ML20137X376
| ML20137X376 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 03/04/1986 |
| From: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-#186-363 OL, NUDOCS 8603060159 | |
| Download: ML20137X376 (30) | |
Text
- - - - - - - _
ORIGINAL UNITED STATES lO NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 50-424 OL 50-425 OL GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, et al.
(Vogtle Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2)
LOCATION: WASHINGTON, D. C. PAGES: 193 - 220 DATE. TUESDAY, MARCH 4, 1986 I
ff -G I
O I AG-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
O oficialReporters 444 North CapitolStreet Washington, D.C. 20001 (202)347-3700 000*%0$d $8000fwa r PDit NATIONWIDE COVERAGE
s 1
7
/^180 00 01 193 V
1 WRBwrb 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 4 ______________________________:
5 In the matter of: :
6 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, et al. : Docket No. 50-424-OL 7 (Vogtle Generating Plant, : 50-425-OL 8 Units 1 and 2) :
9 ------------------------------:
10 Ace-Federal Reporters, Inc.
11 Suite 402 12 444 North Capitol Street, 13 Washington, D. C.
14 Tuesday, 4 March 1986 15 Telephone conference in the above-entitled matter l'6 was convened, pursuant to notice, at 1:35 p.m.
17 BEFORE:
18 JUDGE MORTON B. MARGULIES, Chairman, 19 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 20 JUDGE GUSTAVE A. LINENBERGER, JR., Member, l l
21 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 22 JUDGE OSCAR H. PARIS, Member, 23 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board O 24 l
25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646 )
8480 00 02 194 WRBwrb 1 APPEARANCES:
2 On behalf of the Applicant:
3 JAMES JOINER, Esq. and HUGH DAVENPORT, Esq.,
4 Troutman and Sanders 5 BRUCE W. CHURCHILL, Esq. and DAVID R. LEWIS, Esq.
6 Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge 7 On behalf of Intervenor Campaign For a Prosperous 8 Georgia:
9 TIM JOHNSON 10 On behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff:
11 BERNARD M. BORDENICK, Esq.
12 LEE S. DEWEY, Esq.
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 O 25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336-6646
8480 01 01 195 Ag WRBwrb 1 PROCEEDINGS 2 JUDGE MARGULIES: This is Judge Margulies. 'With 3 me today are Judge Linenberger and Judge Paris.
4 This telephone conference call is pursuant to our 5 prior conference call on January 10, 1986, when it was 6 decided we would hold the prehearing conference in advance 7 of the hearing by this mechanism.
8 The items that we will take up will follow those 9 provided for in 10 CFR 2.752.
10 Before we get to that, I would like to take 11 appearances on the record.
12 We will first start will applicant.
() 13 MR. JOINER: For the applicant, James Joiner and 14 Hugh Davenport of the firm of Troutman, Sanders, Lockerman 15 and Dashmore in Atlanta.
16 We also have Bruce Churchill ar.d David Lewis of 17 the Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge firm of Washington, 18 D. C.
19 JUDGE MARGULIES: We'll next take staff 20 appearance.
I 21 MR. BORDENICK: This is Bernard M. Bordenick for {
22 the Staff. Also with me is Lee S. Dewey. We appear for the 23 NRC Staff, Washington, D. C., 20555.
24 JUDGE MARGULIES: Next will be the appearance of n/
s- 25 intervenors.
l ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646
8480 01 02 196 WRBwrb 1 MR. JOHNSON: For the intervenors, this is Tim 2 Johnson, Campaign For a Prosperous Georgia, at Atlanta.
3 Mr. Teper could not be with us, and he asked me 4 to represent time.
5 JUDGE MARGULIES: As I understand it, 6 Mr. Johnson, the intervenors, as if this time are not 7 represented by counse, is that correct?
8 MR. JOHNSON: That's correct.
9 JUDGE MARGULIES: Looking at the items listed 10 under 1.752, Simplification, Qualification and Specification 11 of the Issues, do we have anything to speak about on that at 12 this time?
() 13 MR. JOINER: We have nothing, for the applicant.
14 MR. BORDENICK: Likewise, we do not have 15 anything.
16 MR. JOHNSON: Intervenors also have nothing to 17 add.
18 JUDGE MARGULIES: I should state at this time 19 that in accordance with our prior conference we have 20 received notification from the parties as to who their 21 witnesses are going to be, as well as copies of the prefiled 22 testimony.
23 Has everyone received that information?
24 (No response.)
25 JUDGE.MARGULIES: I take it you have.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-33M646
8480 01 03 197 r^ 1 MR. JOHNSON: Yes, intervenors have received
\~)T WRBwrb 2 that.
3 MR. BORDENICK: Affirmative for the staff.
i 4 MR. JOINER: The applicants have received the 5 testimony, yes.
6 JUDGE MARGULIES: Moving next to Item 2, the 7 necessity or the desirability for amending the pleadings, do 8 we have anything to discuss in that category?
9 MR. JOINER: Nothing for the applicant.
10 MR. JOHNSON: Nor for the intervenors.
11 MR. BORDENICK: Nothing for the Staff.
12 JUDGE MARGULIES: Item 3, the obtaining of 13 stipulations and admissions of fact, and of the contents and 14 authenticity of documents to avoid unnecessary proof.
15 Does the parties have anything in that area?
16 MR. JOINER: Nothing for the applicant.
17 MR. JOHNSON: Nor for the inte rvenors .
18 MR. BORDENICK: Nor for the Staff.
19 JUDGE MARGULIES: Item 4, identification of 20 witnesses and the limitation of the number of expert 21 witnesses, and other steps to expedite the presentation of 22 evidence. And I will combine that with 5, the setting of a 23 hearing schedule. And I will take up a number of things in 24 the order that we had planned to discuss here today.
O 25 One of the first things that I want to mention is l
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646
8480 01 04 198 WRBwrb 1 that we set the hearing in Waynesboro, Georgia, in that we 2 could not obtain adequate facilities in Augusta; that it 3 appears that the facilities in Waynesboro will 'stisfy the 4 requirements of Appendix A to Part 2 of 10 CFR. It's close 5 to the facility, and it should meet the requirements of the 6 parties and of the public.
7 We have scheduled the hearing to begin at 9:30 on 8 Tuesday. We plan to run the hearings from 9:30 to 5:00 each 9 day. For the second week, we have scheduled the second week 10 to begin at 9:30 on Tuesday, and to continue with the 11 hearing until we finish with all the contentions.
12 Does that meet the requirements of the parties?
() 13 MR. JOINER: Yes, for the applicants.
14 MR. JOHNSON: Also for the intervenors.
15 MR. BORDENICK: That meets the Staff 16 requirements.
17 JUDGE MARGULIES: It's our intention to start 18 with Contention 7 and then move to 10.1 and then 10.5.
19 Does that meet the requirements of the parties?
20 MR. JOINER: Affirmative for the applicant.
21 MR. JOHNSON: Also for the intervenor.
22 MR. BORDENICK: That's satisf actory to the Staff.
23 JUDGE MARGULIES: Our thinking was to have 24 limited appearances: m could start a half an hour earlier 25 on Wednesday and have them 9:00 to 12:00 in the morning and ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
1 202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 3 %-6646
8480 01 05 199 1 have the site visit on Wednesday afternoon.
{V^T WRBwrb 2 What is the thinking of the parties on that? ,
3 In having the limited appearances from nine to 4 twelve on Wednesday, that doesn't mean we cannot proceed 5 witn taking testimony during the time when people may not be 6 appearing in their limited capacity role.
7 MR. JOHNC]N: Does this mean that if citizens 8 came on Tuesday has asked to speak, that they'd have to . wait 9 until Wednesday.
10 If the limited appearances are reserved for 11 Wednesday morning, does that mean that citizenn who appear 12 at other times would be told they could not testify except 13 during that period on Wednesday morning?
14 JUDGE MARGULIES: It's been the practice to have 15 the limited appearance people appear during designated 16 times, so that the hearing can run smoothly. If there is a 17 sufficient number of -- an excess of people who would not be 18 able to fit in on Wednesday, for example, we can schedule 19 another period during which they can come and appear.
20 But it would seem to move the hearing on in a 21 more orderly fashion to set up prescribed periods to have 22 the people come in and testify during those times.
23 MR. JGHNSON: I understand the need for order.
24 My concern is with tha people who inquired of us as to when
() 25 the hearings would be held, and we said beginning Tuesday at ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646
... .. _. _. . _ _~ -_- _.~._ _. .
k i 8480 01 06 .200 ,
l_ 9:30. And I know that some people,had planned and made
{}WRBwrb l.
2 . arrangements to get off of work that day for the specific h 3 purpose'of testifying, including . at least one person who i
! 4 lives in Waynesboro;.if she's-not going toftestify Tuesday, j 5. she has to be' at work on Wednesday, and I don' t know if 4
6 she'd be able to change that at this late date. And'there ,
1 7 may be others in similar situations. That's why.I'm asking. 1
! 8 I wonder if we couldn' t allow, at'the beginning -
9 of each day, limited appearances ~ before ' the witnesser- go on, 10 so that we don' t disrupt the proceedings, . if they' re ' able to f
11 appear before the proceedings begin in the morning and
! 12 request that they be allowed to speak,-that they'be allowed I
() 13 to.
14 ~ I can' t imagine that there'll be that many 15 people.
l 16 MR. JOINER: We have no preference whether it is >
17 Tuesday morning or Wednesday morning; We suggest, however, i
18 that there be a designated time for limited-appearances, and:
19 that to the extent possible we limit those appearances.to l 20 that specified time.
21 But as to the question of Tuesday versus i
j 22 Wednesday, we have no preference.
23 MR. JOHNSON: What about if we set Tuesday ,
\
- 24 morning as the specified time, and then if others came !
4 () 25 forward later in the week ano so request, that the Board i-i i j ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
. 202 Nedonwide Coverage 80(k33 H 646 i _ __ ~ __- _ ~___. ._ _ . _ . _ _ _. _ _-347-3700 .
. _ , . _ _ _ . - - . _ . . _ . _ , . _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ . . _ . _ _ . ~ . _ , _ , _ , _ _ . , _ .
.1 8480.01 07 201 WRBwrb 1 could consider whether to allow them-to speak at that time.
2 I. don't think you should exclude people. But if 3 you're going to set a. specific-time, the only people that I 4 know who plan to appear are planning to . appear on Tuesday, 5 and I would prefer that time.
4 6 JUDGE MARGULIES:- Do you have something-to add, i 7 Mr. Bordenick?
8 MR. BORDENICK: Generally, on questions of time.
9 and place for limited appearances, I would leave that to the 10 Board's discretion. However, having heard the applicant and 11 the intervenor, I would make an alternative suggestion 12 perhaps the Board might want to entertain, which is to set
() 13 aside a short period of time Tuesday evening,.say from 5:00 14 to 5:30, for limited appearances, or maybe even 5:00 to
]
15 6:00, and then cut down on the time that you would have set 16 aside the following morning. In other words, splie the time 17 you would have set aside Wednesday morning between Tuesday 18 evening and Wednesday morning, to try to accommodate all the
- 19 interests involved.
20 That's all I have.
21 JUDGE MARGULIES: Mr. Johnson, how many people do 22 you expect to be appearing on Tuesday?
23 MR. JOHNSON: I really don't know. There's 2
24 really only one individual that I know who has specifically l 25 said that she' intends to appear Tuesday. There are others i
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-33H646
.. ~ . .-._ . - . , - , - - . - . . . - - . . . . . ..- . - - - _ - . . - . - . . - , . - . - .. - - , -,.- - - . -
8480 01 08 202
['% WRBwrb 1 who have said that they would like to if they can work out
()
2 their schedules, and they were all projecting Tuesday 3 morning as the time they were trying to arrange for.
4 I would say definitely more than three or four.
5 If we can set Tuesday morning and then just begin 6 with the regular appearances after the limited appearances, 7 I doubt if it would be very late in the morning.
8 JUDGE MARGULIES: Just let me confer with the 9 other j udges here a minute.
10 (Discussion off the record.)
11 JUDGE MARGULIES: Mr. Johnson, would it be right 12 after lunch on Tuesday?
() 13 MR. JOHNSON: Well, I would prefer-Tuesday 14 morning right when the hearing starts, but whatever the i
15 Board decides, of course.
16 JUDGE MARGULIES: Well, we want to start the 17 hearing and move along with the hearing. Tind we believe it 18 would be disruptive to start off with limited appearances.
19 If it can accommodate you to have an hour 20 following the luncheon break on Tuesday, we would permit 21 that.
22 MR. JOHNSON: Okay. Thank you.
23 JUDGE MARGULIES: And then we would follow up on l 24 Wednesday with a period from 9:30 to 11:30.
25 MR. JOHNSON: Okay.
l ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. )
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646
8480 01 09 203 WRBwrb 1 JUDGE MARGULIES: Does that satisfy the other 2 parties as well?
3 MR. BORDENICK: The Staff has no problem.-
4 MR. BORDENICK: The applicants have no problem.
5 JUDGE MARGULIES: How about setting the site 6 visit also for Wednesday?
- 7 MR. JOINER
- That's agreeable with applicants.
8 MR. JOHNSON: It's also agreeable with the 9 intervenor.
l 10 MR. BORDENICK: That's fine with the Staf f.
i 11 JUDGE MARGULIES: Okay. So that will be the 12 procedure we will follow.
() 13 One of the items that I would like to bring up is 14 the number of copies of documents that the parties wich to 15 put into the record.
16 The Commission practice is to give three copies 17 to the Reporter, one copy to each of the judges, and then 18 one copy to each of the opposing counsel. In terms of the
, 19 prefiled testimony, the j udges already have their copies, j 20 but the parties should be prepared to make those -- the 21 number of copies I outlined -- on the day that the documents 22 are being offered.
23 I don' t know what kind of reproduction facilities 24 are available at the location, so all the parties should be
- O' 25 prepared to have the requisite copies available with them l
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 ~ Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646
8480 01 10 204 f % WRBwrb 1 at the time they offer them.
d 2 Is that understood by everybody?
3 MR. JOHNSON: Intervenors understand.
4 MR. BORDENICK: Understood by the Staff.
5 MR. JOINER: Understood by the applicant.
6 JUDGE MARGULIES: Do the parties have any 7 particular preference as to the order of presentation of 8 their cases? Of course, we'll start out with the applicant.
9 Who is to follow next in the order of 10 presentation? When I say " order of presentation" of their 11 cases, first, in terms of examination or cross-examination.
12 MR. BORDENICK: Normally it would be-the
() 13 intervenors followed by the Staff. That would be both on 14 cross-examination and the presentation of witnesses.
15 MR. JOHNSON: That's satisf actory to the 16 intervenors.
17 JUDGE MARGULIES: We will then follow that 18 procedure.
i 19 Let me ask the other judges if they have other 20 matters to bring forth, and then we'll get to the parties?
21 Judge Linenberger?
22 JUDGE LINENBERGER: No.
I 23 JUDGE PARIS: Nothing.
24 JUDGE MARGULIES: How about-the parties?
25 MR. JOHNSON: I've never been involved in one of ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Ccverage 800 33M646
[
8480 01 11 205 WRBwrb 1 these hearings before, and I just want to ask how does this 2 start out? Is there any kind of opening statement by the 3 parties, or is'it just proceeding to call to order and then 4 the first witness is called, or how is that done?
5 JUDGE MARGULIES: I will permit opening 6 statements by all of the parties at the beginning of the 7 proceeding.
8 MR. JOHNSON: Okay.
9 And then the witnesses will be called?
10 JUDGE MARGULIES: Then the witnesses will be 11 called, yes.
12 MR. JOHNSON: Okay.
13 I also had another matter that we discussed in 14 the last conference call, which was the possibility of 15 having a hearing in Atlanta for the express purpose of the 16 limited appearances, and that is something that we would 17 like to encourage.
18 The Board I believe said in the last conference 19 call that this would be an appropriate time to bring that 20 up.
21 JUDGE MARGULIES: Yes. Could you be more 22 explicit in why you want the limited appearances in Atlanta?
23 MR. JOHNSON: Because there are a lot of people 24 here who have expressed concern and interest in making O 25 appearances and, because of the time and travel difficulty ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 Nationwide Coverage 300 33H646
. __ - ___- _- __ __ _- -__ _ __- ____- _347 3 700 -_ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - _ _ _ _
8480 01 12 206 WRBwrb 1 to Waynesboro, would be unable to attend.
2 I think there is more interest-- I'm sure 3 there's a lot of interest here.
, 4 JUDGE MARGULIES: Do you wish to be heard on 5 that, Mr. Joiner?
6 MR. JOINER: Yes.
7 I would start by observing that Plant Vogtle is 8 approximately 150 miles from Atlanta.
9 Secondly, I would like to point out that 10 CFR 10 Part 2, Appendix A, in paragraph V.B.6. states as follows, 11 and I quote:
I 12 "Particularly in cases where it is evidence
( 13 that there is local concern as to the safety and the i 14 plant, tne Board should so conduct the hearing as to 15 give appropriate opportunity for local citizens to j 16 express their views, while at the same time protecting 17 the legal interests of all parties and the public 18 interest in an orderly and efficient licensing j 19 process."
i 20 Thirdly, I would like to point out that it is our 21 understanding that the NRC has consistently followed the 22 practice of holding adjudicatory hearings near the reactor i
23 site and usually in the hearest city or town to the site.
4 24 And I would cite the case of Citizens Advisory Board of the
( 25 Metropolitan planning Council for Omaha, Nebraska, in ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
' _-_ __-- -___ _ --___ -- ___- - _-__-- 202 347 3700 - _ - - - - Nationwide Coverase 800-336 4646
8480 01 13 207 2
1 Council Bluffs, Iowa, DPRM 81-1, found at 13 NRC 429, and
(}WRBwrb 2 this issue is addressed at page 441.
3 The long and short of what I'm saying is that 4 there is no possibility of there being a valid addressable 5 safety concern in the City of Atlanta, Georgia, in light of 6 the fact that Atlanta is 150 miles from the plant site.
7 JUDGE MARGULIES: Does Staff have anything, 8 before intervenors make any statements?
9 MR. BORDENICK: The only thing that I would add, 10 Judge Margulies, is, of course, limited appearance 11 statements can be made not only verbally but in writing.
12 And, for example, if Mr. Johnson is aware of people in 13 Atlanta who want to make their views known, he can simply 14 advise them to submit those in writing to the Board.
15 JUDGE MARGULIES: Go ahead, Mr. Johnson.
16 MR. JOHNSON: Having a hearing in Atlanta for the 17 purpose, the express purpose of limited appearance would in 18 no way infringe on the ability of people in the local area 19 to appear; in fact, we would very strongly feel that people 20 in the local area should be encouraged to appear. And the 21 Board, of course, is having proceedings down there, and the 22 limited appearances here would not in any way infringe on 23 that.
24 It is my understanding that there have been cases O 25 where Boards have held hearings for limited appearances ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage M336 4646_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
8480-01 14 208 1 outside of the 50-mile area around .the plant.
(~}WRBwrb v
2 Thus, it would not be without precedent.
3 JUDGE MARGULIES: Do you know of a particular l
4 instance, Mr. Johnson, that you can cite for us?
. 5 MR. JOHNSON: No, sir, I don't. That is what I 6 had understood the Board to say in the last conference call.
7 JUDGE MARGULIES: I said it was a matter we would 8 consider.
9 I had a hearing down in Rock Hill, South 10 Carolina, and there was a request to have limited 11 appearances in Charlotte, North Carolina, which is probably 12 a distance of 20 or so miles away. And I did hold limited
) 13 appearances -- or the Board held limited appearances in 14 North Carolina although the plant was in South Carolina.
15 But it was certainly within that 50-mile radius.
16 MR. JOHNSON: Well, then I misunderstood.
17 JUDGE MARGULIES: I said it was a matter we would 18 consider, and asked that you prepare your reasons, the basis 19 for it.
20 Just one minute: Judge Paris has-something to 21 state.
22 JUDGE PARIS: I just wanted to comment, 23 Mr. Johnson, that in the Indian Point proceeding the Board 24 held limited appearance sessions in a number of towns and O 25 cities, but all of them were within the emergency -- or ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
I 202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
8480 01 15 209 (3 WRBwrb 1 adjacent, very close to the emergency planning zone for the V'
2 plant. And the purpose of the limited appearances, of 3 course, is to allow the citizens whose health and safety 4 interests may be affected by the plant to express their 5 concerns to the Board.
6 And I find it hard to see how the health and 7 safety interests of citizens of Atlanta would be affected by 8 the plant.
9 Could you speak to that, please?
10 MR. JOHNSON: Well, no I couldn' t. I was just 11 speaking to the interests and the desire of people here to 12 testify.
O 13 1 wou1d eev, however, thee there ere many geog 1e, 14 for example, in Augusta, which is not much further from the 15 plant than Waynesboro, who would be unable to make it down 16 to Waynesboro during working hours who I imagine would be 17 interested in testifying at a limited appearance hearing 18 either on an evening or on weekends in Augusta.
19 JUDGE MARGULIES: Well, we could accommodate you 20 in terms of holding an evening session if there is a 21 sufficient body of people who want to so testify. But we j 22 have run into problems in terms of getting adequate space.
23 And since they are in Augusta, and it's not that far from 24 Waynesboro, the practical solution would appear to be to 25 hold the limited appearances in Waynesboro, and in the ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-33Hi646
m 8480 01 16 210 WRBwrb 1 evening if necessary.
2 MR. JOHNSON: Okay. Well, I will inform the 3 Board if there are individuals who express an interest to 4 me, or to us in testifying and are unable to in the 5 daytime. And I will inform you as to how many there are.
6 Would it be acceptable to the Board and the other 7 party for me to do that at the beginning of the proceedings 8 next week?
9 JUDGE MARGULIES: Certainly.
10 As is the usual practice, there generally is a 11 press release issued, and there may be people who react to 12 the press release in terms of wanting to appear.
() 13 But Mr. Bordenick was perfectly correct in that 14 we will accept written limited appearances as well, and they 15 will form just as much a part of the record as the oral 16 appearances.
17 MR. JOHNSON: Okay. Well, I will so inform 18 interested parties of that.
19 JUDGE MARGULIES: Is there anything further that 20 the parties wish to discuss?
21 MR. BORDENICK: Does the Board want to talk about 22 time estimates for cross-examination today, or wait until 23 next Tuesday?
24 JUDGE MARGULIES: Are you speaking in terms of 25 setting the times for cross-examination, and things of that
~
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 80433M646
i-8480 01 17 211
'N WRBwrb 1 sort?
(d 2 MR. BORDENICK: Well, for example, my own 3 r personal feeling is if we can get a handle on whether we can I
4 wrap this hearing up next week, or is it going to carry over 5 to the following week; if so, I will have to make travel 6 arrangements.
7 I recognize these would only be estimates, but 8 if the Board is interested in hearing them, now might be an 9 appropriate time; if not, we can do it in Waynesboro on 10 Tuesday.
11 JUDGE MARGULIES: I have no problem with hearing 12 the parties. Certainly it won't be binding. And if it O 13 wou1d oive you eo e idea, and wou1e be he1 9eut, fiae, ie the 14 parties want to discuss those matters.
15 MR. JOINER: Perhaps I should begin by saying 16 that our witnesses on Contention 7 are four in number, and 17 we would seek to put these four witnesses on as a panel.
18 Our direct examination will be very short.
- 19 MR. BORDENICK
- Staff certainly has no objection 20 to that approach.
21 MR. JOHNSON: Intervenors don' t object to that 22 either.
23 JUDGE MARGULIES: I don' t know if the parties can 24 give tirae estimates on cross-examination.
25 Can you, Mr. Johnson?
- l ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
! 202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336-6646
t
.l
)
4 8480 02 01 .212 WRBwrb. 1 MR. JOENSON: Well, our experience from 5cate i 2 '
Public Service commission preceedings has noen that - o
'3 ' cross-examination that we have reason to believe should ' be 1 1
l 4 a[ very brief ends up taking much longer than we expect.,
5 '
because if the witnesses don' t answer to our saticfaction we '
h I
6' have to continue to ask followup questions.
71 So the t considered, I would not think it would ' '
4
. 8 take tr re than a few hours on the groundwat.er contantion for ,
, 6 9/ us, our cross-examination of the applicant.
- 10 And the same on the~ Groundwater would probably
- 11 be more extensive than the other two contentions. !
12 ,
As fot our direct, we also expect it will be very -
l O 13 ' etter ead ee ateced in the record ee if read, hut 14 essentially summarized from the stand.
15 .- JUDGE fiAEG0LIEst How about your 16 cross-examinbtion, Mr. Bordenick?
I L 17 '
MP. BORDENICK: First, Judge Margulies, if I ;
1 l 18 might: I'm so:newhat confused. I don't know whether 1
19 Mr. Johnson's estinato of a few nours goes to the ' '
- 20 applicant's testimony only or to the applicant's and the 21 staff's both.
22 Perhaps he could clarify that.
t
, 23 ftR. JOHNSOti: I'd ray On the groundwater a i i
l 24 maximum of a few hours for each. ' '
i 25 MR. BORDENICK: Okay.
1 l
ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
, 202-347-3700 Fadonwide Coverser 800 336 66 4
~ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _. - ~ _ ~ _ _ _ , -
l
> 2-i 8480 02 G2 213 1 MR. JOHNSON: On the others, probably a maximum
{}WRBwrb 2 of two hcurs on both, i
! 3 MR. BORDENICE: I u.iderstand. Thank you.
{
4 Judge Margulies, did you .want me 'to address the 5, Staf f's estimates? i G JUDGE MARGULIES: Yes, please.
i 7 MR. BORDCNICK: Okay. On the applicant's
< l 8 '
testimony I don' t anticipate that we would have very much ,
9 cross-examination, probably in the order of fifteen ginutes ,
10 to half an hour, if that. That is at to each contention, ,
- 11 nct total.
I i
12 ll As to the intervenors' testimony on 7 and 10.5,
( 13 based on past experience where the applicant goes first, he
, 14 ,1 will probably ask many of the same questions that we would l 15 have asked, so our cross-examination will be considerably i 16 shorter than the applicant's. And, in any event, I don' t d 17 see it exceeding an hour, if that much, on each contention. I i
18 j MR. JOINER: We will wish to cross-examine l 19 Mr. Lawless on the groundwater contention. I need to inform 20 the Board and the other parties that we are pteparing, and 21 hope to file today or tomorrow, a motion to ntrike ,
[ 22 sWos tantial portions, if not all, of Mr. Lawless' l f 23 q testimony. Our motion to strike will be based upon both
- 24 Mr. Lawless' qualifications to testify as to certain matters
) 25 and also vill go to the relevance of his testimony to the
\
1 ACE-FEDEPAL REPORTERS. INC.
l < 202 3(1-3?00 0004 4 #46
- -- . . . . . - , - .-. - -, - . . 'NationwideCoversec -.
11 j 8480 02 03 214
^ WRBwrb 1} issues stated by the Board in its orders on Contention 7. -
0<s 2 I would propose that we argue the nction to 3 I strike at the evidentiary hearing week. But our i; I
4 cross-sx aminations of Mr. Lawless will depend to a large i
5j dagree on the outcome of that notion to strike and the 6 Board's ruling thereon. At the outside, I would expect that 7j our cross-examinar. ion of Mr. Lawless would not take more r 4
8 than a couple of hours.
9 If I may Continue on and speak to Contention ,
10 )a 10.1, we have two pieces of testimony on that contention, 11 ' However, there are a total of five witnesses: Mr. Kitchens, 12 h Mr. Mayer, Mr. Knowl, Mr. Quasni and Mr. Bacoat, and we I
()
13 would propose to put those five witnesses on as a panel and 14 have their testimony copied into the record. <
i 15 on contention 10.5 we have also five witnesses '
F I
i 16 and would propose to put them on as a panel.
l
. 17 '
o'2r cross-exLmination of the intervenors' only 1
18 other witness, Professor Deutsch, will lihowise not exceed a 19 couple of hours. And by way of notice to Mr, Johnson, I .
(
i 20 would say that a fair pottion of that cros -examination will l
, \
21 be voir dire examination to inquire into Professor Deutsch's 22 l qualifications to testify as an expert. I 23 MR. JOHWSOti I'M sorryr I didn't understand the 24 < last part. The majority of your examination will oe...what?
) 25 MR. JOINER: Not necessarily the majority, but a 4
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, IMC.
2r-347 379) - Nationwide cover:2e swimuus !
l 8480 02 04 215 t
I WRBwrb 1 part of my croas-examination of Mr. Deutsch will go to his l 2 qualificatione as ar, expert bo testify on the subject matter 3 of ASCO valves.
h i j 4 "
MR. JOHNSON: Okay; I understand. Thank you.
1 5 Relating to all of this, it counds as if.the
' 1 6- proceedings would bG wrepped up next week. And I wonder if, i
7 for the convenience of Dr. Deutsch, it would be possible to l
o
, 3} set a time, for example on Thursday, for the beginning cf .
I 9P the -- this gets back to the schedule. I guess I'm 10 suggesting an amendrent to the echeduler aut to cet a time 1
J
- 4 11 certain for that subcontention to be considered, 10 5 to be 12 h considered, either on Thursday or yriday, e
() 13 CUDGE MARGULIES: Do the parties have any problem
- 14 with that?
Il l.
t i
4 15 ) MR. JOINER: I would concur with Mr. Johnson i
j 16 j that there is a fair likelihood that we will be able to 4'
17 conclude this evidenciary hearing cext wee'r..
18 { Rather than, however, set a specific time for 19 Mr, Deutsch to appear, and thus interrupt on-going testimony 20 of a panel or of a witness, I would propose instead that we i 21 < simply take Prefessor Deutsch out of turn. 4 ,
0 <
s 22 ' JUDGE MARGULIEG: Do you have any problem with 23 that, Kr. Johnson?
24 MR. JOHNSON: No, I don' t.
()
' l so that, for example, if we said he would appear 25 g )
1
,. h ACE. FEDERAL REPOKT.ERS, INC. '
! 20M4t.1790 IU0 Nedomde Cove ~ age- - . . ._ . _3764H6. -_~
_ _ __~_ -. . . ~ . . . . . . - - . .
Y 4 8480 02 05 216 7
WRBwrb 1 Tuursday morning, that he might be~ the lead-of f witness 2, either in the morning or af ter lunch. Is that consistent I
3 l with what you' re saying , Jim?
1 ,
4 MR. JOINERt' What I was trying to say is; after 5 we finish the testimony on Contention 7 we could then go to 6' Contention 10.5, which I think, based on what we have talked 'l 7< about, is likely to acconnocate your schedule.
8 <
MR. JOHNSON: Okay; that would be acceptable to 5
9 ,
me.
10 JUDGE MARGULIES: Do you have any problets with 11 that, Mr. Bordenick?
{
j L2 1 NR. BORDENICK: No , .I do n ' t, That has certainly. ,
i
() 13 been done before, and we could certainly I'm sure 14 i accommodate Mr. Deutscb.
j 15 JUDGE MARGULIES; The Board has no problem with
? *
! 16 'that. 1
} i e 17 Is there anything further?
l 19 MR. BORDENICx: I have one or two items relating 19 to emergency planning, which, in. Mr . Rochlis' absence, I'd i l
} 20 like to bring to the Board's attention, if we're finished f 21] with the other matters relating to the hearing next week.
22 JUDGE MARGULIES: Yes, we are.
F 23 , NR. BCRDENICK: The *1est ono I just discovered !
(
l 24 an cdminiF;rative error thic morning.- The Staff has filed
( 25 se/eral responses to applicant's notions for summary 1 '
l
! l ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
i' l
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 3 4 4646
- . . . - . . . . ~ - , . - _
8480 02 06 217 i WRBwrb 1 disposition on the emergency planning contention, and 2I attached to our responses have been affidavits from Sheryll 1
3o L. Stovall, from the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
4' And in her affidavit she indicates that "A current statement 5 l of my professional qualifications is attached hereto." And 6 through inadvertacce, the FEHA people being in Atlanta and 7 Staff being in Washington, or Bethesda, that statenent of 8 professional qualifications did not get filed.
l 9 I am cither today or tomorrow going to take steos J '
i 10 to get that served on the Board and parties. And I 11 apologize for any inconvenience that might cause.
12/ The second item is: the Board may recall that f (j 13 , during the course of the last conference, telephone 14 conference on January 10th, wher. Mr. Rochlis waa addrassing 13 responsen to motions for sumocry disposition, he was at that g 16 1 tice comewhat possimistic on FEMA's ability principally due L7 to availability of raviewers, to responi to the notions in a i 10 ? timely canner. First of all, let me say that Mr. Rochlis I
19 had hoped to be on this call today to speak for hinself, but 20 he's appearing at an (13c hearing in Raleigh, North 21 Carolina, today, ao he asksd me to do two things on his 22 behalft one, to indicate tant he was, at least on the 23 motior.s that we respor;ded to so far, which had been in a 24 tirely manner, somewhat overly pessimistic on responding in 4 25 a timely manner, 1
ACE. FEDERAL RE*ORTERS, INC.
( l 202-M7 3700 Nat.onwik Cowrage p *,.6 1646
_ _ __ _ __ _ - ~ . .
H l
l 8483 02 01 ,
210 -
^
WRLwrb 1 on the notions yet to come,- 1 dcn't know whether 2 j ue can uce the past experience as an indicator that FEMA snd i the staff will be able to respond in a tinely manner. We 4 will certainly make avery effort to do that. And also S pursuant to the Board's direction, Mr. Rochlis ,has spokan 6 to, I believe, Mr. Johnson end, I believe, tp Mr. Joiner 7 Vis-a-vis the necescity, if the need arises, to get S extensions of time to respond to the motions. And it's my
- 9 endorstanding that the other parties were amenable to '
10 agreeing to such extensions.if and when they're necectiry.
11 And, again, without knowing what the motion 3 will look likG l 12 ,
that are yet to come, if we do nava to seek an extension I
() 13 do n' t think they'El be for nore than a two-week period, if j 14 that.
15 ' Ostless the Board and the other parties have any 16 questions, that would conclude the romarks I wanted to make j 17 j relative to the omorgency planning aspect of this la proceeding.
i 19 , MR. JOH1'S ON : l'm voclear. Is Itr. Rochlis going 20 to file for each of the motions?
21 MR. BORDENICK: To date, if you exclude I think
! 22 , it was the contontion having to do with the public I
23 inf orma tion--
I 24 MR. JOHt1 SON: That wan EP-6 i
/ 25 MR. BORDEt11CK: If you exclude that one, ; think I
ACEMEDEMI, REPORTERS, INC, 202.W37(n) Nado Mde Ceerage SD7M.M46
s.
r --
f 8480 02 08- 219 1 to date we have responded to two motions. We are'in the
' {}WRBwrb
. 2L process, and will timely respond to the third motion which ,
31 has to do with the NOAA = tone alert radios, L
l' 4 l 'A fouttb motion'came in yesterday. Neither 1
, 5. '
Mr. Rochlis nor I have had a _ chcnce to look at it as yet. I ;
! 4 6 think the response on that one is due March 28th.
} 7 What I'm saying is that the fourth motion and any i
4 8 subsequent motions that come in, we' re unable to state
- L l .
{
1 9 N whether'we'll be.able to respond in~ time or not. We're -
I i 10 hopefel of doing that. On the other hand, I think
( :
1 11 Mr. Rochlis ~~ or the resources available to Mr. Rochlis j ,
12 have been more in line with what he had hoped they would-be ,
f () 13 rather than what he thought they might be on January loth.
14 So, in summary, what I'm saying is we'll have to-15 look at each motion, and hopefully we can respond --- make a .
1 16 timely response to each motion. However, it may.be
{
! 17 necessary to seek an extention of time. He has conferred l ~ '
t i 19 with the other parties. They are agreeable to extensions.
j 19 And, in any event, we probably wouldn't be talking about'an j, 20 extension beyond two weeks to respond to any given motion,.
l 21 if any extension at all is neesssary.
1 L
22 JUDGE MAPGULIES: Well, thank you for this f .23 additional information, Mr. Bordenick.
F i 24 Is there anything further? ,.
L i
O 25 MR. JollNSON Intervenorn havefnothing further.
l AcsFEDERAL REPORTERS,--INC.-
j
.~,, , , - . . - , , .
- l. t .102 341 3700 '
- . . , - , ~ ~ . - . - - - - . .
No:leswide Cowraer 2 354646
, - . - - - - - , , , - ~ , -
l
8480 02 09 220 WRBwrb 1 MR. JOINER: Nothing from applicants.
2 MR. BORDENICK: I have nothing further for the 3 Staff.
4 JUDGE MARGULIES: Well, thank you very much. The 5 Board will be seeing you on the lith.
6 (Whereupon, at 2:20 p.m., the telephone 7 conference was concluded.)
8 9
10 11 12 O 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 O 25 l ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4 646 v-eew
CERTIFICATE OF OFFICIAL REPORTER This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION in the matter of:
NAME OF PROCEEDING: GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, et al.
(Vogtle Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2)
I
! DOCKET NO.: 50-424 OL, 50-425 OL PLACE: WASHINGTON, D. C.
DATE: TUESDAY, MARCH 4, 1986 were held au herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear l Regulatory Commission.
(sigt f/)ff
- (TYPED)
WILLIAM R. BLOOM Official Reporter ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
Reporter's Affiliation O
-- ,, r y-