ML20197K180
| ML20197K180 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 05/13/1986 |
| From: | Dignan T, George Thomas PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, ROPES & GRAY |
| To: | NEW ENGLAND COALITION ON NUCLEAR POLLUTION |
| References | |
| CON-#286-199 OL, NUDOCS 8605200285 | |
| Download: ML20197K180 (23) | |
Text
Vt i
$ ELATED CORRESPONDst%g Dated:
May 13, 1986 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA h. cs,j/
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
g ggg;.
before the p,
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD ai b'
\\
- ct g
~
)
In the Matter of
)
)
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF
)
Docket Nos. 50-443-OL NEW HAMPSHIRE, et al.
)
50-444-OL
)
Off-site Emergency (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2) )
Planning Issues
)
)
APPLICANTS' ANSWERS TO NECNP'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION ON NHRERP ANO MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER Question No. 1:
With respect to each contention and subpart thereof admitted by the Licensing Board's order of April 1, 1986, please provide the following information:
a.
What is the Applicants' position with respect to each contention and its subparts?
Describe in detail the reasons for your position.
b.
Identify and provide access to all documents on which you rely during this proceeding to support your position on each of these contentions.
This includes all documents used in answers to these interrogatories, summary disposition motions, testimony, and cross-examination of witnesses during hearings.
c.
Identify all persons on whose factual knowledge, opinions, or technical expertise you rely for your position on each contention and subpart thereof.
d.
Identify all persons-you may call as witnesses on each of these contentions during these proceedings; s25~03 o
describe the substance of their testimony; and identify and describe any documents and the portions thereof that they may rely on for their testimony.
Answer:
CONTENTION:
Hampton Falls No. 1 a.
Position:
It is the applicants' position that if Hampton Falls persists in refusing to participate, the New Hampshire Compensatory Plan will be implemented.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
New Hampshire Compensatory Plan c.
Persons:
None d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
Hampton Falls No. 2 a.
Position:
See Hampton Falls No.
1.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for
. documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
See Hampton' Falls No.
1.
c.
Persons:
None
- l l
I
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
Hampton Falls No. 4 a.
Position:
See Hampton Falls No.
1.
In addition, the equipment exists or is available but Hampton Falls has refused to accept it.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
None c.
Persons:
Gary J.
Catapano.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
Hampton No. 4 a.
Position:
It is the position of the applicants that there now exists or will in the future exist sufficient equipment to support an evacuation.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
NHRERP Vol.
5.
c.
Persons:
Anthony M. Callendrello..
J
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
Hampton No. 6 a.
Position:
It is the applicants' position that if local personnel are not available, the NHRERP provides the basis for supplying any necessary supplementary personnel.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
NHRERP.
c.
Persons:
Anthony M. Callendrello.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
Hampton Contention 8 a.
Position:
It is the applicants' position that, if implemented, the NHRERP, including the Hampton local plan, will adequately protect people.
Construction of shelters is not required by NRC regulations.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
NHRERP.
-4_
-O c.
Persons:
Anthony M. Callendrello.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been
' selected.
CONTENTION:
Kensington 1 a.
Position:
It is the applicants' position that if local personnal are not available, the NHRERP provides the basis for supplying any necessary supplementary personnel.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
NHRERP.
c.
Persons:
Anthony M.,Callendrello, Scott T.
McCandless.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
Kensington 2 a.
Position:
It is the position of the applicants that the factual allegations in the contention are, for the most part, inaccurate.
To the extent the allegations suggest the lack of a contact person, the plan will be amended to assure notification h
continuity..
a b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
Draft revisions to Kensington Plan.
c.
Persons:
Gary J.
Catapano; Scott T. McCandless.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
Kensington 4 a.
Position:
It-is the position of the applicants that the " adequacy" of shelter is not an absolute.
The school will supply shelter.
Whether to shelter or evacuate will be a decision made in a given case.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
EPA 520/1-78-001A.
c.
Persons:
Scott T.
McCandless.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
Kensington 6 a.
Position:
It is the applicants' position that the appropriate letters have been, or will be, obtained..
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position
- were:
NHRERP Vol. 5 c,
Persons:
None d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
Kensington No. 7 a.
Position:
It is the position of the applicants that the New Hampshire Plan will be appropriately modified to provide radioprotective drugs to emergency workers and institutionalized persons.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
Letter of William T. Wallace to Richard H.
Strome April 24, 1986 re KI Policy.
c.
Persons:
John W.
Baer d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for
. fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
Kensington 10 a.
Position:
It is the position of the applicants that adequate equipment has been or will be l
provided to Kensington.
t I l
_m
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position
'were:
None c.
Persons:
Gary J.
Catapano.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
NECNP RERP-2' a.
Position:
It is the position of the applicants that the necessary information is in the plan.
See
$ 1.4.4.
It is also the position of the applicant that the Coast Guard and FAA are already in position, and shell fish analysis is not time sensitive.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
NHRERP.
c.
Persons:
Scott T. McCandless.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
NECNP RERP 3 a.
Position:
The materials have been distributed to the parties.
If necessary French language.
notifications can be made during an emergency, although we feel it is unnecessary to do so.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for
' documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
Brochures, etc. already distributed.
c.
Persons:
Anthony M.
Callendrello.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
NECNP RERP 8(a) & (b) a.
Position:
While a survey has been done of certain areas in the EPZ, it is the position of the applicants that shelter surveys are not required.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
Stone & Webster Study (March, 1986).
c.
Persons:
None d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
NECNP RERP 10 a.
Position:
It is the position of the applicants that the NHRERP does demonstrate that adequate methods, systems and equipment will be in use..
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position
'were:
NHRERP $ 2.5.3, DPHS Procedures App. C; Letter, Callendrello to Stanton (April 18, 1986).
c.
Persons:
John W.
Baer d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been l
selected.
CONTENTION: NECNP RERP 12 a.
Position:
See.<ensington 7 b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be.:reated or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
See Kensington 7.
c.
Persons:
See Kensington 7 d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
NECNP NHLP 2 (a)(d)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j) a.
Position: It is the applicants' position that sufficient personnel have been or will be made available to carry out the necessary function.
In the case of some towns this will be done through the provision of supplementary resources made.
i available through implementation of the NHRERP including the Compensatory Plan.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for
' documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
NHRERP.
c.
Persons:
Scott T. McCandless.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
NECNP NHLP-3 a.
Position:
It is the applicants position that adequate equipment and personnel will be available to provide for notification of the emergency response organization.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
NHRERP.
c.
Persons:
Gary J.
Catapano.
l d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
NECNP NHLP 4(e) i a.
Position:
It is the applicants position that the survey being conducted by NHCDA will adequately i.
k[
identify "special needs" persons and adequate facilities or plans will exist-to notify them.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for
- documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
Survey Form; NHRERP, Vol.
7.
c.
Persons:
John W.
Baer.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
NECNP NHLP 6 a.
Position:
It is the applicants' position that once such persons are identified and notified, adequate resources will be available to meet their needs.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
See NECNP NHLP 4(e); NHRERP.
c.
Persons:
John W.
Baer; Scott T. McCandless.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to incofar as it calls for
. fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
Rye 2 a.
Position:
The Rannie Webster home will be accounted for in revised plans. l n-
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
None.
c.
Persons:
Scott T. McCandless.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
South Hampton 1 a.
Position:
See Kensington 6.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
See Kensington 6.
c.
Persons:
See Kensington 6.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesser have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
South Hampton 2 a.
Position:
It is the applicants' position that to the extent the Town requires additional manpower, the State will provide it.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
NHRERP.
13 -
O c.
Persons:
Scott T. McCandless.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
South Hampton 3 a.
Position:
See Kensington 6.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
See Kensington 6.
c.
Persons:
See Kensington 6.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
South Hampton 6 a.
Position:
It is the applicants' position that a suitable location for the EOC and adequate equipment can be provided.
The Compensatory Plan, which obviates the need for an EOC, will be used if South Hampton persists with its refusal to plan.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
NHRERP.
c.
Persons:
Scott T. McCandless. !
i
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
South Hampton 8 a.
Position:
The special needs survey will identify people with special needs.
The equipment to handle these needs has been or will be made available.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
Survey Form; NHRERP.
c.
Persons:
John W.
Baer d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
SAPL 5 a.
Position:
See NECNP RERP 10.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
See NECNP RERP 10.
c.
Persons:
See NECNP RERP 10.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
.--.c x
,?
,W
[
1 CONTEkhTON:
SA,PL 7
-a.
Position:
Applicanth position is that the NHRERP will adequately describe procedures and means for
' decontamination.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position r were:
NHRERP; Letter, George.S. Thomas to y
b William T. Wallace (May 5, 1986).
c.
Persons: 1 John W.-Bner.
d.
Witnesses: _ Objeched to insofar as it calls for
. fact witnesses.
ExpeEt witnesses have not yet been P
sele.cted.
CONTENTION:
SAPL 8 a.
Position:
There are or will be sufficient personnel to man the necessary functions on a 24-hour basis, b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the-future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
NHRERP.
3+;
'c.
Persons:
Scott T.
McCandless.
N d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for,
fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
i
o.
CONTENTION:
SAPL 14 a.
Position:
See NECNP RERP 3.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for
- documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
See NECNP RERP 3.
c.
Persons:
See NECNP RERP 3.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
SAPL 16 a.
Position:
It is the applicants' position that the sheltering provisions in NHRERP are adequate.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
NHRERP.
c.
Persons:
Scott T. McCandless.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been
. selected.
CONTENTION:
SAPL 17 a.
Position:
See NECNP NHLP-3.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
n
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
See NECNP NHLP-3.
c.
Persons:
See NECNP NHLP-3.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been 4
selected.
CONTENTION:
SAPL 18 a.
Position:
Surveys will identify all special needs persons and adequate provisions will be made for them.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
Survey Form.
c.
Persons:
John W.
Baer.
d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
CONTENTION:
SAPL 25 a.
Position:
See SAPL 18.
b.
Documents:
Objected to insofar as it calls for documents to be created or utilized in the future.
Documents used in formulating the above position were:
See SAPL 18.
c.
Persons:
See SAPL 18..
O d.
Witnesses:
Objected to insofar as it calls for fact witnesses.
Expert witnesses have not yet been selected.
2.
Please identify and provide access to all documents
^
not identified in response to interrogatory 1(b) that evaluate or discuss the adequacy of emergency planning and preparedness with respect to any of the issues admitted for litigation by the Licensing Board's order of April 1, 1986.
Answer:
All such documents in the possession of the applicants are at the Seabrook Education Center for inspection and copying at such times as counsel may agree during regular business hours.
w6 w
George S/ Thomas Vice President, Nuclear Production New Hampshire Yankee Divison of Public Service Company of New Hampshire.
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 1( 6%,
ss.
May G, 1986 Then' appeared before me the above-subscribed George S.
Thomas and made oath that he was authorized to execute the foregoing answers to interrogatories, that he has made inquiry of appropriate persons within the New Hampshire Yankee Division as necessary and that the foregoing answers are true to the best of his knowledge and belief.
Before me, d b S Newsu Notary 9%blic A
My Commission Expires: 3 - (, - Tb Attorney making objection:
, a
~ TE31iias G.
D Jr.
~
Ropes & Gray @ n, 225 Franklin Street Boston, MA 02110.
MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER In conformity with 10 CFR S 2.740(f) applicants move for a protective order to the effect that the interrogatories objected to need not be answered.
No action on this motion is requested unless and until a motion to compel is filed by NECNP.
By their attorneys,
./
Thenfhs M Dignan, Jr.
R.
K. Gad III Ropes & Gray 225 Franklin Street i
Boston, MA 02110 (617) 423-6100.
s CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Thomas G.
Dignan,fJr., one of the attorneys for the Applicants herein, hereby certify that on May 13, 1986, I made service of the within " Applicants' Answers to NECNP's First Set of Interrogatories on NHRERP and Motion for a Protective Order" by depositing copies thereof with; Federal' Express, prepaid, for delivery to
-(or, where indicated, by depositing in the United States mail,- first class postage paid, addressed to):
Helen Hoyt, Chairperson Robert Carrigg, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board of Selectmen Board Panel Town Office U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Atlantic Avenue Commission North Hampton, NH 03862 East West Towers Building 4350 East West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 Dr. Emmeth A.
Luebke Diane Curran, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Harmon & Weiss Board Panel 2001 S Street, N.W.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Suite 430 Commission Washington, DC 20009 East West Towers Building 4350 East West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 Dr. Jerry Harbour Stephen E. Merrill Atomic Safety and Licensing Attorney General Board Panel George Dana Bisbee U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Assistant Attorney General Commission Office of the Attorney General East West Towers Building 25 Capitol Street 4350 East West Highway Concord, NH 03301-6397 Bethesda, MD 20814
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Sherwin E.
Turk, Esquire Board Panel Office of the Executive Legal-U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Director Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Tenth Floor 7735 Old Georgetown Road Bethesda, MD 20814
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Robert A.
Backus, Esquire
-Appeal Board Panel 116 Lowell Street U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory P.O.
Box 516 Commission Manchester, NH 03105 Washington, DC 20555 Philip Ahrens, Esquire Mr.
J.P. Nadeau Assistant Attorney General Selectmen's Office Department of the Attorney 10 Central Road General Rye, NH 03870 Augusta, ME 04333
s Paul McEacharn, Esquiro Carol S.
Snaidar, Esquire Matthaw T.
Brock, Esquire Assistant Attornay Ganoral Shaines & McEachern Department of the Attorney General 25 Maplewood Avenue One Ashburton Place, 19th Floor P.O.
Box 360 Boston, MA 02108 Portsmouth, NH 03001 Mrs. Sandra Gavutis Mr. Calvin A. Canney Chairman, Board of Selectmen City Manager RFD 1 - Box 1154 City Hall Route 107' 126 Daniel Street Kensington, NH 03827 Portsmouth, NH 03801
- Senator Gordon J. Humphrey Mr. Angie Machiros U.S.
Senate Chairman of the Washington, DC 20510 Board of Selectmen (Attn:
Tom Burack)
Town of Newbury Newbury, MA 01950
- Senator Gordon J.
Humphrey Mr. Peter J. Matthews 1 Pillsbury Street Mayor Concord, NH 03301 City Hall (Attn:
Herb Boynton)
Newburyport, MA 01950 Mr. Donald E.
Chick Mr. William S.
Lord Town Manager Board of Selectmen Town of Exeter Town Hall - Friend Street 10 Front Street Amesbury, MA 01913 Exeter, NH 03833 H. Joseph Flynn, Esquire Brentwood Board of Selectmen Office of General Counsel RFD Dalton Road Federal Emergency Management Brentwood, NH 03833 Agency 500 C Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20472 Gary W. Holmes, Esquire Richard A. Ha.mpe, Esquire Holmes & Ells Hampe and McNicholas 47 Winnacunnet Road 35 Pleasant Street Hampton, NH 03841 Concord, NH 03301 Mr. Ed Thomas FEMA, Region I 442 John W. McCormack Post Office and Court House Post Office Square Boston, MA 02109
(*= Ordinary U.S.
First Class Mail.)
g Thomas G [ gnan, Jr.
.