not.
1 thought by making it a little clearer it might avoid any confusion at the hearing~ ~.As long as there is no doubt to us as to what it means, it'* s okay with me
- COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
What is the ambiguity, as you see it?
Couid you restate it for me, please?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Just that the paragraph as written arguably says to the Board there are short-term issues and there are long-term issues.
Those are already decided for you, and you should give priority consideration to wh~t you have been told are short-term and defer considerati n of those that you have been told are long-term.
And you do not have the.ability to move the long-term issues to the short-term list.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Or identify even another issue.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Yes.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: ::I see.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Well, let's see -- well,
RMG 9 -
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A
24 Aacieral Reporters, Inc.
25 11 possibly even there.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I:see.
And your proposal was to say give priority consideration of those issues which if the Board considers --
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Yes.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
And your problem with that, Len, was?*
MR. BICKWIT:
I don't have any serious problem with it.
I am just saying that without it you are directing the Board to at least address the Commission's best guess issues fi;r;st.
And then if it decides that other issues are better than the Commission's best guess COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Or equal to*.
MR.. BXCKWIT:
Yes.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Which is the way I would have preferred the order to be, as it is our best guess at the moment.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I think the understanding here is clear, Peter.
My impression is that it might be difficult to get the right words in on page 2 to carry all the flavor.
You might end up having to construct a footnote.
And I am not sure --
MR. BICKWIT:
It is a slight change in nuance.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yes.
I didn':t read your intent
RMG 10 -
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Aeeral Reporters, Inc.
25 12 as being a change in the nuance, but rather to understand COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
It's clarification.
MR. BICKWIT:
If clarification is what you are seeking, my own view is that it is clear already.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Since we all understand it the same way, if Peter says it is fine, then I can say fine.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I think that's probably right.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
That's your best estimate of the time it is going to take to get here?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I was thinking your random number,almost of when the.issue was likely to be viewed and likely to become clear to us.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Where next?
Why don't we pick up --
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I don't have anything more for a while.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
~11 right.
Why don't we pick up everybody's page ls and 2s and sweep forward through the thing.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Top of page 2, after it says such hearing decision and review.
Wouldn't it be useful there to just parenthetically note as provided in Section IV of this order?
It is the decision and review, is as described in Section !V, you see.
RMG 11 -
end #20 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 13 MR. BICKWIT:
Fine.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Just tie them together?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Fine.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
What would be the insert?
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Right after the word review in the second line, just a p~renthesis as provided in Section IV of this order.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okay.
That sounds to me like a way of dealing with Peter's sentence.
Would it be?
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I would think so.
MR. BICKWIT:
I would prefer to put it in the first line rather than the second line, syntactically.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
All right.
Wheneabouts?
MR. BICKWIT:
After the paren.
As provided in Chapter IV of this.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
It is a decision with review thereof as provided CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
On the issue.
If you get two parentheses, Peter, of different curvature back to back, they cancel each other.
They disappear then.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Is that right?
You are 23 talking about mathematics.
a 24 (Laughter. )
A~eral Reporters, Inc.
25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Would a reference to a section
RMG 12 -
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 a
24 A
eral Reporters, Inc.
25 14 help for you, Peter?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Let's see.
This is Section
!V?
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Yes.
MR. BICKWIT:
Steve points out we have now switched IV to V.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Oh, you have?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Are we talking about the section beginning:
The Commission has determined that --
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
No, no, it's the Commission has determined that, which is section Roman IV.
It is on page 9, which describes the decisionmaking process.
MR. BICKWIT:
Well,Section IV deals with the immediate effectiveness question.
Section Vis the guts of how.:-this hearing will be conducted.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
V. sets out, here is set up a Board, and it is to.do the following things.
MR. BICKWIT:
Section V wasSection IV in the other document.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I don't think I have any problem referencing this section. Joe, how did you think that that addres.sed it or not?
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
No, no, it i
- just occurred to me when Dick was saying., lob:k, for the sentence hhat he is interested in, the Commission has determined -- it helps him
RMG 13 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A
deral Reporters, Inc.
25 15 to have people flip back to.a later section by saying -- aha, maybe that's a way of signall~ng back on page 12 there is a thing you would like read in connection with the accordingly sentence.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Okay.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I'm sorry, it'sSection VI, which is where the decision comes, 1 and the review.
MR. BICKWIT:
Section VI refers to a lifting of immediate effectiveness.
COMM:IISSIONER KENNEDY:
The Commission will issue an order within 35 days.
MR. BICKWIT:
Yes.
COIV'lMISSIONER KENNEDY:
It is that review that*>JWe are talking about, that I am talking about.
MR. BICKWIT:
How about Section V and Section VI?
Section VI simply deals with :*.bhe lifting of immediate effectiveness.
When we refer to hearing decision review thereof, we were referring to the whole ball game.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: All right.
MR. OSTRACH:
Sections V.. and VI.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okay.
Peter, I will leave it to you to take up that other tning.
If you think it is worthwhile --
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
What is defeating me is that I can't find a relevant Roman numeral.
The nearest one seems t
RMG 14 -
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Ac-eral Reporters, Inc.
25 16 be several pages before it.
page --
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Several pages before?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Is it disallowed to say see COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
It involves the risk of the final draft having the page come out different.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Maybe, since it seems to be semi-resolved, at least before, it's not worth struggling over an obscure reference.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
If I can find one, I will do that for you.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okay.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I have a page 1 item.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
A page 1 item.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I thought we had gotten away from this promptly as practicable about six lines up from the bottom, on the right?
MR. BICKWIT:
We have and we haven't.
We have contrued your sentiment that we would require that certain actions be done, certain long-term actions be done as promptly as practicable.
But that that section of the order would not be made immediately effective.
All of the items listed would be long-term actions which would be required if the hearing so determined.
The reasonable progress language is related to the
RMG 15 I -
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A-deral Reporters, 24 Inc.
end #21 25 17 situation where as a condition to continued shutdown, as.1.a condition to the lifting of continued shutdown, they would have to show that reasonable progress had been made with respect to both the long-term action for which an immediately effective order was -- had been issued to other licensees.
So we still have a concept, promptly as practicable in the part of the order which will not be immediately effective.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Can you show me where that is?
MR. BICKWIT:
III, Clause 2, page 9.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I think page 9 is in good shape.
What can we do about promptly as practicable?
MR. BICKWIT:
Now, you can -- this is an incchmplete concept, -- oh, no, then we say and that reasonable progress::
on the completion of such act prior to restart xs r~quired.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
And that sounds fine.
MR. BICKWIT:
The only problem is such actions refers back to additional long-term actions, and you have in mind a slightly different category of long-term actions when you are talking about the long-term actions that you are going to deal wibh without making them immediately effective and the actions which you are going to insist upon reasonable progress for in order to li£t the suspensions.
But I think it is a modest problem.
CR6326 M.Meltzer t,22 jl 1 -
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Ace-eral Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 18 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
What you' re saying is there are two categories of long-term actions?
MR. BICKWIT:
That's right.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Why don't we say that?
I MR. BICKWIT:
We have said that in the order.
We say it clearly in the order, back on page 9.
I see no problem with being more specific here, but I don't really think it's necessary since we are very specific back on page 9.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I think back end of the thing relieves whatever little roughness in the road there is here.
Back to page 2.
Page 2, going once.
Page 3?
Page 4?
Page 5?
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Wait. Wait.
Page 4.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Good try, Joe, MR. BICKWIT:
Good try, Mr. Chairman.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
We '*ve got these concerns --
result from when one potential interacts between Unit 1 and Unit 2, and then, parentheses, to Unit 2 accident on the management technical resources of Metropolitan Edison.
I guess I would put it the other way around.
the impact of the management and technical resources of
j 1 2 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Ac eral Reporters, Inc.
25 19 Metropolitan Edison on the Unit 2 accident.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
What?
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
You're not starting the Unit 2 accident here.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
But your concerns about their management and technical resources, not how they've been affected by the accident, but whether they are up to running a safe plant in the first place.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
That goes down in 4, et cetera, COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
The point I think that's trying to be captured in number 2 is slightly different than there was, given that there was the accident and 2 is an out and out significant change, COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
But they're thin, because they're occupied with Unit 2, COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
- Yes, COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
It seems to me there ought to be another point, which is simply whether, given our experiences with Unit 2, the management and technical staff have the expertise and discipline to operate a plant safely.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Item 6, page 6, COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Is that on there?
MR. BICKWIT:
Yes.
One refers to actions.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Yes, one is actions, the other is concerns, And it's true that it is covered in item 6,
j 1 3 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Ace-eral Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 20 in page 6, but I think there ought to be a concern that relates underlies this action.
MR. BICKWIT:
How would you have that read?
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY~
Let me just check the form of these.
Well, simply the concern about the adequacy of the management and technical resources of Metropolitan Edison.
MR. BICKWIT:
How about that including the impact of the nuclear accident?
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Fine.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
What is it now?
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Why don't we put it in 4 by saying
-- by listing the adequacy of emergency plans, station operat-ing procedures, and management and technical resources, COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Wait a minute. It says "recognized efficiencies."
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I was going to say "recogniz.ed efficiencies n
--; it's an odd form anyway.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I guess I think that down-plays it too much, along with emergency plans and operating procedures.
I would put it right up there, as number 1 and number 2.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
What was the language to put it into?
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I would simply say concern
jl 4 I -
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Ace eral Reporters, Inc.
25 21 about the adequacy of management and technical capabilities of Metropolitan Edison, which then is followed up on page 6 with Action 6.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY~
How does it read?
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I said it a little different-ly each time.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Steve had it.
He had written something.
MR. OSTRACH:
I believe it would now read:
"2 --
Questions about management, technical resources of Metropolitan Edison."
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I would put "capabilities."
MR. OSTRACH:
"Management capabilities and technical resources"?
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
No, 0 management capabilities and technical resources.
11 MR. OSTRACH:
And then delete the language at the beginning of 2, the impact of the Unit 2 accident?
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
You might add "including whatever the impact,: -- "whatever impact there has been on these of the Unit 2 accident."
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
All right, Page 5?
Page 6?
I j 1 5 22 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Ace-eral Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
On page 5, to what does --
way down, just above 2, "NRC will administer complete examina-tions to all licensed personnel. n What does "complete examinations" mean?
MR. BICKWIT:
Let me call on Staff.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Are they complete examina-tions as to these areas referred to in the previous sentence, which is just TMI-related material?
MR. VOLLMER:
I think they are intended to be, rather than a requalification exam, a complete exam in the sense of it being an issue to operation to the operator, oral and written examination.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I think we ought to say something like that, because right now it might well be taken to imply that he's talking about -- where it says in the previous sentence, "reexamination of all operators in these areas, these complete examinations" --
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
You are whe.re?
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
On page 5, just above 2.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
You're asking, what is a complete examination?
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
In the context that it's written here.
You see, it says, "Licensee wi 11 conduct a 100 percent reexamination of all operators in these areas.
NRC will administer will* complete-examinations _to~ all licensed
j 1 6 I -
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Ace-eral Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 23 personnel."
Are these the same exams, on the same subject matter, or -- no, they're not, they really are basic additional quali-fication examinations.
MR. VOLLMER:
Yes.
COMMISSIONEJR KENNEDY:
Why don't we j us.t say that NRC will administer complete qualification examinations?
MR. OSTRACH:
All right, qualification examinations.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Is that compatible with the cus-tomary jargon in the operating license?
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
We'll need to get it in the right jargon, of course, COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
While why don't we leave Dick to discover what the appropriate jargon is?
And he can call out to the licenses, operator lisensers, if necessary.
And I will propel the project forward.
You had you chance at page 6.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Page 6, item 4, "The Licensee shall take actions required to demonstrate that planned decontamination and so on or restoration operations at TMI-'2 will not impact safe. operations at TMI-1."
Now, you use the word "planned."
Presumably, we mean operations which the NRC has decided will themselves be adequately safe, In other words, you have in mind simply taking the Licensee's plans?
j 1 7 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Ace eral Reporters, Inc.
25 24 MR. OSTRACH:
Oh, no.
The intention was that to the extent those plans are known --
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
To demonstrate, MR. OSTRACH:
If they know they're going to be such-and-such and such-and-such, but they haven't done it yet, those will have to be taken into account.when considering the safety of operation of TMI-1.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, it looks as if you're going to have to have a good deal of information about how TMI-2 will be handled, before you can answer these questions?
MR. OSTRACH:
Yes, sir.
That's expected, I believe.
Mr. Vollmer can speak to that.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
But there is going to have to be some, at least initial, approval of those TMI-2 steps before you can regard --
COM.MISSIONER AHEARNE:
At least some initial review.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Or some initial review of those steps before one can come to the conclusion that --
COM.MISSIONER AHEARNE~
It may not have been able to go through a complete approval.
MR. OSTRACH:
It should be possible to make some sort of scoping analysis as to what the potential risks from TMI decontamination are,even before they have decided which specific approaches will be used,for the exact details of it.
CO~1ISSIONER AHEARNE:
It's a boundary envelope
j 1 8 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Ace-eral Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 25 that you're really asking here to secure; can they convince you that within the envelope of measures on 2, that it's not going to cause impact on the safe operations in l? If they can't, then they can't operate.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Okay, the Licensee is required to demonstrate this?
MR. OSTRACH:
Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I don't understand, now that you bring it up, why shall take actions required to demonstrate --
what actions is he going to take?
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Shall demonstrate~ presum-ably.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
You mean he takes pen in hand and performs calculations; is that what you mean by "takes actions required to demonstrate"?
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Can't you just say, "Licensee shall demonstrate:.?
ought to MR. OSTRACH:
I don't see why we can't say that.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
In that case, we certainly COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Which just indicates why we didn't need the extra people for plain English.
All -- we can handle it ourselves.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I think the only point is salary range.
j 1 9 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 I
24 Ace eral Reporters, Inc.
25 26 (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY~
I think it depends on how plain you want the English.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I think it's plain we have highly capable, technical editors.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Affect, instead of impact,pleases Peter -- requests?
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Will not affect safe operations?
"Affect"?
MR. BICKWIT:
Yes.
I think that's preferable.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Well.now, what?
';Effect"?
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I'm still troubled about the word ;;planned."
The Licensee can have a set of plans that don't affect safe operations at TMI-1, but yet these may not be approved in any way by NRC --
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Why can't it just leave the word "planned" out? I'd agree with Vic.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Yes, I guess I'd take the word "planned" out.
MR. OSTRACH:
That would get.* at_. Commissioner. Ahearne' s concept of the envelope, COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Leaving it out, or putting it in?
MR. OSTRACH:
Because -- taking it out, because
j 1 10 1* -
- J "2
,,,3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A-deral Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 27 planning ties into the Licensee's plan, whereas operations, I think, is a comparab-le concept.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I would take it out.
There are a couple of typos on the page.
MR. OSTRACH:
We have those.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
You have -- I guess the Staff Licensee shall improve, dot, dot, dot, and it's conduct test exercise.
Is there any further description of the test exercise the Licensee is supposed to conduct?
MR. VOLLMER:
That was of the -- I think something was left out.
"Test exercise" was of the emergency plan.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Do you want to add "of the emergency planl'. to it? That might make for more clarity.
MR. VOLLMER:
I guess "of that emergency plan" should be involved with that.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes, I like that.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Page 7?
9?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE~
What happened to 8?
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
When you're a chairman, you take anything you can get -- beg, borrow, or steal.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
On page 7, what was the pur-pose of the addition in item 7 of the added language, the extent relevant to his ability?
What does that add?
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, it was supposed to be 7
j 1 11 ie 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 28 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
We 11, it was supposed to be a lesser test, rather than a more stringent one.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
That was the discussion we had.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY~
Does it turn out to be a lesser test, or what is it?
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I don't know what happens in practice.
MR. BICKWIT:
As I understood the Commission's position, this was the language that it wanted, whether or not it a lesser test.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Oh.
MR. BICKWIT:
It was somewhat unclear to me, and I think.:.. __ and to the Commission as to whether it was a lesser test.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
But it was COMMISSIONER GILINSKY=
I guess I thought it probably 18 would be, but it seemed to me that is the thing to be concerned 19 about, the safe operation of TMI-1, and to the extent that it 20 met the qualifications of that, then it's irrelevant if they 21 can't be demonstrated to affect that.
22 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
If one simply goes through 23 the regular OL-type review, that's precisely what happens.
A 24 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY~
I don't think so.
I don't A-deral Reporters, Inc.
25 think that review is in any way related to safety.
That's my
j 1 12 le end t22 29 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY~
Then we have created a new 2
kind of review, and we don't know what it means; am I right?
3 4
5 6
MR. BICKWI"T:
I think you know what it means.
You just don't know whether it means exactly what is in your regulations with respect to OLs.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I guess the way I would look 7
at it is that contentions related to financial capabilities are 8
admissible to the extent that they can be related to safety 9
matters, -- otherwise, not.
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A-deral Reporters, ~!.
25
CR6326 M.Meltz.er t.23 j 1 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 that.
test?
his view, 29 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
All right.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
It's my impression that this does COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I understand it better.
If that's -- is that the way you would understand it?
MR. BICKWIT:
I'm sorry, but it is the lesser test.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
The contentions -- what is the Commissioner Gilinsky suggests that his view in contentions as to financial ability, precisely as 11 they affect safety, would be admissible,-- otherwise, not.
12 13 MR. BICKWIT:
That would be my understanding.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
That would be your understand-14 ing of this?
15 Sounds reasonable to me.
16 17 18 CHAIR.M.M-l HENDRIE:
Page 8?
9?
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I guess I didn't understand 19 item 4.
It says, "Improve emergency preparedness in accordance 20 with the following:
Modify emergency plans to address changing 21 capabilities of plant instrumentation."
22 What does that mean?
23 Mr. Vollmer?.
24 A
deral Reporters, Inc.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Which page is this?
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Page 8.
25
j 1 2 2
3 30 I wonder if you could explain item 4?
MR. VOLLMER:
Okay.
The emergency plan revolves around the type and capability of a plant instrumentation.
The 4
two are tied very -- fairly close together, so that if, as 5
specific changes are made to plant instrumentation, he should 6
make appropriate modifications to the emergency plan and 7
instructions to the emergency team on how they operate, That 8
was the intent there -- to bring those together, 9
That's part of the recommendations in the Lessons 10 Learned, which round that the emergency plans were not necess-ll arily tied in as they should be to actual measurements made at 12 the facility itself.
13 14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Now, you're extending the capability to take appropriate emergency action for the popula-15 tion around the site at or a distance of 10 miles.
What is the 16 immediately -- what is the short-term actions?
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Oh, I see them here:
"Upgrade satisfy Reg Guide 1.101."
MR. VOLLMER:
Right.
emergency plans to COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I guess Reg Guide -- I don't think Reg Guide 1.101 is that formidable myself, but it goes on -- okay, COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Is this the place to deal with A*
24 that problem?
A-deral Reporters, Inc.
25 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Okay.
Good enough.
j 1 3 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Ac-eral Reporters, Inc.
25 31 There are a number of other items in that list --
9 --
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Wait a minute.
Page 8, again_, down at the bottom --
in order to make clear that we are referring to the July 2 order, would it be useful in Roman III, item 1., to start the sentence by saying, "The Commission, July 2nd, 19 79, order requiring the Licensee, effective immediately, to maintain -- shall remain in effect until further order"?
MR. BICKWIT:
We envision this as standing on its own.
I don't see -- we did not envision this as incorporating the July 2nd order.
I don't regard it as an important differ-ence.
If you are more comfortable saying that what we are doing here is incorporating that order, so be it.
But I thought it was simply --
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Well, to me it might be use-ful only in the sense that -- and it's not a big point -- in the July 2nd order, we said that were going to be issuing a subsequent order.
This would at least tie them together.
MR. BICKWIT:
Well, you've tied them together in the body, page 1.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Yes, I'd forgotten -- so we did.
I don't care.
How about "however" instead of following "on there until further order of the Commission concerning that which
j 1 4 32 will be issued following satisfactory completion"?
2 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I think that's a minor 3
clarification in language.
4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
ll..ny problem?
5 6
7 If the draftsmen don't have a problem with that --
MR. BICKWIT:
No.
CHAIRMAN *HENDRIE:.*
Let me see if I can gather you up a past page 9.
9 Going once.
10 11 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
This is a minor nit-pick, and then I have a broader question -- the third line of Roman IV, 12 instead of "be, 1
)
it says "shall be immediately effective."
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Well, that's the same point I was making.
Is it "shall remain or "shall be"?
MR. BICKWIT: "Shall be."
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
"Shall be"?
MR. BICKWIT:
This order stands on its own.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
All right.
MR. BICKWIT~
Because, in the July 2 order, you 20 didn't refer to a lot of what's in the clause.
21 22 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
That's right.
What about the relationship between item 2, at the 23 top of the page, and what then follows in Section 4?
Are they A
24 wholly consistent?
A-deral Reporters, Inc.
25 MR. BICKWIT:
They have nothing to do with each other..
j 1 5 33 Item 2 is a separate track.
You are requiring that all of the 2
long-term actions listed in this order must be done, but you 3
are not making item 2 immediately effective, so that there is 4
no requirement outstanding against the Licensee under item 2.
5 What you are dealing with *in Roman IV relates only 6
to those i terns where requirements a.re outstanding.
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14
. 15 page?
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okay.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Do you have the typo on that MR. BICKWIT:
Where is that?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
About seven lines up.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Good catch.
Page 9 -- going, going, gone.
Page 10?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Why do you have a qualifier to 16 the extent practicable, the Board should hold sessions?
17 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I was going to drop that 18 qualifier down to the second half of the sentence.
19 "The Board will hold its sessions to the extent of the 20 facility and to the extent practicable."
21 MR. BICKWIT:
Do you want all of the hearings in the 22 vicinity?
23 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I would think so.
A 24 MR. BICKWIT:
Then, in that case, to the extent A-deral Reporters, Inc.
25 practicable --
l
j 1 6 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A
deral Repo~ters, Inc.
25 34 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I don't think so.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
You don't think so?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Isn't that standard for a Licensing Board?
MR.
The Licensing Board are attempting to maximize to the extent of participation, but the may hold hearings in the Washington metropolitan area_-- in fact, do.
Certainly you are free to require that all the hearings be held in the area of the facility.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I guess I would rather leave to should and take that qualifier out -- no problem.
I guess I don't understand why you want to put the qualifier in the second part, because it says it should attempt COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I guess because it was there, I shifted to what I was more comfortable with.
I have no problem taking it out.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I don't mind taking it out.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okay?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Let's see, I had indicated perhaps I'm lost, I don't remember -- a feeling that I would prefer to have the Board set a schedule and then, obviously, endeavor to comply with whatever we felt was -- but I thought I would go at the scheduling question that way rather than attaching a detailed schedule here.
j 1 7 i e 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A
24 A-deral Reporters, Inc.
25 Did we -- did we have a vote on that?
MR. BICKWIT:
I thought you won.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
You thought I won?
MR. BICKWIT:
Then at the last --
(Laughter.)
MR. BICKWIT:
I don't remember whether your 35 attendance at the last one -- the drift seemed to be this one.
Do you remember our discussing that?
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
That's the price of missing.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD~
That's I thought I was here -- that's where I thought I won.
MR. BICKWIT:
No, I thought you won earlier in the game.
I didn't think you won at the last session.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I have to admit I was surprise to see the schedule there.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I think it looks a little tacky.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I thought Peter won, also, and I looked at it,--
MR. BICKWIT:
The Commission is free to decide who wins.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Well, why don't we see how it fits and how -- let's see, your language, Peter, would be what?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Well, at one point -- did we actually have it in writing? -- the thrust was that the Board
j 1 8 36 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A
24 A.deral Reporters, Inc.
25 would establish a schedule.
I think that's about all we said_
-- we expected that the Board would --
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I don't think we ever actually drafted any language.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I thought I remembered at one point, to the effect that we expected the Board to publish a schedule.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes, it was --
MR. BICKWIT:
We had drafted something which said it is the Commission expectation that the Board, at an appropriate time in the proceeding, will set a target date for its issuance of the initial decision.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
No, it was more than that. It was a concept that the Board should attempt to construct a schedule and then attempt to stick to it.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
That was all that I remember-ed actually being written.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
The Board to construct a schedule?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I have no problem with going further and saying the Board should construct a schedule.
MR. BICKWIT:
It was also the concept that it might be within a fixed number of months of the Staff's safety evaluations report.
So at this point, where are we?
How would you now
j 1 9 e
end 23 s 24 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A
aderal Reporters, Inc.
25 37 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I guess I would drop that thought into the next paragraph is what I would say "It's the Commission expectation the Board will conduct a proceeding expeditiously and that it will, at the earliest practicable time, set forth a schedule including a target date for comple-tion.
MR. BICKWIT ~
Okay.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Don't feel bound by those exact words, but that's the concept.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Didn't we at one point suggest that, independently of the order, we might write a memo to the Board saying the Commission looked at this question at consid-erable length and the attached schedule represented at least one view of how things might be accomplished to give them some idea of at least what we had looked at, what we had thought about?
MR. BICKWIT:
The question is:
Did you?
Is it legal?
It's legal.
I must say I prefer to communicate in the order.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I would, too, if we're going to suggest a schedule or whatever.
I think this is the way to do it, rather than send notes down the line.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I was trying to make it just a little bit less directive in character.
j 1 10 A-deral Reporters, 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Inc.
25 38 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
The problem I had with it was that at least I don't feel that comfortable, as I understand all of the proceedings and problems that fall on the Board; similar to a concern Peter had earlier, I don't mind saying that we have looked at it to some extent and here is what it appeared to us.
What appeared to us might be a feasible schedule, but it's really the Board that has to set its own schedule.
What I'm interested in doing is having them think early on actually trying to set a schedule, publish it, and then try to stick to it.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Well, I will say on behalf of the draft schedule, which is not an ordered thing, but a thing to which the Board is admonished to hew if it can, that it does move things along, it does get there.
I would whack a few days off some of those time periods over at the end and get there in 315 days or thereabouts.
I will be the Board's schedule isn't within six months of this.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
If the Board publishes a schedule that we consider to be slow, I assume that's something we can take a look at.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I guess that doesn't give me much comfort.
On the other hand, on other occasions, and on other subjects, I have offered you the same limited comfort and
j 1 11 le 2
3 4
5 39 recognized that you weren 1*t taking much from it.
Why don't we just see what the voting positions are on it and get on with it?
Peter, obviously, you proposed the --
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Does the Board have access 6
to the transcript of these meetings?
Certainly this schedule 7
has been read into the transcript.
8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I don't know that the Board pays 9
any attention or not.
The transcript to this meeting says 10 donrt bother with this for serious or official purposes or so 11 MR. BICKWIT:
Maybe the rules,or the Board is not 12 to consult~-
13 14 15 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Unless we waive the rule.
MR. BICKWIT:
Unless you waive the rule.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I don*t know whether thatts 16 useful in this case or not, but there are a number of instances 17 in which the Board could get a certain amount of guidance and 18 others in which they could get a certain amount of misguidance.
19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Could I suggest some language 20 that at least would satisfy me?
I'm not sure whether it would 21 satisfy anybody else, 22 23 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
You are amending Peter's proposal?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
24 Ac ederal Reporters, Inc.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Go ahead and see if you can get it 25 accepted by its original sponsor.
I j 1 12 40 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A
deral Reporters, Inc.
25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE~
Picking up from it is the Commission's expectation the Board will conduct a proceeding expeditiously:
"The Board should, as early as possible, publish an appropriate schedule and attempt to meet it.
"A ten ta ti ve schedule, proposed by the Commission, is attached for the Board's possible use."
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
That 1*s good with me.
COMMISSIONER GRADFORD:
I would not attach...:the tentative schedule just because we've prepared it without:
reference -- with out any knowledge of what the Board is going to be up against.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I think it's specifically the attachment of the tentative schedule that is the route point.
I could vote for that.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
We 11., you "ve got three votes.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I guess I don't object to communicating the schedule in some way to the Board, but I find it odd to attach it to this letter.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
The only reason I'm proposing to attach it really is Len's point that it really is best, if you're going to communicate it to the Board, to communicate in the order, is the way I interpret it.
And so, you know, I would have gone* with Dick's suggestion to send a letter, but I defer to Len 1*s judgment on
j 1 13 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A
24 A<Wderal Reporters, Inc.
25 41 what is the most appropriate fashion of doing that.communica-tion.
MR. BICKWIT:
I'm not saying it would be illegal to do otherwise.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
My purpose in suggesting that it be detached from the order was to give it, as I said, a little less directive quality.
In a letter, one could use all the qualifiers he wished -- say, you know, the Board should not feel constrained by this,.which represented an attempt by the Commission to describe how it might be possible to move forward.
MR. BICKWIT:
There would be no legal problem with that.
I would be more comfortable if you said those very words in the order.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Well, maybe somebody could draft them.
If that was done, would that --
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Let me have the words again.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I'm just saying the Board should not be constrained by these.
It was simply enclosed here to indicate how the Commission itself had visualized, if possible, to proceed.
COMMISSIOENR BRADFORD:
It's getting better.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I think I've got* -- if we could add 1'The Board is to pay no attention to the pages, over the
j 1 14 le 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A
ederal Reporters, Inc.
25 42 pages, over the signature of the secretary" -- I think I've got you over.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I would leave it out, just because I think we will be presumably appointing a Board we would have some confidence as to their ability to run a hearing.
My strongest objection toward the language was that we expected them to comply with -- this gets around that.
CO~!MISSIONER KENNEDY:
There is another advantage to publishing some sort of a schedule -- that is that all the parties know pretty generally, from the very beginning, what's going to be expected of them and how much time they would have to do that.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I certainly agree with that.
I would just have the Board do it.
And I would drop that sentence down into the paragraph following the Commission's primary, and I would say, given this overriding imperative, it is the Commission's expectation.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Where would you put it, Peter, in the next paragraph?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Where would I put what?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Move that down?
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
At the bottom of the page?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
The bottom of the page?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Yes.
I I
j 1 15 43 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A
eral Reporters, Inc.
end t24 25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Then you would delete the rest?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
No, there is sort of -- odd thing that begins -- I guess it's not so odd.
It looked like it began with a small "t" -- but the hearing will be conducted in accordance with I can see right where it is.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I have a crummy page 10.
I am having trouble reading it.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Peter, we have some confusion at this end.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I thought you were moving that down all the way to the bottom of the page.
COMMISSIONER BMDFORD:
I was.
John kept the language "It is the Commission's expectation" -- I was just taking that and putting it after the clause "given this overriding imperative, it is the Commission's expectation" -- and then I was putting whatever else you put in there there, and then period -- "The Board is instructed to explore" --
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Is this a schedule worked up by the Commission or OGC, or just a schedule worked up by the Staff?
MR. BICKWIT:
This is a schedule worked up by the Staff.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
And worked over.
CR6326 Meltzer t.25 j 1 16 -
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A-eral Reporters, Inc.
25 44 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
It is also is fairly -- I think the concept is fairly consistent with many of the con-cepts in regulatory reform, which is saying we ought to be providing schedules as we are going to proceed, COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
At least somebody ought to be providing schedules.
I'm not sure that they would have the Commission doing it.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okay, as amended.
If anybody knows how the amendment went MR. OSTRACH:
My understanding is that we have this material, as amended by Commissioner Ahearne, it is the Commission's expectation language and two other sentences all of that would be moved after the phrase "given this over-riding imperative" -- we' 11 end with a period.
We' 11 start a new sentence, "The Board is instructed to explore" and then continue from there.
there.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Right.
And you are leaving MR. OSTRACH~
The intervening paragraph stays in COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Stays in there, right.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE~
And your phrasing, John, was COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Then it would read, ;;Given this overriding imperative, it is the Commission's expectation
j 1 17 45 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A
cleral Reporters, Inc.
25 that the Board will conduct.the proceeding expeditiously.
The Board should, as early possible, publish an appropriate schedule and attempt to meet it.
A tentative schedule, compose by the Commission, is attached for the Board's possible use."
And I go on and pick up something Dick had said, "although the Board should not be constrained by it."
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
That's fine.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Okay?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Well, not fine, but --
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Acceptable?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD~
Given the votes around the table, it's acceptable.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
That would relieve the strain enough to make it unnecessary to vote the issue?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
- Yes, CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
All right, I think that was a notable achievement, John.
Page 11?
Page 12?
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
On 12, after 1, talking about the short-term actions and so on, I think maybe it might be useful to insert something here to speed up the question of dealing with the financial qualifications issue and some language might read like:
"As to the issue of financial qualifications, a party wishing to raise the subject as a
jl 18 46 I
2 3
contention must clearly indicate why the Licensee's financial condition wi*ll undermine the Licensee's ability to operate the plant safely."
4 That is consistent now with the way we agreed things 5
were back a few pages.
6 "Parties raising the issue should do so before the 7
special prehearing conference, which is trying to get that 8
issue up front."
9 And then the question 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A
24 A~eral Reporters, Inc.
25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Do they have to raise all the contentions?
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I want to be sure this one is, too.
And then indicate -- now, the question would be who's going to resolve it? Is this a matter which should be certified to the Commission, or is this going to be resolved by the Board?
If it's going to be resolved by the Board, fine.
If the Commission is going to have to resolve these contentions, then, again, they ought to be certified to us immediately.
MR. BICKWIT:
It is my understanding that it would be treated like any other commitment.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
The Board would rule on it.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
The Board would rule on it in any appeals
j 1 19 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A
deral Reporters, Inc.
25 47 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Splendid.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Dick, why do you feel that unique short-term issue should be called out?
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Only because it is unique..,
All the others are going to be dealt with that way.-- are going to be dealt with quickly, and this one ought to be dealt with in the same time frame, quickly, instead of just laid out.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
What I meant was, you are saying, among the set of short-term actions, you're going to be calling out financial qualifications as unique?
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Because it is that.
It's not like the others, all the other short-term actions that have appeared in all kinds of orders.
COMMISSIONER ______
Not the separation of --
COMMISSION KENNEDY:
It just seems to me that that is the kind of issue that's going to be around for a long time, subject to all kinds of things.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I have no problems.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
You don't have a problem on that?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE :*
No.
Vic was the one who was most interested in that.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I would limit it to conten-tions --
(inaudible)
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
That's what that says.
(5:10 p.m.; Commission Gilinsky leaves.)
j 1 20 4 8 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A
24 A-deral Reporters, Inc.
25 place?
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Have you got that language some-MR. BICKWIT:
.I'm glad you cleared that up.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
That's what this says.
All it does -- it says, "Get them in early."
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okay.
Do we need a vote on getting them in early?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Len, do you see any problem with that?
MR. BICKWIT:
I don't.
My sense of symmetry, as yours was, is some degree offended by it.
But I don't see any problems with it.
MR. OSTRACH:
It is the two sentences you read, Commissioner, but not the last sentence?
And where, precisely, did you wish that to go, sir?
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
After page -- let's see, it's on page 12?
After 1,-- after parenthesis, 1.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Would this be a new parenthe-sis?
A new --
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I don't think it needs to be.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
But this is embedded in some-thing to be considered?
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I guess it can be, CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Let's see, it's not a subject to
j 1 21 49 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A-eral Reporters, Inc.
25 be considered at the hearing.
There are a number in this section.
There are a number of instructions about the pro-ceeding.
And why don't we --
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Maybe above the subjects to be considered at the hearing.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Why don't we leave it to counsel to find the suitable place in this Section 5, which says, "Now, look, here's how we' re going to run this hearing," to find a suitable place to sandwich that instruction in; all right?
I don't think it comes at the end of 1, which is a bit of different animal.
And, furthermore, that will help your symmetry problem a little bit -- not entirely.
MR. BICKWIT:
Yes.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Steve, could you then read it again, because I was trying to follow it in context of 1, and it didn't track too well.
MR. OSTRACH: "As to the issue of financial qualifi-cations, a party wishing to raise this subject as a contention must clearly indicate why the Licensee's financial condition will undermine the Licensee's ability to operate the plant safely.
11 Parties raising* this issue should do so before the special prehearing conference."
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I would -- guess I would say "might" rather than "will."
If he can indicate why it
j 1 22 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 will, he's proven his case.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
All right.
Or are presumed to "might" is fine.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Page 13?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Now, Peter have a set of language to go in the top there that was fine with me.
50 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I guess that is a little bit more of a statement of conclusion than I would like to see here at this point.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
The conclusion is that the Commission has not determined whether such issues were mainly developed.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I don't think it states it any more strongly than the draft.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I had trouble with it, too.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
It does ingeniously avoid the psychological distress and presumable consequences likely.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Yes, which is certainly in its favor.
Yes, I guess that's all right.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
It seemed to me the 23
-- did the draftsmen see any A
24 A-deral Reporters, Inc.
MR. BICKWIT:
The only problem that we have is it's 25 a little cryptic.
I jl 23 51 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A
deral Reporters, Inc.
25 advantage.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I thought that was an CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
So, Bradford, trapped again.
(Laughter.)
MR. BICKWIT:
Just this modification, but from what you say, it's probably very under-modified, while real and substantial concern attaches to issues such as psychological distress and others arising from the continuing impact of aspects of Three Mile Island.
I'm just afraid that, as it is written, someone who hadn't been party to these discussions would not really have a clue as to what we're talking about.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I had my difficulties with that.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE~
Fine with me.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okay.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I think if you do that, then you have to say any party wishing to raise -- instead of "this subject," it should be "subjects of this nature,"
or "such subjects as contentions."
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Fine.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Is it presumed by the change in language that it might be an appropriate matter for raising in the proceeding, but not relevant legally?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I do not see how you could --
jl 24 52 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A
deral Reporters, Inc.
25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
If it ain't relevant legally, well you can't raise it legally.
And that's the determination.--
clearly.
All right, 14?
15?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
On 14,-- or 14 is the same concern I had --
(inaudible)
That is, the Board should accord priority to consid-eration of matters relating to the need for continued suspen-sion,-- it's the same reading again* -- as long as it's clear that the Board may determine the priorities.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I think that is quite amply clear from the section as it was before.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Would it be useful, down in the bottom paragraph, instead of saying, "The Commission will decide," to say, "The Commission will issue an order 11 7*
I guess they're the same, or are they?
MR. BICKWIT:
Well, normally you wouldn't issue an order,if you decided that it should remain, immediately effective.
You would issue an order only if you wanted to lift immediate effectiveness.
It would be a very unusual action of the Commission to say, 11 We want this order to be immediately effective," and then have a procedure for issuing an order saying we still wanted it to be, COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Having gotten from the Board,
jl 25 le I
I e new bkup
. e 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 53 certified to it, the question, with or without a recommendation, it would seem to me desirable that an affirmative action on the part of the Commission be taken to either indicate that its initial decision is that the present order shall remain in effect or that it shall be lifted.
MR. BICKWIT:
I see no problem with it.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
It would seem to me desirable to do that.
(5:20 p.m., Commissioner Bradford left.)
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
In other words, the Commission is obligated to take an action to do something at that point, to say either yes or no, not just to -- by doing nothing, say no.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Well, will it then also get 15 us -- maybe that's desirable, but will get us into a situation 16 that we have just recently found ourselves in if we commit to 17 issuing an order in 35 days and we don't issue an order, we 18 will then have to issue a deferral of the requirement to issue 19 an order.
20 21 22 23 COMMISSIONER BICKWIT:
I think you have to do that anyway.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Even the decision?
MR. BICKWIT:
Even under this.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yes, I re -- decide here, to be reflected in appropriate form or pronouncements of the
j 1 26 le e t25 s t26
,I 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
'9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 54 Commission.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Except the time between the decision and an order sometimes is a week or two.
So if you want to put -- issue an order, then I would go for 40 days.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
We snap them out here, around here pretty good.
This is getting it typed and -- signing it, isn't it?
What else do you have to do in terms of just -- that is, the Commission makes a decision and says, "We do this and so-and-so," so that there are not substantive matters.
It's just a question how fast can a paper that reflects the decision appear?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I agree, but it might not be just yes or no.
MR. OSTRACH:
The GESMO case, for example, took five months between the Commission decision and the Commission order, so there have been periods of time.. --
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Let me point out that as long as -- just in that connection, I'm glad you raised that particularly interesting example.
It underlay one of my concerns.
The Commission may have decided, but recall that 22 an order now has a plant in a certain status -- A, down; right?
23 Now. if it's going to take a long period of time from A
24 that decision until that order can be effected by the decision, A-deral Reporters, Inc.
25 then it seems to me that that ought to be recognized from the
j 1 27 le 2
55 outset.
And it was precisely with that thought in mind that I suggest maybe issue an order now.
If, in fact, there are a 3
great many other things that need to be said, one could issue that in seriatim.
One could issue an order saying that, in 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 fact, a decision in this way is made and will be followed by a further explanation of conditions, et cetera.
But to just let it sit there -- if, for example, the decision were to raise the subject, lift the earlier order, allow the plant to operate, and then it just sat there for some considerable period of time while an order was being drafted and approved, one would have to ask if that was a good regula-tion, I think.
It was that that I had in mind, to say nothing of the fact that I do sympathize, in a very strong way, with Mr. Gilinsky's concern for discipline on the process.
And discipline begins at home.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I have no objection to making it "The Commission will issue an order."
I, frankly, don't think you need the extra five days.
It seems to me that the nature of the order issued at that time will be either the Commission agrees with the initial decision of the Board --
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Or disagrees.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Or it disagrees in part, or in full.
And if it dis agrees, I think then one has a longer time A
24 running.
A-ed~ral Reporters, Inc.
25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
But I expect the order then
j 1 2 8 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 56 we' 11 iss.ue, is that we will issue an order in a few days, issue an order in 35 days.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Will that get me to page 15?
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Do you have full proxy?
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I intend to go ahead and try to complete.
And if I think there are subjects that come up that I think if Vic would be here. we'd have a problem with, why go around and see him.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I have no comments on the rest of the paper.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Nor do I?
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Good.
Then could I ask you to flip to the schedule, please, 14 because I want to ask the counsel something?
15 At one point there was comment about the -- down 16 here under the discovery completed, it says, "During the 17 discovery period, objection, et cetera, publication of SER
18 19 20 21 22 23 MR. BICKWIT:
Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE~
At one point I was being ;"told that it's a poor idea to give what seemed to be instructions to one of the parties.
You give instructions uniformly to all parties.
MR. BICKWIT:
I would prefer that you take that line A
24 out.
A-deral Reporters, Inc.
25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okay.
I kind of wondered.
I was
j 1 29 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 57 going to recommend that we spell out SER if we left it in.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Could you put a footnote to indicate though it is not -- this is not a matter of scheduling
-- it has been assumed that an SER will be published at about this time, or something?
MR. BICKWIT:
You can do that.
You could leave it in.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I understand the reason for taking it out.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I think we ought to take it out.
MR. BICKWIT:
Legal sensibilities.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Except, again, it's a bit like the schedule itself.
Knowing that that's about the time it's going to come along would be, I should think, helpful to the parties.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Wellf I think the Board will ask the Staff fairly soon off what they think their schedule isv and I think, in fact, the Board will --,ijou know, will sort of base its schedule around the Staff's projected production of the base safety report.
(5:25 p.m., Commissioner Bradford returned.)
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
That is, in fact, what they do normally in hearings.
They want to find out when the parties 24 will have their filings ready, and particularly when the Staff A
ederal Reporters, Inc.
25 is going to complete its analysis.
j 1 30 5 8 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A
ederal Reporters, Inc.
25 A second question:
Filing of proposed findings and reply to proposed finding's and decision -- well, let's see, the first two are lase led as being prescribed by 27548.,...2 and.,.3.
Do they really need 40 days to file proposed findings, consid.,..
ering that most of the parties will know when they go into the blasted hearing how they want it to come out?
And I wouldn't expect -- I've got a notion most of them -- well, I don't know.
I take back the notion, because I may be quite wrong about it.
Is it sufficiently well defined and mandated in the regs, so that it's not worth trying to take 10 days out of it?
Or does that unreasonably shorten the period?
Are there good or bad reasons for doing or not doing?
MR. BICKWIT:
I dontt think it unreasonably shortens the period.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
So you would have no problem with going to 30?
MR. BICKWIT:
No.
I guess my only reservation is that you would probably say similar things with respect to all of these matters,and whether it really gets you anything, by attempting to trim a day or a day here.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Well, I have been scanning all of other deltas and trying to figure out if we could get stuff out of it. It did seem a bit of a long time, but do people need that kind of time to compile their findings or propose findings?
j 1 31 59 2
3
[..
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A
deral Reporters, Inc.
25 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
It depends a lot on -- well, others who have litigated it could probably give you a better answer than I.
My own experience, presiding, it depends on all -- as you say, you go through the proceeding, you develop by the end of it a pretty fair idea of what you want to --
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
A pretty fair sense of where you think it ought to come out?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
If you're faced with a 10,000-page record that you're going to have to go back through to find supporting points, it's more difficult than if you have a record of 3-or 400 pages.
MR. BICKWIT:
I just say, having never litigated or presided, this is the kind of question I don't value my judg-ment very much.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Why don't we leave it at 4*0?
MR. OSTRACH:
In any event -- perhaps this is surplusage, but this is something that is uniquely a matter for the Board to decide.
It's an aid to the Board-proposed find-ings, and I am sure -- and since they have been given the latitude to select whatever time they believe is appropriate, this is something that is selected by the Board anyway.
And if 40 is the period in the regulations, I suggest the Commission just use that period; and let the Board change if it sees good cause to, CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
All right.
j 1 32 2
3 4
5 6
60 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Back there, in the very beginning, it looked to me as though you might get as much as 25 days out.
I realize it's, again, just pushing people, Is it feasible, for example, filling of intervention petitions, 15 days instead of 20?
MR. BICKWTT:
In view of my lack of experience, I 7
have consulted people who have had experience; and the reaction 8
I get is that these are reasonable time periods., and it is 9
difficult to collapse them.
10 11 12 13 14 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Remember, as to one set of contentions that we have requested briefsr or at least our discussions have gone well beyond the contentions.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
The only other thing I would like 15 to note -- and I don't know how to do anything about it, since 16 we prefer not to talk about what the Staff and the committee 17 are doing, and so on -- this schedule would contemplate, as a 18 matter of fact, publication of the Staff's safety report about 19
-- in fact, about half way through the discovery period, which 20 would be about December 1st.
21 And that would lead to an ACRS letter in about mid-22 January, which would then be somewhat would be about a month 23 before the beginning of the hearings.
It seems to me that that A
24 is a practical arrangement, and I don't know, for the reasons Aacieral Reporters, Inc.
25 that Len has mentioned --
j 1 33 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A
ederal Reporters, Inc.
25 61 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Is the ACRS letter to be expected that soon?
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
If the Staff can get the SER, or a draft version of the SER, to them by the 1st of December and, hopefully a few days before -- it would be a help.
Their schedule can schedule subcommittee meetings in December, then get it to the January meeting.
And then there could be a let-ter soon afterwards, Peter, all I was going to say was -- I wasn't proposing to put any of that kind of language in this thing.
I think we have got an object here -- I think the counsel had to clean it up, and I would hope that we could deal with it by affirmation -- tomorrow or the next day.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
It seems likely.
Now, we've got three names -- personnel session tomorrow?
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
That's one of the reasons I've got to have that session tomorrow.
MR. BICKWIT:
One final small point -- I would strike this footnote.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Indicates estimate?
MR. BICKWIT:
In fact, some of these days do not include the mailing days.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
You would also de-asterisk and take the footnote out?
jl 34 62 end t26
- 2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A
ederal Reporters, Inc.
25 MR. BICKWIT:
Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okay, sold.
(Whereupon, at 5: 35 p. m., the hearing was adj ou:rrned.)
l
- 1.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF:
PUBLIC MEETING CONTINUATION OF DISCUSSION OF ISSUES IN RESTART Place -
Washington, D. C.
Date -
Tuesday, 7 August 1979 ACE - FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
Official Reporters 444 North Capitol Street Washington, D.C. 20001 NATIONWIDE COVERAGE
- DAILY Pages 1 -
62 Telephone:
(202) 347-3700