ML20205R355
| ML20205R355 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 10/31/1988 |
| From: | Sneider C MASSACHUSETTS, COMMONWEALTH OF |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#488-7434 OL, NUDOCS 8811100006 | |
| Download: ML20205R355 (15) | |
Text
_ _
7YM DXKEif0 U5HrC i
18 NW -4 N030 l
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION FF!Cb ; - n
-L ; h" '
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD I'iOC6f ! PG '..wd BRMie Before the Administrative Judges.
Ivan W.
Smith, Chairman f
Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr.
Dr. Jerry Harbour I
l
)
In the Matter of
)
Docket Nos. 50-443-OL t
)
50-444-OL i
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY
)
(Off-Site EP)
OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, EI AL.
)
i
)
(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
October 31, 198b i
)
l i
t MASSACHUSETTS ATTORNEY GENERAL JAMES M. SHANNON'S OBJECTIONS TO APPLICANTS' INTERROGATORIES 1
AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS CONCERNING JOINT INTERVENOR CONTENTIONS l-63 AND MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER i-The Massachusetts Attorney General ("Mass AG') hereby files f
his objections to the Applicants' two sets of interrogatories a
and requests for production of documents concerning Joint I
Intervenor Contentions 1-63.
On October 27, 1988, the Joint 1
Intervenors filed a motion ' to extend to December 15, 1988, 4
the deadline by which the Joint Intervenors must answer or
[
[
i i
1/
Motion, of the Joint Intervenors to Extend Time Within Which i
to Reply to the Applicants' Two Sets of Interrogatories and l
Document Requests Regarding the SPMC Contentions, filed i
October 27, 1988.
(
~
O p
otherwise respond to these two sets of Applicants' interrogatories and requests for production.
The Cbjections herein are being filed now to preserve them in the event that this motion is denied.
Please note that due to the press of time and the breadth of the discovery requested, these objections are made with reference only to the wording of the interrogatories or requests for production.
Documents and other information yet to be reviewed by the Mass AG may contain information which is privileged or otherwise objectionable, and 1
we do not waive at this time our right to later object to the production of such documents or other information that we have not yet reviewed.
Gen m 1_ Obi ntion_1:
The Mass AG objects to any interroga&ories and the production of any documents to the extent that they call for the exposure of attorney-client communications or work-product as described by 10 C.F.R. S 2.740.
Geneta LQblec1Lan_2:
The Mass AG objects to production of the requested documents at the location requested and instead will make them available for inspection at the office of the Mass AG and/or at the locations at which the documents are normally kept and in the manner in which they are retained in the usual course of business.
2 -
Objections to Interrogatories and to Raquests for production __of pacuments I
I.
CDnceI.nl ng..Jo i nt IntmIy_ennt Content io n s _.1_2h 13.
Obischkan The Mass AG objects to Interrogatory No. 13 on the grounds that the five-year time period is overly broad, unduly burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
43.
Objection The Mass AG objects to Interrogatory No. 43 on the grounds that it seeks the definition of terms used in CON Contention 6 which contention has been superceded by the language of JI 4.
137.
Obiettlan This interrogatory is overly broad and without more parameters "all such circumstances" cannot be described in detail.
141.
Obientinn Mass AG objects to this interrogatory to the extent it calls for a legal conclusion and therefore cannot reasonably lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
In addition, Mass AG objects on grounds of relevance to that portion of the interrogatory that seeks information regarding protective action decision-making at the Pilgrim, Yankee Rowe and Vermont l
nuclear power plants.
3-
142.
See General Objection 1.
1 See General Objection 1.
144.
Obj ec tinn Mnes AG objects to this interrogatory to the extent it calls for a legal conclusion and therefore cannot reasonably lead to the discovery of admissible evidence and also on the grounds set forth in General Objection 1.
145.
See General Objection 1.
151.
Obiection Mass AG objects to this interrogatory seeking information regarding protective action decision procedures for the pilgrim, Yankee Rowe and Vermont Yankee nuclear power plants on grounds of relevance.
152.
Objection See response to Interrogatory No. 144.
163.
Qbjection See General Objection 1.
In addition, Mass AG objects tn this interrogatory on the grounds that it is burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
178.
Obinetion Mass AG objects to this interrogatory to the extent it calls for a legal conclusion and is therefore not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
-4
II.
CQnc2Lning_ Joint Intervenor Contentions 6 and 27-63 1.
See General Objection 1.
2.
See General Objection 1.
3.
See General Objection 1.
6.
See General Objection 1.
7.
See General Objection 1.
8.
See General Objection 1.
12.
Objection What routines "would be followed" depends to a great extent on the nature and extent of the emergency.
As worded, the interrogatory is too vague and cannot be answered.
14.
Objection This question is too vagus and does not provide a sufficient situational context to be answered.
23.
See General Objection 1.
25.
See General Objection 1.
i 26.
See General Objection 1.
29.
See General Objection 1.
l 31.
Objection The Mass AG objects to this interrogatory because it seeks information which is not relevant to this contention.
103-105.
Objection The Mass AG objects to Interrogatories 103 to 105 on l
t
b the grounds that they concern legal contentions which do not support discovery.
Moreover, the Applicants have sought summary disposition on these matters and the Mass AG will file its response shortly.
32.
See General Objection 1.
50.
See General Objection 1.
52.
Objection -- irrelevant.
See also General Objection 1.
53.
Obisction That part of the interrogatory which seeks a description "in detail" of what messages and information officials would provide to the media is speculative in the absence of the details of a specific radiological event, and it is therefore objected to as being impossible to answer and calling for speculation.
l 54.
See General Objection 1.
55.
See General Objection 1.
56.
See General Objection 1.
60.
See General Objection 1.
67.
Obj ec_ tina See General Objectiort 1, especially with respect to "estimates, and observations."
69.
Objection As to "estimates and observations," see General Objection 1.
70.
Qbjection As to "estimates and observations," see General Objection 1.
71.
See General Objection 1.
73.
Qhiection As to "estimates and observations," see General Objection 1.
76.
Objection This interrogatory is objected to because it seeks information which is not relevant.
Also see General Objection 1.
79.
See General Objection 1.
80.
See General Objection 1.
84.
Obiettinn As to "estimates and observation," see General Objection 1.
87.
Objection As to "estimates and observations," see General I
Objection 1.
The Mass AG also objects to "quantify [ing)" data
[
for the Applicants or doing any counts or calculations not otherwise in our possession or control.
89.
See General objection 1.
i 90.
See General Objection 1.
(
92.
See General Objection 1.
93.
Qhitction -- irrelevant.
See also General objection 1.
101.
Obiettion As to such special equipment provided in other EPZs.
f the interrogatory is irrelevant and is therefore objected to.
l See also General Objection 1.
112.
Obies112n -- irrelevant, 7
I t
.-m.--,-.
w---
-~.
---.-rn_--
e i
t 119.
Objection As to estimates and observations, see General f
Objection 1.
121.
Obiscilan r
As to estimates and observations, see General 1
Objective 1.
122.
Obiectlan As to estimates and observations, see General Objective 1.
4 131.
Objection t
l Objection as to "why" schools lack such plans --
f irrelevant.
137.
Qbjection -- any answer would be totally speculative I
i
(
without describing the specific radiological emergency and the situation at the schools.
l i
138.
Objection -- irrelevant.
I 139.
(d)
See General Objection 1.
P 142.
See General Objection 1.
{
143.
Objection i
{
As to estimates and observations, see General i
l Objection 1.
i 144.
Qbjection i
See General Objection 1.
As to qualifications for hospitals who may receive patients from other EPZs, this j
interrogatory is objected to on grounds of rf)levance.
[
145.
Objection as to "why not" -- irrelevant.
(
147.
See General Objection 1.
l 7 l
I l
.- ---- - -. --2
0 148.
See General Objection 1.
149.
Objection on grounds of relevance as to instructions provided to hospitals in other EPZs.
152.
Ohjection -- irrelevant 153.
Qblecilsn Insofar as this interrogatory seeks copies of such procedures for hospitals in other EPZs it is objected to on grounds of relevance.
154.
As to estimates and observations, see General objection 1.
157.
Objection -- irrelevant 162.
See General Objection 1.
168.
Objection -- irrelevant 170.
Qbiection.
As to estimates and observations, see General Objection 1.
175.
Obiettion.
As to estimates and observations, see General Objection 1, 183.
Objection -- irrelevant 187.
Obj2nt1Dn.
As to estimates and observations, see General Objection 1.
189.
Qblentlan -- irrelevant 225.
Objection The Mass AG objects to this interrogatory on the grounds of relevance.
The requested infotmation may be of relevance to a pending lawsuit between Applicants and the Town of Haverhill but is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence in this licensing proceeding.
Without waiving its objection, the Mass AG states that it is the policy of this office to respond to information requests from city and town officials, but not to advocate, instruct or advise city or town officials regarding any action they should take.
264.
Obiettion The Mass Ad objects to this interrogatory to the extent it calls for a legal conclusion and is, therefore, not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
266.
Objection See response to Interrogatory No. 264.
267 Qhigntion See response to Interrogatory No. 264.
10 -
MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE _ ORDER The Mass AG moves that the Board issue a protective order prohibiting Applicants from obtaining discovery to the extent objected to by the Mass AG in response to Applicants' Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents Concerning Joint Intervenor Contentions.
Respectfully submitted, JAMES M.
SHANNON ATTORNEY GENERAL M s.hO By:
Carol S.
Sneider Allan Fierce John Traficonte Assistant Attorneys General Duclear Safety Unit One Ashburton Place Boston, MA 02108 617-727-2200 1
G METU UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 11UCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIOt1
.M W/ -4 A10:30
$C T
3
)
In the Matter of
)
)
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPA!1Y OF
)
Docket tio.(s)
)
50-443/444-OL (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
)
.)
CEBTlEICATE OF_SFJLVICE I, Carol S.
Sneider, hereby certify that on October 31, 1988 I made service of the within MASSACHUSETTS ATTORNEY GENERAL JAMES M.
SHAT 1!10N'S OBJECTIONS TO APPLICANTS' INTERROGATORIES A!1D REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS CONCERNING JOINT INTERVE!10R CONTENTIONS 1-63 AND MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER, by mailing First Class or by Federal Express as indicated by (*) to the following parties:
Sherwin E. Turk, Esq.
Docketing and Service l
U.S. 11uclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 15th Floor 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 l
Ivan Smith, Chairman Gustave A.
Linenberger, Jr.
l Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commissior Commission East West Towers Building East West Towers Building 4350 East West Highway I
4350 East West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 Bethesda, MD 20814 l
Dr. Jerry Harbour Robert R.
Pierce, Esq.
Atomic Safety & Licensing Bd.
Atomic Safety & Licensing Bd.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission East West Towers Building East West Towers Building 4350 East West Highway 4350 East West Highway 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 Washington, DC 20472 Concord, NH 03301 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 Diana P.
Randall State Representative 70 Collins Street Town of Hampton Falls Seabrook, NH 03874 Drinkwater Road Hampton Falls, Nil 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 Commission Portsmouth, NH 03801 Washington, DC 20555 Matthew T.
Brock. Esq.
J.
P.
Nadeau Shaines & McEachern Board of Selectmen 25 Maplewood Avenue 10 Central Road P.O.
Box ?60 Rye, NH 03870 Portsmouth, NH 03801 Sandra Gavutis, Chairperson Calvin A. Canney Board of Selectmen City Manager RFD 1, Box 1154 City Hall Rte. 107 126 Daniel Street Kensington, NH 03827 Portsmouth, NH 03801 2
e Senator Gordon J. Humphrey Angelo Machiros, Chairman U.S. Senate Board of Selectmen Washington, DC 20510 25 High Road (Attn: Tom Burack)
Newbury, MA 10950 Senator Gordon J.
Humphrey Edward G. Molin 1 Eagle Square, Suite 507 Mayor Concord, NH 03301 City Hall (Attn: Herb Boynton)
Newburyport, MA 01950 Donald E. Chick William Lord Town Manager Board of Selectmen Town of Exeter Town Hall 10 Front Street Friend Street Exeter, Nil 03833 Amesbury, MA 01913 Brentwood Board of Selectmen Gary W. Holmes, Esq.
RFD Dalton Road Holmes & Ellis Brentwood, NH 03833 47 Winnacunnet Road Hampton, NH 03841 l
philip Ahrens, Esq.
Diane Curran, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General Harmon, Curran & Towsley 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.
Ropes & Gray Hampe & McNicholas 225 Franklin Street 35 pleasant Street Boston, MA 02110 Concord, NH 03301 Beverly Hollingworth Ashod N. Amirian, Esq.
l 209 Winnacunnet Road 376 Main Street l
Hampton, NH 03842 Haverhill, MA 01830 l
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 Anne E. Goodman, Chairperson 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. Wolfe, Chairperson Civil Defense Director 1110 Wimbledon Drive Town of Brentwood McLean, VA 22101 20 Franklin Street Exeter, NJ 03833 r
Charles P.
Graham, Esq.
Barbara St. Andre, Esq.
Murphy & Graham Kopelman & Paige, P.C.
33 Low Street 77 Franklin Street Newburyport, MA 01950 Boston, MA 02110 Judith H. Mizner, Esq.
R.
Scott Hill-Whilton, Esq.
Lagoulis, Clark, Hill-Whilton Lagoulis, Clark, Hill-Whilton
& McGuire
& McGuire 79 State Street 79 State Street Newburyport, MA 01950 Newburyport, MA 01950
([.c % h \\ b
,'KA. s s-L s..
Carol S.
Sneider Assistant Attorney General Nuclear Safety Unit Department of the Attorney General One Ashburton Place Boston, MA 02108-1698 (617) 727-2200 DATED:
October 31, 1988
-4
-