ML20197G469

Order Denying Intervenors 860512 Joint Motion for Extension of Time Until 860528 to Respond to Interrogatories.Change of Due Date Would Require Reevaluation of Entire Schedule. Served on 860515

ML20197G469
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	05/13/1986
From:	Hoyt H Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:	HAMPTON FALLS, NH, NEW ENGLAND COALITION ON NUCLEAR POLLUTION, SEACOAST ANTI-POLLUTION LEAGUE, SOUTH HAMPTON, NH
References
CON-#286-172, CON-286-172 82-471-02-OL, 82-471-2-OL, OL, NUDOCS 8605160233
Download: ML20197G469 (3)

Text

_

,NY

/' D i

1

/^ Q, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA W ,f 1 5 M 8FA.

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i sc D

\ m E

ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges:

Helen F. Hoyt, Chairperson Emmeth A. Luebke Jerry Harbour SERVED MAY Ifl998 In the Matter of ) Docket Nos. 50-443-0L

) 50-444-0L PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY ) (ASLBP No. 82-471-02-0L) 0F NEW HAMPSHIRE, et al. ) (Offsite Emergency Planning)

)

(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2) ) May 13,1986 ORDER (Denying Request of NECNP, 3 APE Town of Hampton Falls and Town of South Hampton for Extension for Answering

. Interrogatories by May 14,1986) i On May 12, 1986, a Joint Motion by the New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution, Seacoast Anti-Pollution League, Town of Hampton Falls, and Town of South Hampton was filed requesting extension of time for answering interrogatories from May 14, 1986 to May 28, 1-986. The motion was received by the Board on May 13, 1986.

The Board conducted a telephone survey to determine responses of other parties to the proceeding because of the time of the request and near due date of May 14, 1986. The schedule was established, by the Board's Order of January 17, 1986. The results of this survey by the Board was as follows: Applicants opposed; NRC Staff took no position but if time extension is granted that the d'ie date for filing of summary disposition motions should also be extended; and the State of New Hampshire did not oppose.

l e605160233 e60513 3 PDR ADOCK 0500 G 4

6 2

The Board has considered the responses of the parties and the movants positions in the May 12 motion including the complaint that Applicants had submitted voluminous sets of interrogatories and requests for production of documents "regcrdag every contention cdmitted to this proceeding and totalled over 120 pages." Also, movants complain that the State of New Hampshire had submitted " interrogatories seeking detailed information on the parties positions in this case."

The Board finds no merit in these intervenors' complaints that the Applicants and the State of New Hampshire have exercised their rights to question the issues raised by these same intervenors in 6 admitted contentions, many with multi-issues involved. The Board established the schedule on January 17, 1986 and all parties have complied with this schedule except for a brief extension granted to counsel for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts due to illness. To change the due date for answering interrogatories would also require a reevaluation of the entire schedule, including the imediate and next due date of May 21, 1986 for motions for sumary judgment. The Board here is dealing with experienced counsel who are expected to judiciously exercise professional responsibilities in all phases of litigation. Others participating in this litigation have the same requirements to examine

., documents and to prepare responses. We do not accept these petitioners'

{}'seofthisasagroundforanextensionofaduedate.

The motion is denied. We confirm our telephone denial of the motion to these parties on May 13, 1986.

i.

I b,

! 3 j FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY a .AND LI NSING BOARD i

i /

HelenF.Hoyt,Chairpepn Administrative Judge

]

4 4

i Bethesda, Maryland 1

l i

4 I

t J

II f

i i

ii 1

i i

I i

e i

'l E

J 4

_