ML20247Q285
| ML20247Q285 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 09/20/1989 |
| From: | Dignan T PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, ROPES & GRAY |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#389-9207 CLI-89-19, OL, NUDOCS 8909280159 | |
| Download: ML20247Q285 (5) | |
Text
(_
~
ip207
.O' IXgj!D
- e9 SEP 25 N0:00 September 20, 1989 i
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR, REGULATORY COMMISSION l
r+
before the ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
)
In the Matter of
)
)
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY
)
Docket Nos. 50-443-OL OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, 31 A1
)
50-444-OL
)
(Seabrook Station, Units 1
)
(Offsite Emergency and 2)
)
Planning Issues)
)
APPLICAN'IS' ANSWER TO REN2WED MOTION OF THE MASSACHUSETTS ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR A SCHEDULE FOR THE FILING OF CONTENTIONS ARISING OUT OF THE SEPTEMBER, 1989 ONSITE EXERCISE Under date of September 18, 1989, the Attorney General I
of The Commonwealth of Massachusetts (MAG) has filed a
" Renewed Motion.
for a Schedule for the Filing of Contentions Arising out of the September, 1989 Onsite Exercise" ("The Motion").
For the reasons set forth below, 1
The Motion should be denied.
To begin with, although resolution of the matter is not t
a prerequisite for deciding The Motion, The Motion proceeds from a faulty premise.
In The Motion it is stated:
"The Cor. mission has indicated in CLI-89-19 (dated September 15, 1989) that the September exercise is litigable by Interveners assuming that the exercise provides a basis for alleging a ONEKSCRE.58 i
8909200159 890920 03 ADOCK 0500 3
gDR
i i
.w; p
f>
fundamental flaw in-the onsite plan.
CLI-89-19, slip opinion at 4 and n. 5."1 This is a long reach.
The Commission hardly seems to have-focused upon the legal issue'of whether any litigation rights at all could arise out of the onsite exercise.
Indeed, the actual Commission language cited by MAG begins "in the event the exercise provides the occasion for any admissible contention.
.n2 Nowhere did the Commission address and deal with the legal issue of whether there exists any right to litigate such an exercise.
This is not surprising, because the application for the exemption which was being addressed in CLI-89-19 did not put that matter in issue.
In-addition, it is clear that the commission was not attempting to' address anything beyond the narrow issue of the efficacy of the' requested exemption, because it did not address the issue of whether satisfaction of the 10 CFR 5 2.734 reopening criteria was necessary, which it surely is.
Prescinding from the foregoing, what MAG wants is a profiling guarantee as to the ruling which will'be made with respect to any contention filed with respect to the first of the five " late-filed" criteria, and gar force the timeliness criterion in 10 CFR 5 2.734.
Absent the agreement and acquiesence of all parties, MAG is not entitled to such a ruling in advance of the filing of a contention.
It is only 1
The Motion at 1.
2 CLI-89-19 at 4. _ - - - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ - _ - - _ _ _ - _ _ _
s.
a in the setting of a concrete contention that a proper analysis as to the good cause for failure to file can be made.
For the foregoing reasons, The Motion must be denied.
In the event that the Board does not concur with the reasoning set forth above, the request for forty-five days should not be allowed.
In the event the Staff report comes out on October 16, 1989, this would give MAG until November 30, 1989 to file contentions.
It simply does not tcke that much time to read a report and decide whether there is a litigable contention.
Applicants suggest that a period of five business days be allowed and no more.
CONCLUSION The Motion should be denied; if granted the time period allowed should be five business days after the filing of the Staff Report; no time period should be allowed as of right from any subsequent event.
Respectfully submitted,
'M C(33x= - -
Th6 mas G. Dignan, Jr.
George H. Lewald l
Jeffrey P. Trout l
Jay Bradford Smith Geoffrey C. Cook William L. Parker Ropes & Gray One International Place Boston, MA 02110-2624 (617) 951-7000 counsel for Applicants
~3-
T L+
. m m,.
" !Ac
'89 SEP 25 A10:00 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I,. Thomas G. Dignnn,Jr.,oneoftheattheys;forSN Applicants herein, hereby certify that on Sept'embet"20, 1989, I made; service of the within document by mailing copies thereof, postage prepaid, to:
Admini.strative Judge Ivan W. Smith, John P. Arnold, Esquire i
Chairman Attorney General.
Atomic. Safety and Licensing George Dana Bisbee, Esquire Board Assistant Attorney General U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Office'of the Attorney General
. Commission 25 Capitol Street Washington, DC 20'555 Concord, NH 03301-6397 Administrative Judge Richard F.
Mr. Richard R. Donovan Cole Federal Emergency Management Atomic Safety and Licensing Agency.
Board Federal Regional Center
'U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 130 228th Street, S.W.
Commission' Bothell, Washington 98021-9796 Washington, DC. 20555 Administrative Judge Kenneth A.
Judith H. Mizner, Esquire McCollom' 79 State Street, 2nd Floor 1107 West Knapp Street Newburyport, MA 01950 Stillwater, OK 74075 Diana Curran, Esquire Robert-R. Pierce, Esquire Andrea C. Forster, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Harmon, Curran & Tousley Board-Suite 430 U.S. Nuclear Kegulatory 2001 S Street, N.W.
Commission Washington, DC 20009 Washington, DC 20555 Adjudicatory File Sherwin E. Turk,. Esquire-Atomic Safety and Licensing Office of the Executive Legal Board Panel Docket (2 copies)
Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Robert A. Backus, Esquire Appeal Board Backus, Meyer & Solomon U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 116 Lowell Street Commission P.O. Box 516 Washington, DC 20555 Manchester, NH 03105
__-__-______--_-____-____a
_ _ - _ = - - _.
- a; t
Philip-Ahrens, Esquire Mr. J. P.'Nadeau-
> Assistant Attorney General Selectmen's Office Department of the Attorney 10 Central Road General.-
Rye, NH 03870 Augusta, ME 04333 Paul McEachern, Esquire John Traficonte, Esquire.
Shaines.& McEachern' Assistant Attorney. General 25 Maplewood Avenue Department of the Attorney.
P.O. Box 360' General Portsmouth, NH 03801 One Ashburton Place, 19th Fir.
Boston, MA 02108 Chairman.
Mr. Calvin A. Canney Board of Selectmen City Manager 95 Amesbury Road City Hall Kensington, NH- 03833 126 Danfol Street Portsmouth, NH 03801 Senator Gordon J. Humphrey R. Scott Hill-Whilton, Esquire U.S. Senate.
Lagoulis, Hill-Whilton'E' Washington, DC 20510 Rotondi-
-(Attn:
Tom Burack) 79 State Street Newburyport, MA 01950 Senator Gordon J. Humphrey Barbara J. Saint Andre, Esquire One Eagle Square, Suite 507 Kopelman and Paige, P.C.
. Concord, NH- 03301 77 Franklin Street (Attn:
Herb Boynton)
Boston, MA 02110 Mr. Thomas F. Powers, III Mr. William S. Lord Town Manager.
Board of Selectmen Town of Exeter Town Hall - Friend Street 10 Front Street Amesbury, MA 01913 Exeter, NH 03833
-H. Joseph Flynn, Esquire Ashod N. Amirian, Esquire Office of General Counsel 1145 South Main Street Federal Emergency Management P.O.
Box 38 Agency Bradford, MA 01835 500 C Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20472 Gary W. Holmes, Esquire Richard A. Hampe, Esquire Holmes & Ells Hampe and McNicholas 47 Winnacunnet Road 35 Pleasant Street Hampton, NH 03842 Concord, NH 03301 Thomas D.' Dign(r3/Jr.._-___________ _ __ _ _ _