ML20215C318
| ML20215C318 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 10/07/1986 |
| From: | Hoyt H Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | SEABROOK, NH |
| References | |
| CON-#486-1015 OL, NUDOCS 8610100234 | |
| Download: ML20215C318 (3) | |
Text
x'
/ o/S T
/
i c%$?
E2'A3
'86 g -6 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
"'50'*J ai ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD k$Y"hC*-
Before Administrative Judges:
Helen F. Hoyt, Chairperson br rry Harbo r ggg Op.T -8 l$$
In the Matter of Docket Nos. 50-443-0L 50-444-0L PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY
)
(ASLBPNo. 82-471-02-OL) 0F NEW HAMPSHIRE, et,al.
)
(Offsite Emergency Planning)
)
(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
October 7, 1986 ORDER (Addressing"TownofSeabrookMotion For Reconsideration of Order of the BoardofImposingSanctions")
On September 22, 1986 Town of Seabrook filed its motion for reconsideration of a sanction imposed by order of this Board dated September 11, 1966. As grounds for its motion, Town of Seabrook states (1) that Town of Seabrook is the site of the Public Service Company of New Hampshire nuclear generating facility, and that Town of Seabrook is concerned for safety of its citizens and its property values; (2) that Town of Seabrook has an interest in radiological emergency response plans and that Town of Seabrook has not been " involved in purposeful intentional delay or noncompliance; but rather, if it is in noncompliance with Board orders, it has been by mistake and misfortune;"
(3) that Town of Seabrook finds the sanction harsh and oppressive; and 8610100234 861007 PDR ADOCK 05000443 PDR O
t ki 2
(4) that Town of Seabrook is now prepared to answer in detail any interrogatories.
Applicants' Answer to Town of Seabrook Motion For Reconsideration of Order of the Board Imposing Sanctions dated September 25, 1986 was filed with the Board and has been considered by the Board. Applicants oppose Town of Seabrook motion.
The Board has reviewed Town of Seabrook motion and Applicants' response. Nothing the Town of Seabrook sets forth in its first three grounds gives cause to modify the September 11, 1986 order. However.
Town of Seabrook has in its fourth reason stated that it is " prepared to answer in detail any interrogatories and will do so expeditiously."I (Emphasis supplied). The Board accepts the word of Town of Seabrook's attorney that it now will respond to these five-month old interrog-atories dated April 28, 1986. But Seabrook and its attorney are cautioned that if these responses are not delivered in hand to the Applicant, NRC Staff, other parties and this Board within fourteen days from the service date of this order, the Board will on its own motion restore its September 11, 1986 sanction order insofar as it applies to Seabrook.
l l
i I
The Board notes here that Seabrook, on the date of this order, is
(
the only city or town who has stated it can and will respond. The l
Board believes that Town of Seabrook is now fully aware as all other parties should be that this Board looks upon discovery as an important tool in the litigation process.
l
1
\\
!\\
<1 3
Upon the receipt of the full and complete responses to Applicants' interrogatories of April 28, 1986 as directed above, the Board will modify its order of September 11, 1986 as it applies to the Town of Seabrook.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSIN BOARD N iv Helen F. Hoyt, Chairpersbn Administrative Judge Dated at Bethesda.. Maryland this 7th day of October 1986.
o m,_ _. _.. _, ~.. _ _ _ _. _, _ _ _ _ _,. _. _ _ _ _ _ _.. _
.,_