ML20042A209
| ML20042A209 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/19/1982 |
| From: | Brenner L Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8203230204 | |
| Download: ML20042A209 (6) | |
Text
r gjyE""
UNITED STATES OF MEDICA 77 N0'.01 NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0tMISSI ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Juitges: (
Lawrence Brenner, Cnairinan Dr. James H. Carpenter Mr. Frederick J. Shon SERVED MAR 22 M
)
In toe lidtter of
)
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-322-OL
)
(Snorenam Nuclear Power Station
)
Marcn 19, 1982 Unit 1) f c?:
J m ^... y~
a MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING CHANGE IN SCHE ULE FOR PREHEARING CONFERENCE AND SITE VISIT AND?J r an 2 21982: *-
EXPLANATION OF CROSS-EXAMINATION PLANS AND PROCT 00RESmummne:.G
- mag e 73 a
7 Je By separate Notice to be published, the Board has schedule a limited _s ch ' l "
appearance session in Riverhead for the evening of April 13, 1982, and a prehearing conference and limited appearance session in Hauppauge for the day and evening, respectively, of April 14.
Accordingly, the site visit originally scheduled for April 14 will now be made on April 13, beginning at 10:30 a.m.
PossiDie approaches to cross-examination plans and procedures to coordinate cross-examination were discussed at the March 9, 1982 conference of parties.
(Tr. 314-23.)
After considering the discussion, the Board DSO establishes the following procedures.
5
//
HR M8EEoESSki O
?
As previously indicated, plans for the cross-examination of witnesses for each week must be filed with tne Board by all parties and interested governmental agencies who wisn to ask questions.
The plans must be received tne beginning of the hearing week (usually Tuesday), one week before the week in which the testimony is estimated to be given.
Thus, cross-examination plans for the first hearing week of May 4-7 must be received by the Board by April 27, 1982.
The plans will be kept in confidence from other parties by the Board.
However, parties will nave to disclose them. to parties they are
. coordinating with to the extent necessary to effectuate the coordination we are requiring below.
In addition, a party is not precluded, of course, from choosing to serve notice on any other party that it intends to cross-examine on specified aspects of the direct testimony. After being used, the cross-examination plans for the previous month shall be served by mail in the proceeding by the parties no later* than the fif teenth of the following month.
There are two fundamental purposes for the cross-examination plans. The first is to provide information to the Board so that it may prepare for the substantive issues, and to identify any aspect of the subject matter whicn may not otnerwise De covered by party cross-examination.
The second purpose is to aid the Board in regulating the hearing to avoid cumulative, duplicative, argumentative, irrelevant, and unproductive cross-exanination, and to identify proposed cross-examination not required for the full and true disclosure of the facts.
~
The cross-examination plan shall be sufficiently detailed to inform tne Board of the substantive issues addressed by the cross-examination and to assist tne Board in regulating improper and unproductive cross-examination as just discussed.
The cross-exanination plan may set forth the actual line of proposed questions.
At the minimum, the cross-examination plan shall specify the objectives of the cross-examination, the affirmative evidence the crcss-examiner intends to produce by the cross-examination, and the aspects of the direct testimony which the cross-examiner intends to discredit.
Cross-examination by intervening parties other than interested I
governmental agencies shall be limited to tne ambit of each intervenor's interest in the proceeding as expressly or implicitly indicated by the petition to intervene and its own contentions.
Nothwithstanding tne requirement to file cross-examination plans, and the procedures detailed below, follow-up cross examination restricted to questions needed to follow-up on answers given at the hearing, and which questions therefore could not have been included in an advance pl2n, may be as k ed,
i For each panel of witnesses presented by LILC0 or the Staff, or jointly l
by ootn, / 50C and Suffolk County shall identify which party will be 1[As set forth in our " Memorandum and Order Confirming Rulings Made at i
the Conference of Parties [Etc.]," slip op. at 23-24, (March 15,1982), we encouraged 50C and the County to co-sponsor joint written testimony where practicable.
We also directed, where possible because of similar positions, that 50C and the County, and the Staff and LILCO, respectively, co-spor.sor joint panel presentations of their separate written testimonies.
_4_
the lead cross-examiner and absent special circumstances only one cross-examination plan by those intervenors shall be filed.
Special circ 11 stances coula include a refusal oy the lead cross-examining party to include a particular line of examination in its plan.
(The Board may inquire closely into the reasons for such a refusal.)
In such a circumstance, the other cross-examining party may file its own secondary cross-examination plan li.nited to the particular line of examination which the lead examiner would not include.
This paragraph applies to all testimony which SOC and Suffolk County both have a rignt to examine on.
In SOC's case, this may be limited as noted above. Witn respect to testimony on S0C contentions for which Suffolk County does not have a similar contention, SOC may insist on being the lead cross-examining party.
If so, the County and S0C still must coordinate and file one joint plan to the extent possible.
For each panel of witnesses presented by S0C or Suffolk County, or jointly by both, the NRC Staff and LILC0 shall coordinate their cross-examination plans to avoid redundancy. To the fullest extent possible, tnis coordination shall take place before their plans are filed with the doard.
It must take place before the plans are used.
Unless the Staff and LILCO agree otherwise, LILCO shall be the first to cross-examine such panels, followed by the Staff.
Where SOC and the County seek to ask questions of the other's witness, and where the NRC Staff and LILC0 seek to ask questions of the other's witness, wnether or not the other's witness is on a panel with the i
e
, questioner's witness, the party seeking to examine shall file a cross-examination plan which may be, but need not be, disclosed to the witness by the examiner.
Tne f ailure to file sucn a plan will not foreclose the asking of questions in the nature of redirect examination which folloEs-up on the cross-examination asked by adverse parties.
In summary, the order of examination will be as follows, unless the parties agree otherwise as to particular testimony:
a.
SOC and/or County (SC) Witness Panel 1.
LILC0 - cross-examination 2.
Staff - cross-examination (coordinated with LILCO's) 3 & 4.
50C and SC - cross-examination and redirect.
(Party sponsoring witness panel asks last. Where there are multiple sponsors, S0C and SC shall decide order).
5.
Follow-up examination by parties 6.
Board questions (to the extent not asked by Board during the exanination by the parties.)
b.
LILCO and/or Staff Witness Panel 1.
Lead cross-examiner - (either SOC or SC pursuant to joint plan) 2.
Secondary cross-examiner - (where such a plan is filed and subject to Board discretion)
O
o 6-3&4.
LILCO ani Staff - cross-exemiaatico and redirect.
(Party sponsoring witness panel asks last. 'Where there are multiple sponsors, LILCO and Staff snali decide order.)
5.
Follow-up examination by parties 6.
Board questions (to the extent not asked by Board during the examination by the parties).
FOR' TiiE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD h
, Chairman Lawrence Brenner ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Bethesda, Maryland Marcn 19,1982 I
i i
=w-
-.r 9-
-.g
,&p--.
y 4
wm-
=,-
--3-.,--.-9
+r-py.-.
-,, --