ML20108E793
| ML20108E793 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/05/1985 |
| From: | HUNTON & WILLIAMS, LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO. |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#185-968 OL, NUDOCS 8503120315 | |
| Download: ML20108E793 (6) | |
Text
e T!yy LILCO, March 5, 1985
+
g IJO
'+
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION "d5 Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Bo'ard "g l. A!!:37 cfr$hYaW" uvir.r CO GW In the Matter of
)
- g.ggya
,m
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
)
Docket'Noi5'Op322-1(OL)
- w,
,e y
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,)
+
Unit 1)
)
% n,%,
LILCO'S MOTION TO FILE REBUTTAL TESTIMONY LILCO, by counsel, pursuant to 10 C.F.R.
S 2.743(a),
respectfully requests that it be granted leave to file rebuttal testimony oy Dr. Franz Pischinger, Edward J. Youngling and Dr.
Paul Johnston to respond to the Staff testimony concerning mechanical loads experienced during fast starts and step changes in electrical load which allegedly create a BMEP in excess of that which is associated with a continuous' electrical load of 3300 KW.
In support of its Motion, LILCO states:
J (1) LILCO's prefiled testimony of January 15, 1985 h
addressed all the intermittent loads which, in LILCO's view, had been raised by the County's load contention and the motions i
and discovery regarding that contention.
(2) LILCO considered that the cyclic and intermittent loads covered by the contention were those-identified by LILCO in its testimony.* Thus, LILCO limited its testimony to these 1
loads.
The County, too, focused solely on these cyclic and intermittent loads and did not refer to any loads attributable 8503120315 850305 l
PDR ADOCK 05000322 O
o PDR
(/
JL
+
_ _a
)
' tcr wide open fuel racks during f ast start and loading.
- Thus, LILCO did not expect that the Staff would sponsor testimony regarding an intermittent mechanical load in excess of that resulting from operation at 3300 KW, and possibly up to that resulting from opera' tion at 3900 KW, caused by opening of the fuel racks to the wide-open position during fast starts and I
application of load.
(Test. of Knox, at 6; Test. of Bush, et al., at 13)
LILCO does not believe that the loading condition described by the Staff in fact occurs or that it creates an intermittent load.
J (3) LILCO's proffered rebuttal testimony will show that the.BMEP's equivalent to those associated with 3800-3900 KW electrical loading hypothesized to occur during fast starts by
\\
the Knox and PNL testimony do not in fact occur.
LILCO's testimony will also show that pressures in excess of those I
associated with operation at 3300 KW which might be placed on l
}
the EDGs by step changes in load associated with emergency operation are negligible since they would last only a few cycles (approximately 1.5 seconds).
I
{
(4) The standard applied to the admission of rebuttal testimony is a " good cause" test.
This requires that the proposed rebuttal testimony ber (1) relevant to an_important point in the direct testimony; (2) arguably relevant to an issue'of decisional importance; (3) not cumulative with any other testimony in the record;-and (4) incapable of being
-2 i
I
- reasonably filed in a more timely fashion.
See In the Matter of Long Island Lighting Company (Emergency Planning Proceeding), Memorandum and Order dated March 4, 1984, per Judge Laurenson.
(5) The " good cause" standard for the admission of rebuttal testimony is liberally applied, and the authoritie_
i clearly support the proposition that the party with the burden of proof should be given an opportunity to submit rebuttal on matters which develop in the course of litigation.
The Licensing Board in In the Matter of Philadelphia Electric Co.,
et al., Metropolitan Edison Co.,
et al., Public Service Electric and Gas, Co., and Rochester' Gas and Electric Corp., et al., 10 N.R.C.
527, 529 (1979), stated:
Under familiar adjudicatory principles, parties saddled with the burden [of proof]
typically proceed first and then have the right to rebut the case presented by their adversaries.
(6) LILCO's rebuttal testimony meets the requirements of the good cause test.
First, LILCO's proffered rebuttal testimony is directly responsive to the Staff's testimony and addresses one of the central issues in'the litigation, namely, the existence, size and duration of any intermittent load.
Second, LILCO's rebuttal testimony is not cumulative since LILOO's direct testimony did not view fast starts or step changes in load during emergency operation as creating an intermittent mechanical load and therefore did not address the i.
9
-e m
effects of fast starts and loading on the engine.
- Finally, LILCO's rebuttal testimony is timely.
LILCO did not expect the Staff's testimony, and it should be given an opportunity, as the party with'the burden of proof, to respond with rebuttal 1
testimony.
(7) Unless LILCO is granted leave to file its rebuttal I
testimony, the issues raised for the first time by the Staff-in j
f its testimony will not be addressed by LILCO, thus leaving a void in the record.
The Board should therefore permit LILCO to file its rebuttal testimony to remove this gap in the evidence and to assist the Board in reaching its findings.
j WHEREFORE, LILCO respectfully requests that the Board grant LILCO's Motion to File Rebuttal _ Testimony.
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY By l
T.
S. Ellis, III l
Anthony F. Earley, Jr.
l HUNTON & WILLIAMS
'I Post Office Box 1535 l
Richmond, Virginia 23212 l
Odes L. Stroupe, Jr.
l HUNTON & WILLIAMS Post Office Box 109 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 John Jay Range HUNTON & WILLIAMS Post Office Box 19230 Washington, D.C.
20036 DATED:
March 5, 1985 s
~
3-CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE In the Matter of LONG IwLAND LIGHTING COMPANY (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1)
Docket No. 50-322_(OL)
I hereby certify that copies of LILCO's Motion to File I
Rebuttal Testimony were served this date upon the following by first-class mail, postage prepaid, or by hand as indicated by an asterisk:
Lawrence Brenner, Esq.*
Secretary of the Commission
- Administrative Judge U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Atomic Safety and Licensing Commission Board Panel Washington, D.C.
20555
}
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing l
4350 East-West Highway Appeal Board Panel l
Fourth Floor (West Tower)
U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Dr. Peter A. Morris
- Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing-Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory l
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l
Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 4350 East-West Highway Fourth Floor (West Tower)
Robert E. Smith, Esq.
Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Guggenheimer & Untermyer 80 Pine Street Dr. George A.
Ferguson*
New York, New York 10005 Administrative Judge School of Engineering Herbert H.
Brown, Esq.*
Howard University Lawrence Coe Lanpher, Esq.
Room 1114 Alan R.
Dynner, Esq.
2300 - 6th Street, N.W.
Joseph J. Brigati, Esq.
Washington, D.C.
20059 Kirkpatrick & Lockhart 1900 M Street, N.W.
8th Floor l
Washington, D.C.
20036 l
l l
l l (
I Bernard M. Bordenick, Esq.*
Stephen B.
Latham, Esq.
David A.
Repka, Esq.
Twomey, Latham & Shea Richard J. Goddard, Esq.
33 West Second Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Post Office Box 398 Commission Riverhead, New York 11901 Maryland National Bank Bldg.
7735 Old Georgetown Road Ralph Shapiro, Esq.
Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Cammer and Shapiro, P.C.
9 East 40th Street Martin Bradley Ashare, Esq.
New York, New York 10016 Attn: Patricia A. Dempsey, Esq.
L County Attorney James Dougherty, Esq.
Suffolk County Department 3045 Porter Street of Law Washington, D.C.
20008 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11787 Jonathan D.
Feinberg, Esq.
New York State Mr. Marc W. Goldsmith Department of Public Service Energy Research Group Three Empire State Plaza 4001 Totten Pond Road Albany, New York 12223 Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 Howard L. Blau
)
.MHB Technical Associates 217 Newbridge Road 1723 Hamilton Avenue Hicksville, New York 11801 j
Suite K g
San Jose, California 95125 Fabian G.
Palomino, Esq.
Special Counsel to the
}
Mr. Jay Dunkleberger Governor
)
New York State Energy Office Executive Chamber, Room 229
)
Agency Building 2 State Capitol Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12224 Albany, New York 12223 1
l i
I John Jay Range O
f Hunton & Williams i
2000 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
P.O. Box 19230 Washington, D.C.
20036 DATED:
March 5, 1985 I 4 f
W
.