|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20093G4541995-10-18018 October 1995 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 51 Re Decommissioning Procedures for Nuclear Power Reactors ML20058K7381993-12-0303 December 1993 Memorandum & Order CLI-93-25.* Commission Denies State of Nj Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Adjudicatory Hearing Filed on 931008.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 931203 ML20058E0151993-11-14014 November 1993 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Exemptions in Accident Insurance for Nuclear Power Plants Prematurely Shut Down ML20059B0301993-10-22022 October 1993 NRC Staff Response to Commission Questions Posed W/Respect to State of New Jersey Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing.* Denies Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing.W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20059B1111993-10-20020 October 1993 Philadelphia Electric Co Response to NRC 931014 Order.* State Failed to Demonstrate Entitlement to Hearing to Challenge Util Amend to Permit Util to Receive Shoreham Fuel ML20059B0621993-10-20020 October 1993 Long Island Power Authority Response to Nuclear Regulatory Commission Order of 931014.* Requests That NRC Reject State of Nj Filing.W/Certificate of Svc ML20057G2141993-10-14014 October 1993 Order.* Requests for Simultaneous Responses,Not to Exceed 10 Pages to Be Filed by State,Peco & Lipa & Served on Other Specified Responders by 931020.NRC May File by 931022. W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 931014 ML20059A4581993-10-14014 October 1993 Order Requesting Answers to Two Questions Re State of Nj Request for Immediate Action by NRC or Alternatively, Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing. Operations Plans for Marine Transportation Withheld ML20059F0191993-10-0808 October 1993 Long Island Power Authority Reply to New Jersey Filing of 931020.* Licensee Requests That NRC Deny State of Nj Intervention Petition.W/Certificate of Svc ML20057F2191993-09-30030 September 1993 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR50.54(q) Eliminating Licensee Requirement to Follow & Maintain in Effect Emergency Plans ML20059B1291993-09-14014 September 1993 Affidavit of Jh Freeman.* Discusses Transfer of Slightly Used Nuclear Fuel from Shoreham Nuclear Power Station to Limerick Generating Station.W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20097C3241992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioners Consented Motion to Dismiss Joint Opposition to Issuance of Decommissioning Order Prior to Hearing.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20097C2911992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioner Consented Motion to Dismiss Appeal.* Dismisses 911203 Notice of Appeal W/Prejudice & W/Each Party Bearing Own Costs & Atty Fees Due to Encl Settlement Agreement. W/Certificate of Svc ML20097C2891992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioner Consented Motion to Dismiss Appeals.* Appeals Being Dismissed Due to Encl Settlement Agreement.Nrc Should Dismiss Appeals W/Prejudice & W/Each Party Bearing Own Costs & Atty Fees.W/Certificate of Svc ML20097C1361992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioners Consented Motion to Dismiss.* Petitioners by Counsel Move ASLB to Dismiss Petitioners as Petitioners for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing in Proceeding W/ Prejudice.W/Certificate of Svc ML20097C2631992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioner Consented Motion to Dismiss.* NRC Should Issue Order Dismissing School District & Scientists & Engineers for Secure Energy,Inc as Petitioners in Proceeding.W/ Settlement Agreement & Certificate of Svc ML20097C1081992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioners Consented Motion to Dismiss Appeal.* Petitioners Hereby Move to Dismiss 910628 Notice of Appeal in Matter W/Prejudice & W/Each Party to Bear Own Costs & Atty Fees.W/ Certificate of Svc ML20096A5921992-05-0707 May 1992 Motion to Withdraw Supplemental Filing.* Petitioners Urge NRC to Allow Withdrawal of Supplement for Good Cause Shown. W/Certificate of Svc ML20096A5311992-05-0606 May 1992 Long Island Power Authority Comments on SECY-92-140 & Response to Petitioner Joint Opposition to Decommissioning Order.* Util Urges NRC to Adopt Recommendation in SECY-92-140 & Approve Order.W/Certificate of Svc ML20096A5071992-05-0505 May 1992 Suppl to Joint Opposition to NRC Staff Recommendation for Issuance of Decommissioning Order Prior to Hearing & Contingent Motion for Stay.* Supplements Joint Opposition Prior to Hearing.W/Certificate of Svc ML20095K8991992-04-29029 April 1992 Joint Opposition to NRC Staff Recommendation for Issuance of Decommissioning Order Prior to Hearing & Contingent Motion for Stay.* Petitioners Urge Commission to Reject NRC Staff Proposal in SECY-92-140.W/Certificate of Svc ML20095H5611992-04-28028 April 1992 Affidavit of Lm Hill.* Affidavit of Lm Hill Supporting Util Position That Circumstances Exist Warranting Prompt NRC Action on NRC Recommendation That Immediately Effective Order Be Issued Approving Decommissioning Plan ML20094G3971992-02-26026 February 1992 Notice of State Taxpayer Complaint & Correction.* NRC Should Stay Hand in Approving Application for License Transfer as Matter of Comity Pending Resolution of Question as Util Continued Existence in Ny State Courts.W/Certificate of Svc ML20094G2261992-02-25025 February 1992 Petitioner Notice of Lilco/Long Island Power Authority Exaggeration & of Commencement of State Court Action.* NRC Should Await Ny State Decision Re Matter within Special Jurisdiction.W/Certificate of Svc ML20092K9021992-02-24024 February 1992 Petitioner Opposition to Ltr Request for Dismissal of Pages.* Suggests That Transfer of License Inappropriate at Present Time.W/Certificate of Svc ML20092K9511992-02-21021 February 1992 Response of Lilco & Long Island Power Authority to Petitioner Opposition to NRC Staff Recommendation for License Transfer Approval.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20092K8701992-02-20020 February 1992 Petitioners Opposition to NRC Staff Recommendation for Approval of License Transfer.* Urges Commission to Reject NRC Recommendation in SECY-92-041 & Remand Matter for Consideration in Normal Proceeding.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E2661992-02-20020 February 1992 Petitioner Opposition to NRC Staff Motion to Dismiss.* Petitioners Urge NRC to Deny Staff Motion or Defer Action Until Petitioners Have Fully Developed Petitions & Supplied Detailed Contentions.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E4011992-02-18018 February 1992 Answer of Long Island Power Authority to NRC Staff Motion to Dismiss Intervention Petitions.* Util Urges NRC to Grant Motion & Dismiss Intervention Petitions.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E3161992-02-13013 February 1992 Lilco Response to NRC Staff Motion to Dismiss Intervention Petitions on Decommissioning Plan.* Requests That Petitions Be Struck & Petitioners Be Instructed of Possible Dismissal.W/Certificate of Svc ML20092D2931992-02-0606 February 1992 Answer Denying Petitions for Leave to Intervene & Request for Prior Hearing Re Decommissioning ML20091E2741992-02-0606 February 1992 Answer of Long Island Power Authority to Intervention Petitions Concerning Shoreham Decommissioning Plan.* Requests That Petitions for Leave & Requests for Hearing Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20091E2941992-02-0606 February 1992 Lilco Opposition to Petitioner Request for Hearing on Shoreham Decommissioning Plan.* Informs That Util Opposes Both Requests for Hearing.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E2831992-01-22022 January 1992 Shoreham-Wading River Central School District Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Prior Hearing.* Requests That Petition for Leave Be Granted & Hearing Held. W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20091E2811992-01-22022 January 1992 Scientists & Engineers for Secure Energy,Inc Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Prior Hearing.* Requests That Petition Be Granted & Hearing Be Held.W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20086T7231992-01-0303 January 1992 Motion of Long Island Power Authority for Leave to File Supplemental Matls.* Requests That Supplemental Memorandum & Supplemental Legislative History Matls Be Filed. W/Certificate of Svc ML20086T7541992-01-0303 January 1992 Memorandum of Long Island Power Authority Concerning Supplemental Legislative History Matls.* Supports Legislative History & Argues That License Not Subj to Termination Under Section 2828.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086Q9171991-12-30030 December 1991 Lilco Opposition to Petitioners Request for Stay & Suggestion of Mootness.* Suggests That Stay Request & Suggestion of Mootness Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086Q9281991-12-30030 December 1991 Opposition of Util to Motion for Stay of License Transfer & to Suggestion of Mootness.* Concluded That Relief Sought in Petitioner Motion & Suggestion Should Be Denied. W/Certificate of Svc ML20091H8261991-12-19019 December 1991 Suggestion of Mootness Due to Long Island Power Authority Imminent Demise.* Concludes That If Commission Were to Transfer Shoreham Licenses to Lipa,Nrc Could Find Itself W/Class 103 Facility W/O Licensee.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091H8661991-12-18018 December 1991 Lilco Opposition to SE2 Appeal from LBP-91-26 & LBP-91-39. Concludes That Appeal Should Be Summarily Rejected or Be Denied on Merits.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086N1661991-12-17017 December 1991 Motion for Stay of License Transfer Pending Final Order on Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing & for Addl or Alternative Stay.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086M0791991-12-16016 December 1991 Certificate of Svc.* Certifies Svc of Petitioner Notice of Appeal & Brief in Support of Appeal in Proceeding to Listed Individuals ML20086J6351991-12-0909 December 1991 Lilco Opposition to Petitioners Contentions on License Transfer Amend.* Concludes That License Transfer Amend Contentions Be Rejected & Petitioner Request to Intervene Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086J3521991-12-0909 December 1991 Response of Long Island Power Authority to Petitioners Joint Supplemental Petition.* Board Should Dismiss Petitions to Intervene for Lack of Standing & Reject All Contentions Proffered by Petitioners.W/Certificate of Svc ML20094E1041991-12-0909 December 1991 Response to Long Island Power Authority to Petitioners Joint Supplemental Petition ML20091G2051991-12-0303 December 1991 Brief in Support of Appeal.* Commission Should Consider Appeal on Basis That Findings of Matl of Facts Clearly Erroneous.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091G1971991-12-0303 December 1991 Notice of Appeal.* Informs of Appeal of LBP-91-26 & LBP-91-39 in Facility possession-only License Proceeding ML20086C5381991-11-18018 November 1991 Petitioner Joint Supplemental Petition.* Petition Includes List of Contentions to Be Litigated in Hearing Re License Transfer Application.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086C5471991-11-18018 November 1991 App to Joint Supplemental Petition of Shoreham-Wading River Central School District & Scientists/Engineers for Secure Energy,Inc.* 1995-10-18
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20059B0301993-10-22022 October 1993 NRC Staff Response to Commission Questions Posed W/Respect to State of New Jersey Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing.* Denies Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing.W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20059B0621993-10-20020 October 1993 Long Island Power Authority Response to Nuclear Regulatory Commission Order of 931014.* Requests That NRC Reject State of Nj Filing.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059B1111993-10-20020 October 1993 Philadelphia Electric Co Response to NRC 931014 Order.* State Failed to Demonstrate Entitlement to Hearing to Challenge Util Amend to Permit Util to Receive Shoreham Fuel ML20059F0191993-10-0808 October 1993 Long Island Power Authority Reply to New Jersey Filing of 931020.* Licensee Requests That NRC Deny State of Nj Intervention Petition.W/Certificate of Svc ML20097C2631992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioner Consented Motion to Dismiss.* NRC Should Issue Order Dismissing School District & Scientists & Engineers for Secure Energy,Inc as Petitioners in Proceeding.W/ Settlement Agreement & Certificate of Svc ML20097C2911992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioner Consented Motion to Dismiss Appeal.* Dismisses 911203 Notice of Appeal W/Prejudice & W/Each Party Bearing Own Costs & Atty Fees Due to Encl Settlement Agreement. W/Certificate of Svc ML20097C1361992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioners Consented Motion to Dismiss.* Petitioners by Counsel Move ASLB to Dismiss Petitioners as Petitioners for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing in Proceeding W/ Prejudice.W/Certificate of Svc ML20097C1081992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioners Consented Motion to Dismiss Appeal.* Petitioners Hereby Move to Dismiss 910628 Notice of Appeal in Matter W/Prejudice & W/Each Party to Bear Own Costs & Atty Fees.W/ Certificate of Svc ML20097C2891992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioner Consented Motion to Dismiss Appeals.* Appeals Being Dismissed Due to Encl Settlement Agreement.Nrc Should Dismiss Appeals W/Prejudice & W/Each Party Bearing Own Costs & Atty Fees.W/Certificate of Svc ML20097C3241992-06-0303 June 1992 Petitioners Consented Motion to Dismiss Joint Opposition to Issuance of Decommissioning Order Prior to Hearing.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20096A5921992-05-0707 May 1992 Motion to Withdraw Supplemental Filing.* Petitioners Urge NRC to Allow Withdrawal of Supplement for Good Cause Shown. W/Certificate of Svc ML20096A5311992-05-0606 May 1992 Long Island Power Authority Comments on SECY-92-140 & Response to Petitioner Joint Opposition to Decommissioning Order.* Util Urges NRC to Adopt Recommendation in SECY-92-140 & Approve Order.W/Certificate of Svc ML20096A5071992-05-0505 May 1992 Suppl to Joint Opposition to NRC Staff Recommendation for Issuance of Decommissioning Order Prior to Hearing & Contingent Motion for Stay.* Supplements Joint Opposition Prior to Hearing.W/Certificate of Svc ML20095K8991992-04-29029 April 1992 Joint Opposition to NRC Staff Recommendation for Issuance of Decommissioning Order Prior to Hearing & Contingent Motion for Stay.* Petitioners Urge Commission to Reject NRC Staff Proposal in SECY-92-140.W/Certificate of Svc ML20094G2261992-02-25025 February 1992 Petitioner Notice of Lilco/Long Island Power Authority Exaggeration & of Commencement of State Court Action.* NRC Should Await Ny State Decision Re Matter within Special Jurisdiction.W/Certificate of Svc ML20092K9021992-02-24024 February 1992 Petitioner Opposition to Ltr Request for Dismissal of Pages.* Suggests That Transfer of License Inappropriate at Present Time.W/Certificate of Svc ML20092K9511992-02-21021 February 1992 Response of Lilco & Long Island Power Authority to Petitioner Opposition to NRC Staff Recommendation for License Transfer Approval.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20092K8701992-02-20020 February 1992 Petitioners Opposition to NRC Staff Recommendation for Approval of License Transfer.* Urges Commission to Reject NRC Recommendation in SECY-92-041 & Remand Matter for Consideration in Normal Proceeding.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E2661992-02-20020 February 1992 Petitioner Opposition to NRC Staff Motion to Dismiss.* Petitioners Urge NRC to Deny Staff Motion or Defer Action Until Petitioners Have Fully Developed Petitions & Supplied Detailed Contentions.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E4011992-02-18018 February 1992 Answer of Long Island Power Authority to NRC Staff Motion to Dismiss Intervention Petitions.* Util Urges NRC to Grant Motion & Dismiss Intervention Petitions.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E3161992-02-13013 February 1992 Lilco Response to NRC Staff Motion to Dismiss Intervention Petitions on Decommissioning Plan.* Requests That Petitions Be Struck & Petitioners Be Instructed of Possible Dismissal.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E2941992-02-0606 February 1992 Lilco Opposition to Petitioner Request for Hearing on Shoreham Decommissioning Plan.* Informs That Util Opposes Both Requests for Hearing.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091E2741992-02-0606 February 1992 Answer of Long Island Power Authority to Intervention Petitions Concerning Shoreham Decommissioning Plan.* Requests That Petitions for Leave & Requests for Hearing Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20091E2811992-01-22022 January 1992 Scientists & Engineers for Secure Energy,Inc Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Prior Hearing.* Requests That Petition Be Granted & Hearing Be Held.W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20091E2831992-01-22022 January 1992 Shoreham-Wading River Central School District Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Prior Hearing.* Requests That Petition for Leave Be Granted & Hearing Held. W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20086T7231992-01-0303 January 1992 Motion of Long Island Power Authority for Leave to File Supplemental Matls.* Requests That Supplemental Memorandum & Supplemental Legislative History Matls Be Filed. W/Certificate of Svc ML20086Q9281991-12-30030 December 1991 Opposition of Util to Motion for Stay of License Transfer & to Suggestion of Mootness.* Concluded That Relief Sought in Petitioner Motion & Suggestion Should Be Denied. W/Certificate of Svc ML20086Q9171991-12-30030 December 1991 Lilco Opposition to Petitioners Request for Stay & Suggestion of Mootness.* Suggests That Stay Request & Suggestion of Mootness Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091H8261991-12-19019 December 1991 Suggestion of Mootness Due to Long Island Power Authority Imminent Demise.* Concludes That If Commission Were to Transfer Shoreham Licenses to Lipa,Nrc Could Find Itself W/Class 103 Facility W/O Licensee.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091H8661991-12-18018 December 1991 Lilco Opposition to SE2 Appeal from LBP-91-26 & LBP-91-39. Concludes That Appeal Should Be Summarily Rejected or Be Denied on Merits.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086N1661991-12-17017 December 1991 Motion for Stay of License Transfer Pending Final Order on Petition to Intervene & Request for Hearing & for Addl or Alternative Stay.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086J3521991-12-0909 December 1991 Response of Long Island Power Authority to Petitioners Joint Supplemental Petition.* Board Should Dismiss Petitions to Intervene for Lack of Standing & Reject All Contentions Proffered by Petitioners.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086J6351991-12-0909 December 1991 Lilco Opposition to Petitioners Contentions on License Transfer Amend.* Concludes That License Transfer Amend Contentions Be Rejected & Petitioner Request to Intervene Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091G2051991-12-0303 December 1991 Brief in Support of Appeal.* Commission Should Consider Appeal on Basis That Findings of Matl of Facts Clearly Erroneous.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086C5381991-11-18018 November 1991 Petitioner Joint Supplemental Petition.* Petition Includes List of Contentions to Be Litigated in Hearing Re License Transfer Application.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086C5471991-11-18018 November 1991 App to Joint Supplemental Petition of Shoreham-Wading River Central School District & Scientists/Engineers for Secure Energy,Inc.* ML20082G8971991-08-0909 August 1991 Lilco Responses to Petitioner Filings of 910805 & 06.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20082G8441991-08-0707 August 1991 Motion for Offical Notice to Correct Representation.* Moves Board to Take Official Notice of Encl NRC Records to Correct Representation Made at Prehearing Conference. W/Certificate of Svc ML20082G8571991-08-0707 August 1991 Petitioners Response to Lilco Re Physical Security Plan.* Petitioners Suggest That Util post-hearing Filing Does Not Dispose of Any Issue as to Util Compliance W/Settlement Agreement.W/Certificate of Svc ML20076D0721991-07-22022 July 1991 Petitioners First Emergency Motion for Stay.* Movants Urge Commission,In Interest of Justice,To Enjoin Lilco from Taking Any Actions Under possession-only License Which Might Moot Renewed Application for Stay.W/Certificate of Svc ML20076D1541991-07-22022 July 1991 Lilco Response to Petitioner Emergency Motions.* Believes Petitioner Emergency Motions Should Be Denied to End Frivolous Pleadings & Burdens of Time & Resources of Nrc. W/Certificate of Svc ML20076D0841991-07-21021 July 1991 Petitioners Second Emergency Motion for Stay.* Petitioners Urge Commission,Ex Parte,To Enjoin Lilco,From Any & All Acts W/Respect to Shoreham Which Would Be Inconsistent W/Nrc Representation in Court.W/Certificate of Svc ML20076D2071991-07-15015 July 1991 Lilco Opposition to Shoreham-Wading River Central School District (Swrcsd) Appeal from LBP-91-26.* Appeal Should Be Denied Due to Listed Reasons.W/Certificate of Svc ML20082D4051991-07-12012 July 1991 Lilco Opposition to SE-2s Contentions on Possession Only License Amend.* Concludes That Contentions Should Be Rejected & Request for Hearing on Possession Only License Amend Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20082D4001991-07-12012 July 1991 Movant-intervenors Motion for Change of Venue of Prehearing Conference.* Intervenors Request Change of Venue of 910730 Prehearing Conference from Hauppauge,Ny to Washington DC Area.W/Certificate of Svc ML20082D3891991-07-10010 July 1991 Lilco Support of NRC Staff Motion for Reconsideration of LBP-91-26.* for Reasons Listed,Nrc 910625 Motion Should Be Granted & Request for Hearing & Petition to Intervene in Amend Proceeding Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20082B4311991-07-0303 July 1991 Lilco Opposition to Petitioner Contentions on Confirmatory Order,Physical Security Plan & Emergency Preparedeness License Amends.* Petitioner Contentions Should Be Rejected & License Amends Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20082B3531991-07-0202 July 1991 Unopposed Motion for Variance in Svc Requirements.* Informs That Filing & Svc Requirements Presents No Obstacle to Filing W/Aslb or Svc Upon Any Parties.W/Certificate of Svc. Served on 910702.Granted for Licensing Board on 910702 ML20082B2461991-06-28028 June 1991 Movant-Intervenor Brief in Support Accompany Notice of Appeal.* School District Urges Commission to Reverse & Remand Dismissal Order W/Appropriate Guidance.W/Ceritifcate of Svc ML20082B2571991-06-28028 June 1991 Unopposed Motion for Variance in Svc Requirements.* Petitioners Urge ASLB to Grant Variance in Svc Procedures Requested to Allow Svc of Judge Ferguson.W/Certificate of Svc 1993-10-08
[Table view] |
Text
. .
DOCKETED Aprilif,1987 17 MH 21 P4 59 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION , _, ,
GCC8 L i e. . 'd" 11.
Before the Atomic Safety and Licensina Board "
)
In the Matter of )
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322-OL-3
) (Emergency Planning)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power )
Station, Unit 1) )
)
SUFFOLK COUNTY AND STATE OF NEW YORK MOTION TO COMPEL LILCO TO PROVIDE SOURCES OF DATA RELIED UPON IN TESTIMONY By letter of April 2, 1987, counsel for Suffolk County requested counsel for LILCO to provide information and documents pertaining to certain data relied upon in LILCO's testimony and which were not previously provided to Suffolk County and the State of New York (the " Governments") in discovery. On April 3, 1987, LILCO refused to provide certain of the information requested by the County. For the reasons set forth below, the Governments hereby move this Board to compel LILCO to provide the requested information.
8704230124 870413 PDR ADOCK 05000322 g PDR
BACKGROUND On March 30, 1987, LILCO submitted to the Board and the parties its written testimony on the reception center issues
("LILCO Testimony").
One of the issues addressed in the-LILCO Testimony is the number of people which LILCO is capable of monitoring. In support of the testimony on this issue, one of LILCO's witnesses, Mr. Daverio, offers certain data regarding the number of people who can be monitored within 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> at other reception centers.
These data purport to show that at some reception centers, there is a capacity to monitor 100% of the EPZ population, while at other reception centers there is a lesser capability. LILCO Testimony at 12. According to Mr. Daverlo, the data are based on " contacts made by my staff with County and utility personnel at several sites." LILCO Testimony at 12.
From these " contacts" he apparently developed the table which is set forth on page 12 of the LILCO Testimony.
As LILCO had not previously produced the data reflected on page 12 of its Testimony (although those data clearly fell within the scope of earlier discovery requests),l/ counsel for the County, by letter of April 2, 1987, requested LILCO to identify the source of the data and to provide all documents reflecting those data. Egg Attachment 1. By letter of April 3, 1987, counsel for LILCO provided two documents (which do not appear to 1/ Indeed, on grounds ofthe data work had been withheld by LILCO during discovery product. Egg Attachment 2.
be fully responsive to the County's request) but refused to identify the source of the data regarding monitoring capabili-ties. Egg Attachment 2. The ground on which counsel refused to provide the information was that disclosure of the source of the data "might subject individuals to harassment and intimidation."
Attachment 2 at 1.
LILCO's asserted grounds are baseless. In effect, LILCO is attempting to introduce hearsay evidence into the record and then preclude the Governments from inquiring into the reliability of that hearsay. Such LILCO efforts to obstruct appropriate discovery and to hinder meaningful cross-examination cannot be condoned. We are filing this motion in order to obtain the necessary data. If the data are not produced, however, the testimony will clearly need to be struck.
DISCUSSION LILCO is attempting to buttress its argument that it need not have the capability to monitor the entirety of the EPZ popu-lation by arguing that at some other reception centers, there is less than 100% monitoring capability. The Governments have already stated their position to the Board regarding the relevance of evidence about reception centers at plants other than Shoreham. However, if such data are nevertheless admissible, the Governments must be provided the opportunity to
- -_ _ . =
explore fully the accuracy and reliability of such data. This is particularly so here, where LILCO is relying on " contacts" with unspecified sources in order to support its position. Such hearsay evidence, if not stricken from the record entirely in upcoming motions to strike, nevertheless is of questionable reliability. In light of that fact, the Go'rernments have the right to explore the validity of LILCO's data, but are being den-ied thnt right by LILCO's intransigence.
LILCO's stated position that disclosure of the sources of its data may subject those sources to harassment or intimidation is utter nonsense. The Board should note that LILCO does not claim that its sources fear intimidation or harassment, or that they have asked for anonymity; LILCO has just taken it upon itself to assert the argument on its own. The Governments may or may not contact the unnamed LILCO sources; but if they do, it will not be for the purpose of harassment or intimidation.
Rather it would be to inquire into the bases for the data and to perform the sort of investigation which is normal and accepted in all forms of litigation.
i The April 3, 1987, letter from LILCO's counsel also asserts that the County and the State have access to information about I
the capabilities of other reception centers and therefore have no substantial need to get the information which they are seeking from LILCO. This is beside the point. Certainly, the County and i
the State have access to information about the capacity of the reception centers and are likely to introduce such information l at trial (assuming the Board rules such data are relevant). The result will be that the Board is confronted with conflicting evidence; LILCO says one thing and the Governments say another.
How can the Board decide which data to give greater weight? The answer is that the Board must permit the parties to explore the reliability of the data on which the other parties rely. This can only be done fairly if the Governments have the information they need to investigate the validity of LILCO's data.
It should also be noted that because the LILCO data were withheld from the Governments until several weeks after the close of discovery, the Governments had no opportunity to explore the validity of those data, or of the documents provided with LILCO's April 3 letter. This makes the need for the information sought by the Governments all the more compelling.
In summary, LILCO is attempting to inject evidence into this hearing without having the reliability of that evidence scruti-nized by the parties and by this Board. LILCO's attempts in this regard are improper and must be rejected by this Board. A party has no right to introduce hearsay data, to hide the source of the data, and nevertheless to ask the Board to rely on such data.
Accordingly, the Board should rule also that if LILCO refuses to divulge the data, its testimony on those matters will be struck.
I CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Suffolk County hereby requests that LILCO provide the information requested in the County's April 2, 1987, letter.
Respectfully submitted, Martin Bradley Ashare Suffolk County Attorney Building 158 North County Complex Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11788 v , . .
Lawrence C. Lanpher Christopher M. McMurray David T. Case KIRKPATRICK & LOCKEART 1800 "M" Street, N. W.
South Lobby - Ninth Floor Washington, D. C. 20036-5891 Attorneys for Suffolk County f
/$. 11a d A t Q Richard J. Zahnleuter Special Counsel to the Governor of the State of New York Executive Chamber, Room 229 Capitol Building Albany, New York 12224 Attorney for Governor Mario M. Cuomo and the State of New York l
April 13, 1987 i
6-
Attachmtnt 1 KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART SOUTH lob 8Y fTH Floor ExcHApos PLAct 1800 M STRFET. N.W.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 200 % 5891 sin 3274oo0 H28 BluCKE11 AVENUE MLAMI, FL 3313I TELEPHONE 00D 77&9000 005) 3744til TELEX *ece KL DC Ut uco ouvEn autDog)
TELECOPER 004 77&9100 MTT38URCH, PA 15222 5379 CHRISTOPHER M. McMURRAY "
004 7769054 April 2, 1987 VIA TELECOPY James N. Christman, Esquire Hunton and Williams 707 East Main Street Post Office Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212
Dear Jim:
We have received and reviewed LILCO's reception center testimony and find that certain analyses and documents referenced in the testimony have not yet been provided to us.
First, on page 12 of the testimony, Chuck Daverio discusses monitoring capacities at certain plants based on " contacts made by [his) staff with county and utility personnel at several cites." Please identify the county and/or utility personnel contacted with respect to each site, the date such contact was made, and by whom such contact was made. In addition, please provide all documents reflecting such contacts.
Second, on page 18 of LILCO's testimony, Michael Lindell discusses two studies. The first study discussed appears to be his survey of University of Washington students for which we have previously requested, but not yet received, all underlying documentation. With respect to the second (follow-up) study, please provide all documents pertaining to that study to the extent that they were not already turned over either in Doctor Lindell's deposition or in your recent production of further documents from Doctor Lindell.
Third, in light of your letter of March 17, I was surprised to find that Doctor Mileti has, in fact, conducted certain analyses for the purpose of supporting his testimony. Please provide all of the data collected by Doctor Mileti regarding tourist activities in Las Vegas during the atomic bomb tests and all documents reflecting such data. Also, please provide the
KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART James N. Christman, Esquire April 2, 1987 Page 2 data referred to by Doctor Mileti regarding property values in the Three Mile Island area and all documents reflecting those data.
Fourth, on page 30 of LILCO's testimony, Edward Lieberman cites his most recent analysis of traffic congestion which is referred to as KLD TR-201. While we have received the final report for KLD TR-201, which was attached to LILCO's testimony, we have not yet received the documents reflecting his further analyses, which were within the scope of our earlier request to you for such analyses. We cannot, of course, conduct an adequate review of KLD TR-201 without the underlying data.
Finally, I have reviewed the documentation already provided to us by LILCO and do not see a copy of the information sheet which the traffic guides are supposed to hand out to arriving evacuees. Please provide a copy of that information sheet immediately.
The above documents and information are necessary in order for us to review and analyze the LILCO Plan and LILCO testimony adequately.
this request.
Therefore, I appreciate your prompt attention to Yours truly,
/.
Christopher M. McMurray CMM/ mas
Attachment 2 Huwrox Sc WILLIAMS 707 East MMN STREET P.O. Som 1535 8000 pt ==sv6 vama avc =ve. = w e o toa.se3o Recuwown. VamonwsA eoese soo ,a..a. =ve was==oto= o e aoose =cw von.o ac. ,oen soos, 736t*=oses ace oss esoo f ascamo=c aia see sooo TccennoNE 804 788 8200 trosa ea4s4e ww=? we remet womes=.a sa=a towe n TE L E m 6 844251 e o aos Sees onc
=,4== oven sovant noerosa. wies.eesa assed , , , , , , ,
vsstemont oom ses sooe matteces, seokr= canosessa aveos Takaa?ssoas vattewo=t sie ese-3ooo SSCO came= e*+oog moao rimst ta==,c ,sser
, , ,e4==
, , , ousto =o
,aearam, vemo mia aeoso mesomwe6Lt. tresat sset steos f t6 -on. ,os asa as tatape.ons ses est ease res m. 24566.300001 o...ev osas no .o. ... 7 2 7 8 April 3, 1987 VIA TELECOPY Christopher M. McMurray, Esq.
Kirkpatrick & Lockhart South Lobby - 9th Floor 1800 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036-5891
Dear Chris:
This letter responds to your latest request for information; we received it at 5:00 p.m. yesterday and so could not make much progress on responding to it until today.
First, the basis for the statement on page 12 of LILCO's testimony about " contacts made by [Mr. Daverio's] staff with county and utility personnel" are the documents identified as Nos. 5 and 6 in Section III of LILCO's Responses and Objections (dated February 4, 1987) to your first set of interrogatories.
As we said then, both documents are work product; however, we are enclosing them for you in order to avoid a needless dispute. We have redacted the names of individuals from the first of the documents. Your latest request seems aimed at the identity of the people contacted, and we object to producing those names on the grounds stated in our February 4, response to your Interrogatory No. 12, particularly the ground that disclosure might subject individuals to harrassment and intimidation. We might add that, since LILCO's testimony names the counties, and since your client and the State surely have better access to information about the capabilities of those counties than LILCO has, we do not believe you can show any substantial need to get this information from LILCO.
Second, Dr. Lindell has informed us that he does not have access to the raw data files for the first study mentioned in his testimony; the data are stored on a computer at Battelle Memorial Institute. If the data and figures in the Nuclear Safety article are not sufficient for your purposes, Dr. Lindell says that it
1 H UNTON & WILLI AM S Christopher M. McMurray, Esq.
April 3, 1987 Page 2 would be possible to hire someone at Battelle to run all the data on the computer. Please let us know if you wish to bear this expense.
As you know, Dr. Lindell's second study has not been completed. Thus far, we have provided you his summary sheet containing the results of the frequency analysis. This sheet contains all the data Dr. Lindell will be looking at in preparing his manuscript. To copy the frequency data themselves would be difficult, because it would require separating print-out pages that may have data written on the perforated edges. If you feel that the summary sheet is not adequate and that you need the raw data as well, Dr. Lindell can have the six diskettes containing the key-punched data copied, at your expense, and sent to you for your own analysis.
Third, apparently you have misconstrued Jim Christman's letter of March 17, 1987. Dr. Mileti has not conducted additional analyses in support of his testimony. Rather, the data you request are from studies he conducted several years ago, which came to our attention the week-end of March 21. We anticipate having these data, or a citation to where they are publicly available, for you on Monday.
Fourth, as we discussed earlier today, the underlying data for KLD TR-201 will be produced for you on Monday, since you indicate you cannot use them stored on a disk, which could be provided to you tomorrow. Consistent with our past arrangements, we will expect Suffolk County to cover the cost of reproducing the documents.
Fifth, LILCO has not yet written the information sheet to be disseminated to evacuees at the reception centers, i
I hope this answers the questions raised in your letter of yesterday. If you have any further inquiries, please let us know.
Sincerely,
/ -
Mary Leugers 443/735
- cc: James N. Christman, Esq.
l Stephen W. Miller, Esq.
- e DOCKETED USNBC Aoril 13, 1987 17 MH 21 P4 :59 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OfflCE CF 1.nt !ar" Before the Atomic Safety and Licensino Board $ffhC
)
In the Matter of )
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322-OL-3
) (Emergency Planning)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, )
Unit 1) )
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the SUFFOLK COUNTY AND STATE OF NEW YORK MOTION FOR RESCHEDULING OF RELOCATION CENTER HEARING TO COMMENCE UPON COMPLETION OF EXERCISE LITIGATION and the SUFFOLK l
COUNTY AND STATE OF NEW YORK MOTION TO COMPEL LILCO TO PROVIDE SOURCES OF DATA RELIED UPON IN TESTIMONY have been served on the following this 13th day of April, 1987 by United States mail, first class, except as otherwise noted.
Morton B. Margulies, Esq., Chairman
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Director, Utility Intervention U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission N.Y. Consumer Protection Board Washington, D.C. 20555 Suite 1020 Albany, New York 12210 Dr. Jerry R. Kline* William R. Cumming, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Spence W. Perry, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of General Counsel Washington, D.C. 20555 Federal Emergency Management Agency 500 C Street, S.W., Room 840 Washington, D.C. 20472
Mr. Frederick J. Shon* Anthony F. Earley, Jr., Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board General Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Long Island Lighting Company Washington, D.C. 20555 175 East Old Country Road Hicksville, New York 11801 Ms. Elisabeth Taibbi W. Taylor Reveley, III, Esq.*
Clerk Hunton and Williams Suffolk County Legislature Post Office Box 1535 Suffolk County Legislature 707 East Main Street Office Building Richmond, Virginia 23212 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11788 Mr. L. F. Britt Stephen B. Latham, Esq.
Long Island Lighting Company Twomey, Latham & Shea Shoreham Nuclear Power Station 33 West Second Street North Country Road Riverhead, New York 11901 Wading River, New York 11792 Ms. Nora Bredes Docketing and Service Section Executive Director Office of the Secretary Shoreham Opponents Coalition U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.
195 East Main Street 1717 "H" Street, N. W.
Smithtown, New York 11787 Washington, D.C. 20555 Mary M. Gundrum, Esq. Hon. Michael A. LoGrande New York State Department of Law Suffolk County Executive 120 Broadway, Third Floor H. Lee Dennison Building Room Number 3-116 Veterans Memorial Highway New York, New York 10271 Hauppauge, New York 11788 MHB Technical Associates Dr. Monroe Schneider 1723 Hamilton Avenue North Shore Committee Suite "K" Post Office Box 231 San Jose, California 95125 Wading River, New York 11792 Martin Bradley Ashare, Esq. Fabian G. Palomino, Esq.*
Suffolk County Attorney Richard J. Zahnleuter, Esq.
Bldg. 158, North County Complex Special Counsel to the Veterans Memorial Highway Governor of the State Hauppauge, New York 11788 of New York Executive Chamber, Room 229 Capitol Building Albany, New York 12224 Mr. Jay Dunkleburger Richard G. Bachmann, Esq.*
New York State Energy Office U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.
Agency Building 2 Washington, D. C. 20555 Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12223
David A. Brownlee, Esq. Mr. Stuart Diamond Kirkpatrick and Lockhart Business / Financial 1500 Oliver Building NEW YORK TIMES Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222 229 West 43rd Street New York, New York 10036 Douglas J. Hynes, Councilman Town Board of Oyster Bay Town Hall Oyster Bay, New York 11771 Chfi'sto[5hFr M. McMurray David T. Case
- KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART 1800 "M" Street, N. W.
South Lobby - Ninth Floor Washington, D. C. 20036-5891
- Via Hand Delivery April 13, 1987 I
-_ . - .- - . _ .. _.