ML20073T215

Response Opposing NRC Oral Motion to Extend Time for Reply to Intervenor Motion to Reopen Restart Hearing.Sufficient Time Already Provided.Delay Unnecessary.Certificate of Svc & Amended Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20073T215
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	04/30/1983
From:	Aamodt M AAMODTS
To:	Ahearne J, Gilinsky V, Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
ISSUANCES-SP, NUDOCS 8305100406
Download: ML20073T215 (4)

Text

... . . . - . . .. . . - . - - . . - . . - . . . . . .

-

• 4AM '4/30/83 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGUIATORY COMMISSION , ,s m BEFORE THE COMMISSIONERS: [

s cc,%,

e.

Nunzio Palladino, Chairman d' gD Oo b John Ahearne Ud -

Victor Gilinsky cu C~ 't

~ IO63 3 @

Thomas Roberts /

N James Asselstine E['

c, #

Im In the Matter of METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY Docket 50-289 SP (Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1)

J ANODT RESPONSE TO ORAL MOTION OF NRC ST1?? TO EXTEND TIME FOR REPLY TO AAMODT MOTION TO REOPEN THE RESTART EEARING In our comments to the ~ Commission concerning GPU v. B&W, filed with I)ocketing and Service Branch on April 18, 1983, we motioned for a reopening of the record of the Restart Proceeding and for access to documents related to GPU v. B&W, but not provided, and the affidavits of three engineers, recently employed at TMI-2, and corroborating information ob interference with employees' testimony in the DOJ investigation of the Hartman matter. The NRC Staff informed us by telephone yesterday that they will seek an extension until May 16 to reply to our motions. We oppose the delay for the following reasons:

1. The subject which provides the basis for our motion has been a focus of the parties since March 16, 1983, when the Stucky memo directed the parties to file comments on GPU v. B&W.

~

2. The time provided by NRC rules for replies to motions should be sufficient. Ten days af ter receipt of a motion are provided for service of replies. The NRC Staff has an additional five days. Our motions were served on the parties on April 21, 1983, therefore, the parties' replies are due hay 6, except for the Staff's, which are due May 11.1 1

Amended Certificate of Service, Inclosure 1.

8305100406 830430 PDR ADOCK 05000289 G ppa

,, ._ -- ,- - - -,,-_e. - - -

3

3. As a practical matter, the parties have more than ten days in which to make their replies. The licensee received a copy of our motions (from the Staff) on ipril 22. The Commonwealth and TMIA were in receipt on April 25. UCS, in all likellhood, received our motion by April 25.2 The Staff has had our motions since April 21, having been provided a copy by Docketing & Service.3

4. The Commission's schedule may not permit delay. Chairman Palladino (Memo, April 22, 1983) set the date of May 6, 1983 by which the Staff was to " revalidate" their conclusions concerning the management phase of the Restart Proceeding. The matter of restart of Unit 1 is a current consideration of the Commission. We are concerned that delay in replies to our motion may prevent consideration of it.

5. The NRC Staff has already taken a position which lends substantial support for our. motion to reopen. The Staff has already admitted that the Hartman matter is significant, pertinent to the issue of management integrity, and, as revealed in GIU v. 3&W, not aired in the Restart Proceeding. (Staff Comments, April 18, 1983; Memo, April ,

26, 1983). The Staff stated their need to reconsider their conclusions from the Restart Proceeding. What the Staff needs as a party to the Restart Proceeding, the Staff should not be accomodated through an extension to attempt to deny the other parties. If the Staff intends to support our motion, the extension would only be a useless delay; l the Staff's position of " revalidation" already supports our motion to reopen.

6. The Commission does not need the replies of the parties to reopen the hearing. The Commission should reopen the hearing sua snonte in view of the significance of the Hartman matter and the new information provided by the three engineers involved in TMI-2 cleanup operations.

l Respectfully submitted, c- M ll). C Li u.2. i L. s.% <;$ Y_

Marjorie M. Aamod t l

2 We were unable to contact UCS's attorney, however the Postmaster at lancaster PA believed that delivery to Washington D. C. could i

have occurred as early as April 23.

I We interpreted the Stucky memo (March 16,1983) as Locketing

& Service assuming the responsibility for service to all parties.

s Amended CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Thic is to certify that the document AAE0DT COMMENTS CONCERNING NRC STAFF REVIEW OF GPU v. B&W COURT TRIAL TRANSCRIPT AND MOTIONS TO REOPEN RECORD OF RESTART PROCEEDING and ERRATA were served on the Service list on April 21, 1983 on the SERVICE IIST below, except for those marked (f). The Docke~ ting & Service Branch was served by Express Mail on April 16, 1983 with the document and thecErfata son '

May 3,1983April was served by degosit 2, 1983.in U. S. Mail, (having first beeniserved)by already class. Ja6BGohseSxEsq*9 SERVICE IIST

((m[

9, g v, $\

a v ,

Robert Ad1Ei,yEsq.o ..

h Chairman Nunzio Palladino U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 505 ExecutivesHousef. (~

Washington, D. C. 20555 x 23b7 p '3 Herds Commissioner John 1hearne

• Jack Goldberg, Esq.- r-U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission legal Offices -

Washington, D. C. p20555 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. ,20555 Commissioner Victor Gilinsky U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Judge Gary 1. Milho111n Washington, D. C. 20555 4412 Greenwich Parkway, N. W.

Washington, D. C. 20007 Commissioner Thomas Roberts U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

• Service & Docketing Branch Washington, D. C. 20555 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Commissioner James Asselstine U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Atomic Safety & licensing Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel l U. S. ; Nuclear Regulatory Commission l Washington, D. C.

l Att: Chairman, Administrative Judge Ivan W. Smith G. F. Trowbridge, Esq.

Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C. 20036 TMIA 1037 Maclay Street Harrisburg, PA 17103 Union of Concerned Scientists c/o Harmon & Weiss 1725 I Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C. 20006

i

• l CERTIFICATE.OF SERVICE l This is to certify that the document AAMODT RESPONSE TO ORAL ]

MOTION OF NRC STAFF TO EXTEND TIME FOR REFLY TO AAMODT MOTION TO REOFEN. THE RESTART HEARING was served on all those listed below on May 3,1983.by deposit with United Parcel, Wilmington, Delaware, for delivery to those in Washington, D. C. and by deposit in U. S.

Mal.1, First Class, for all others.

~

OE ,

m Marjorie Aamodt SERVICE LIST Service & Docketing Branch Union of Concerned Scientists U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission c/o Harmon & Weiss Washington, D. C. 20555 1725 I Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C. 20006 Chairmad Nunzio Palladino U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Robert Adler, Esq.

Washington, D. C. 20555 505 Executive House F. O. Box 2557 Commissioner John Ahearne Harrisburg, F% 17120 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Jack Goldberg, Esq.

Legal Offices Commissioner Victor Gilinsky U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissios U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Washington, D. C. 20555 Commissioner Thomas Roberts 4412 Greenwich Parkway, N. W.

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20007 Washington, D. C. 20555 Commissioner James Asselstine U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Atomic Safety & licensing Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Atomic Safety & licensing Board Fanel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 A tt: Chairman, Administrative Judge Ivan W. Smith G. F. Trowbridge, Esq.

Shaw, Pittman, Fotts & Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C. 20036 TMIA 1037 Maclay Street Harrisburg, F% 17105

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _