ML20205M451
| ML20205M451 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 03/30/1987 |
| From: | Sneider C MASSACHUSETTS, COMMONWEALTH OF |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20205L859 | List: |
| References | |
| OL, NUDOCS 8704020397 | |
| Download: ML20205M451 (11) | |
Text
r-e 4
00CKETED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
'57 iMR 31 P3 50 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before Administrative Judges:
Helen F. Hoyt, Chairperson hhhf((},hy' Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr.
EaAgq Jerry Harbour
)
In the Matter of
)
)
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW
)
Docket Nos.
)
50-443/444-OL HAMPSHIRE, ET AL.
)
(Off-Site EP)
(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
March 30, 1987
)
ATTORNEY GENERAL JAMES M. SHANNON'S MOTION TO COMPEL FEMA'S RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORIES Attorney General James M. Shannon hereby moves the Licensing Board pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 4 2.740(f) to issue an order compelling the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(" FEMA") to respond to the following interrogatories served on FEMA by the Attorney General on March 5, 1987, which FEMA either did not answer or answered in an incomplete and/or evasive manner.
The specific interrogatories for which the Attorney General seeks an order compelling responses are set forth below together with FEMA's responses thereto and the arguments of the Attorney General in support of this motion.
Interrogatories 7-18 read as follows:
^
h[R DO R
G
1 7.
Are peak summer day evacuation time estimates for the populations within two miles, five miles and ten miles of the Seabrook plant longer than the average two-mile, five-mile, and ten-mile EPZ evacuation time estimates for nuclear power plants in this country?
8.
Please provide the names of all nuclear power plants that have longer evacuation time estimates for populations located within two miles, five miles or ten miles of those plants than does the Seabrook reactor.
Include those respective time estimates for each plant.
9.
Is population density greater for the areas within two miles, five miles, and ten miles of the Seabrook plant than the average population densities for areas within two miles, five miles and ten miles of all other nuclear reactors in this country?
10.
Please provide the names of all nuclear power plants in thic country that have higher population densities in the areas within two miles, five miles or ten miles of the plants than does the Seabrook reactor.
11.
Is there a larger summer transient population within two miles, five miles or ten miles of the Seabrook plant than there is within two miles, five miles, or ten miles of all other operating reactors in this country.
12.
Please identify all nuclear power plants in this country that have a larger summer transient population than does the Seabrook plant for the areas located within two miles, five miles, or ten miles of the plant, and for each of those reactors indicate what provisions, if any, have been made to shelter the transient population; where such population is situated with respect to that reactor; the average dose reduction factor of shelters used for that population; evacuation time estimates for that population if it were to be evacuated; the location with respect to the transient population of any sheltering they will be expected to use; whether that population is predominantly a beach population; whether sufficient sheltering capacity exists to shelter __
4 the entire transient population; and'if 2
sufficient capacity does not exist to enable the sheltering of the entire population, state for what percentage of the population sufficient sheltering capacity exists.
4 13.
Will emergency planning for the area within ten miles of the Seabrook plant effectuate less " dose reduction" than the average dose reduction for all other nuclear i
plants in this country, assuming comparable radiological releases in the event of an i
accident?
14.
Compare the average dose reduction expected to be effectuated for the summer transient beach population within ten miles of j
the Seabrook plant to the average dose reduction expected to be effectuated for persons within i
ten miles of all other reactors in this country, assuming comparable radiological releases in the event of an accident.
l
]
15.
Please provide the basis for your
-l response to interrogatories 13-14 and any documents relevant to your responses, i
16.
Do homes within the Seabrook ten-mile EPZ have on the average a lower dose reduction i
factor than do homes around all other nuclear 1
reactors in this country?
l 17 Compare the average dose reduction factor of homes within the Seabrook ten-mile EPZ beach i
i area to average dose reduction factors of homes i
around other reactors.
I 18.
Please provide the basis for your responses to interrogatories 16-17 and any l
documents relevant to your response.
FEMA objected to each of the Interrogatories 7 through 18 on the following basis:
i FEMA objects to this Interrogatory as irrelevant and unduly burdensome.
The information reauested is irrelevant since the licensing criteria imposed by regulations of the RNC do not reauire that emergency response plans at any plant be better than those at any other plant, i
1 1
l but rather that they provide reasonable assurance that appropriate-action will be taken to protect the public.
It would be unduly
)
burdensome for FEMA to assemble the inforr.ation requested since it is not the type which FEMA j
regularly maintains and because it requires extra search of FEMA's records and records of other Feceral agencies to produce the information requested.
Attorney General Shannon moves the Board to issue an order j
compelling FEMA to respond to Interrogatories 7 through 18 Pursuant to the Commission's regulations discovery may be had on any matter, not privileged, which is at all relevant to the 1
proceeding.
10 C.F.R. 4 2.740(a)(1).
Moreover, the i
regulations provide "filt is not ground for objection that the
]
information sought will be inadmissible at the hearing if the i
i information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the l
I i
discovery of admissible evidence."
Id.
And, as NRC case law l
l shows, the discovery rules are to be construed very liberally.-
4 l
Discovery can be denied only if it can be shown that the evidence sought can have no reasonable bearing on the issues.
- See, e.g., Boston Edison Co. (Units 2), supra, 1 NRC at 582.
FEMA's assertion that the interrogatories inquire as to irrelevant matters is without merit.
Evidence of what has been determined to be adequate at other plants is indeed relevant to I
l a determination of the adequacy of the New Hampshire RERP.
It would certainly be relevant to a determination of this Board if i
plants with similar emergency planning constraints as the Seabrook plant (e.g., large densely packed beach populations 4
- l
u within several miles of the-plant: long evacuation times few evacuation routes; and no plans to shelter a significant l
portion of the population) have been licensed.
Indeed, the very fact that the Commission has established no absolute i
standard against which the adequacy of a particular response plan may be measured makes especially relevant the findings of adequacy or inadecuacy, and the bases therefor, at other plants.
That a comparison of Seabrook to other plants in this country can in some manner be relevant to this Board's findings can be seen from the on-site emergency planning and safety phase of this licensing proceeding in which the NRC Staff's own testimony in support of its position on a disputed issue of adequacy for which the regulations provided no absolute standard introduced evidence indicating how the issue had been resolved at other plants in this country.
See NRC Staff Testimony of Richard J. Eckenrode on the SPDS Portion of Contention SAPL Supp. 6, at p. 11.
Indeed, the Licensing Board found this comparison to other plants to be sufficiently i
relevant to ask its own questions seeking further elucidation l
I on such comparisons.
See Public Service Company of New l
Hampshire (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2), Onsite Emergency Planning and Technical Issues, Transcript of Hearing dated October 3, 1986, at pp. 981-84, 990.
Certainly, then, it cannot be said that responses to the Attorney General's r
interrogatories could not reasonably lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. i
s 1
With respect to FEMA's further objection that j
interrogatories 7 through 18 are burdensome, the' Attorney General is not requiring FEMA to do any analyses that it has 3
I not already performed.
Nevertheless, FEMA has not stated that it does not have documents containing such information (on evacuation times, population densities, sheltering facilities,.
etc.) at other nuclear plants, and has not provided any explanation o'f how it would be burdensome to produce such i
i documents, such as by indicating the numbers of documents i
involved or dectibing the effort it would take to produce these documents.
A mere generalized statement that the interrogatory l
is burdensome is not sufficient.
See Boston Edison Company, i
supra, 1 NRC at 584.
1 Furthermore, if FEMA's concern is that a response would entail detailed sifting and analysis of a great volume of j
material, then it should still be recuired to produce the i
materials in its possession from which the reauested information may be obtained.
Id. at 583 ("IWlhere a heavy j
burden would be imposed if a party were required to answer.
, a segregation and analysis of a great mass of material being necessary, or where data and information must be compiled and collated, the court as an alternative may recuire the t
i interrogating party 'to dig out and sift the information'by an j
i examination of the other party's files.").
)
l l
1
- 1 4
l
s s
Therefore, the Attorney General requests that this Board enter an order compelling FEMA to respond to interrogatories 7 through 18, i
Respectfully submitted, JAMES M. SHANNON ATTORNEY GENERAL By:
b Carol S. Sneider Donald S. Bronstein Assistant Attorneys General Environmental Protection Division Department of the Attorney General (617) 727-2265 1
1 i
DATED:
March 30, 1987 I
d i
i I
I CCCMETED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA USNRC NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'S7 tR9 31 P3 :31
~
)
0FFIG 7 -
tas y In the Matter of
)
00CKEi m >. 3 G ylct
)
ORANCH PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW
)
Docket No.(s) 50-443/444-OL HAMPSHIRE, ET AL.
)
(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Carol S. Sneider, hereby certify that on March 30, 1987 I made service of the within documents, by mailing copies thereof, postage prepaid, by first class mail, or as indicated by an asterisk, by Federal Express mail, to:
- Helen F. Hoyt, Chairperson
- Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr.
Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Conmission East West Towers Building East West Towers Building 4350 East West Highway 4350 East West Highway Third Floor Mailroom Third Floor Mailroom Bethesda, MD 20814 l
3ethesda, MD 20814
- Dr. Jerry Harbour
- Sherwin E. Turk, Esq.
Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Office of the Executive Legal U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Director Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission East West Towers Building Tenth Floor 4350 East West Highway 7735 Old Georgetown Road Third Floor Mailroom Bethesda, MD 20814 Bethesda, MD 20814
- H. Joseph Flynn, Esq.
- Stephen E. Merrill Assistant General Counsel Attorney General Office of General Counsel George Dana Bisbee Federal Emergency Management Assistant Attorney General Agency Office of the Attorney General 500 C Street, S.W.
25 Capitol Street 5
Washington, DC 20472 concord, NH 03301
f i
- Docketing and Service Paul A. Fritzsche, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Office of the Public Advocate Commission State House Station 112 Washington, DC.
20555 Augusta, ME 04333 Roberta C. Pevear Ms. Diana P. Randall State Representative 70 Collins Street Town of Hampton Falls Seabrook, NH 03874 Drinkwater Road Hampton Falls, NH 03844 Atomic Safety & Licensing Robert A. Backus, Esq.
Appeal Board Panel Backus, Meyer & Solomon U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 116 Lowell Street Commission P.O.
Box 516 Washington, DC 20555 Manchester, NH 03106 Atomic Safety & Licensing Jane Doughty Board Panel Seacoast Anti-Pollution League U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 5 Market Street l
Commission Portsmouth, NH 03801
{
Washington, DC 20555 Paul McEachern, Esq.
J. P. Nadeau Matthew T. Brock, Esq.
Board of Selectmen Shaines & McEachern 10 Central Road 25 Maplewood Avenue Rye, NH 03870-P.O. Box 360 Portsmouth, NH 03801 Ms. Sandra Gavutis, Chairperson Mr. Calvin A. Canney Board of Selectmen City Manager 4
RFD 1, Box 1154 City Hall Rte. 107 126 Daniel Street E. Kingston, NH 03827 Portsmouth, NH 03801 Senator Gordon J. Humphrey Mr.AngeloMachirbs, Chairman U.S. Senate Board of Selectmere Washington, DC 20510 25 High Road c~
(Attn: Tom Burack)
Newbury, MA 10950 Senator Gordon J. Humphray Mr. Peter J. Matt' hews 1 Eagle Square, Suite 507 Mayor Concord, NH 03301 City Hall (Attn: Herb Boynton)
Newburyport, MA 01950 Mr. Donald E. Chick Mr. William Lord i
Town Manager Board of Select:nen
~
Town of Exeter Town Hall 10 Front Street Friend Street Exeter, NH 03833 Amesbury, MA ~ 01913 u
~ -
y
I i
Brentwood Board of Selectmen Gary W. Holmes, Esq.
RFD Dalton Road Holmes & Ellis Brentwood, NH 03833 47 Winnacunnet Road Hampton, NH 03841 Philip Ahrens, Esq.
Diane Curran, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General Harmon & Weiss Department of the Attorney Suite 430 General 2001 S Street, N.W.
State House Station #6 Washington, DC 20009 Augusta, ME 04333
- Thomas G. Dignan, Esq.
Richard A. Hampe, Esq.
R.K. Gad III, Esq.
Hampe & McNicholas Ropes & Gray 35 Pleasant Street 225 Franklin Street Concord, NH 03301 Boston, MA 02110 Beverly Hollingworth
- Edward A. Thomas
'209 Winnacunnet Road Federal Emergency Management Hampton, NH 03842' Agency 442 J.W. McCormack (POCH)
Boston, MA 02109 William,Armstrong Michael Santosuosso, Chairman Civil Defense Director Board of Selectmen Town of Exeter Jewell Street, RFD 2 10 Front Street' South Hampton, NH 03827 Exeter, NH 03833 Robert Carrigg, Chairman Mrs. Anne E. Goodman, Ch'airperson Board of Selectmen Board of Selectmen Town Office.
13-15 Newmarket Road Atlantic Avenue Durham, NH 03824
~.
North Hampton, NH 03862
- ~
Allen Lampert Sheldon J. Wo2fe, Chairperson Civil Defense Director Atomic Safety and Licensing
~
Town of Brentwood Board Panel 20 Franklin Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission u
Exeter, NH 03i33 Washington, DC 20555 Gustave A. Linenberger,'Jr.
Charles P. Graham, Esq.
Atomic Safety & Licensing. Board McKay, Morphy.& Graham U.S. Nuclea~r Regulatoty Old Post Office Square Commission' 100 Main Street
.s f'" '
East West Towers Building Amesbury, MA 01913 t
4350 Eest West Highway Third Floor.Mailroom Third Floor Mailtoom Bethesda, MD 20814 Bethesda,.HIi 20814-Judith H.'Mizner, Esq.
Silvergates Gertner, Baker, Fine, Gc,od & Mizner 8 8 B ro..id Street Boston, MA. 02110 s.
A J
a s.
O Rep. Edward J. Markey, Chairman U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Energy Conservation and Power Room H2-316 House Office Building Annex No. 2 Washington, DC 20515 Attn:
Linda Correia Carol S.
Sneider Assistant Attorney General' Environmental Protection Division Dated:
March 30, 1987 s
i 1 s,
--e, r,,
-v
- -- -