ML20205N368

Seacoast Anti-Pollution League Response to Applicant Interrogatories & Request for Production of Documents to All Intervenors & Participating Local Govts Concerning Joint Intervenor....* W/Svc List.Related Correspondence

ML20205N368
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	10/27/1988
From:	Backus R, Doughty J BACKUS, MEYER & SOLOMON, SEACOAST ANTI-POLLUTION LEAGUE
To:	PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
References
CON-#488-7397 OL, NUDOCS 8811040093
Download: ML20205N368 (9)

Text

7M1

. , RfCATED CORRESPONDLitQA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA [;g g g g.

p ig -

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD '68 OCT 31 P3 :56 cree Before Administrative Judges: M J_

Ivan W. Smith, Chairman Gustave A. Licenberger, Jr.

Dr. Jerry Harbour In the Matter of ) Docke t Nos. 50-443-OL

) 50-444-OL PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY )

of NEW HANPSHIRE, et al ) (Of f site Emergency Planning)

)

(Seabrook Station, )

Units 1 snd 2 ) Oc tobe r 27, 1988 SEAC0AST ANTI-POLLUTION LEAGUE'S RESPONSE TO APPLICANTS' INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO ALL INTERVENORS AND PARTICIPATING LOCAL COVERNMENTS CONCERNING JOINT INTERVENOR CONTENTIONS 1 - 26 The Seacoast Anti-Pollution League herein responds to those Applicant interrogatories dated October 11, 1988 addressed to contentions which SAPL intends to litigate: J18 and JI 17.

Objection to Production of Docue.ents SAPL objects to Applicants' reques t that all documents be produced at Applicants' attorneys' of fices in Boston, Massachusetts. The request is unduly burdensome and costly. SAPL has had to travel to Seabrock Station to inspect documents during this proceeding and it is not unreasonable to expect that Applicants' counsel should exhibit similar willingness to travel to inspect docueents, h

O

[

h 5 0 'S

l INTERROGATORIES

1. Please produce all analyses, studies, and reports bearing on any and/or all of the f actual issues raised in the Joint intervenor Contentions.

ANSWER:

SAPL objects to this interrogatory as being overly broad in scope and undefined. "All of the f actual issues raised in the Joint intervenor Cententions" is too unbounded a request since the issues can be defined in any number of ways. Applicants should assume the burden of clearly identifying the specific issues about which they are seeking documents. SAPL assumes that Applicants are requesting that SAPL produce all analyses, studies and reports bearing on "any and/or all" of the f actual issues related only to those contentions SAPL intends to litigate. SAPL further assumes that in those instances in which the documents referenced have previously been served on all parties, SAPL would need only provide identification of those documents.

Vithout waiving objection, SAPL will interpre t the "any" quite literally and note that the FEMA Draf t and Final Exercise Reports bear on factual issues raised in the JI Contentions as does evacuation tiee estimate and sheltering testimony filed by the Massachusetts Attorney General in the New Hampshire portion of the litigation of this case.

2. In each case where one of the following interrogatories asks f or "all the f acts" or "all the f acts, estimates, and observations", please also identif y the person (s) and/or document (s) that are the source (s) of those f acts, esticates, and/or observations, and produce all documents that reflect, concern, ref er or pertain to any and/or all of those f acts, estleates, and observations.

t 3

l ANSWER:

• This interrogatory is again overly broad and unreasonably burdensome, I

and SAPL objects to answering for those reasons except insof ar as SAPL has 1

provided answers already in the response to Interrogatory 1 above and in  ;

response to the specific interrogatories, f l

3. Please identify the person (s) answering or substantially contributing to ,

the answer to each of the following interrogatories. Please also identify all persons consulted, and identify and produce all communications and documents consulted and/or relied upon, in answering each interrogatory.

ANSWERt l

Jane Doughty, Field Director, Seacoast Anti-Pollution League, 5 Marke t

(

Street, Portsmou th, N. H. 03801, is the respondent to all of these interrogatories. SAPL objects to the second sentence of this interrogatory on i

grounds of work product. i i

AS TO JI CONTENTION 8 l i

I

77. Given the route maps provided in the SPMC and the notification to the r public in EBS ressages regarding the start times for bus routes, do Intervenors (

assert that there are f urther practicable measures that can be taken to shorten  :

the time during which transit dependent persons in Salisbury and West Newbury would wait outside along bus routes? If so, please describe in detail all such  ;

measures, including all the steps necessary to make each measure practicable,  !

and state all the f acts, estimates and observations underlying your answer. (

ANSWER:

1 i

SAPL objects to this interrogatory on the ground that it seeks to place I

SAPL in the position of eeergency planner f or the Applicants. The burden is on i l

I I

1 . ,

i t l

the Applicants to develop an adequate eeergency response plan.

1 J

78. Please state, for each bus route in Salisbury and Vest Newbury, how long i

Intervenors assert that the average transit dependent person would be waiting 4 outdoors, and what "radiation dose" and "exposure to the eierents" that person

! would receive during the wait. If Intervenors assert that the times, doses,

{ and/or exposures would vary depending on the accident scenario, answer i separately for each such scenario. Please state all the f acts, estimates, and observations underlying your answers.

ANSVER:

The only empirical evidence as to actual bus route transit times of which l

SAPL is aware is the bus route transit time inf ormation given in the Draf t FEMA Report on the graded exercise which took place in June 1988. Though the times given in the report are for New Hampshire bus routes, SAPL believes it I

reasonable to infer that Massachusetts residents would wait similar periods of I time and that in an actual radiological emergency, these wait times would be extended significantly due to traf fic conges tion and vehicle breakdowns obstructing the progress of emergency response vehicles. As happened during

) -

the exercise, some buses would f ail to complete their routes and transit

! dependent residents would hence need to wait indefinitely extended periods of time and perhaps might never receive transport assista 1ce.

S APL objects to those portions of this interrogatory which ask for i

radiation doses, exposure to the eierents and separate answers for each

! scenario because those portions are vague, lacking in specificity, and unduly l

burdensoee. The numbers of possible scensrios and resulting times, doses and exposures are virtually infinite and it would be impossible for SAPL to give a reasonable response to this unbounded inquiry. Further, the Board's November 16, 1987 ruling on the Sholly-Beyea testimony indicated that the Board is

n 1 . .

unwilling to consider evidence as to specific dose consequences. Hence this l

interrogatory is not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence to the extent that it asks intervenors to make projections of radiation doses.

AS TO JI CONTENTION 17 137. Do Intervenors assert that there are circumstances for which, following beach closure at the Site Area Emergency classification, greater dose savings '

would be achieved by an instruction to the transient beach population to shelter rather than evacuate? If so, please describe in detail all such circumstances, and state all f acts underlying your answer.

ANSWER:

f SAPL objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it f ails to set f orth enough parameters to allow the development of a meaningful answer. Among other things, one would need to know the me teorological conditions, the time j between the beach closure order and the radiological release and the population present in the teach area.  ;

i

{ 138. Please state all f acts underlying Intervenors' assertion that l

i "subs cantial portions of the beech population are entrapped by the traffic congestion generated b," an order to evacuate and cannot remove themselves from areas close-in to the plant for many hours," and define (with quantification)

, "subs tantial portions" and "many hours."

)I I

ANSVER: i

)

J l SAPL's support f or the assertion quoted in the interrogatory is based in part on observation of the congested traf fic conditions in the beach areas even under non-emergency conditions. The assertion is further supported by evidence l

, brought in the course of litigation of evacuation time estimates and sheltering t

1 I l

i l l

. . ~ _

.t-I issues in the New Hampshire portion of the litigation of this case by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. SAPL objects to that portion of the interrogatory which asks for "substantial portions" and "many hours" because it would be impossible to answer the interrogatory without specification of scenarios inquired about and assumptions to be adopted.

139. Please state all f acts, other than those discussed in response to the preceding interrogatories, underlying Intervenors' assertion that "no choice of protective actions is set forth in the SPMC for large numbers of people," and define (with quantification) "large numbers."

ANSWER:

The assertion that "no choice of protective actions is set forth in the

, SPMC for large numbers of people" arises f rom the f act that there is a large beach population which has no access to reasonably ef fective shelters. The quantification of "large numbers" is to be found in the evacuation time J

l estimate :estimony of the Massachusetts Attorney General filed earlier in this case os has been noted in prior interrogatory responses.

DATE: Oc tobe r 2', , 1988 Respectfully submitted, 1

l SEACOAST ANTI-POLLUTION LEAGUE Byt (1.u;1h l Jane ' Doughty l Q l

4

[

_7 STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE COUNTY OF HILLSBOROUGH /Qfk7f}A Then personally appeared the above-named Jane Doughty and acknowledged that the foregoing statements by her subscribed are true and cerrtet to the best of her knowledge and belief.

Bef ore me, ik. f Uh Ngespy,c;Pgic / Jut 4w vi-Gm b ce

% Convrussion k, gwv'e" uww~ *g g Respectf ully submitted, Seacoast Anti-Pollution League By its Attorneys, BACKUS, MEYER 6 SOLOPON DATE: Oc tobe r 27, 1988 g ,

Robert A. Backys, Esquirie /

116 Lowell Street P.O. Box 516 Manchester, N.H. 032105 (603) 668-7272 I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing SEACOAST ANTI-POLLUTION LEAGUE'S RESPONSE TO APPLICANTS' INTERROCATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO ALL INTERVENORS AND PARTICIPATING LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CONCERNING JOINT INTERVENOR CONTENTIONS 1 - 25 have been served this day by first class mail, postaEe prepaid, to all parties oti the enclorad service list.

dh bi(4tW br, , .-

Ro be r t A . Ba c kus', E s q . '#

L L

~

Ivan W. Smith, Chairman &mhw h a Dignan, Es @

Atmic Safsty ard Licensing Stato aepresentative Board Rwn f Ha@ ton Ihlis Ropes & Gray' Street 225 Franklin U.S. NRC Dr h ter W Boston, m 0200 Washingtm, DC 20555 lla.pton Falls,}H 03S44 W DCT 31 P3:56 Dr. Jerry Harbour Docketing & Service Sec.

JaneDodsdh' p. , . ,

Atomic Safety and Licensire Office of the Secretary styl uv .

Icard U.S. IE 5 Market StEeeb U.S. NRC tushington, DC 20555 Portsmouth, lH 03301 hhington, DC 205',5 Office of Selectmen Gustave A. Linenberger George Dana Bisbee, Esquire Town of Han ten Falls Atomic Safety and Licensing Attorney General's Office

}brptcn Falls, IM 03844 Etard State of New Hampshire U. S. 10C Corcord, la 03301 h 5ington, DC 20555 Ashcd N. Amirian, Esqaire Joseph Flynn, Asst. Gen. Cnsl. Sandra Gavutis Assistant City Solicitor Fod. Durg. M;mt. Agey. E wn of Kensington 376 thin Street 500 C Street Si Box 1154 Haverhill, in 01830 lbshington, DC 20472 East Kensington, la 03827 Carol Sncider, Estaire Sherwin E. Turk, Esgaire Charles P. Graham, Esquire Assistant Attorney Gancral Office of Exec. Iepl Dr. M:Kay, Fitzphy and Graham Che Ashburton Place U.S. tE .

100 Main Street 19th Floor mshington, IC 20555 Anesbury, Fn 01913 Boston, )n 02109 R. S:stt Hill .hilten, Esqaire Julith H. Mizner, Esqaire William S. Iord, Selectman 79 State Street 79 State Street Wwn Hall li%wrt, bn 01950 t h bun p rt,in 01950 Friend Street Amesbury, >R 01913 Diane C6rran, Esquire Paul W hern, Ecquire Senator Goabn J. Ht W.ey H arman. Curran & Rusley thtthew Brt:ck, Esquire U.S. Senate 20001 S Street Mi 25 bbplewood A wnue Washington, IC 20510 Sttite 430 P.O. Box 360 Attn: Janet Coit Washington, IC 20009 Portrouth,1H 03801

J. P. tudeau

. h n cf Rye 155 Washington lead Rfn,101 03870 Mjulicatory File .

Atmic Safety and Licensing B:ord Panel U.S. !UC turhington, DC 20555 Richard R. D:nwan ID%

Federal Pagistry Center 130 228th Street, SW Bothell, la 98021-9796 Robert R. Pierce, Esquire Ato=ic Safety and Licensing Bocrd Fanel U. 5. !;RC k'a shington, DC 20555 Ja- cs !!. Carpmter, Alt.

Tech. Firber Atcnic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. NRC Washingtcn, DC 20555 John H. Frye, III, Alt.

Chairmin Atcmic Safety an!

Licensing Board U. S . 1.TC

Washingtcn, DC 20555

(

9