ML20214T231
| ML20214T231 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 12/04/1986 |
| From: | Hoyt H Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-#486-1787 82-471-02-OL, 82-471-2-OL, OL, NUDOCS 8612080526 | |
| Download: ML20214T231 (5) | |
Text
,, rif 7 SERVED DEC -51986
\\
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DC3ETEP NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 86 DEC -5 A10:42 Before Administrative Judges:
Helen F. Hoyt, Chairperson CFFil.
Emeth A. Luebke CCCU I['O c Jerry Harbour In the Matter of
)
Docket Nos. 50-443-0L 50-444-OL PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY (ASLBPNo. 82-471-02-0L) 0F NEW HAMPSHIRE, et al.
(Offsite Emergency Planning)
(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
December 4,1986 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Establishing Hearing Schedule (On Offsite Issues Raised by NHRERP)
On November 12, 1986 the State of New Hampshire, through its Attorney General, reported on the status of the NHRERP. The Board notes the progress of the New Hampshire Civil Defense Agency in distribution of the copies of the NH plan, Revision 2, to controlled copy holders and the continued review of the plan by state planners as well as questions and coments by the holders of the controlled ccpies, FEMA and the Regional Assistance Comnittee reviewers. With the early filing of contentions by several parties based on Revision 2, the Board has seen that parties to this proceeding have also been engaged in review and questions on the NHRERP (Revision 2) formulated as late-filed contentions. We note also the two tasks that are occupying the NHCDA are the final development on a program for training of emergency responders which will permit training efforts to begin soon. The second gBA2988nBBEjj[
DSc7_
,=
i
. i..
I 2
task is the hardware side where NHCDA is conducting a review of the resource requirement for the state and local entities and an inventory of the emergency equipment already purchased and installed to date. The towns within the Seabrook EPZ are being asked to identify any remaining resource needs.I' "The resource inventory and needs detennination will be cross-checked with Revision 2 of the NHRERP to ensure that all resources identified in the plan will be in place."
(Reportofthe Status of the NH RERP, November 12, 1986, page 2).
In response to our Order of November 14, 1986 requesting that parties submit a proposed hearing schedule for contentions based on NHRERP, we have received several schedules varying from a start for these hearings in March 1987 or September 1987.
We note that four 1
The Board urges the towns within the Seabrook'EPZ to identify any remaining resource needs.for the NHCDA since a failure to do so would impact on this Board's determination of whether a town's resource needs questioned through a contention were genuine or not.
2 Applicants' Proposals for Scheduling Order for NH Offsite Emergency Planning Contentions - November 20, 1986; SAPL's Response and Objection to Memorandum and Order of November 4,1986 and Motion for Clarification and Reconsideration - November 15, 1986; Town of Hampton Response to Board Order of November 4, 1986 and Motion to Defer Hearing Schedule and Alternative Proposed Schedule -
November 19, 1986; Response of State of NH to Board's fiovember 4, 1986 Memorandum and Order - November 20, 1986; Town of Amesbury's Proposed Hearing Schedule - November 20, 1986; NRC Staff's Proposed Schedule for Hearings on the NHRERP - November 21, 1986; NECNP's Motion for Reconsideration and Response to Licensing Board's Memorandum and Order of November 4,1986 - November 21, 1986; and Attorney General Francis X. Bellotti's Response and Objection to Memorandum and Order of November 4,1986 and Motion for Reconsideration - November 21, 1986.
v-b 3
intervenors (MASS AG, NECNP, T0H and SAPL) filed nearly identical schedules.
The Board has considered those proposed schedules in addition to our understanding of the continuing dynamic process for the NHRERP dercribed to us by the State of NH in its November status report.
The Board finds that there has been a strong showing by NH that the NH plan is ready for litigation and there is no reason to reconsider our November 4,1986 Order. The matter of " integrated hearings" (NH and MASS RERP) is a non-issue and will not be revisited by the Board. Our detennination that all contentions based on the NHRERP would be heard in one series of hearings is reaffinned. To accomplish this task, we set forth the following schedule:
Schedule for NH Offsite Emergency Planning Contentions Date Deadlines December 1, 1986 Late-filed contentions arising out of NHRERP Rev. 2 due.
December 16, 1986 Parties other than Staff respond.
December 22, 1986 Staff response to contentions.
December 29, 1986 Replies of Intervenors to Applicants and Staff Responses.
January 16, 1987 Board Order ruling on contentions, discovery coninences.
February 3,1987 Discovery closed (last discovery requestdue).
b 4
February 16, 1987 Answers to last interrogatories due within 14 days after the close of discovery.
February 23, 1987 Deadline for motions for sumary disposition on late-filed Rev. 2 Contentions admitted or for other contentions as to which circumstances have changed such that sumary disposition is now appropriate.
March 16, 1987 Response opposing or supporting motions due within 20 days.
March 27, 1987 Opposing parties may file responses to new facts and arguments presented in statements supporting motions for sumary disposition.
April 10, 1987 Board Order ruling on motions for sumary disposition.
April 20, 1987 Prefiled testimony due 10 days after Board ruling on motions for sumary disposition.
No sooner than Hearings comence.
April 27, 1987.3 The Board directs that service of papers relating to offsite emergency planning contentions be effected by express mail or personal delivery in any instance where normal service would not result in actual receipt of those papers on or before a deadline for the filing of those papers. As has been this Board's custom, the date for filing of any 3
The Board has left this date uncertain depending on arrangements for space and location. Board will issue an order when it has completed the arrangements.
5 pleading means that the pleading be delivered in hand to the parties and this Board on that date.
IT IS S0 ORDERED.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICEN ING BOARD eTUh F. Hoyt,'Chaifpd 1
Administrative Judge J
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 4th day of December 1986.
i.
1 mm,
=_
u