ML20092K819

Motion to Compel Production of training-related Documents by Lilco Up Through June 1984.Certificate of Svc Encl. Related Correspondence

ML20092K819
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	06/26/1984
From:	Mark Miller KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NY
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML20092K806	List: ML20092K798 ML20092K810 ML20092K819 ML20092K824 ML20092K827
References
NUDOCS 8406290121
Download: ML20092K819 (8)

Text

m

' Cp '

's REl.ATED C0iiESPOND DOCKETED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UDE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing'84 JW 28 P2:12 board

fFICE Cr 392 CC" .iijyc & SC PiM GH

)

In.the Matter of )

) Docket No. 50-322-OL-3 LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) (Emergency Planning)

)

(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, )

Unit 1) )

)

SUFFOLK COUNTY MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF TRAINING-RELATED DOCUMENTS BY LILCO On Friday, June 15, 1984, during cross-examination of the LILCO witnesses on Contentions 39.A and B, 40, 41, 44.D, E and F, 98, 99.C and G, and 100.B, D and G (Training of Offsite Emergency Response Workers), Suffolk County learned for the first time that LILCO had recently conducted additional training drills for LERO trainees. The results of these drills were requested and, when LILCO objected to producing the requested material, the Board suggested that "a motion (to compel] and briefs be filed." Tr.

11,971 (Laurenson). Pursuant to the Board's suggestion, and for the reasons set forth below, Suffolk County, pursuant to 10 CFR Section 2.740(f), hereby requests that the Board order LILCO to produce the training-related documents requested of LILCO on June 15, 1984.

O ,

8

-,- -s -

3

?v y T

s. s s During the hearing on June 15,.the County made clear its need for.the requested documents. The County pointed out, for e x a m p l e ,: that in-light of the; testimony given by the LILCO wit-nesses on the-training issues in controversy, and considering LILCO's reliance on training drills-and exercises as a way to critique the performance of trainees.-- ther,eby providing a way to assess the overall adequacy of the training provided by LILCO

-- the requested _information falls squarely within the NRC's mandate that discovery be relevant to the subject matter involved

, + w in this proceeding. 10 CFR Section 2.740(b)(1). Further, the

• 8 County argued that the information soughe a'ppears " reasonably

. calculated to lead to the discovery of hdmissible evidence," id.,

and therefore should be provided by'LILCO. See generally Tr.

s 11,970-71.

It is significant that when'the County, on May 30, 1984, brought to the Board's attention a,similar discovery dis'pute involving LILCO's refusal to produce training-related documents, s

the Board, after having heard t'ho argumen.ts of the parties, ruled . , -

that the test for determining a p' arty's~ entitlement t6 discovery y s

. 4 is whether the documents are reisvant to the subject matter involved in the proceeding." Under this test; the Board, on

- .q June 1, 1984, determined that thsEe was nod need'to "look too far to establish relevancy," and ordered LILCO to produce the requested documents. Tr. 9,672 (Laurenson).

\-

h

• • -V-r

\

_ . - _ . _ , _ , , , _ . , _ __ m __ ._. _ . _-,

4 In its June 1 ruling, the Board ordered LILCO to produce

. documents that had first been requested by the County on April 18, 1984. Specifically, the County had requested "[a]ll documents relating to the critiques and evaluations of LERO

~

trainees' performance by drill and/or exercise controllers and/or

! observers . . . including all completed drill and/or exercise evaluation forms-. . . and/or exercises that have been con-

, ducted." Tr. 9,670 (Laurenson). In ordering production of such documents, the Board agreed with the County that the LILCO train-ing testimony referenced and relied upon the evaluations and critiques regarding LERO trainees' performance during drills and exercises as a way to support the assertion made in the LILCO testimony that the LILCO_ training program teaches trainees their

-emergency jobs, including how to perform such jobs. See Tr.

9,672-73. Thus, the Board ruled that the completed evaluations and critiques were relevant to the LILCO testimony and the train-ing contentions in issue and ordered LILCO to produce such docu-

.ments. Tr. 9,673 (Laurenson).

Clearly, the documents now sought by the County are no less relevant to the~LILCO testimony and the_ contentions. The County has requested the results of the most recent LILCO training

. drills and/or exercises. According to the LILCO witnesses, with the exception of limited training drills for LILCO's traffic guides, the recently completed June drills / exercises are the only training drills or exercises 1that have been conducted since E

-a b

February 1984. See, e.g., Tr. 11,969-70. During the cross-examination of the LILCO witness panel during the week of June 11, the County established that there have been numerous and serious deficiencies in the training drills and exercises con- ,

ducted under.the LILCO training program, and that those deficien-cies prevailed up to and through the February exercises. Because the June drill / exercise results may reveal whether such deficien-cies still exist or have been remedied in any way, the County is ,

entitled to the requested information. In this way, the County

~

can make a better determination regarding the adequacy of the LILCO training program. Under prior Board rulings in this case, the County is therefore entitled to the requested information.

Accordingly, the County requests that LILCO be ordered to produce all documents relating to the critiques and evaluations t

l L.

6 a

\

of LERO trainees' performances by drill and/or exercise control-1ers and/or observers, including all completed drill and/or exer-cise evaluation forms, from LILCO drills and/or exercises that have been conducted up to and through June 1984.

Respectfully sumitted, Martin Bradley Ashare Suffolk County Department of Law H. Lee Dennison Building Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11788 Lawrence Coe Lanpher.

Karla J. Letsche Michael S. Miller Christopher M. McMurray KIRKPATRICK, LOCKHART, HILL, CHRISTOPHER & PHILLIPS 1900 M Street, N . W. -

Washington,.D.C. 20036 Attorneys for Suffolk County

. Date: June 26, 1984 s

r i

y:~

RELATED CORnESponpgygg COLKETED USNRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

'84 JJN 28 P2:12 Before'the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 60'CditHG & sed BRANCH

')

In the Matter of )

)

LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322-OL-3

) (Emergency Planning)

(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, )

Unit 1) )

)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of SUFFOLK COUNTY MOTION TO

. COMPEL PRODUCTION OF TRAINING-RELATED DOCUMENTS BY LILCO dated June 26, 1984, have been served to the following this 26th day of June 1984 by.U.S. mail, first clcss, except as otherwise noted.

James A. Laurenson, Chairman

• James B. Dougherty, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 3045 Porter Street, N.W.

U .~ S . Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20008 Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Jay Dunkleberger Dr. Jerry R. Kline

• New York State Energy Office Administrative Judge Agency Building 2 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Empire Sate Plaza U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Albany, New York 12223 Washington, D.C. 20555 W. Taylor Reveley, III, Esq.#

Mr. Frederick J. Shon

• Hunton & Williams Administrative' Judge P.O. Box 1535 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 707 East Main Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Richmond, Virginia 23212 Washington, D.C. 20555 Edward M. Barrett, Esq. Spence Perry, Esq.

General Counsel Associate General Counsel Long Island Lighting Company Federal Emergency Management 250 Old Country Road Agency Mineola, New York 11501 Washington, D.C. 20472

3

, Mr.-Brian McCaffrey Stephen B. Latham, Esq.

Long Island Lighting Company Twomey, Latham & Shea Shoreham Nuclear Power Station P.O. Box 398 P.O. Box 618 33 West Second Street North Country Road Riverhead, New York 11901 Wading River,'New York 11792 Ms. Nora Bredes Marc W. Goldsmith Executive Coordinator Energy Research Group,_Inc. Shoreham Opponents' Coalition 400-1 Totten Pond Road 195 East Main Street Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 Smithtown, New York 11787 Joel Blau, Esq. MHB Technical Associates New York Public Service Commission 1723 Hamilton Avenue The Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller Suite K Building San Jose, California 95125 Empire State Plaza l Albany, New York 12223 Hon. Peter F. Cohalan Suffolk County Executive Martin Bradley Ashare, Esq. H. Lee Dennison Building Suffolk County Attorney Veterans Memorial Highway H. Lee Dennison Building Hauppauge, New York 11788 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11788 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board '

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Panel Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission- Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Docketing and Service Section Jonathan D. Feinberg, Esq.

. Office of the Secretary Staff Counsel U.S. . Nuclear Regulatory Commission New York State Public 1717 H Street, N.W. Service Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 3 Rockefeller Plaza

- Albany, New York 12223 '

Bernard M. Bordenick, Esq.

• David A. Repka, Esq. Stuart Diamond Edwin J. Reis, Esq. Business / Financial U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission New York Times Washington, D.C. 20555 229 W. 43rd Street New York, New York 10036 Stewart M. Glass, Esq. Eleanor L. Frucci, Esq.

• Regional-Counsel Atomic Safety and Licensing Federal Emergency Management Board Panel Agency U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 26 Federal Plaza, Room 1349 Commission New York, New York 10278 Washington, D.C. 20555 b -

r

}~

Fabian Palomino, Esq.

• Special Counsel _to

-the Governor Executive Chamber, Room 229 State. Capitol' Albany, New York 12224

~

Michael S. Miller KIRKPATRICK, LOCKHART, HILL, CHRISTOPHER & PHILLIPS 1900 M Street, NW, Suite 800 Washington, D.C. 20036 Dated: June 26, 1984

• By Hand

1. By Federal Express O

w L