ML20154B822
| ML20154B822 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 02/26/1986 |
| From: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-#186-246 OL, NUDOCS 8603040402 | |
| Download: ML20154B822 (47) | |
Text
--
ps OR'GINAL O
w S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION T6 FER 27 P4 :38
?!Nh .
u n,i h v IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 50-400 OL
, 50-401 OL l
CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY (Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant)
PREHEARING CONFERENCE O .
LOCATION: WASHINGTOL D. C. PAGES: 10369 - 10413 DATE: WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1986 0l f k h e d - //A /- $
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
O om ace--
444 North Capitol Street 9603040402 e60226 0 Washington, D.C. 20001 PDR A DOCV. 0500l (202)347-3700 NATIONWIDE COVERACE
0000 00 01 10369 1 WRBwrb l- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA i
2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 -------------------------------x 4 In the matter of: :
5 CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY :
6 NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN : Docket No. 50-400 OL 50-401 OL 7 MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY :
8 (Shearon Harris Nuclear Power : TELEPHONE CONFERENCE 9 Plant) :
10 --------------------------------x 11 Ace Federal Reporters, Inc.
12 Suite 402 13 444 North Capitol Street, N.W.,
14 Washington, D. C.
15 Wednesday, February 26, 1986 16 ' Telephone conference in the above-entitled matter 17 was held, pursuant to notice, beginning at 10:00 a.m.
18 PARTICIPANTS:
- 19 JAMES L. KELLEY, Esq., Chairman, 20 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 21 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i 22 Washington, D. C. 20555 23 I 24 O 25 l
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
2 2-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 80 4 316-6646
0000 00'02 10370 1 WRBwrb 1 JAMES H. CARPENTER, Member, 2 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, 3 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory . Commission 4 Washington, D. C. 20555 5 GLENN O. BRIGHT, Member, 6 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, 7 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 8 Washington, D. C. 20555 9 On behalf of the Applicants:
10 THOMAS A. BAXTER, Esq. and 11 LISA RIDGEWAY, Esq.,
12 Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge 13 l 1800 M S'treet, N. W.,
("}
14 Washington, D. C.
15 DALE HOLLAR, ESQ.,
16 Associate General Counsel, 17 Carolina Power and Light Company 18 P. O. Box 1551 19 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 20 On behalf of the Federal Emergency Management Agency:
21 STEPHEN ROCHLIS, Esq.,
22 Regional Counsel, Region IV, ;
1 23 Atlanta, Georgia i
24
() 25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 2 336 6646 L-_.--__ .- .
--.2__
0000 00 03 10371 1, WRBwrb 1 Appearing Pro Se:
U 2 .
WELLS EDDLEMAN, 3 812 Yancey Street, 4 Durham, North Carolina 27701 5 On behalf of-the Attorney General of the 6 State-of North Carolina:
7 JO ANNE SANFORD, Esq. and FRED GAMIN, Esq.,
8 Raleigh, North Carolina 9 On behalf of the NRC Staff:
10 JANICE E. MOORE, Esq.,
11 Office of the Executive Legal Director u
,1 12 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 13 Washington, D. C. 20555 14 15 16 17 ,
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 -
O 25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.~
202-347-3700 Nationwide coverase 800 336 6646
l-6000 01 01 0 10372 I
2 NRBwrb 1 PROCC-EDINGS
/~'i ,
\_/ 2 j JUDGE KELLEY: This is Judge Kelley. With me are 3 Judge Bright and Judge Carpenter. ,
4l Let me just note first that we have received the
$ , proposed witness list from the applicanto and the staff and 6[j from .Mr. Eddleman. We have prefiled from the applicants and 7 the staff;. We don't hav9 any subpoena requests from the 3' applicants and the stafft we do have a subpoena request from l
9 Mr, Eddlesan for four people. '
10 Last week :< hen those came in -- they, by the way, ,
11 ; took a week to get here: mail continues to b*e slew. We l i
understand that the staff would have objections to some of 12 )!i 13 f these subpoena requests, and in light of that we scheduled
)
14 the telephone conference for today.
r 15 l We might have done this a little earlier, 1 might ,
I 16 j note, but for the fact that I was out for a bar exam, t
17 L We have received from the applicants written 18 objections to the Eddledan request for subpoenas, and I i
19 understand that the staff will want to present its objections today on the record, 20 f 21 Will that be from Mr. Rochlis, Ms, Moore, or who? s l
1 22 [ MS. MOORS: Mr. Rochlis, 23 JUDGE EELLEY: Let me just note further that what 24 we are attempting to dc here, as we have done in the past,
(]) 25 ; is to foreshorten -- or the phrase " cut through" has 26 sometimes .
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Madenwide Covrass 9043N64
)
_a .-. .-- .~. .-
0000'01 02 10373 2 WRBwrb 1 been used -- with respect to hearing from the parties and O
O 2 ruling on subpoena requests; that is, we have not, as we 3 could do under the rule, simply issued the subpoena on an 4 indication of relevance and then proceed on a motion to 5 quash basis. We're simply getting the parties on the phone 6 and hearing them out in the interests of speeding things up 7 a bit.
8 I might simply note that if a particular party 9 has an objection we may have to hear from them further; I 10 don' t know. But perhaps we can resolve most of whatever 11 disputes there may be by hearing "from the parties.
12 So that's what we propose to do. '
pa 13 l As I say, we have Mr, Eddleman's request, we have 14 the written response from the applicants. Perhaps we might 15 ! go next to FEMA and the staff and hear any objections that 16 they have got, and then also hear Mr. Eddleman respond to 17 the various objections, and the Board would have some 18 ! questions either during that process or perhaps at the i
19 close.
20 I suggest that we ask first about the subpoena 21 request for Mr. Jesse Riley. Mr. Riley has been requested 22 as a Board witness-- Strike that; I meant to say 23 Mr. McKinney is the person requested as the Board witness:
l 24 we'll get to him in just a minute. Let's go to Mr. Riley -
O 2s , firse.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nadonwide Coverage 800-336 6646
- . - _,._._ _ . m.- - - _ - - - - - - - - -
J
i 0000 01 03 10374 1 WRBwrb 1 Mr. Rochlis, do you have any objection to that
, i
2 request?
3 MR. ROCHLIS: Yes, your Honor.
l 4I Essentially with Mr. Riley, the Board has i
1 5j indicated in the January 16th ruling that this is a limited 6 rehearing, most of the issues are very, very specific and 7 they relate to the previous hearing and previous filings in i
8; this matter. I don't see how Mr. Riley is going to be 9 qualified as an expert to testify on the matters before the 10 Board, nor-- Even if he is qualified on a number of these 11 , matters that the Board wanted a more complete record on, it 12 l would call for more speculation and conjecture on
(~^. 13 ; Mr. Riley's part as to why Mr. Keast testified in a certain tj ,
14 ! way or why Dr. Crider testified in a certain way.
l 15 ' So for reasons of his' lack of qualifications, the I
fact that this is a very limited rehearing, and due to the 16 lr 17 ' expertise required, I don' t think there has been any showing 18 that Mr. Riley would add to the record in any shape or form 19 l in this matter.
l 20 JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
21 Perhaps it might be best... Mr. Eddleman, would 22 you prefer to speak on each individual rather than having to 23 do it all cumulatively? j l
24 MR. EDDLEMAN: Sure; I think that would be i l
/m
(_) 25 cleaner, Judge, if that's convenient with the other parties i
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
232-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33M686
I 0000 01 04 10375 l_ HRBwrb 1 and the Board.
( ')
2 JUDGE KELLEY:
Let me ask you about Mr. Riley 3 before you begin your response.
4 MR. EDDLEMAN: Yes, sir.
5 JUDGE KELLEY: The applicants make the point 6' that by virtue of his being subpoenaed he may not then have 7; prefiled testimony, and they suggest that the use of the 8l subpoena may be, in effect, an end run arcund the prefiling 9 requirement. His point is, he's assuming Mr. Riley is in 10 fact a friendly witness to you, and we wonder-- We think 11 j perhaps there may be some merit in the applicant's point.
12 So we'd like you to address that specifically. -
f^)
v 13 l MR. EDDLEMAN: I will make every effort to 14 provide prefiled for Mr. Riley. He's been quite Dusy. And, 15 l as the applicants were informed, that if I had a direct 16 witness it would probably be Mr. Riley. But we could not 17 work that out. And so I decided, in light of his workload, 18 ' to go ahead and subpoena him to make sure that he did show i
19 f
'up.
i 20 ' I think-- You know, I can certainly talk to him 21 and see if we can get prefiled into the hands of the Board 22 i and the parties and anybody who has got to have it by the 23 l end of this week. That's about as fast as I think we can l
24 l turn it around. -
tm l
() 25 l MS. RIDGEWAY: Mr. Chairman, I think that ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nanonwide Coverage 800-3364646
1 0000 01 05 10376 1 WRBwrb 1 Mr. Eddleman has just effectively conceded the point that O 2 indeed he could have prefiled the testimony of Mr. Riley.
3 And I would point out that in the Thursday, January 23rd, 4 conference call in this case where we set the schedule, the 5 Board at transcript page 10,286 made it quite clear to 6 Mr. Eddleman that he was to identify his direct witnesses 7 for which prefiled testimony would be available at the same 8 time as the other parties.
9 It was made very clear to him that his only 10 leeway was in subpoenaed witnesses. And I think that 11 prefiled testimony now is far too late. We' re all entitled 12 ' to have prefiled testimony filed at the same time, so that 13 ' we have the same opportunity to prepare for
{}
14 cross-examination.
15 JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
16 Mr. Eddleman, anything further?
17 MR. EDDLEMAN: Yes, Judge.
18 To respond to that: tirst, it was not clear to 19 me, from my discussions with Mr. Riley, that he would even 20 be able to show up. That's one reason that I subpoenaed 21 him. I wasn't trying to get around the prefiling: I'm 22 perfectly willing to make anything available that I can, 23 My discussion with Mr. Riley basically went to 24 the point that he did have knowledge of alerting systems and ,
() 25 the effectiveness of the alerting systems. The Board's ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
ll02-347 3700 Nationwide Coversee 800 336-66 4
l 0000 01 06 10377 1 WRBwrb 1 Question 6 is the main thing that he would go to, I think,
- s 2 although he may have some points on the others.
3 But the ultimate question here is: will the 4 system work, is it going to alert acceptably a large 5 percentage of the people in the EPZ; which I would contend 6 is essentially 100 percent, within the rule. And it wasn't 7 clear that he would be able to work out his testimony in 8' time, and it's not clear still what he wo.uld be able to 9 prefile.
10 But I will get in touch with him as quick as 11 possible, if that's ordered.
12 I would like also to respond to Mr. Rochlis' 13 objection, if I may. He basically seems to think that we 14 can' t establish Mr. Riley's qualifications. I think we can 15 establish that. He certainly has experience in this area 16 and has been through a hearing with it, and I think some 17 ) members of the Board may be familiar with his participation 18 in that hearing.
19 As to the expertise required, I think he does 20 have the knowledge in the area of alerting effectiveness.
21 And that's really the ultimate question here. So I think he 22 would be qualified, and could add to the record.
23 JUDGE KELLEY: Let me just make a comment on what 24 we feel is before us this morning and what would be in the '
(') 25 normal course before us next week.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
, , - - - ~ , . , . . m , , ., . . . . . . . . . - . . . .
0000 01 07 10378 1 WRBwrb 1 It seems to us that we're being asked for ,,
2 subpoenas and people are being put forward as being able to 3 address certain issues. And if, for example, we were to 4 conclude that the issue isn't even before the house, then we 5 could say: Well, that testimony is not relevant,-and we deny 6 the subpoena.
7 By contrast, we aren't really sitting this 8 morning to pass on people's expert qualifications. Indeed, 9 if an expert came in voluntarily there's no subpoena 10 discussion involved, and in the normal course his il qualifications would be open to voir di're and he might be 12 l excluded or not. But that would happen next week.
1
(~x. 1 3 '- So while there may not always be a clear line U
14 between the two areas I'm talking about, it does seem to us 15 ! that we're not primarily focussed on whether a given person 16 l is an expert on acoustics or tone alerts or whatever. To 17 some extent we're taking the parties' representations on 1
l 18 that point.
19 With regard to Mr. Riley, then, does anyone else 20 have any further comment?
21 What we'd like to do is to talk about all four, 22 and then the Board will retire and consider what we'vo 23 ! heard, and come back with a ruling.
I 24 Anything else on Mr. Riley?
n
() 25 MS. RIDGEWAY: Not for applicants, ycur Honor.
i ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646 r..---,- . - . , - . . . , , , , , , , - . . - . , .
. s 0000 01 08 10379 2sWRBwrb 1 MR. ROCHLIS: Not for FEMA, your Honor.
U 2 - JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
3 Well, let's go to Mr. McKinney. Mr. McKinney-is i 4 sought by Mr. Eddleman as a Board witness. He's with 5 Southern Bell Marketing. The applicants have filed an 6 opposition that based on their view that Mr. Eddleman hasn' t 7 satisfied the requirement of the Summer case with regard to 8 Mr. McKinney.
9 Mr. Rochlis?
10 MR. ROCHLIS: To save time, your Honor, I would 11 esssentially concur. I don't think Mr. Eddleman has met the ,
12 summer criteria in this case with regard to Mr. McKinney.
() 13 ' ,
JUDGE KELLEY: Very well.
14 This raises another consideration with regard to 15 Mr. McKinney, and maybe more broadly with regard to phone 16 l alert testimony and findings alike.
17 i!
We d id , in our January 16th order, issue an 18 invitation to the applicants to look at. alternative 19 supplementary forms of alerting, including phone alert. But 20 the language we used was "such as the telephone alerting '
21 system called for" in the Eddleman contention. We did not 22 intend to single out phone alert -- not phone alert; we did 23 not intend to single out telephone alerting as something 24 that the applicants were required to proffer as a means of 7
() 25 alerting. The applicants' testimony does contain a l
I I
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33H646 n m
e 0000 01 09 10380 1 WRBwrb 1 discussion of telephone alert.
r-)
x>
2 It does seem, however, that if you look at the 3 applicants' proposal as essentially siren plus tone alert 4l radio, and their position being that those two things will 5 meet the regulations, and it seems somewhat debatable 6 whether a discussion of telephone alesting is essential to 7 the case, or even whether it need be addressed in any detail 8 at all. If that were so, would that not raise some question 9 about the need for Mr. McKinney's testimony? We don't 10 propose to make findings on the telephone, but that's 11 something the other parties may want "to speak to.
i 12 l We've come to Mr. Eddleman, so why don' t we let
('}
v_
13 him speak first. You can include that comment I just made 14 , ia your comment l
15 l Go ahead, Mr. Eddleman.
I 16 ! MR. EDDLEMAN: Judge, first, in a relaxed manner, 17 let me take vigorous exception to a couple of the ideas that 18 ; you j ust expressed in a tentative f ashion.
l l 19 ! First, I t hi n' since the contention mentions 20 telephone alerting ;ke uitly, that in order to resolve the j 1
21 contention -- now this is just my position I'm laying out 22 here--
l 23 JUDGE KELLEY: Right. l 24 liR. EDDLEMAN: -- tha t it is required to resolve
() 25 the issue.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336 4 646 h _ m ____ -- _ _ _ _ _
- 1
0000 01-10 10381 i
WRBwrb 1 I would also point out that in evidence is the 2 fact that a telephone call can alert 90 percent of the 3 _
people in the zone that's in evidence; okay? So when 4 you're talking about the question of what the applicants 5 propose, certainly the burden of proof is on them. But they 6 can' t rewrite the contention. The contention doesn' t say 7 tone alert radio, it says telephones and other systems.
8 Tone alerts are another system. But I don't think they 9 should be allowed to determine what other systems are 1 10 considered. I think that all other systems should be 11 considered. And that's what Mr. McKinney has information 12 on.
() 13 JUDGE KELLEY: I think that in a hearinQ on the
- 14 adequacy of alerting, that all possible alerting systems are 15 open for litigation.
16 MR. EDDLEMAN: Well, certainly the one that's 17 , mentioned in the contention is open for litigation. And the 1
18 Board actually asked in its Item 6-- I realize that you' re ,
4 19 saying you didn' t mean to require . testimony on those systems 20 from anyone, but you invited it. And Mr. McKinney, because i 21 of his management, is unable to appear as a voluntary 22 witness. I had to subpoena him.
23 Now, it says in the Summer decision as quoted by 24 the applicants -- I'm looking at page 3 of their opposition -!
j 25 which I got by Federal Express yesterday: "The Board can i
l ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
I 202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646
.., . _. _ _. .- _ . _ . . - . . . . . ~. _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ -
0000 01 11 10382 1 WRBwrb 1 call their own witnesses only af ter giving the parties 7- ;
i N' 2 proceeding every opportunity to clarify or supplement their 3 previous testimony." It seems to me I think that's exactly 4 what the Board has done. And, second, " showing why it 5 cannot reach an informed decision without any independent 6 witness." I'd say the answer to that is that Mr. McKinney 7 is informed, he knows this stuff much better than the 8 applicants' witness.
9 Also, you've got to realize that when I issued 10 the subpoena request, the applicants' testimony had not even 11 i been filed, and I didn't know how extensive it was going to 12 be. But looking at it, their testimony about telephones is i
(~} 13 l clearly not sufficient to assess the adequacy of a phone w/
14 system, i
15 j It does appear', however, that there are systems i
16 l that would cost less than what they're proposing that would i
involve telephones.
17 l 18 l So that it looks like it's a little bit screwy in l
19 their position.
20 I don' t see what's unf air about the opportunity 21 that the Board has given the parties to supplement this.
22 "The parties' first opportunity to clarify or supplement 23 testimony presented November 4th and 5th," as argued on page 24 4 of applicants': I think that's ridiculous. The applicants
(,,) 25 in fact supplement it on January the 2nd with the affidavit ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336-6646
~ ~ _ _ _ _ _ ~ ~ _ . .__ . . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ . . . . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ , , , , , , , . , , , , , , , , ,,
0000 01 12 i 10383 WRBwrb l- of Mr. Keast. They could have clarified or supplemented it 2 at any time. There's nothing that restrains them from 3 alerting the Board to any errors or any incompleteness, 4 requesting re-opened hearings, or anything they want to do 5 to bear their burden of proof. ,
6 But I certainly am not responsible for their 7 failure to bear it.
8 As to the question of whether you can' t reach an 9 informed decision without independent witnesses, I think 10 I've addressed that: he's somebody who has got broader
~
11 experience and broader knowledge than the applicants' 12 witness. It's just not adequate. -
() 13 So I think that covers Mr. McKinney. Thank you.,
14 JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
15 We'd like to hear reactions or comments from--
16 Ms. Ridgeway, are you speaking for the applicants?
17 MS. RIDGEWAY: Yes, your Honor.
I 18 JUDGE KELLEY: Do you think, under the contention 19 as admitted, and as interpreted by the Board, this Board is 20 required to reach questions of adequacy of telephone 21 alerting systems?
22 MS. RIDGEWAY: No, your Honor, I do not. -As a 23 matter of fact, we would vigorously argue that under the 24 regulatory scheme that the Board need hear no testimony
() 25 whatsoever on telephone systems.
t ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 .
Nanonwide Coverage 800 33(H5646
0000 01 13 10384 1 WRBwrb 1 We can choose to meet our burden any way we 2 please. The regulatory scheme contemplates that the 3 selection of the means by which the regulation is met is at 4 the option of the licensee, and provided we meet the 5 regulations we can do it any way we choose.
6 Indeed, there is Commission law -- I can' t 7l provide a ready citation right at the moment; but just as a 8 general matter -- that you do not design systems on the 9 witness stand; that is, that applicants advance their system 10 and the Board either finds that it meets the regulation or 11 that it does not. At which point applicant must supplement 12 their system in some way. But that it is not up to the 13 Board or to the other parties to redesign the system for the s_
14 applicant's.
15 For that reason we agree with the Board that 16 i based on the testimony that we have filed showing that i
17 sirons and tone alert radios will meet the Commission's 18 4 regulation, that the Board need not hear anything at all on 19 telephone systems.
20 JUDGE KELLEY: And it's sirens and tone alerts 21 that you're now relying on to meet the regulation?
22 MS. RIDGEWAY: That's correct, your Honor.
23 JUDGE KELLEY: Thank you.
24 Any comment, Mr. Rochlis?
() 25 MR. ROCHLIS: Well, as I understand from the ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646 m_.m_m._ m__. . __ _ _ _ . - - - - - -- -
0000 01 14 10385 1 WRBwrb 1 Board's, I think it was the April '85 ruling, the Board i
2 narrowed Mr. Eddleman's contention to essentially read: Will 3 the sirens awaken people sleeping at night, or will some 4 other augmentation system be required to augment the siren 5 system? And although it's true that Mr. .Eddleman started 6 out with the telephone system, I would have to agree with 7 Ms. Ridgeway's recitation that it's up to the applicants to 8 pick the system as long as it's in compliance with the 9 regulations.
10 JUDGE KELLEY: Thank you.,
11 Anything else, Mr. Eddleman?
12 MR. EDDLEMAN: I think I've already covered these O 13 points.
(J 14 JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
15 MS. SANFORD: Judge Kelley, I would like to make i
16 a couple of observations.
17 No. 1, the issue of the telephone alerting system 18 ! is in CPL's testimony and is before the Board at this time 19 and presumably will come under discussion next week.
20 , Something that occurs to me is that everyone has 21 an interest, certainly, in expediting the deliberations, and 22 I'm wondering if it would not make sense to get Mr. McKinney 23 in here so that all the questions can be answered in one 24 forum and hopefully the decision can be disposed of.
I f4 v-25 JUDGE KELLEY: The issue of the telephone?
l ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
3)2 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336-6646
, , . - - - , - = , , - , _ . , _ , , , . , - . . . , . , . . . , _ . . . . , . . . _ . . ,
0000 01 15 10386 1 WRBwrb 1 MS. SANFORD: The issue of the adequacy of the
(~
k-} 2 alerting generally. And telephone alerting having been 3 raised and the Board having expressed an interest in 4 telephone alerting as one of the augmented or supplemental 5 systems here, it would just seem to me, reasonably, it is 6 going to be discussed, as a practical matter, and it would 7 seem to me that perhaps all of our purposes would be served 8 if someone is there from Southern Bell who could speak with 9 authority on the subject.
10 JUDGE KELLEY: ' Okay. I'm sorry I didn' t ask you 11 before: do you have any comments on Mr. Riley?
12 MS. SANFORD: No, sir.
13 { JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
14 Let's move, then, to Mr. Black, who is an 15 employee of CP&L. Agai', we have the applicants' basic 16 arguments.
17 Mr. Rochlis?
I 18 MR. ROCHLIS: I think we have to go back again to 19 the issue of what we are litigating here. And this is a 20 limited reopening. I don't see anything at this time that 21 Mr. Black could testify to. Perhaps at an earlier date he 22 may have been able to testify to certain issues involved in 23 the contention which would have been relevant, but at this 24 time, based on the six issues that the Board indicated were -
() 25 to be litigated, I don't see the relevance in Mr. Black's ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336 4646
0000 01 16 10387 4 WRBwrb 1 testimony at all.
2 JUDGE KELLEY: Okay. Mr. Eddleman?
3 MR. EDDLEMAN: Well, the first thing is that in 4 light of the Board's ruling denying the subpoena for 5 Dr. Bassiouni before, where it basically said if this guy
- 6 was an af fiant on smumary disposition and they don' t file 7! testimony for him, you're on notice that if you want him I
8 you'd better subpoena him. So I did.
9 I think that the applicants are deciding who they 10 want on the witness stand. And I think Mr. Black has 11 considerable knowledge of this -- he's Mr. Gocdwin's boss, 12 as I understand it -- and has probably a broader view of 13 this matter than Mr..Goodwin does. And I think that his 14 knowledge of this is just quite relevant. The applicants' 15 just simply don't want to get it in front of the Board.
16 JUDGE KELLEY: What aspect of his knowledge and 17 experience would you stress with regard to Mr. Black in 18 relation to the issues?
19 MR. EDDLEMAN: Well, first, the selection of-the 20 systems; the adequacy of the sirens themselves in terms of 21 the consideration that went into that; with regard to the 22 Board's first few points, and also the question of how they 23 chose to use the tone alert radios as the backup, and the 24 adequacy of the tone alert radios, the experience of other -
() 25 utilities they're familiar with, the experience CP&L has, ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverase 800 336 6646
0000 01 17 10388 2 WRBwrb 1 the reasons for the selection, and what other alternatives 2 might have been considered and what they were good for.
3 JUDGE KELLEY: If, in fact, the systems they 4 chose are adequate, what difference does it make why they 5 chose them?
6 MR. EDDLEMAN: If another system is more adequate 7' it makes a big difference.
8 JUDGE KELLEY: That's a loser, Mr. Eddleman, 9 you'll never win on that one.
10 1 If you meet the requirement that's all that's I
11 required. The fact that something around is better and 12 gives you more margin is not relevant in this case.
13 ,
MR. EDDLEMAN: Well, Judge, you're the judge.
14 -But I may appeal on that one.
15 Let me pass on, then, to the questions of the--
16 Well, I guess you' re going to say cost is irrelevant, too; 17 it doesn't matter what it costs, they'can--
18 j JUDGE KELLEY: No, no, I didn' t say that.
19 MR. EDDLEMAN: Well, I was speculating in light 20 of some previous statement about the NRC not being concerned 21 with cost. I beg your pardon.
22 JUDGE KELLEY: I think you made a good point, 23 Mr. Eddleman. With regard to cost, there is a 24 cost-effectiveness statement that we quoted in our last (g] 25 order. And insof ar as that might get you into comparisons, }
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
ll02-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
, 0000 02 Ol' 10389 I
WRBwrb 1 I suppose that may be fair game.- This is just me talking:
i 2 I'm not making a Board ruling.
E i _3 MR.~EDDLEMAN: Right. I'm : reacting to your i .4 point.
I
! 5 JUDGE KELLEY: I think that point may'be well i
1 6 taken.
i 7 MR. EDDLEMAN: . Okay.- That one, and also the
- 8 experience of other utilities with the tone alerts, I think l 9 that's a point that Mr. Black could address. And'I think i
l 10 that's very relevant to the question of whether the tone j 11 alerts are going to be adequate. ,
. 12 JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
1 13 Ms. Sanford?
- 14 MS. SANFORD: Yes, sir. I have no comments with j 15 respect to Mr. Black.
j 16 JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
I 17 Let's go to Dr. Bassiouni. The applicants---
I
! 18 MS. RIDGEWAY: Mr. Chairman.
19 JUDGE KELLEY: Yes?
i j 20 MS. RIDGEWAY: I'd just like quickly to make two q-j 21 points before we pass on. That is, that first I would 22 reiterate, as we pointed out, to the extent that 1
23- Mr. Eddleman is saying that Mr. Black was an affiant on
}
.24 summary disposition on 57(c)(3), he simply wasn' t. We point -
O 25 ehae out ae page 11.
i 4
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
} ..__..._..._..-.__.-.....-_.______.,.__.,____..__-....-..33H646__
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverass 800
0000 02 02 10390 1 WRBwrb 1 Secondly, the Board noted in passing that one of O
(-) 2 the Board's orders had noted that cost-effectiveness was 3 included as a consideration in the Commission CLI decision 4 on the final rule on emergency planning, and I would simply 5 point out there that a careful review of the language there 6 would indicate, I think, that they were discussing 7 cost-ef fectiveness in terms of FEMA setting the criteria, 8 the percentage that would be required to be notified, not 9 that there would be cost-ef fectiveness taken into 10 consideration in deciding between systems; rather than
~
11 deciding what the regulation meant, that they would allow 12 FEMA in its implementation of the regulation to decide f 13 j whether it was cost-ef fective to require implemental 14 supplementation.
15 MR. EDbLEMAN: Judge, may I respond to that, 16 briefly?
17 JUDGE KELLEY: Go ahead.
18 MR. EDDLEMAN: First, I contend strongly that ,
19 applicants' decision to limit this to five miles is wrong.
20 so in that context I think the effectiveness -- that this 21 would also apply to Mr. Black, of course. The effectiveness 22 of the system, assuming it is ef fective, I think it should 23 be at least covering the whole zone, not just the five i
24 miles. But the cost-ef fectiveness criteria clearly impacts j t
25
(]) that decision by reason of the Commission's order.
ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336 4646 )
= m m e m m n r. ~ ..~ n . - - . , - . ~ . . - . . . . . --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .l
i 0000 02 03 10391 i
i 2 WRBwrb 1 to my understanding -- and I may have misread-L O 2 Mr. Black,' but I thought he was asking it on this issue s but 3 I'm not' clear on that.
4 MS. RIDGEWAY: Mr. Chairman, I would just 5 reiterate. I think we're moving away from the mark here. -
6 We would just reiterate that Mr. Black's' testimony would be 7 simply cumulative of Mr. Goodwin's, and we Delieve that 8 that's a basis for the Board's ruling to dispose of the 9 subpoena request for Mr. Black.
10 JUDGE KELLEY: Okay. Let's pass to 11 Dr. Bassiouni.
12 Let's go to the staff. -
{) 13 14 f!R. ROCHLIS: Again, I would say with regard to Dr. Bassiouni that this is, again, a limited rehearing; that i
15 a number of the issues are involved in testimony of --
16 previous testimony of both Dr. Krider and Mr. Keast; that 17 the testimony of Dr. Bassiouni with regard to the previous-18 testimony, anything that he would have to say would be 19 speculative and in the nature of conjecture; and 'that while 20 Dr. Bassiouni may have some expertise in this matter, I'm 21 not going to get into the expertise issue because of. what 22 the Board has ruled previously today. But I don' t think 23 he's a psycho-acoustician. And most of these issues that 24 the Board has raised deal with psycho-acoustics. And while -
() 25' he may be able to interpret some of the graphic data that ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646
0000 02 04 10392 l_ WRBwrb 1 Dr. Krider and Mr. Keast present, there's nothing to 2 indicate that the Board doesn' t have that same expertise.
3 JUDGE KELLEY: Is it possible that he might bring 4 a different professional opinion to some of these issues?
5 MR. ROCHLIS: It's possible, if he had the 6 professional expertise.
7 JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
8; Mr. Eddleman?
I 9I MS. MOORE: Your Honor, might I add something? I 10 know Mr. Rochlis is making the argument for FEMA and the 11 staff, but I would like to add just a brief statement at 12 this point.
(~'; 13 l UDGE KELLEY: Sure.
\ /
14 MS. MOORE: I would only add that I think that 15 ! the critical factor here, as well, is Dr. Bassiouni's 16 familiarity with the record on nighttime notification. And 17 ' I believe the applicant's made the point, and I won't 18 l belabor it, that his role with respect to the Harris plant 19 involved summer daytime conditions, and that he has not at 20 j this point made an analysis that would reflect nighttime 21 conditions. And each of the Board's six issues -- five 22 issues, anyway, requires a familiarity with the Harris 23 l record, and possibly the sixth as well. And that is what I 24 believe Dr. Bassiouni lacks at this point.
()
,n 25 That's the only statement I would add. Thank ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646
0000 02 05 10393 1 WRBwrb 1 you.
2l JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
3 Mr. Eddleman?
4 MR. EDDLEMAN: Judge, the first thing is, I 5 believe that the applicants and the staff and FEMA have 6 neglected to check and see if Dr. Bassiouni really is 1
7I familiar with this record. He informs me that he has read 8 over the transcript, and he thinks that he's quite familiar 9 with the record on this issue.
10 He thought that nighttime -- I discussed this 11 with him yesterday -- that the nighttime versus daytime 12 thing was a joke, in his words; that of course you make the
,r~N 13 adjustments.... I'm trying to paraphrase what he said.' You 14 have a different distribution of temperature levels as you 15 l go upward from ground, and some other things which he is i
16 ; quite familiar with, that you have to adjust for. But the 17 idea that he was just a daytime person and that this is 18 l nighttime and he can' t' handle it, he does not agree with 19 that at all.
20 I'd also like to raise a question regarding 21 applicants' objection to Dr. Bassiouni. One of the things 22 they say in their footnote 4 which begins on page 7 and goes 23 over onto page 8, they're accusing Dr. Bassiount of making 24 an error, and saying that means that his testimony would not.
(( ) 25 have value - "unrealiability and lack of probative value,"
ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
0000 02 06 10394 1 WRBwrb 1 as discussed here. And I'd like to ask them in context of 2 that whether they're willing to withdraw all the testimony 3 of Mr. Keast in light of his affidavit filed January the 2nd 4 which takes back some of his testimony as an error, which he 5 apparently didn' t recognize at the hearing.
6 I think that Dr. Bassiouni has worked for i
7 probably at least two third or 75 percent of the nuclear 8 utilities -- I think he usually says four-fifths -- in the 9 country; he has extensive data on sites. One of the things 10 he informs me is that he thinks Mr. Keast's sound map is not 11 cred ible, that it's not. . . .well, what he actually said was 12 you couldn't believe it. And that's the old sound map. I
~
{} 13
{ don' t think he's got the rest of the testimony yet, but I've 14 sent it off to him, or arranged to do so.
15 Dr. Bassiouni has very broad experience in this 16 area, and he runs a major consulting firm that works for 17 l most of the utilities. I think he has the knowledge, and I l
18 think that his knowledge is very relevant.
19 I think the question of whether he might bring a 20 differing professional opinion is really the core of the 21 objections that are being raised.
22 These things are quibbles. For example, the 23 applicants say, Well, af ter all, he did bring the German 24 study to the Board's attention but he doesn' t know enough
() 25 about it to say anything about its in ef fect that's what ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage m 33 H 646
.____-__--__n_-_--_---_-
0000 02 07 10395 2_ WRBwrb 1 they're arguing. That's ridiculous. He obviously knew
/ \
J 2 about it when they didn' t, and knows how to analyze it.
3 Familiarity with the various data that are used 4 in assessing a wakening probability: he's well qualified in 5 acoustics and can analyze these matters. And I think his 6 qualifications are clearly of record, and it's just absurd 7 for the applicant to use this guy as an affiant on the 8 original attempt to get summary disposition. As they 9 stressed, he dealt with very narrow matters in that 10 affidavit, but I suspect that's because applicant chose to 11 have him address very narrow matters. They have certainly 12 not maintained, in context of other contentions, for example
{} 13 14 I think it's 213, which is the' wake sirens, that Dr. Bassiouni lacked the expertise to analyze acoustic 15 issues that are different from the question of daytime 16 alerting.
17 I also think that Dr. Bassiouni's having this I
18 data base on the Harris zona and actual measurements of the 19 sound levels that are produced by the sirens -- which nobody 20 else has put in evidence so far as I know... actual data --
21 that's very probative of what could actually happen: to know 22 the actual loudness of the sirens. That tells you something 23 that's very important. And Dr. Bassiouni has this data, and 24 nobody 'else is putting it in evidence.
() 25 If the ultimate question is will this work--
ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646
0000 02 08 10396 l l
1 WRBwrb 1 This comes in under Item 6, and the question is: What 2 supplementation is necessary? In order to know what 3 supplementation is necessary you' ve got to know the 4 effectiveness of the siren system. And I believe 5 Dr. Bassiouni has considerable knowledge and data about 6 that. And then you've got to be familiar with other 7 alternative and backup systems.
8i Dr. Bassiouni informs me that he's dealt with 9 utilities using tone alert radios, using plans for telephone 10 systems, plans for combination systems of different kinds, 11 that he's quite familiar with various backup systems and has 12 the ability to evaluate their usefulness.
13 So I think probably Dr. Bassiouni is, as far as O .
14 Issue 6, the best possible witness who's available.
15 Let me see:-- I think-- Let's see. I just want 16 l to go through here.
I i
l 17 :
l (Pause.)
l 18 { Dr. Bassiouni has some serious questions in mind, 19 according to what he was telling me, about the ability of 20 tone alert radios to meet both the administrative 21 requirement and the signal strength and alerting requirement 22 that would be necessary for them to be effective. He raises 23 questions about -- really, making a worst-case analysis of 24 the signal to the tone alert radios, and so on.
g 25 I guess my point is that Dr. Bassiouni is quite ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
i 202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646
_ _ . . , _ _ .. _ .. ~ . _ - -.._ , , m m _ _,._,.,._,,,m.,,__
0000 02 09 10397 l_ NRBwrb 1 familiar with this record, has followed this issue, and has 2 already done one preliminary analysis -- I shouldn't say 3 " preliminary," but he did a review at the request of the 4 Licensing Board. And I think his information is very 5 relevant, and I think that the applicants just want to keep 6 him out of here because he would have a different 7 professional opinion: that's my opinion of what stands 8 behind the objection.
9 1 MS. MOORE: Mr. Chairman, I would move to strike 10 Mr. Eddleman's last comment as unfounded.
11 JUDGE KELLEY: Granted. Just the last one.
12 l Mr. Eddleman, I gather from what you said that 7) 13 j' you have talked with-- You said you have talked with LJ -
14 Dr. Bassiouni just yesterday?
15 l MR. EDDLEMAN: Yes, sir.
16 l JUDGE KELLEY: Is he willing to come as a witness 17 for you?
18 MR. EDDLEMAN: Judge, he has always said that if 19 he were subpoenaed that he would come and tell the truth.
20 JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
21 MR. EDDLEMAN: I'm not saying that he's going to 22 say "Yes, I'm going to j ump on a plane and come right -- "
23 JUDGE KELLEY: Let me just follow up a little 24 bit.
) 25 MR. EDDLEMAN: --if subpoenaed ."
ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347-3700 Nation *ide Coverage 800 336-6646 0 _ /1.
l l 0000 02 10 10398 1 WRBwrb 1 JUDGE KELLEY: Did you tell him that you hed l
2 requested a subpoena for his appearance?
3 MR. EDDLEMAN: Yes; and he has a copy of the 4 subpoena request.
5 JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
6 And if subpoenaed, is he prepared to come for the 7 hearing next Tuesday?
8l MR. EDDLEMAN: Judge, I didn't directly ask him L'
9 that.
10 j JUDGE KELLEY: Oxay.
11 MR. EDDLEMAN: I believe*he is, but I couldn't 12 j answer that.
p v
13
. The best thing to do I think is to contact him.
JUDGE KELLEY: All right.
14 l 15 ! M R. EDDLEMAN: Anybody can do it. I'11 do it if 16 you request me to.
i 17 j JUDGE KELLEY: There is some fine print on the i
18 q bottom of page 2 of the subpoena request which says " fees I
19 and mileage need not be tendered to the witness upon servic1 -
20 of a subpoena issued on behalf of the United States or an 21 office or agency," and then the footncte...
22 Excuse me a moment.
23 (Pause.)
24 JUDGE KELLEY: What I read was a footnote on the i i i n
() 25 l back of page 2 of the return of service. What it comes dova }
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage ROM 364546
- _ ~ . _ - n
'0000 02 11 10399 1 WRBwrb 1 to, as I understand this, you'd be required to-- This Y
> 2 speaks of fees and mileage. Are you prepared to pay his 3 basic expenses?
4 MR. EDDLEMAN: Absolutely.
5 JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
6 MS. RIDGEWAY: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to address 7 a few of the points that Mr. Eddleman made.
8 First, to the extent that in their response to 9 the request for subpoenas applicants allowed as how perhaps 10 it might be taken for granted that Dr. Bassiouni would not 11 have come at Mr. Eddleman's request, I would like to note 12 that, given the extensive conversation that Mr. Eddleman has 13 obviously had with Dr. Bassiouni, it's a . perversion of the 14 procedural scheme to allow him to have these extensive 15 conversations and not prefile direct testimony. It just 16 blinks reality to think that he will discuss these thinns 17 with Mr. Eddleman so extensively, and that Mr. Eddleman is 18 i not required in any way to give advance notice, and is 19 thereby able to deprive applicants, the staff and the Board 20 i cf the opportunity to prepare meaningful cross-examination 21 on a technical issue like this. And I don't believe that 22 the Board is required to take that step of just blinding 23 itself to the reality of the situation.
24 Secondly, I would reiterate the point that
() 25 Ms. Moore made for the staf f; that is, that the work that ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
b 2L7.' 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 3M-6646
0000 02 12 10400 l_ WRBwrb 1 Dr. Bassiouni has done personally is limited exclusively to ,
2 l daytime analysis. Certainly he doesn' t represent that he 3 has ever done a nighttime analysis for any of the other 4 utilities in the country.
5 And the loudness issue that Mr. Eddleman raised 6, as a basis for bringing him down is simply not in issue.
7 I The Board in its January 16th Memorandum and Order, on pago 8 1 of that order expressly ruled tcat the record was not
- 9 being reopened on actual scund levels in the EPZ.
10 Therefore, daytime or nighttime sound propagation are simply 11 _
not at issue here.
I 12 l And I think that we would just continue to press 3 13 the arguments that we made with respect to the
(~j's L- ,
14 l psycho-acoustic expertise the Board expressly requested on, 15 ! I believe it was Item 2. The Board noted the need for 16 , psycho-acoustic expertise on that. And I think that as to 17 that issue that is conclusive as well.
18 JUDGE KELLEY: Ms. Sanford?
19 MS. SANFORD: Yes, sir.
20 ; JUDGE KELLEY: Do you have a comment on this?
21 MS. SANFORD: A couple of comments.
22 No. 1, I find Mr. Eddleman's arguments compelling l
23 ' concerning the contribution and the relevance that 24 Dr. Bassiouni is likely to bring to this proceeding, o
i 25 Concerning the reality of the situation in terms l
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336 6M6
o -
~
I l
0000 02 13 10401 1 WEBwrb 1g of Mr. Eddleman's ability to get Dr. Bassiouni as a witness k~') h 2 in prefile f ashion, I doo' t know anything about the 3l negotiations or the contacts that the two of them have had.
4 I would wonder for the record here whether Dr. Bassiouni's 5 professional situation is such that it would be perhaps 6 difficult for him to agree to come as Mr. Eddleman's 7 .
witness. But his desire to speak to the Board in a factual
- 8) and truthful manner might be such that he would be willing 9 to be subpoenaed.
1 10 JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
11 [ I think we've heard everybody, then, on the four 12 subpoenas. -
T' 13 l MR. EDDLEMAN: Judge, would you lika verification (s}
14 , abcut that last point raised? Because I did have the 15 l conversations with Dr. Bassiouni and I could speak to it.
I 16 l But only if you need it.
17 JUDGE KELLEY: I don' t think we do. Thank you.
18 iI I think we understand basically the posture of the thing.
1 -
19 All right; the Board is going to go on its " Mute" 20 button and discuss these matters. It may take us, oh, at 21 least ten minutes, I suppose. It's about ten minutes of 22 eleven. Don' t hang up. This call is on the NRC. So would 23 you like to just not hang up your phones and pick them back 24 up at five af ter eleven? In that all right?
() 25 Okay; we'll see you at five after.
ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Co$ersee M336646
0000 02 14 10402 1 WRBwrb 1 (Brief recess)
I)
'/
JUDGE KELLEY:
2 We've considered the requests and 3 the arguments of the parties' counsel, and we're going to 4 rule on the four requests for subpoenas. These will be 5 rather brief rulings. Mr. Eddleman has to leave shortly.
l 6 It's going to be in the nature of a bottom line. If we~ heed
! 7 to expand on this later for the record we can do that.
i 8 As to Mr. Riley, the main point here is that any 1
9 testimony he gives be prefiled. And we' re going to require 10 that his testimony be profiled by 9:00 a.m. next Monday in 11 Rale igh. It should be delivered to CP&L by 9:00 a.m., and 12 also to the Board. I don' t know about FEMA and the staf f people, but we pla'n to be at the Radisson Hotel.
I
{} 13 14 Are the FEMA people and the staff people there, l
15 too?
l l
l 16 l MR. ROCHLIS: We're going to be at the Radisson, i
17 yes.
18 j JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
19 You can deliver them to the desk at the Radisson 20 l Hotel at nine o' clock Monday morning. That's Mr. Riley's l
21 profiled testimony.
l 1
! 22 1 MR. EDDLEMAN: Yes, sir. l 1 \ l t
t 23 JUDGE KELLEY: As to a subpoena for Mr. Riley, I 24 mean if for some reason he wants one we can issue him one.
1
() 25 It doesn't seem to me to be necessary.
l !
ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC, 232-347 3700 Nationwide Coverase m 336 4 66 I
i i
0000 02 15 10403 1 WRBwrb 1 Do you want one?
2 MR. EDDLEMAN: Judge, I think he'll come.
3 I'll tell you what: If he wants one to frame on a
! 4 his wall, I'll have him call you.
i 5 JUDGE KELLEY: All right, fine.
6 Next, as to Mr. McKinney of the telephone company 7 who is being called as a Board witness, we're going to deny 8 the request for a subpoena to Mr. McKinney; for two reasons:
9 basically, we don't think the Summer test, the part of it 10 requiring the other parties to have every opportunity to
- 11 present their view, hs been met, which is a prerequisite to 12 a Board calling a witness. Alternatively, the Board
{} ,
13 believes that the issue of tele,nhone alerting, in light of
- 14 the applicants' proposal to rely on sirens and tone alert I
15 radios, is marginal at best.
16 Thirdly, as to Mr. Black: Based on what we've .
17 heard, we believe that Mr. Black should be subpoenaed if 1 18 l necessary. We really don' t "think we can tell, but we think 19 he might have some useful testimony. And when I say "if 20 necessary," in light of the Board's attitude, that he should
. 21 be at the hearing available to testify. !
1 22 i Ms. Ridgeway, Mr. Hollar, do you want to have him !
l 23 subpoenaed, or could you just produce him?
24 MS. RIDGEWAY: Your Honor, we'll voluntarily
() 25 produce him.
ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 3 4 4646
~ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
0000 02 16 10404 l_ WRBwrb 1 JUDGE KELLEY: Thank you.
2 Now, Mr. Eddleman, as to what Mr. Black might be 3 expected to testify to, you list a number of items, some of 4 them not too specific, but there is a listing of items on 5 page 2 of your pleading of matters that you think you might 6 be able to speak to.
7 MR. EDDLEMAN: Right.
8 JUDGE KELLEY: Are you prepared to limit your 9 questioning to those matters?
10 MR. EDDLEMAN: If wo include the matters that I 11 mentioned in the discussion here, and those matters, the 12 answer is yes.
i
/)
(/
13 l JUDGE KELLEY: I'm not sure I recall how far that 14 )l goes beyond. It just seems to me that it's reasonable that 15 the applicants and the staff have -- if they don't have 16 prefiled, that they have at least some fairly specific 17 notice of what they think the man might be asked.
18 2 MR. EDDLEMAN: Right.
19 I JUDGE KELLEY: The alternative would be for you l
20 ' to prepare as specific as possible a list of items which wo 21 would then havo you filo Monday morning along with the Riley 22 testimony.
23 MR. EDDLEMAN: I think that's the best 24 alternativo.
n
(--) 25 l JUDGE KELLEY: Would you do that? All right.
ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
l 202 347 3700 Nationwide Coversge 80433M446 x _
0000 02 17 10405 l_ WRBwrb 1 Make it as specific as possible.
> Yes, sir.
2 MR. EDDLEMAN:
3 JUDGE KELLEY: We realize that possibly testimony 4 will come up in the hearing. Say, for examplo, a person who 5 works for Mr. Black may get into some area, and you may want 6 to ask Black also, that kind of thing wo expect we'd allow, i
7 other things being appropriato. But the list would be 8 helpful, be necessary to the other parties, since we don't 9 have profiled.
10 In the case of Dr. Bassiouni, we are going to 11 issue a subpoena for Dr. Bassiouni. It seems to us that 12 l Mr. Eddleman has made a good case for the possibility that
(')
Lj -
13 I Dr. Bassiouni might be able to contribute to one or more of 14 the issues that are open.
15 We do not suggest, in so saying, that all of 16 , Mr. Eddleman's areas of possible inquiry are in fact open.
l 17 i I think an example was cited by Ms. Ridgeway about the i
18 intensity of sound, and that's not open in this hearing, 19 for example. But there are other areas where he may be abit 20 to speak.
21 Now, with regard to the samo question of notico 22 of areas to be reachods wo are not going to require profiled 23 testimony from Dr. Bassiouni, but we are going to require, 24 l again by nine o' clock on Monday morning, a pretty specific
() 25 listing of points that Dr. Bassiouni is to mako. We ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
2 2 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 804 334 6646 o n
0000 03 01 10406 1 WRBweb 1 understand that-- We know, from what'Mr. Eddleman said,
~
2 that they've had conversations and that he is familiar with 3 this problem, of course. And he should be able we think.to 4 come up with a good list of areas for consideration. And 5 this, then, would give the FEMA and the applicants some i
6 notice of what's to be in. ,
7 So just to recap Operationally, we need 8 prefiled testimony from Mr. Riley; we need a list of points 9 from Mr. Black and Dr. Bassiouni, all to be served -- !
i 10 delivered by Mr. Eddleman by nine o' clock in the morning on i 11 Monday, giving people a day to look 'these matters over.
f 12 That's our ruling. I 13 . We have one other point. We had Board 14 consideration of some material, predecisional material, :
f
^
15 notes and the like relating to one of Mr. Eddleman'a ,
16 contentions, and we ruled on that. Subsequently, some l l !
17 additional notes surfaced from the Argonne National !
18 Laboratory and Ms. Moore mailed them to the Board for in 19 camera review on February 20th. And I understand from Judge i 20 Carpenter that some additional notes also surfaced more f i
21 recently. And we would just like to say that we want to 22 , talk about those matters and wrap them up once and for all s 6
- t $
23 when we're down in Raleigh. And we would expect that, by )
24 that time at least, all of the relevant notes and graphs O 25 itt a ve a aa produc a, e 1e e rar 'a aoere -
ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202 347 3700 NadonwWe Coverage 9004364M6
.m~r~.--., ~. _ ~ . - .. . - _ . -
0000 03 02 10407 WRBwrb 1 inspection, so we can consider what to do with it.
\" 2 Now, does anybody have anything else they want to 3 raise, any questions about the rulings on subpoenas from 4 anyone?
5 MR. BAXTER: Mr. Chairman, we would like to move 6 for the Board to reconsider the deadline for profiling 7 Mr. Riley's testimony, and ask that it be set for 5:00 8 p.m. Friday evening, or, as an alternative, by noon on 9 Saturday.
10 Ms. Ridgeway and I are in Washington on Monday.
11 We will try to get down here as quickly as possible. But we 12 think that, given the prefiling deadline of January 18 and 13 January 21, which Mr. Eddleman was under, as were all
[}
14 parties, that allowing him to file testimony only twenty-four hours in advance of the hearing seriously 15 l i
16 prejudices our ability to prepare for this hearing.
l' 17 ; JUDGE KELLEY; Okay. Mr. Eddleman, I think you 18 indicated in earlier discussion that you might be able to do 19 this by the end of the week.
20 Rould you respond to Mr. Baxter's request?
21 MR. EDDLEMAN: It's that I'm moving this 22 weekend. My new address is 812 Yancey Street, Durhamf 23 27701. I will make my best effort to get it in the 24 applicants' hands at least Friday afternoon. I think 1 can
() 25 have Mr. Riley just send it to them by mail, if he can do ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
2C2,347 3700 Nationwide Coverap 80P-3) H M 6
0000 03 03 13408 1, WRBwrb 1 it, because that's the fastest way to get it, is direct from 5- 2 him. ,
3 But I don' t want to be held to that if I can' t do 4 it.
5 JUDGE KELLEY: When do you think Mr. Riley can 6 complete his testimony?
7 MR. EDDLEMAN: I'll have to talk to Mr. Riley 8 this afternoon after I get out of school and determine -
9 that. I really don' t know. He's busy, he told me. But I 10 con' t know the details.
11 I'll do it as fast as possible.
t f 12 -
JUDGE KELLEY: Well, then, in fact are you
] 13 l' opposing the motion for reconsideration?
(R J' 14 MR. EDDLEMAN: I think what I'm opposing is being 15 bound by this deadline. I'll volunteer to do it as fast as 16 I can. If I can have it in their hands by Thursday I'll do 17 l that. I'm not sure I can guarantee at this point that I can 18 meet a 5:00 p.m. deadline Friday .because I haven't discussed 19 it with Mr. Riley and because I'm moving.
20 JUDGE KELLEY: Well, assuming that the testimony 21 could be completed let's say by the end of Friday--
22 , MR. EDDLEMAN: Right.
l 23 JUDGE KELLEY: --is there any real problem with 24 getting testimony from Charlotte to Raleigh by Saturday
()
25 noon?
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. l 202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646
0000 03 04 10409 1 WRBwrb 1 MR. EDDLEMAN: You say from Mr. Riley by Saturday 2 noon?
3 JUDGE KELLEY: Right.
4 MR. EDDLEMAN: I can have him send it to them by 5 express mail if he completes it on Friday.
6 JUDGE KELLEY: How about delivery?
7 MR. EDDLEMAN: Judge, I'm not familiar... I 8 think there is Saturday delivery of express mail in Raleigh; 9 I'm not certain of that.
10 JUDGE KELLEY: I meant personal delivery. --if 11 necessary.
12 MR. EDDLEMAN: Judge, if I can. As I say, I'm l
13 having to move over the weekend. But if I can I'11
(~}
14 certainly do it.
15 JUDGE KELLEY: Hold on a minute.
16 (Pause.)
17 JUDGE KELLEY: All right.
I 18 The Board considered this, and reconsidered and 19 we think that Mr. Baxter's request for delivery by the end 20 of Friday or by Saturday noon, we think Saturday noon is 21 reasonable under the circumstances. This, after all, is 22 coming up late, and frankly should have been prefiled in the 23 first place.
24 So we're going to make Saturday noon a deadline;
() 25 that is to say, something, Mr. Eddleman, you'll have to meet ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336 4 646 I
0000 03 05 10410 2_ WRBwrb 1 to deliver Mr. Riley's testimony to CP&L. You can serve the 2 other parties Monday morning; unless there's an objection 3 from staff or FEMA.
4 So we're going to impose a deadline for delivery 5 to CP&L of noon Saturday.
6 MR. EDDLEMAN: Did you mean noon Saturdayu?
7 JUDGE KELLEY: Yes.
8 MR. BAXTER: That's to Mr. Hollar in Raleigh.
i 9 MR. EDDLEMAN: Right.
10 JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
11 Anything else?
12 MR. BAXTER: Yes, Mr. Chairman. We assume that
^; 13 by the list of topics to be covered by Dr. Bassiouni that's (G i 14 t o be served by 9:00 a.m. Monday morning, that we're going 15 to get something more specific than just "all items in the Board's January 16 th Memorandum and Order."
16 l ii 17 ; JUDGE KELLEY: Oh, yes.
18 MR. BAXTER: That there be some indication of 19 positions being taken.
20 JUDGE KELLEY: Yes; that's what the Board meant.
21 MR. BAXTER: My last item, Mr. Chairman, is that 22 we need to have a scheduling discussion, before we complete 23 this conference call, about the order of witness 24 presentation.
(s '; 25 JUDGE KELLEY: All right. l i
1 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646 o ..
. ~ ~ . - - . , . , . . . .- - - - - -
0000 03 06 10411 1
WRBwrb 1 Mr. Eddleman, can you stick with us on this?
\~2 2 MR. EDDLEMAN: It will be very difficult.
3 I wanted to, as I was going to run out the door, 4 make a request that a copy of the transcript from today's 5 call be sent to Dr. Bassiouni, and that would make it 6 possible I think for him to get out a quicker response on 7 l this. If it has to come to me and then go back to him then 8 we're going to have a time delay.
9 JUDGE KELLEY: We'll do our best. I can' t 10 promise it.
11 MR. EDDLEMAN: Okay. Thank you.
12 MR. BAXTER: Mr. Eddleman shouldn't leave yet.
l
{} 13 l 14 What happens if'he calls Dr. Bassiouni and he's not available all next week, for instance?
15 JUDGE KELLEY: Well, Mr. Eddleman, I wanted to 16 ask you a couple of things in that regard.
17 Are you still with us?
l I
18 MR. EDDLEMAN: Yes, I'm here.
19 JUDGE KELLEY: Now, we'll mail a subpoena to 20 Dr. Bassiouni and he'll know it's coming.
21 I would like you to call him today--
22 MR. EDDLEMAN: Yes, sir.
23 JUDGE KELLEY: --and with the understanding that 24 it's on the way and he's being subpoenaed, will he come, can -
p)
( 25 he work out the list of points, and so on, with you. And if ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
i 202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336 6 86
- - . . - . . , . ~ . --
l l
0000 03 07 10412 l
1, WRBwrb 1 there are problems in that regard, would you get back to the
(_) 2 Board as quickly as possible, certainly by tomorrow?
3 MR. EDDLEMAN: Yes, sir, I'll do that.
4 JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
5 Now, someone was speaking a minute ago, I'm not 6 sure who it was.
7 Was that you, Mr. Baxter? --about the witness 8 order or presentation?
9 MR. BAXTER: Yes.
10 Mr. Black, for instance, is not available on the 11 l 5th, the second day of the hearing, so we would have to put 12 him on the first day.
{)
~
13 I'm going to start running into conflicts with 14 Mr. Keast on the afternoon the 5th.
15 We had previously contemplated that we would put 16 on Mr. Keast first, on his February 21 prefiled testimony, 17 and that logically Dr. Krider would go second because he 18 covers some of the same territory. And then we would put on 19 our panel testimony from February 18th on Item No. 6.
20 I mean, we need to discuss, for instance, when 21 Mr. Riley is available. We're going to have to slip 22 Mr. Black in there sometime the first day.
23 JUDGE KELLEY: Shall we reconvene on this 24 tomorrow morning?
() 25 MR. EDDLEMAN: Judge, that would be the best for ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
262-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 80433(H5646 L_
0000 03 08 10413 1 WRBwrb 1 me.
2 JUDGE KELLEY: Would that be satisfactory, 3 Mr. Baxter?
4 MR. BAXTER: Yes.
5 JUDGE KELLEY: Ten o' clock?
6 MS. SANFORD: That's fine.
7 MR. EDDLEMAN: Tha t'- fine.
8 JUDGE KELLEY: Thank you.
9 Anything else that comes up' plus the order of 10 witnesses we'll talk about tomorrow morning at ten.
11 We'll call you.
12 MR. BAXTER: Judge Kelley, I'll be back in my 13 Washington office.
14 JUDGE KELLEY: Okay.
15 Is that it?
16 i Good-bye.
17 (Whereupon, at 11:24 a.m., the telephone I
18 conference was concluded, to recommence at 10:00 a.m.,
19 Thursday, February 27, 1986.)
20 21 22 23 24 -
O 2s ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-33(H5646
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: CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY (Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant) i 4
DOCKET NO.: 50-400 OL 50-401 OL PLACE: WASHINGTON, D. C.
.o DATE: WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1986 were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
(sigt) [ eff 7d (TYPED)
WILLIAM R. BLOOM Official Reporter
' ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS INC.
Reporter's Affiliation, a
O i I
l
-)
- -- , , v -
g - , - - - -