|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20247Q7371989-07-28028 July 1989 Order Authorizing Dismantling of Facility & Disposition of Component Parts ML20211Q3021986-07-14014 July 1986 Order Authorizing Dismantling of Facility & Disposition of Components in Accordance W/Phase I of Dismantling Plan & NRC Rules & Regulations,Per 851029 Application ML20205G6071985-11-0808 November 1985 Order Terminating Proceeding Since Committee to Bridge the Gap Withdrew Petition for Leave to Intervene.No Other Petitions Remain.Served on 851112 ML20205G6551985-11-0808 November 1985 Memorandum & Order Approving Parties 851010 Stipulation to Dismantle & Dispose of All Reactor Components & Equipment Except for Biological Shield & Components Described in Stipulation.Served on 851112 ML20133Q2781985-10-30030 October 1985 Response to ASLB 851016 Memorandum & Order Re Settlement Agreement & Proposed Order on Matters in Dispute Concerning Proposed License Renewal & Dismantlement Proceedings. Paragraph 6 of Proposed Order Should Be Revised ML20133Q2941985-10-30030 October 1985 Affidavit of Dj Kasun Re Question 3 in ASLB 851016 Memorandum & Order Concerning Effect of Release of UCLA Security Plan to Public on Security of Other Nonpower Reactors W/Similar Plans.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20133J0691985-10-16016 October 1985 Memorandum & Order Requesting Parties to Respond by 851030 to Listed Questions Re 851010 Settlement Agreement & Proposed Order Terminating Proceeding.Served on 851017 ML20108A9601984-11-13013 November 1984 Answer Opposing Committee to Bridge the Gap 841024 Petition for Hearing & Leave to Intervene.Petition Fails to Satisfy Requirements & No Good Cause Exists for Deferment of Ruling on Petition.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20094A4741984-10-24024 October 1984 Petition of Committee to Bridge the Gap for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing Re Proposed Issuance of Orders Authorizing Disposition of Component Parts & Termination of License R-71.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20097A1271984-09-0707 September 1984 Response to ASLB 840806 Order Part B.Prompt Shipment of SNM, Removal of Metallic Core Components & Prompt Dissolution of Protective Order Required by Order,Regulations & Public Policy.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20097A0181984-09-0707 September 1984 Reply to Committee to Bridge the Gap 840801 Response Re Request to Withdraw Application.Aslb Should Approve Withdrawal of Application & Terminate Adjudicatory Proceedings.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20096G8791984-09-0707 September 1984 Response to ASLB 840806 Order Re Other Parties Responses to UCLA Motion for Withdrawal of Renewal Application. Clarification of Ambiguities in Proposals Progressing.W/Svc List ML20094C1371984-08-0101 August 1984 Response Opposing Staff Proposed Conditions for UCLA Withdrawal of License Renewal Application.Aslb Should Follow Required Practice Consistent W/Nrc Case Law.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20093H9281984-07-20020 July 1984 Reply Opposing Committee to Bridge the Gap (Cbg) 840703 Response to Univ Request to Withdraw Application.Cbg Not Established as Participant in License Termination Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20093G1541984-07-20020 July 1984 Withdrawal of 840622 Emergency Petition for off-shipment of Reactor Fuel Prior to Arrival of Olympic Athletes.Petition Moot.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20090C7851984-07-11011 July 1984 Response Opposing Committee to Bridge the Gap 840622 Petition for Commission Order to Remove SNM Prior to Olympics.Motion Lacks Factual Basis & Does Not Conform to Procedure.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20092P2431984-07-0303 July 1984 Response Supporting Univ 840614 Request to Withdraw Application for License Renewal.Proposed ASLB Order Accepting Withdrawal Request Encl.W/Certificate of Svc ML20151J9891984-06-25025 June 1984 Memorandum Explaining Reason Underlying 840622 Telegraphic Memorandum & Order Suspending All Further Proceeding. Licensee Has Shown No Desire to Retain Fuel Longer than Necessary.Served on 840626 ML20092G2821984-06-22022 June 1984 Emergency Petition for off-shipment of SNM from Site Before Olympics,Due to Withdrawal of Renewal Application & Security Risk Associated W/Olympics.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20140C6651984-06-18018 June 1984 Order Canceling Contention Xx Evidentiary Hearings Due to Licensee 840614 Request to Withdraw License Renewal Application & to Decommission Reactor.Served on 840619 ML20197H3831984-06-14014 June 1984 Request to Withdraw License Renewal Application on Condition That Application Be Made to Decommission ML20197H4051984-06-14014 June 1984 Motion to Suspend Proceedings Pending ASLB Action on Request to Withdraw Application.Hearing on Security Contention Should Be Canceled Immediately to Avoid Unnecessary Expense.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20197G7651984-06-11011 June 1984 Motion to Compel Further Written Response of B Ramberg or for Alternative Relief & Costs.Committee to Bridge the Gap Has Not Revealed Documents Per Interrogatory Requests. W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20091Q6071984-06-11011 June 1984 Objection to ASLB 840606 Notice of Evidentiary Hearing Specifying That Portions of Contention Xx Evidentiary Hearing Will Be Closed to Public.Only Portions Dealing W/Protected Info Should Be Closed.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20091M8351984-06-0707 June 1984 Motion to Compel Committee to Bridge the Gap to Provide Further Written Answers to Questions 6 & 7 of Univ 840525 Interrogatories Re Security Contentions.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20091G8411984-05-30030 May 1984 Notice of T Taylor & D Hafemeister Depositions on 840604 & 05,respectively.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20091B3371984-05-25025 May 1984 Interrogatories Re Security Contention.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20090J6721984-05-0909 May 1984 Response to Applicant Request for Reversal of ASLB 840413 Finding of Matl False Statements.Requests Hearing in Which Questions Unanswered by Two UCLA Responses Can Be Thoroughly Explored.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20084H1991984-05-0404 May 1984 Notice of Disposition of Plotkin & Gt Cornwall on 840510 Re Physical Security & Request for Production of Documents. Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20084F7061984-05-0101 May 1984 Estimate of Level of Threat Facing UCLA Reactor in Response to ASLB 840420 pre-hearing Conference Order.Facility Attractive Theft & Sabotage Target.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20084F1971984-05-0101 May 1984 Declaration of Wh Cormier in Response to ASLB 840413 Memorandum & Order Re Questions About Apparent Misrepresentations Made by Univ & NRC ML20084F1641984-05-0101 May 1984 Response to ASLB 840413 Order Directing Univ to Indicate Whether Any Representatives Had Reviewed Cormier 830825 Statements.No Representative of Regents Reviewed Statements Before or After Submittal ML20084F1881984-04-27027 April 1984 Declaration of Nc Ostrander Re Review of Cormier 830825 Statements.No Member of Staff Requested to Review Documents Before or After Submittal ML20084E7271984-04-27027 April 1984 Notice of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20084D0711984-04-25025 April 1984 Motion for Reconsideration & Clarification of Portions of ASLB 840420 Prehearing Conference Order Re Contention Xx. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20084C4001984-04-24024 April 1984 Reply Opposing Applicant Motion for Reconsideration of ASLB 840322 Order & Further Suppl to Rebuttal.Source Term Issue Under Investigation Should Not Be Litigated in Individual License Proceeding ML20084C4151984-04-23023 April 1984 Response to Committee to Bridge the Gap (Cbg) 840406 Motions for Reconsideration of ASLB 840322 Memorandum & Order Ruling on Cbg Objections to Rebuttal Testimony.Motions Should Be Denied.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20088A0551984-04-0606 April 1984 Motion to Reconsider Portions of ASLB 840322 Memorandum & Order,Overruling Objections to Untimely Filed Rebuttal Testimony.Aslb Has Placed Interest in Complete Record Above Statutory Interests of Proceedings.W/Certificate of Svc ML20088A1611984-04-0606 April 1984 Motion for Reconsideration of Certain Portions of ASLB 840322 Order.Only Penalty for Violation of ASLB Orders Is Further Delay & Continued License Possession,Precisely What Licensee Desires.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20088A2011984-04-0606 April 1984 Response to Applicant 840330 Rept Re Reactor Shutdown, Repair & Testing Schedule.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20088A6911984-04-0606 April 1984 Petition Per Reconsideration of ASLB Order Ruling on Committee to Bridge the Gap Objections to Rebuttal Testimony.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20087D7111984-03-0909 March 1984 Response to ASLB 840224 Order Indicating Concerns on Security Plan & Security Insp Repts Re Sabotage Matters Raised by Contention Xx & Directing Univ & Staff to Respond by 840309.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20235Z3661984-03-0606 March 1984 Affidavit of MD Schuster in Response to Question Raised by Aslp in UCLA Proceeding in Aslp 840224 Order Re Physical Security Insp Repts to UCLA & Every Licensee Inspected ML20080N2431984-02-16016 February 1984 Motion Denying Committee to Bridge the Gap 740109 Motion for Reactor Curtailment.No Factual or Legal Basis Exists to Support Extreme Remedy Sought.W/Certificate of Svc ML20080B7491984-02-0101 February 1984 Response Objecting to Applicant/Nrc Proposed Witnesses & Proposed Mod to Protected Order.Witnesses Do Not Qualify as Experts.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20080B6871984-01-31031 January 1984 Response Objecting to Release of Certain Protected Info. Proposed Sanitized Portions of Security Plan Should Be Released Only to Qualified Witnesses.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20079H8501984-01-20020 January 1984 Reply Opposing Applicant 840117 Request for 24-day Extension to Respond to Committee to Bridge the Gap 840109 Motion for Curtailment.Reasonable Extension Not Opposed.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20079H4011984-01-17017 January 1984 Application for Extension of Time Until 840216 to Respond to Committee to Bridge the Gap 840109 Motion for Curtailment III (Irreparable Injury Associated W/Any Further Delay). Extension Will Not Delay Matters.W/Certificate of Svc ML20079H3751984-01-17017 January 1984 Response to Committee to Bridge the Gap Memorandum Clarifying Contention Xx,Paragraphs 1,2 & 3.Committee Should Be Made to Respond to NRC Motion Re 10CFR73.67. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20079J1881984-01-16016 January 1984 Review of UCLA Analysis of Facility Shutdown Mechanism. Postulated Power Excursion Will Not self-terminate as Assumed by Expulsion of Water Out Top of Fuel Box Region Through Surrounding Brick Walls 1989-07-28
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20133Q2781985-10-30030 October 1985 Response to ASLB 851016 Memorandum & Order Re Settlement Agreement & Proposed Order on Matters in Dispute Concerning Proposed License Renewal & Dismantlement Proceedings. Paragraph 6 of Proposed Order Should Be Revised ML20097A0181984-09-0707 September 1984 Reply to Committee to Bridge the Gap 840801 Response Re Request to Withdraw Application.Aslb Should Approve Withdrawal of Application & Terminate Adjudicatory Proceedings.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20094C1371984-08-0101 August 1984 Response Opposing Staff Proposed Conditions for UCLA Withdrawal of License Renewal Application.Aslb Should Follow Required Practice Consistent W/Nrc Case Law.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20093H9281984-07-20020 July 1984 Reply Opposing Committee to Bridge the Gap (Cbg) 840703 Response to Univ Request to Withdraw Application.Cbg Not Established as Participant in License Termination Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20090C7851984-07-11011 July 1984 Response Opposing Committee to Bridge the Gap 840622 Petition for Commission Order to Remove SNM Prior to Olympics.Motion Lacks Factual Basis & Does Not Conform to Procedure.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20092P2431984-07-0303 July 1984 Response Supporting Univ 840614 Request to Withdraw Application for License Renewal.Proposed ASLB Order Accepting Withdrawal Request Encl.W/Certificate of Svc ML20092G2821984-06-22022 June 1984 Emergency Petition for off-shipment of SNM from Site Before Olympics,Due to Withdrawal of Renewal Application & Security Risk Associated W/Olympics.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20197H4051984-06-14014 June 1984 Motion to Suspend Proceedings Pending ASLB Action on Request to Withdraw Application.Hearing on Security Contention Should Be Canceled Immediately to Avoid Unnecessary Expense.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20197G7651984-06-11011 June 1984 Motion to Compel Further Written Response of B Ramberg or for Alternative Relief & Costs.Committee to Bridge the Gap Has Not Revealed Documents Per Interrogatory Requests. W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20090J6721984-05-0909 May 1984 Response to Applicant Request for Reversal of ASLB 840413 Finding of Matl False Statements.Requests Hearing in Which Questions Unanswered by Two UCLA Responses Can Be Thoroughly Explored.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20087D7111984-03-0909 March 1984 Response to ASLB 840224 Order Indicating Concerns on Security Plan & Security Insp Repts Re Sabotage Matters Raised by Contention Xx & Directing Univ & Staff to Respond by 840309.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20080N2431984-02-16016 February 1984 Motion Denying Committee to Bridge the Gap 740109 Motion for Reactor Curtailment.No Factual or Legal Basis Exists to Support Extreme Remedy Sought.W/Certificate of Svc ML20080B7491984-02-0101 February 1984 Response Objecting to Applicant/Nrc Proposed Witnesses & Proposed Mod to Protected Order.Witnesses Do Not Qualify as Experts.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20080B6871984-01-31031 January 1984 Response Objecting to Release of Certain Protected Info. Proposed Sanitized Portions of Security Plan Should Be Released Only to Qualified Witnesses.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20079H8501984-01-20020 January 1984 Reply Opposing Applicant 840117 Request for 24-day Extension to Respond to Committee to Bridge the Gap 840109 Motion for Curtailment.Reasonable Extension Not Opposed.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20079H4011984-01-17017 January 1984 Application for Extension of Time Until 840216 to Respond to Committee to Bridge the Gap 840109 Motion for Curtailment III (Irreparable Injury Associated W/Any Further Delay). Extension Will Not Delay Matters.W/Certificate of Svc ML20079H3751984-01-17017 January 1984 Response to Committee to Bridge the Gap Memorandum Clarifying Contention Xx,Paragraphs 1,2 & 3.Committee Should Be Made to Respond to NRC Motion Re 10CFR73.67. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20079H9711984-01-16016 January 1984 Reply to NRC & Applicant 831230 Pleadings Re Contention Ii.Ucla Ceased Using Reactor in Fashion for Which License Granted & Therefore,Should Not Be Permitted to Receive License.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20079E4461984-01-11011 January 1984 Response to Committee to Bridge the Gap 831227 Second Motion to Curtail Activities.Motion Deficient in Form,Based on Factual Misrepresentations & Lacks Merit & Therefore Should Be Denied.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20083H3291984-01-0909 January 1984 Motion for Curtailment of Reactor Operation Pending Final Determination of Safety Concern.Irreparable Injury Associated W/Any Further Delay of Proceeding.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20083J4331983-12-30030 December 1983 Response to ASLB 831130 Memorandum & Order Requesting Further Views on Whether Use of Reactor Disposative of Contention Ii.Renewal of Class 104 License Respectfully Requested.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20083J3831983-12-30030 December 1983 Response Opposing Citizens to Bridge the Gap Motion for Curtailment of Activities.Motion Premature & Based on Misrepresentation of Factual Record.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20083J3541983-12-30030 December 1983 Response to ASLB 831130 Memorandum & Order Directing Parties to Address Question Re Whether Sale of Irradiation Svcs by UCLA to U West Constitutes Research Activities.Sale Constitutes Commercial Activity.W/Declaration Svc ML20083F5921983-12-27027 December 1983 Corrected Version of 831214 Motion for Curtailment of Activities Re Sabotage Protection Plan ML20083F5861983-12-27027 December 1983 Motion Requesting Evidentiary Hearings Be Scheduled No Later than 840215 Re Issue of Adequacy of Reactor Security So That Issue Can Be Resolved Well in Advance of 1984 Olympic Games. Declaration of Svc Encl ML20083A6201983-12-14014 December 1983 Motion for Curtailment of Activities Due to Lack of Plan for Adequate Protection Against Sabotage (Contention Xx). Facility No Longer Has Authority to Possess or Utilize SNM W/O Plan.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20082M3011983-12-0202 December 1983 Response Requesting That ASLB Overrule Committee to Bridge the Gap 831117 Objections to Rebuttal Testimony.Committee, Not Univ,Delaying Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20082D6671983-11-16016 November 1983 Motion to Strike Proposed Rebuttal Testimony by Util & Nrc. Only Small Portion of Proposed Testimony Qualifies as Genuine,Legitimate Rebuttal.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20078B8551983-09-21021 September 1983 Answer to NRC Petition for Reconsideration of ASLB Rulings on Contention 11 Re Commercial Use of Reactor.Aslb Should Uphold Rule That Bars Commercial Use of Reactors Covered by Class 104 Licenses.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20077Q3111983-09-13013 September 1983 Consolidated Response Opposing UCLA & NRC 830829 Motion to Strike & Objections to Committee to Bridge the Gap Testimony & Exhibits.Objections Lack Merit.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20077Q3181983-09-12012 September 1983 Response Opposing NRC 830815 Motion for Reconsideration of ASLB 830511 Denial of NRC Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention Xx Re Radiological Sabotage.Pu/Be Sources Not Exempt from SNM Count.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20024F2681983-09-0606 September 1983 Exceptions to Alternate ASLB Member Ja Laurenson Recommended Decision Re Contention Ii.Reactor Primary Use Is No Longer Research & Educ.Licensee Cannot Be Entrusted W/Class 104 License.W/Declaration of Svc ML20077S6391983-09-0606 September 1983 Response Supporting NRC 830502 Petition for Reconsideration of ASLB 830422 Order Denying Licensee & NRC Motions for Summary Disposition of Contention Ii.Aslb Misinterpreted 10CFR50.22.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20077S4201983-09-0606 September 1983 Response Opposing Alternate ASLB Member 830712 Recommended Decision That Class 104 License Be Granted Upon Condition That Less than 50% of Use of Reactor Be Dedicated to Commercial Purposes.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20080D2021983-08-26026 August 1983 Motion to Strike H Pearlman Testimony Re 15 C Graphite Temp Due to Wigner Release.New Conclusion Inserted Into Evidence W/O Supporting Basis.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20080D3121983-08-25025 August 1983 Response Supporting NRC 830815 Petition for Reconsideration of ASLB 830511 Memorandum & Order.Aslb Should Reverse Ruling Denying NRC Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention Xx. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20076G8951983-08-20020 August 1983 Motion Opposing Admission of Portions of Committee to Bridge the Gap Testimony.Testimony Is Beyond Scope of Matters ASLB Directed to Be Considered or Otherwise Inadmissible.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20024C3621983-07-0606 July 1983 Reply Opposing Util 830630 Motion to Reopen Contention II Proceedings.Motion Untimely,W/O Proper Foundation & Unnecessary.Proferred Matter Irrelevant.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20072K7851983-06-30030 June 1983 Motion to Reopen Special Proceedings on Contention Ii,To Take Official Notice of Commission Licensing Records Re Ga Technologies,Inc License Class ML20024A0751983-06-0909 June 1983 Response Opposing Ucla 830602 Motion,Requesting Leave to Introduce Testimony on Seismic Matters at Safety Hearings, Deferred by ASLB in 830513 Memorandum & Order Re Contention Xvii.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20071P3151983-06-0202 June 1983 Requests for Clarification of ASLB 830513 Order Scope of Upcoming Hearing.Ucla Must Be Allowed to Present Testimony on Seismic Questions to Answer Issue of Worst Case Accident. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20023C0001983-05-0404 May 1983 Motion for Reconsideration of ASLB 830422 Memorandum & Order to Clarify Scope of Contention II Proceedings.Certificate of Svc Encl.Accounting Based on Actual Use of Reactor Demonstrates That Costs Attributed to Noncommercial Use ML20073R2241983-04-29029 April 1983 Response to Committee to Bridge the Gap (Cbg) 830414 Motion to Strike Portions of UCLA Response to Cbg Request for Expedited Ruling on Contention Xiii.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20073R1571983-04-29029 April 1983 Response to Committee to Bridge the Gap 830414 Motion Opposing Scheduling Earlier Date for Filing of Written Testimony.Ucla Wishes to Reserve Right to Modify Witness List If New Date Set for Hearing.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20073G0131983-04-15015 April 1983 Final Supplemental Response in Opposition to Applicant 830316 & NRC 830323 Responses to Issue of Quantity of SNM Currently Possessed by Applicant.No Reliance Can Be Placed on Applicant & NRC Estimates ML20073J1521983-04-14014 April 1983 Motion to Strike Portions of NRC & Util 830404 Responses to Committee to Bridge the Gap 830315 Request for Expedited Ruling on Contention Xiii.Responses Not Responsive to Motion Before ASLB & Are Motions in Incorrect Format ML20073J0721983-04-14014 April 1983 Motion for Reconsideration of Certain Hearing Scheduling Matters in ASLB 830407 Order.Deadline of 830715 to Prefile Testimony Should Be Reset to 830515.Declaration of Svc Encl ML20073G8231983-04-12012 April 1983 Reply Opposing Committee to Bridge the Gap 830404 Response to ASLB 830322 Memorandum & Order,Taking Exception to ASLB Stated Concerns on Potential Sabotage as Part of Accident Analysis.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20072T5771983-04-0101 April 1983 Response to Committee to Bridge the Gap & City of Santa Monica 830315 Filings Re Scheduling.Opposes Change to 830615 Filing Date for Testimony.Dates Should Not Be Set for Hearings on Contentions I,Ii,Vi or Xv.W/Certificate of Svc ML20072R5751983-03-30030 March 1983 Response in Opposition to Committee to Bridge the Gap 830315 Request for Partial Summary Disposition of Contention Xvii Re Site Seismicity.Univ Will Stipulate to Facts Appended to Gap Request.Certificate of Svc Encl 1985-10-30
[Table view] |
Text
~. . . _ . .
9-CCCMETED UShBC
'84 JLt 25 All:41 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA..-. __ ...
NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0t@tISSION. Vf d .
BEFORE THE AT0f1IC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of Docket No. 50-142 -E THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY (Proposed Renewal of Facility-0F CALIFORNIA License Number R-71)
(UCLA Research Reactor) ) . July 20, 1984
)
. UNIVERSITY'S. REPLY TO CBG'S RESPONSE TO UNIVERSITY'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW THE APPLICATION i
DONALD L. REIDHAAR
-GLENN R. WOODS CHPISTINE HELWICK 590 University Hall 2200 University. Avenue-Berkeley, California 94720 Telephone: (415)642-2822
-Attorneys'for Applicant
-THE REGENTS 0F THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
-Q
^
,- . - .. .- .- . - - - - . . - - ~ . -. - -. -
$ 4. ? ,. _
lL
~
I. INTRODUCTION l
On' July 3,.CBG filed a response to University's request to
- withdraw its license renewal application. CBG does not object to the .
- withdrawal request provided that ~the Board in accepting the withdrawal imposes certain conditions and takes care of certain. procedural matters.
Among the conditions which CBG seeks to. impose are the following: that
. University _ ship from its facility all of its special nuclear material by January 1,1985; that University submit a plan for dismantlement of the
~
reactor by January 1,1985; that the reactor. be dismantled; that CBG be kept informed in the matter of. the UCLA reactor by continued service of
~ staff-applicant correspondence and-maintenance of the local public document room until such time as dismantlement is complete; that until
~
~
the year 2000 University provide notice:to-CBG of any intended. change in-licensing status of the. reactor; that CBG be given an opportunity to.
copy for its records the reactor security' plan and .other security -
documents comprising.the security file'fo'r-the UCLA reactor; and that;
~
University be required to' preserve and permit copying of'essentiall'y all
-other documents.related~to.the reactor facility until final
~
-dismantlement of the reactor occurs. As. discussed, below,-University;
~
~
opposes the: imp'osition>of:thesefconditions. -
'II. BACKGROUND .
- University submitted an applica' tion to renew the c_ operating: 7 O
clicens'e of its ~ UCLA research reactor' in = February,'1980.. l Notice oLthe' proposedirenewal offthe license!.and the!opportunityifor; hearing was .
t .
' .I :
'" Committee to~ Bridheithe' Gap's' ResponseJto~ liniversity's1Reques't to! s
~
e f
-. WithdrawLits; Application for:Licen.se -Renewal" (Response)e -
d
.v. . ;
m ~
f S?
' - ^
v w
^ ' ~
J_. ;
. +
o w
c V;,
,, , , m _- r , s
, 79 - < . -
o _ .c- - -
e <
, l _
- jjj
r~ ^
i
. _2 published'in the Federal Register in April, 1980. CBG petitioned to intervene in May, 1980. The Licensing Board accepted CBG as a party to the proceeding in September, 1980, and, by March, 1981, twenty contentions had been admitted for litigation. A period of extensive discovery followed. Summary disposition was granted on one issue (the financial qualifications of the University), but denied or deferred on the remaining issues. Evidentiary hearings were held on the class of license issue in May, 1983, and on the " inherent safety" issue in July, August and October, 1983. With the exception of its ruling on the adequacy of the financial qualifications of the University, the Board did not issue any decisions on factual issues in contention.
On June 14, 1984, University informed the Commission of its intention to withdraw the application and requested that the Board suspend the proceedings for the purpose of considering University's-request to withdraw. In orders issued June 18 and June:22, 1984, the Board suspended the proceedings pending consideration of the withdrawal request. Staff.and CBG both responded to the withdrawal request. On June 22, 1984, CBG submitted a petition to the Commission to require immediate removal of the-fuel from the UCLA facility.- That petition is still pending.
III. DISCUSSION
'A. Applicable Legal Standards The NRC Staff'has reviewed.the regulations.and Appeal Board Jdecisions pertinent.to the' withdrawal of.a: license application.and:
x-1 kIr. m
5 ;. . .
a; p
u w n. , .
l q
. i Jtermination ofla license.2. Staff points out'that-University must-i
~
. retain' a valid . license pending completion of the license termination n '
- procedures. - Accordingly,-Staff concludes that the withdrawal of the
_ application for license renewal can be granted on condition that University apply for termination of licence, pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 950.82 3
and comply with the procedures necessary to obtain an order termi.nating the license. Staff Response, at 8. Staff also concludes that the Board should' vacate its ruling on Contention XVIII-(financial qualifications) and ~ dismiss the adjudicatory proceeding without prejudice. Staff Response, at 9-10. University concurs in Sta'ff's application of the relevant legal standards to University's request to withdraw its -license renewal-application.
~
B. Additional: Conditions Being Proposed.by CBG In its Response, CBG proposes a number of conditions to be-
. imposed on University 11n " consideration of the Board's acceptance of:the -
- withdrawal-request". In_ general, CBG's proposed conditions ~ pertain to
- the. lice ~nse termination procedures of 10 C'.F.R.c950.82 and not to the.-
proceeding to consider University's applicationf to renew.the~ UCLA..
. reactor..' operating license. However, CBG.has not.; established,L nortcould J -
it establish, any rightlto participat'e in the-licen'se termination
- process.1 As -justification .forjits' proposed conditions' CBG . relies 2l '"NRC'.St3ffResponsetothe: Request:bythe-Oniversity'ofCalifornia'.
. to Withdraw the Application ~for Renewal of the License-for; the UCLA- ,
LResearch Rea'ctor"f, dated:' July.2, 1984 (Staff's Response).JStaff>
zrefers to the: standards established by'the. Appeal' Board in ,
' Philadelphia Electric Co'.-(Fulton1 Generating Station, Unitstiland; ,
J 2), ALAB-657,_14 NRC.967c(1981) and PuertoHP.ico Electric = Power
~
. Authorityi(North? Coast' Nuclear: Plant,: Unit 1),- ALAB-662, .14 NRC
' ' ^
n1125 (1981). ^
E Y e'- I 5~ ,
- a. ,. f s.# s,
principally on the Black Fox and Bailly cases.3 CBG's reliance on these cases is misplaced. Black Fox and Bailly both involved decisions by licensing boards granting withdrawal of construction permit applications on condition that the site be restored. As noted by Staff, restoration of the site was an appropriate condition to be imposed by the boards in the circumstances of those cases because the site improvements were made under limited work authorizations (LWA's) which the-boards had granted during the construction permit proceeding. Staff Response, at 4, citing, inter alia, Black Fox. The circumstances of the instant proceeding are entirely different. This Board has not authorized UCLA to take actions affecting the environment which now it might properly be asked to consider reversing.
The first specific condition which CBG proposes is that the reactor remain out of operation. University is not opposed to this condition but the condition is unnecessary. As University has reported to the Board, the UCLA staff has rendered the UCLA reactor permanently inoperable by severing the control blade shafts to-the reactor.
The third condition proposed by CBG is that University is to ship all SNM off the UCLA site by January 1,1985. The removal of fuel from the UCLA facility site is part_of the decommissioning process. CBG cites Black Fox and Bailly in' support.of this condition b't, u as discussed above, these cases are inapposite. University has committed 3
Pu'blic Service Company of Oklahoma et al. (Black Fox Station, Units 1 and 2), LBP-83-10, 17 NRC 410 (1983); Northern Indiana Public
. Service Company (Bailly Generating Station, Nuclear-1), LBP-82-37, 15 NRC 1139.(1982).
p n .
. 1 n Lto shipping its nuclear fuel' as.soon as reasonably practicable
~
consistent with its obligations as licensee. In view of this commitment the setting of.a specific date is unnecessary.
It is'also imprudent since it would serve to define for potential adversaries the " window" within which the fuel is to be shipped. In-any case, University could not commit;to shipping its fuel by January 1, -1985, and CBG has not provided any reasons for setting such a date.
Considered together, the second and fourth' conditions proposed !
by CBG are that the reactor be dismantled; that a plan for dismantlement-
~
be submitted by January 1,1985; that University produce progress reports periodically to be se'nt to Staffiand CBG; and that Staff thereafter provide written reviews of thes'e reports to University and:
~
CBG. CBG also cites Black Fox and Bailly.in support:ofLthese conditions. But again.-these cases provide no such~ support...'UniversityJ
-is~ proceeding-to decommission its reactor and terminate:its license '
I pursuant to Section 50.82 'of.the Comission's ' Rules of Practice. CBG has:no right to seek.to interpose litself. in this process by asking this Board to impose conditions.pertainingLto the license terminationi procedures. ~ Moreover,-University ~ cannot! commit to submitting its plan by. January 1,1985. :The UCLA staffj plans to .' dismantle,.the reactor core .
,and tofremove:and~ dispose.of the exterior plumbing and metallic?
ccmponents of the core.- Oncethefuelandthe.corecomponentsofthel s
reactor are. removed, the staff intends to' conduct:a; detailed radiation ,
_ : survey to evaluate:.various options related'to further: dismantlement'of! .-
' the facility., The manner' and timing of. any further dismantlement"that' a
may be .needed-(for example,; of Lthe concrete shielding) can' only;be~ .
I , g 1
' ~ ' " ^'
,q- - -- , j JA~ ..t .
- < .b -
a .~ _
a
r 1
determined after the radiation survey is conducted. The imposition of conditions related to University's decommissioning plans is unreasonable and unwarranted.
The fifth condition which CBG seeks to impose is that Staff and University cor.tinue to serve staff / applicant correspondence on CBG until dismantlement is complete and notify CBG of any intended changes in licensing status until the year 2000. CBG relies here on the Stanislaus case4 but has failed to. properly disclose the circumstances of that case which-has little relevance to this proceeding. In Stanislaus, the construction permit applicant Pacific Gas and Electric Co. (PG & E) moved to withdraw its application pending its challenge in federal court to California's nuclear safeguards laws .that prohibited the-construction of new nuclear 91 ants until a determination had been made by a State commission that proper means exist for the disposal of high-level nuclear waste. Stanislaus, 17 NRC at 47. PG & E planned to reinstate its application and go forward with the project when conditions so permitted and, accordingly, it proposed a method for the preservation of discovery documents as a condition of its withdrawal of the application. Over intervenors' objections the. Licensing Board granted PG & E's request to withdraw, without prejudice, and adjudicated the parties' disagreements over the most suitable method of preserving documents.- Id., at 50, 52,.and.55. It is worth noting that the document preservation order finally adopted.by the Licensing Board'in.the Stanislaus case included a provision.that the parties' obligation to 4 ~
Pacific Gas and Electric Company -(Stanislaus Nuclear Project, Unit 1), LBP-83-2, 17 NRC 45 (1983).
{
m .
~ ' retain documents would terminate upon Applicant's report that it had eliminated the project from its future plans. I_d., at 57 (1 3.3).
. University has eliminated its reactor project from its future plans.
Under the circumstances in this proceeding, the Stanislaus document preservation order has.no relevance.
In addition to the five sets of conditions discussed above, CBG requests that the Board " wrap-up" certain procedural matters. CBG first requests that the Board dissolve the protective orders of June 17, 1982 and January 18,1984 (revised April. 20,1984 and again on June 1, 1984). In effect, CBG requests that the Board vacate these orders to be effective on the date the SNM has departed the UCLA reactor site. These protective orders were promulaated to give CBG a conditional right of access to certain security-rek ted information in order that CBG could litigate certain of its contentions in the' license renewal proceeding.
But for the adjudicatory proceeding CBG would have had no right-to take the photographs which are the subject matter of the 1982~ order, nor--
would it-have had any right to access to the " protected information"' '
that is the subject of the 1984 order. -Both orders.provided that CBG
- would give up the information it received pursuant to the orders:when the adjudicatory proceeding terminated. .CBG should be required.to comply with these terms of the protective' orders wh~en the Board dismisses the proceeding.
CBG apparently assumes that once the fuel-is~ removed'from the L facility. University will no longer have an interest in, protecting.
~
information~about the physical security system at the facility. CBG is I
e_ :
P~, .
1
-8 mistaken. University has invested considerable resources in its physical security system and intends to maintain that security system even after the SNM has been removed from the facility. Throughout the period of decommissioning and until a final termination order issues, University will be required to maintain physical security at the facility to prevent inadvertent exposure of personnel to any residual radiation. Aside from its responsibilities as licensee during decommissioning, University may decide to use the facility as a secure-storage area in order to benefit from its investment in a security. The Board should recognize Univesity's legitimate and continuing interest in protecting security information for its facility.
The regulations cited by CBG do not support tihe remedy which-
.CBG seeks. Section 2.744 is not applicable. It is concerned with :
requests for protected information made during the course'of adjudicatory proceedings. CBG's . request is being made after the.
adjudicatory proceeding has. terminated. CBG can no longer assert any legitimate right.or interest in information concerning the physical security system at the UCLA facility respecting which it now seeks unrestricted access. Section 2.790 establishes' administrative procedures applicable to the disclosure and withholding of final NRC.
It is not directly applicable to documents
~
records and documents.
' disclosed subject to protective ~ orders duri .g adjudicatory proceedings.
Section -73.21 imposes certain affirmative duties' on licensees and others :
to protect " safeguards information'!. .CBG asserts?that under this
.section the Board has an affirmative-duty to remove information from the-
[ , protected category when the original justification vanishes. Whatevet
, the merits:of that argument, the original justification'for protecting '
r: _ i
'. ~
_g_
1 I
information related to the physical security ~ of the UCLA facility has not vanished.
CBG also wants an order preserving, until the reactor is finally dismantled and disposed of, all documents in UCLA's " security file" and all documents listed on " Attachment 1" to its Response which includes essentially all documents related to reactor operations.
Further, CBG wants an opportunity to copy all these documents "for .its records" before the documents are destroyed by the University.
Basically, what CBG is requesting is that its discovery rights continue even after the adjudicatory proceeding is dismissed. CBG can provide no justification for such an extraordinary extension'of the rules of discovery. The Stanislaus case is inapposite.
The last conditions proposed by CBG purportedly concern the parties' legal rights after the proceeding is dismissed. CBG requests
- that the Board's order specify that any rights that exist or accrue to CBG will . devolve upon CBG at any future address or upon .its designated successor. This condition. is unnecessary. University.is unaware'of any rights that could properly _ accrue.to CBG by . virtue of the Board's order dismissing this proceeding other than those that are already specified in the Commission's Rules of Practice. _. Finally, CB'G urges the Board to-
" follow the Bailly model" and order that the conditions to be imposed _be considered as an obligation assumed by~ University in consideration of
- the Board's accepting the withdrawal at this~ time. This' condition.isi
. likewise unnecessary. University's obligations as a licensee.with
---.n-y
respect to any order wh'ich the Board may issue are defined in the Comission's Rules-of Practice and the case law.
IV. CONCLUSION For the reasons above, University respectfully requests that
~
the Board reject the conditions proposed by CBG and instead grant University's request to withdraw its license renewal application on the
- conditions proposed by Staff only.
Dated: July 20, 1984.
DONALD L. REIDHAAR GLENN R. WOODS CHRISTINE HELWICK
~
By / i
. WILLIAM H. CORMIER Representing UCLA
~k^
~.
a _
a:
s
,.s d
C ', '
r:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 0007 ry JJtme In the Matter of )
Docket No 0 142 THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY- (Proposed Renewa of#ar2Eli1 0F CALIFORNIA ) License Number R-71) ;y; g3 (UCLA~Research Reactor) ) Ob[h h gg CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the attached: UNIVERSITY'S REPLY TO CBG'S RESPONSE TO UNIVERSITY'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW THE APPLICATION.
is the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mai:, first class, postage prepaid, addressed as indicated, on this date: Ju:y 20, 1984 ,
John H. Frye, III, Chairman Mr. Daniel Hirsch Administrative Judge Cte. to Bridge the Gap ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 1637 Butler Avenue, #203 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Los Angeles, CA 90025 Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. John H. Bay, Esq.
Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke Chickering & Gregory Administrative Judge Three Embarcadero Center ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Suite 2300 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission San Francisco, CA 94111 Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Daniel-Hirsch Mr. Glenn 0. Bright Box 1186 Administrative Judge Ben Lomond, CA 95005 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Nuclear Law Center Washington, D.C. 20555 c/o Dorothy Thompson 6300 Wilshire Blvd., #1200-Counsel for the NRC Staff Los Angeles, CA 90048 0FFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Ms. Lynn G. Naliboff Washington, D.C. 20555 Deputy City Attorney Attn: Ms. Colleen P. Woodhead City Hall-1685 Main Street Chief, Docketing and Service Section (3) Santa Monica, CA 90401 0FFtCE OF THE SECRETARY U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission ,
Washington, D.C. 20555 l WILLIAM H. CORMIER Representing UCLA ;
THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY
. OF CALIFORNIA m