ML20196J489

Transcript of 880629 Conference in Bethesda,Md Re Remand/ Emergency Planning.Pp 20,929-20,943

ML20196J489
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	06/29/1988
From:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:
References
CON-#388-6720 OL-3, NUDOCS 8807060397
Download: ML20196J489 (17)

Text

ORIsyyy UNITED STATES O NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of:

LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322-OL-3 (SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION, )

UNIT 1) ) Remand / Emergency Planning i

l

! O Pages: 20929 through 20943 Place: Bethesda, Maryland l Date: June 29, 1988 l b\

Q\

l HERITAGE REPORTING CORPORATION OficialReporters O 1220 L Street, N.W., Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 628-4888 8807060397 DR 880629 ADOCK 05000322

. - eDe _ - _ _ _ - _ _ . - _ _ _ _ __

20929 1 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD

(~ }

3 4 In the Matter of: )

)

5 LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No.

(SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION) ) 50-322-OL-3 6 (tJNIT 1) ) (Remand / Emergency Planning) 7 8 Thursday June 29, 1988 9

Room 427 10 East-West Towers Building 4350 East-West Towers 11 Bethesda, MD 12 A conference in the above-entitled matter was 13 convened, pursuant to notice, at 3:03 p.m.

14 BEFORE: JUDGE JAMES P. GLEASON, CHAIRMAN Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel

() 15 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 16 JUDGE FREDERICK SHON, MEMBER 17 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 18 Washington, DC 20555 19 JUDGE JERRY KLINE, MEMBER Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel 20 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 21 l 22 23 24 i 25 l

l l Heritage Reporting Corporation

() (202) 628-4888 1

20930 1 APPEARANCES:

(} 2 On behalf of the Nuclear Regu?.atory Commission:

3 MITZI YOUNG, ESQ.

LISA CLARK, ESQ.

4 ED REIS, ESQ.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 5

6 On behalf of Lono Island Lichtina Co.:

7 DONALD P. IRWIN, ESQ.

8 K. DENNIS SISK, ESQ.

JAMES N. CHRISTMAN, ESQ.

9 Hunton & Williams 707 East Main Street 10 P.O. Box 1535 Richmond, VA 23212 11 12 on behalf of Suffolk County:

13 KARLA LETSCHE, ESQ.

CHRISTOPHER M. McMURRAY 14 Kirkpartick and Lockhart f- South Lobby - 9th Floor

(_) 15 1800 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 16 17 On behalf of New York State:

18 RICHARD ZAHNLEUTER, ESQ.

Deputy Special Counsel to the Governor 19 Executive Chambers Capitol, Room 229 20 Albany, New York 21 On behalf of FEMA:

22 WILLIAM R. CUMMING, ESQ.

23 Federal Emergency Management Agency Washington, DC 20972 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation

( () (202) 628-4688 L

20931 1 PROCEEDINGS 1

'~ 2 JUDGE GLEASON: All.right, gentlemen and ladies, 3- this is Judge Gleason here with Judges Shon and Kline. And 4 this is a conference call which is called by the Board to 5 announce its decision with respect to this hearing in  !

l 6 connection with the emergency response plan that we have l 7 been discussing in the past several weeks.

'8 Perhaps just to keep the record straight, you 9 ought to identify yourselves for the record again. And if 10 you will do it in the customary order with the applicant 11 followed by the staff, FEMA, the county and state, in that 12 order, why, we can proceed.

13 MR. IRWIN: Thank you, Judge Gleason. This is Mr.

14 Irwin for Long Island Lighting Company.

() 15 With me are Messrs. Sisk and inristman.

16 MS. YOUNG: Thank you, Judge Gleason. This is Ms.

17 Young representing the NRC staff.

18 With me are Ed Reis and Lisa (lark.

19 MR. CUMMING: William R. Cumming, counsel for 20 FEMA.

21 MS. LETSCHE: Karla Letsche, representing l

l 22 Frederick County, and with me is Christopher M. McMurray.

23 MR. ZAHNLEUTER: This is Richard Zahnleuter, l

24 representing the Governor of New York State and the State of 25 New York.

Heritage Reporting Corporation

() (202) 628-4888 l

1

20932 1 JUDGE GLEASON: All right. Thank you. The Board

'2 has reviewed the filings of the parties have made and the

{J 3 responses the parties have made to the request to the Board

'4 to consider perspective witnesses at a proposed hearing in 5 connection with the emergency plans.

6 And it really has resolved the number of witnesses 7 to be a little bit more extensive than the Intervenors have 8 proposed and less extensive, a little bit less extensive, 9 than the Applicant has proposed.

10 And so we have decided that there will be a 11 hearing. I think it is important, once again, to set forth 1:2 the scope of the hearing which I outlined fairly well in our 13 telephone conference of June 24th, and that is that the 14 hearing is going to relate to the production of emergency

-() 15 plans and whether they should have been produced earlier and 16 if they have not been produced, what the circumstances were 17 for their non production.

18 And of course, the answers to this line of inquiry 19 relates to the scope of the sanctions which we intend to 20 impose and also relate to the final disposition of the 21 realism contentions.

22 The witness list -- well, first of all, we will 23 have the hearing here in Bethesda at the Appeals Board 24 Hearing Room on the 5th floor of the East-West Tower 25 Building on East-West Highway on July lith, starting at 9:30 Heritage Reporting Corporation

() (202) 628-4888 i

20933 1 a.m. .And we do not anticipate that hearing should take more 2 than three days, hopefully less.

f'~T J

3 But viewing your abilities to cross-examine that I 4 have noticed in the past, we will provide three days, so it 5 will be July 11 through the 13th.

6 And we have a list of 12 witnesses that we would 7 like to hear from.

8 On the County side, we would like to hear from 9 -- we would like to have present: Frank Jones, John 10 Bilello, Richard Jones, Frank Petrone, William Regan, and 11 Dr. David Harris, 12 And we also would like to have Mr. Norman Kelly, 13 who was referred to as having something of substance perhaps 14 to say in the Intervenor's response that came in yesterday.

() 15 On the State's side, we would like to hear from 16 Mr. Germano, from Mr. Davidoff, from Mr. Papile, and from 17 Dr. Axelrod. And Mr. DeVito. I am sorry, I missed DeVito; l 18 and Mr. DeVito, as well.

I l 19 That should be a list of 12 people. Let me go 20 over those State witnesses again, because I may have left 21 somebody off.

l 22 I will start with Mr. DeVito, Mr. Germano, Mr.

i l 23 Papile, Mr. Davidoff, and Dr. Axelrod.

24 That makes a list of 12 witnesses and we kind of 25 concluded that we should be able to do four witnesses a day, Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888

(])

20934 1 two in the morning and two in the afternoon, and should be 2 able to conclude that within three days time.

{~}

3 We would like you to work out among yourselves the 4 specific time of appearances for those witnesses, with one 5 caveat. We would like the State witnesses to be separate 6 from the County witnesses so that we don't intermix the two.

7 Let me go on to a couple of other things. There 8 were some suggested procedures that have been submitted by 9 LILCO, some of which we believe are acceptable, but some are 10 not.

11 First of all, we do direct that responses to the 12 third set of interrogatories which do in fact relate to 13 these emergency plans be complied with. And we would like to 14 have those complied with by the middle of next week. So,

() 15 let's say, Wednesday.

16 There were some documents that were requested in 17 addition to those third set of interrogatories, and LILCO's 18 second set of interrogatories. And without trying to 19 identify specifically what those requests cover, if there 20 are any documents that relate to emergency plans or relate 21 to things that should have been produced in connection with 22 emergency plans, those documents should be furnished to 23 LILCO.

24 That also relates to the other miscellaneous 25 document production request. There should be some Heritege Reporting Corporation

() (202) 628-4888

20935 1 verification or authentication by New York State of the New

{} 2 York State Radiological Emergency Response Plan and the New 3 York State Disaster Plan.

4 There should be a submittal of Annex K of the 5 Suffolk County Emergency Operations Plan. And if there are 6 any additional updates of the Emergency Operations Plan, 7 those should be submitted. And also they should be 8 submitted by next Wednesday. The close of business by next 9 Wednesday.

10 I want to say in connection with that the purpose, 11 the use of those plans is not to deal with the best efforts 12 issue. It is only to deal with the narrow focused inquiry 13 that we are following currently as to whether a plans that 14 were existing should have been produced.

l

() 15 So I don't want to get these things mixed up.

j 16 There will be no written pre-filed testimony 17 required of any witnesses, but we would ask each counsel if 18 they desire to provide some foundation laying questionings, 19 some direct questioning of the witnesses that are being 20 called before being cross-examined by the Board and the 21 other parties.

22 We do agree the witnesses should appear 23 individually, not panels. We do not agree that there is a l 24 necessity to sequester the witnesses.

l 25 And it is not necessary, in our view, for us to I Heritage Reporting Corporation

() (202) 628-4888 l

20936 1 instruct the witnesses not to discuss their proposed

{} 2 3

testimony with other potential witnesses or other people other than their counsel prior to the hearing.

4 The parties themselves will not be confined to the 5 scope of direct examination and this will in effect take the 6 place of the absence of any pre-trial discovery which would 7 ordinarily otherwise be allowed prior to the examination of 8 witnesses at hearings.

9 And we don't believe that the parties should 10 submit suggestions to the Board under seal in advance 11 because they will have an opportunity to do their own 12 questioning.

13 So, I guess that really covers the waterfront, so 14 to speak. Let's hold a minute and see if I have missed

() 15 anything.

16 (Pause) 17 JUDGE GLEASON: All right. That concludes the 18 communication of the decisions that we have reached. Is 19 there anything that is confusing about it that anyone wants 20 to raise, or some other matter that you want to bring up at 21 this time?

22 MS. LETSCHE: Judge Gleason, this is Ms. Letsche 23 for Suffolk County.

24 JUDGE GLEASON: Ms. Letsche, go ahead.

l 25 MS. LETSCHE: Well, I have one clarifying question I

i l Heritage Reporting Corporation

(} (202) 628-4888

1:

20937 1 and then an additional question.

(} 2 The clarifying question is: With respect to your 3 ruling about' questioning by other parties during the 4 hearing.

5 JUDGE GLEASON: Yes.

6 MS. LETSCHE: Would not be confined to the scope 7 of the direct examination. I assume that it does need to be 8 confined to the scope of the issue as defined by this Board, 9 is that correct?

10 JUDGE GLEASON: I am glad that you brought that up 11 Ms. Letsche, because I intended to say that. Although we 12 don't necessary want to confine any of the parties in the 13 area of asking questions, everybody has to keep in mind that 14 this is a scoped hearing, if you will. Or a focused

() 15 hearing.

16 And we want the questions to relate to the 17 specific purpose for which the hearing is being held. That 18 is correct.

19 MS. LETSCHE: My second question, Judge Gleason, 20 is: With respect to your ruling that witnesses should 21 appear individually, not in panels.

22 JUDGE GLEASON: Yes.

23 MS. LETSCHE: I request that the Board reconsider 24 that ruling, particularly with respect -- well, it would 25 only apply -- to the witnesses being provided at this point Heritage Reporting Corporation

() (202) 628-4888

20938 1 by the Goverr. ment. Suffolk so far has only been required to

'T 2 put on one witness.

(G 3 I think in the cause of consistency, it would be 4 much more efficient to put certain of the witnesses, and 5 perhaps ask the counsel to get together and decide on the 6 order of witnesses we could propose to get impaneled. And 7 the reason is that the individuals that you have identified 8 either work together or have, you know, had a relationship 9 given the involvement that they had in the matters at issue.

10 And, in terms of providing foundation questioning 11 and getting out the facts in the most efficient way, it 12 would be much better and quicker, I believe, and the Board 13 would get to the facts more directly if some of them were 14 presented in panels.

() 15 And I am not prepared right now to sit down and 16 say what I think those panels should be. But I would 17 request that the Board reconsider that ruling and let the 18 parties propose to you some panel presentation of the 19 governmental witnesses.

20 JUDGE GLEASON: Well, we have considered that, Ms.

l 21 Letsche, and I do think we would be better off by having l

22 them talk individually in response to the questions.

23 So, if you can reach some agreement to the l

24 contrary or a different agreement with the other parties and 25 submit that to the Board, we will reconsider that.

l Heritage Reporting Corporation

(} (202) 628-4888 i

20939 1 MS. LETSCHE: Okay, thank you, Judge Gleason. 1 2 JUDGE GLEASON: Are there any other comments?

(%.~~)T  !

3 MR. IRWIN: Yes, Judge Gleason, this is Mr. Irwin I

4 for LILCO. I am operating under the assumption -- LILCO 5 certain has no objection to producing Mr. Kelly and I am 6 assuming from the silence of representatives from Suffolk 7 County in New York that they have no objection to the 8 production of any of the witnesses.

9 JUDGE GLEASON: Well, I assume that is correct.

10 Is that right, Ms. Letsche?

11 MS. LETSCHE: That's not correct. We do not 12 believe there is any basis to --

13 JUDGE GLEASON: Well, I didn't ask that question.

14 You are going to produce those witnesses. That is what I am

() 15 asking.

l 16 MS. LETSCHE: I do have, Judge Gleason, to check 17 with these individuals and make sure that they are available 18 and check with our client and let you know.

19 JUDGE GLEASON: Right.

20 MS. LETSCHE: But I want the record to be clear 21 that the County does object to, and disagrees with, the t

l 22 ruling of the Board that it is appropriate -- given the t

i 23 limited scope of this hearing -- to require the Government 24 to produce the additional people that you have made.

! 25 And the reasons will be fully obvious once you get l

Heritage Reporting Corporation

() (202) 628-4888

20940 1 those people up there because they are not going to have any fw l2 pertinent information on the subject that you have --

U 3 JUDGE GLEASON: Well, that remains to be seen.

4 But if you have any problems, I want you to notify me 5 promptly in that area.

6 MS. LETSCHE: We certainly will.

7 JUDGE GLEASON: All right. Mr. Irwin?

8 MR. IRWIN: Yes, sir?

9 JUDGE GLEASON: Anything else?

10 MR. IRWIN: No , sir, not from LILCO.

11 MR. ZAHNLEUTER: I have one thing, Judge Gleason.

12 JUDGE GLEASON: All right.

13 MR. ZAHNLEUTER: Richard Zahnleuter.

14 JUDGE GLEASON: Go ahead.

() 15 LIR. ZAHNLEUTER: Earlier you stated that the State 16 witnesses were to be separate from County witnesses.

17 JUDGE GLEASON: That's right.

18 MR. ZAHNLEUTER: I am not sure what that means.

19 Could you explain what that means?

20 JUDGE GLEASON: That doesn't mean separate as far 21 as the room is concerned, but it means as far as time is 22 concerned. We would like the State witnesses all to follow 23 each other, and those to follow the County or proceed it.

24 Obviously, you have got to have some kind of 25 division, but we don't want a County witness followed by a Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888

(}

1

- ______ ___ _____________ _ _. Q

20941 1 State witness followed by a County witness followed by a

(~T 2 State witness.

U 3 And we will leave it up to you people to work out 4 whether the State witnesses should go first or they should 5 be in&> :sper sd with the County witnesses or go last. But 6 wherever they appear, we want them to appear one after the 7 other.

8 MR. ZAHNLEUTER: I trust that if I canvas these 9 State people for availability and there is a need to vary 10 from that, we will discuss that among the parties and then 11 discuss it with you.

12 JUDGE GLEASON: Well, if you work something out 13 among the parties, it is all right. But, let us know about 14 that.

() 15 MR. ZAHNLEUTER: One other question is that the 16 State has offered Mr. DeVito, obviously, for the Board's 17 inquiry. The other four officials were not offered and it 18 was just recently that LILCO explained the rationale for 19 having those four people be deposed and the State was not 20 given a chance to reply to LILCO's recent pleading where it 21 explained the rationale.

22 And I would like to inquire, if I may, what the 23 Board's rationale is for requiring the four State witnesses 24 and Mr. DeVito.

25 JUDGE GLEASON: Well, the rationale very simply is Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888

(])

20942 1 that we believe that these people if anybody knows about our

, 2 line of inquiry, or these people should know.

'}

3 And that is the kind of criteria we used in making 4 that judgment.

5 MR. ZAHNLEUTER: I cannot guarantee that these 6 witnesses will be the witnesses that are appropriate.

7 JUDGE GLEASON: Well, I know thet. We have to 8 make that kind of a choice based on the submissions that 9 have been made to us. So that is the decision that we have 10 made.

11 MR. ZAHNLEUTER: Dr. Axelrod, in particular --

12 JUDGE GLEASON: I don't really want to argue the 13 point about these witnesses, Mr. Zahnleuter. Because there 14 are witnesses that we have stricken off of other lists for,

() 15 you know, what we believe are good and substantial reasons.

16 There are people that we put on.

17 And we have made the best choice that we can under 18 the circumstances.

19 MR. IRWIN: Judge Gleason, this is Mr. Irwin. I 20 have two observations. I suppose that Mr. Zahnleuter has 21 additional witnesses whom he thinks are appropriate. There 22 is certainly no difficulty with his proposing them. But we 23 do agree with the Board that the ones that the Board have 24 chosen are in the appropriate class of witnesses.

25 Secondly, if there are it turns out difficulties Heritage Reporting Corporation

() (202) 628-4888

20943 1 in enforcing the voluntary appearance of these witnesses, I

{} 2 3

assume that the Board wou'.d permit a timely application for subpoenas by loco, if need be?

4 JUDGE GLEASON: We intend to do that.

5 MR. IRWIN: Thank you, sir.

6 JUDGE GLEASON: All right. Thank you all. We 7 will see you at the hearing.

8 Thank you. Goodby.

9 (Wherei 1, at 3:25 p.m., the conference was 10 concluded.)

11 12 13 14

() 15

! 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation

(} (202) 628-4888

1 CERTIFICATE 2

() 3 This is to certify that the-attached proceedings before the 4 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the matter of:

5 Name: Long Island Lighting Co.

(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1) 6 7 Docket Number: 50-322-OL-3, Remand / Emergency Planning 8 Place: Bethesda, Maryland 9 Date: June 29, 1988 10 were held as herein appears, and that this is the original 11 transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear 12 Regulatory Commission taken stenographically by me and, 13 thereafter reduced to typewriting by me or under the direction 14 of the court reporting company, and that the transcript.is a 15 true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings.

16 /S/ bI ,

1. 7 v

17 (Signature typed): Andrew M. Emerson 18 Official Reporter 19 Heritage Reporting Corporation 20 21 22 23 24 25 l

() Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 b.