ML20077S610
| ML20077S610 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/19/1983 |
| From: | Lanpher L KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NY |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20077S612 | List: |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL-3, NUDOCS 8309220151 | |
| Download: ML20077S610 (5) | |
Text
.
i;
'9/19/83 l
6 00CNETED UNITED STATES OF M: ERICA USNRC NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 13 SEP 21 #1 :23 Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 0FFICE OF SECRETARV 00CKlitNG & SERVICf.
BRANCH
)
In the Matter of
)
)
LONG' ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-322-OL-3 i
)
(Emergency Planning)
- (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,
)
Unit.1)
)
)
SUFFOLK. COUNTY MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE REPLY e
On September 6, 1983, Suffolk County filed,a Motion to Compel Responses to Discovery Requests Relating to Non-LILCO Support Organizations. Late on Friday, September 16, 1983,
'the County received a LILCO Motion for Protectiv'e Order and Response to Suffolk County Motion'to Compel Discovery.
After review of LILCO's September 16 filing, the County has decided that it needs to file a reply.
The County accordingly moves for leave to reply.
The reply will cover the following points:
(1)
LILCO's failure to assert any legal authority in support of its view that it is entitled to shield certain
.lt F
materials from discovery; (2)
LILCO's failure to' disclose.to the Board that it I
has made certain materials related to uncompleted negotiations with non-LILCO entities available to Governor Cuomo's Shoreham Commission.- See attached letter from County Counsel to LILCO e
i 8309220151 830919
{DRADOCK 05000322 PDR h
t
>. _ _ j_
Counsel rejecting terms of proposed protective order; (3)
LILCO makes allegations that the County has interfered with LILCO negotiations or that the County has supported efforts to interfere with LILCO negotiations.
These serious charges are false; and (4)
LILCO's proposed protective order (assuming any such order is deemed appropriate) is grossly deficient in the following regards:
(a)
It does cover the full class of documents requested by the County; and (b). The proposed limitations and
" sanctions" are completely un-reasonable and far too broad and severe.
The County is prepared.to do its best to file a response on these matters by close of business on September 20.
In the alternative, the County requests that the Board convene a conference. call to discuss this dispute.
The County notes'for the. Board's information that the
. deposition.of Ms.' Robinson, a LILCO employee,.is scheduled for this Friday,-September 23.
That deposition will involve LILCO negotiation with non-LILCO entities.
Accordingly, the A As)
~
. - c.
County hopes that this dispute regarding the scope of permitted County discovery can be resolved prior to Friday.
Respectfully submitted, David J. Gilmartin Patricia A. Dempsey Suffolk County Department of Law Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11788 Sk/ tem $t W
Herbert H.
Brown Lawrence Coe Lanpher Karla J. Letsche KIRKPATRICK, LOCKHART, HILL, CHRISTOPHER & PHILLIPS 1900 M Street, N.W.,
Suite 800 Washington, D.C.
20036 Attorneys for Suffolk County September 19, 1983
~
Emxrxnucx, LOCKIIART, HrLL, CmusronInn & P1rrr_rrm A Paarwassarr lacLemuro A 7 c.;
-i Comsamarios 1900 M Sraznr, N. W.
WAsursorox, D. C. 20006 marnown (sos).se.roco ory m usumas CABLE:MIFR3 33mIFAraxx.ferwmn!,doursor & E1rTCElsos r L.'s o
wren =
moo came smzanro 1rarTza's DramCT DIAL FtTMEER r1TTSBURGIL rENWWYLTAN1h Essa
(.as) 868.eaoo (202) 452-7064 September 15, 1983 BY TELECOPIER Kathy E.B. McCleskey, Esquire Hunton & Williams 707 East Main Street Richmond, Virginia 23212
Dear Kathy:
I am in receipt of your September 14 letter transmitting a draft protective order relating to the 31aine Robinson discovery dispute.
The draft order is not acceptable.
Indeed, in view of yesterday's Shoreham Commission meeting, I cannot understand how LILCC car. continue to assert its objection to our requests for the information covered by the Motion to Compel.
I am informed that at yesterday's meeting, Elaine Robinson, responding to comments by Dr. David Harris, stated that she had notes of numerous conversations with hospital and other medical personnel (with whom LILCO has had conversations) and that these notes were available for the Commit.sion.
Ms. Robinson's comments were in an attempt to rebut the. County view that LILCO had done virtually nothing to transform the plannin; document into a plan with substance.
Since Ms. Robinson was willing to make the data available to the Shoreham Commission, how can LILCO refuse to make them available to the County?
Further, in the same vein, LILCO has made available to the Shoreham Commission certain data and documents related to MediBus Inc., a company with which LILCO has had conversa-tions but with whom no agreement has been reached.
See September 2 letter from Elaine Robinson to Dr. John Marburger and attachments thereto.
Since LILCO has already made such information public (in an attempt to respond to Mr. Fricano's
y
/
)
i
- " KrniPATRICK, LOCKHART, Brn, Cun2 TrPum::2 O Purures Kathy E.B. McCleskey, Esquire I
September 15, 1983 Page Two s
comments), how can LILCO, as a matter of privilege, refuse to produce other such data?
In our view, there is no privi-lege involved here (and LILCO has never provided any legal authority for any such privilege) but to the extent there is one, LILCO clearly has waived it.
I. 1 Sincer ly, l
l Kar a Letsche i
t' KJL:so i
h 4
P 1
l 1
?
i
?
- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _