ML20207E495

Forwards Util Response to Suffolk County Deposition Scheduling Ltr & 861210 & 19 Ltrs from Util Counsel to Suffolk County Counsel,Setting Out Course of Deposition Scheduling to Date Among Parties.Related Correspondence

ML20207E495
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	12/23/1986
From:	Mccleskey K HUNTON & WILLIAMS, LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
To:	Frye J, Paris O, Shon F Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
CON-#187-2072 OL-5, NUDOCS 8701020191
Download: ML20207E495 (9)

Text

r; x i -4 N r?tKET NUMBER p32 2.-6d F r.0 3. C. UTi! FAC.. ., r. . -- - - - edlEU CU.nicSPCN0li.NCg Huwrow & WILLIAus COLf;f'if 7o7 EAar MAIN 3rnss? P.O. som 1535 e asmes.v6w.n n am.aus.'m.w. Racassown. VamonwsA sosts s.us

.. o. .o. '86 DEC 29 PSru&, e o ~~~....?

mm.aemeron.co.e o. c. .e TELA pMcNa 804 788 8200 sanons aia so...

t Lam ase.4. numt us coo ratspaosos ace.....e.oo

,i , vino nia ..vowsm TELgx 6544258 ons ***wowse .ouans o a. .o. s F. r.. o .oa .o.

seo. rosa, via.see.

im a as.ie 69t' Nak: IGM. NoRv.e CAmouNa a?.oa ve6s o.. .o..... . ..o. vsus o a..-.....ooo rin.? vanna..ss .meen .u.go no so.o cuase.micos moao e o .on ..e e o. . maouve6Ls vs==ssess 37.oe

....,... v. on ....as

.i4 7 2. December 23, 1986 'c's -oa s ='=-a n- 3'-

vs6spaons tos 3.a aaoo

...sce oi.s ~o .o. 7.. .

John H. Frye, III, Chairman Dr. Oscar H. Paris

Mr. Frederick J. Shon Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission East-West Towers 4350 East-West Hwy.

Beth,esda, MD 20814

Dear Administrative Judges:

Attached is LILCO's response to Suffolk County's deposition scheduling letter to you of yesterday evening. Also attached are December 10 and December 19 letters from LILCO counsel to Suffolk County counsel, setting out the course of deposition scheduling to date among the parties.

Sincerely,

$ /

Kathy E.B. McClesk '

301/6157 cca Service List 870102A PDR

$N$$22 PDR G

3so3

o-z

+;

r) .

HuwroN & WILLIAMS 707 E'As? MAIN STREET P.O. Box 1535 acoo paumsyLva=i4 *ve=us. m. w. RIcuxoND. VIROINIA 20212 soo p4an avamur

p. o. som seaso atw voan. New vona sooi?

wasanwovow, o. c. aoose TELEp**o=s aia-sos.ecoo TELarnoNE agg.ogg.iSoo TE LE PH ON E 804-788-8200 TELEm da4sse wur us rimer vimoimia amma towsm TELEX 6844256 ons nammoven sovans p o. mon sees = o som aos moeroom, venoinea assu mAbrion.Noarw canow=aateoa tsLapwont so4 eas.esos teLam onssieeeesooo December 23, 1986 ri s r ve~~..s.a e.~. eoito.

sono cua.w emioot moao e o som one FAe Aram, vimo6NIA to3o TEL pm NE e e3? 43 TELermous vos-asa atoo ritt No.

ointer oint no so4 veo.

BY TELECOPY Michael S. Miller, Esq.

Kirkpatrick & Lockhart .

South Lobby - 9th Floor 1800 M Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036-5891

Dear Mike:

This letter memorializes our discussion of yesterday evening about your December 22 letter to the Licensing Board on deposi-tion scheduling.

1. LILCO does not agree to extending depositions beyond the January 21 cut-off established by the Board. The need to extend the scheduling to include all the depositions that Suffolk County wishes to take can be eliminated by taking the FEMA witnesses in panels, as we have done in the past, and if necessary, by scheduling more than one deposition each day.

2. The first and only notice LILCO has received of the identification of witnesses Saegert and Zook is in the second paragraph of your letter to the Board. We do wish to depose them; I would be grateful if you would inquire which days they are available prior to January 21,

3. It is not acceptable to LILCO to depose Dr. Harris and Mr. Mayer on January 23, after the discovery cut-off. You have represented that they are unavailable prior to that day. I would be grateful if you would check with them again to determine why they are unavailable and whether they could accommodate a deposi-tion prior to January 21.

4. Messrs. Behr and Kessler are not available for Monday next. We identified December 29 as a day when both those wit-nesses would be available with the clear understanding that we would be given adequate notice before Christmas to arrange travel schedules and witness preparation. As I am sure you can

hh ' '

x - Huwrow Sc WILLIAMS l Michael-S. Miller, Esq.

December- 23, 1986 Page 2 understand,-both gentlemen intend to spend the remainder of this

- week and Christmas weekend with their f amilies.1/

-5. 'As a matter of courtesy, I would be grateful if you would consult with counsel about scheduling matters before

-sending to _the Licensing Board a proposed schedule unilaterally chosen by Suffolk County.

Sincerely, li 4)

Kathy EsB. McCleskey 301/6157 1

l l

l I

l 1/ Had you told me last week that you wished to deposeYou them on did the 29th, we might have been able to accommodate you.

mention a week ago Sunday that you might want to take witnesses Weismantle, Robinson, or Kessler on the 29th or 30th. I told you then that we needed to finalize that schedule early last week to allow for travel plans and preparation of witnesses. Tip Letsche subsequently called on Wednesday to schedule Suffolk County wit-ness Colwell's deposition on December 30 (you had told me previ-ously he was unavailable). I heard nothing more about LILCO wit-nesses until your letter arrived last night.

l

Huwrow & WILLIAus

. 707 EAe7 MAm stmas? P.O. Box e535 a e -- _ _

, o. .o. . e m,wwue, m, m RICEttgOND. VIBOINIA See:S .co .n.wa.us mm.sa. sero . ., s. . . sw vo . aw vo.s econ ests o.asee.e.s.ee . ee ruktpMONa SO4 788 SaCO ests =o=c ave.ao..eoco esu. .a. . .w., we

... . . ,o... Tsuax e844asi

o. . .- ...... o ...co.

v.u

.o.,om.

o . .... ......

,.. ....o.

u o . . c..ow.....o.

" " " " " ' ' n u o............oo December 10, 1986 ,,..,u........,,.,,,o

.o.o.......,..

. o w.. ...

. . s. vtF4,N,. 48o 3o . ...,,ua.. n. . . .. ,...a. ,,.o, n u.~o.a. ,os.u.....oo TELg.,eoas. .,g . 3,a. 3,g

,,u .o o,. c,o,.

-BY TELECOPY Karla J. Letsche, Esq.

Michael S. Miller, Esq.

Kirkpatrick & Lockhart ,

1900 M Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036

Dear Tip and Mike:

This letter memorializes our discussions of the past few days regarding deposition schedules.

I.

We have agreed upon the following deposition schedule for the week of December 15:

F. Petrone 12/15/86 10:30am 100 Park Ave., NY P. Cosgrove 12/16/86 9 am Yaphank J. Streeter 12/16/86 11:30 am Yaphank R. Roberts 12/16/86 2:30 pm Yaphank E. Michel 12/17/86 9 am Yaphank P. McGuire 12/17/86 11:30 am Yaphank R. Dormer 12/17/86 2:30 pm Yaphank C. Perrow 12/18 9 am 1800 M Street, D.C.

S. Cole 12/18/86 2:30 pm 1800 M Street, D.C.

G. Simon 12/19/86 9 am 2000 Pennsylvania, D.C.

95T .

3 Huwrow & WILLIAus Karla J. Letsche, Esq.

Michael S. Miller, Esq.

December 10, 1986 Page 2 Please give me a call today if this list is inaccurate.

As you know, LILCO had requested the depositions of Perrow, Cole, and Simon to be taken in.New York. It is my understanding that, although they live in the New York area, these witnesses are available only in Washington D.C. on the 18th and 19th. We are deposing them there as an accommodation to Suffolk County.

I spoke with ACE Federal Reporters yesterday (I understand that you did too); it appears that they are set for next week. .

They ask that we forward the remaining schedule by letter as soon as we settle upon it.

II.

As promised, here is a list of the days LILCO witnesses are available between December 19 and January 15:

D. Behr 12/22, 12/23, 12/29 through 1/13 C. Daverio 12/22, 12/23, 1/5 through 1/15 J. Kessler ,12/29 through 1/15 E. Lieberman 1/5 through 1/9 B. McCaffrey 12/29 through 1/15 E. Robinson 12/29 through 1/15 J. Weismantle 12/29 through 1/15 W. Wilm 1/8, 1/9, 1/13, 1/14 Since all but two of the LILCO witnesses are available for some part of December, I am hopeful that we can complete the dep-osition of these witnesses well before the 15th. Please call me this afternoon or tomorrow with your suggested schedule so that we can finalize it by the end of this week.

In addition, I would be. grateful if you would'(1) tell me this week whether Suffolk County witnesses Colwell, Loftus, and l

Rowan are available on the 30th, 5th and 6th, respectively, and l

(2) provide a resume for Mr. Cole.

1 i .,. - - _ _ - - , _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ . , _ _ . , . _ . . _ , . _ _ _ _ _ , _ . ___, . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

v:.

• Huwrow & WILLIAMS Karla J. Letsche, Esq.

Michael S. Miller, Esq.

Decembar 10, 1986 Page 3 I suggest we plan a conference call among the parties on Friday morning to finalize the schedule. Perhaps the Board's rulings on contentions will be available by then, allowing us to factor in the FEMA witnesses as well.

Best regards.

Sincerely,

//

K . thy .B. McCleskey 301/6157 cc Richard J.,Zahnleuter, Esq.

William R. Cumming, Esq.

Bernard M. Bordenick, Esq.

p-

d. o 3..

g.

a.

a HuwToN dc WILLIAMS 707 EAST MAIN Sfmast P.O. Box 1535 sooo newmovLvaminawawus,m.w.- R casasown, VIaoawIA eoeaa .oo .. a .w a o.mousesso =cw vona. =ce vonn soce, wassumeton. o. c. aoose tetspuous asa-soo-acoo

' M6ap=ome aos see esco TatspwoME 804 788 8200 truamaas4e =w=vus rimet vinesmea e..nn towan TELEX 8844254 one wams.ovan sowanc

• o. een aseo a o som soo wooro6a, vene.=,a assia mast.c e. monvi. caso6sma ateoa

' fattpe.o=a so4 ean seos 'ELepao=tseeessacco Deceaber 19, 1986 ri.or no..e e. sa . owiso. o

.oso..a.. e .e..oa. . o so. es,

,,i-a.. ,,::,",,"*:a.,o "' ;?,"a::'.':';" ',':*'

" " 'il'yR ' f*if'f i,y ,,a o oisset osas no so4 fee.

Karla J. Letsche, Esq.

Michael S.. Miller, Esq.

Susan M. Casey, Esq. '

'Kirkpatrick & Lockhart

. South Lobby - 9th Floor 1800 M Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036-5891

Dear Tip,

Mike and Susan We do not seem to be making much headway on a deposition schedule or timeline stipulation. I am writing to summarize where I think things sit, in hopes of pushing the process along.

I. -

As to Suffolk County witnesses, we have agreed to depose three witnesses on the following schedule:

L. Colwell 12/30/86 10 a.m. 1800 M Street, D.C.

F. Rowan 1/6/87 11 a.m. 1800 M Street, D.C.

E. Loftus 1/16/87 9 a.m. 1800 M Street, D.C.

It is my understanding from you, Tip, that these witnesses are available only in D.C. and not New York where they were no-ticed,1/ and that the only day Ms. Loftus is available between now and January 21 is January 16, despite LILCO's strong interest If In this regard, I was distressed to hear from Drs. Cole and Pertow in deposition yesterday that they had come to D.C. solely for the purpose of attending their depositions. This contradicts directly your representations to me, Tip, that they were unavailable in New York due to conflicts in their schedules. I understand that Mr. Simon said today in deposition that it actu-ally would have been more convenient for him to have been deposed in New York. This also directly contradicts your representations to me about his availability.

vs . = .

yi:

M- y ~

W b

i+ 1. a*

Huwrow &:Wrr.z.IAus Earla J. Letsche, Esq.

--Michael 8. Miller, Esq..

Susan.M. Casey, Esq.

gE l December.19, 1986 LFage 2 m

4

[

'in deposing her:as-soon as possible. In audition, you have not N :yet' provided availability dates for Messrs. Mayer .and Harris.

To date we have not received updated responses from Suffolk  !

l County to LILCO's discovery' requests to include documents and in- l (formation pertinent to the witnesses you identified after LILCO's

= requests were served. I would be grateful if you would update those requests immediately and continue to update them as your witnesses intensify their. preparations for litigation.

- Finally,:do you intend to identify additional witnesses?

1 Dr. Cole! indicated in his deposition yesterday, for example, that Professor' Susan Saegert will be a witness on your behalf, yet we di thave heard'nothing from you about that possibility. Are there others as yet unidentified?

II.

As to LILCO's-witnesses, I gave you their availability dates on December 10 and expressed interest in concluding scheduling last week. Mike-agreed with me during discussions first last week and then this week that we ought to be able to complete

. scheduling by last Friday and, then, today. To date I have heard nothing from you about which days you would like to depose these

. witnesses. I find this particularly unfortunate since several of them were available in December and we now have lost those days.

In addition, you have said that you want to schedule the LILCO witnesses before we begin to schedule the remaining FEMA witness-es. I find this particularly troubling in view of your represen-tations in your letter yesterday to the Board about the difficul-E sties in deposition scheduling. I would be grateful if you would

~ consult your calendars this weekend and advise me on Monday when you want to depose the LILCO witnesses. (Since December 10, Mr.

i Lieberman has become unavailable on January 5-6 due to other work commitments and so is available only on January 7-9; the dates identified for the remaining witnesses stand.)

III.

As to a stipulation on the timeline, we seem to be getting After discussion with Mike and Susan on Sunday evening, nowhere.

I thought we had agreed in principle to stipulate early this week to the accuracy of the times and events listed in the timeline, and'to the authenticity of the documents supporting it. On the basis.of that-discussion, LILCO did not object to Suffolk Coun-ty's notice that a stipulation was being negotiated, thus 6.

I

c .

g. <

y ,

HUNTON & WILLIAMS Karla'J. Letsche, Esq.

Michael S. Miller, Esq.

Susan M. Casey, Esq.

December 19,.1986 Page 3 potentially obviating the need for a response to LILCO's admis-sion request. After. discussion with Tip on Wednesday, it ap-peared that the only information you are willing to stipulate is the. authenticity of documents.

, As I explained during our conversations, the timeline is a chronological compilation of players' log entries and LERO mes-sage form entries. It sets out, in effect, the exercise events from start to finish.. A stipulation would obviate the need to introduce numerous documents in testimony and hearings to estab- '

lish what happened at the~ exercise, thus benefiting all parties in the process. A stipulation would also obviate the need for Suffolk County to respond to LILCO's request for admissions; that response is now five days out of time. As you know, a unilateral notice of filing out of time does not relieve you of your obliga-tion to respond in accordance with NRC rules.

I talte it from my discussion with Tip that your chief con-cern with stipulating the facts in the timeline is that some of the activity described was simulated. I am amenable to identi-fying simulated activity as such by placing an asterisk next-to those entries. In addition, if you identify inaccuracies in the timeline, we will correct it. It is difficult to do anything further about a stipulation, however, without your comments.

I look forward to hearing from you on these matters shortly so we can resolve them before Christmas.

Best regards of the season, and enjoy your new offices.

They look promising.

Sincerely, i tt Kath7 E.B. cCleskey 1 1 301/6157 cc William R. Cumming, Esq.

Bernard M. Bordenick, Esq.

..