|
---|
Category:INTERROGATORIES; RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES
MONTHYEARML20069L2091983-04-22022 April 1983 Supplemental Interrogatories.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20069L1991983-04-22022 April 1983 Interrogatories & Document Request.Related Correspondence ML20071D2941983-03-0303 March 1983 Supplemental Response to 820621 Interrogatories on Contention 6.2,transmitting Form for Recording Continuous Type Releases.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20083Q3931983-02-22022 February 1983 Motion to Permit Entry on Licensee Controlled Land to Observe 830309 Emergency Planning Exercise from Control Rooms & near-site Emergency Operations Facility ML20065C2111983-02-22022 February 1983 Motion to Permit Entry Upon Land Controlled by Licensees & to Allow Observance of 830309 Emergency Planning Exercise from Both Units 2 & 3 Control Rooms & from near-site Emergency Operations Facility ML20028C8671983-01-0707 January 1983 Response to Licensee 821203 Ltr Requesting Supplemental Responses to Licensee First Set of Interrogatories. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20064C4481982-12-30030 December 1982 Suppl to Responses to First Set of Interrogatories & Document Requests on ASLB Questions 1,2 & 5 ML20070L5471982-12-24024 December 1982 Supplemental Response to First Set of Interrogatories Under Commission Question 1 ML20070L5491982-12-22022 December 1982 Response to First Set of Interrogatories & Document Requests Under Commission Question 6.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20070F7581982-12-17017 December 1982 Supplementation of Interrogatory Response,Naming Question 1 Witnesses.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20069Q5231982-12-0707 December 1982 Supplemental Response to Interrogatories on Commission Questions 1 & 2.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20069P7641982-12-0606 December 1982 Supplemental Response to First Set of Interrogatories & Document Requests on ASLB Questions 1,2 & 5 ML20067B1761982-12-0303 December 1982 Response to 820716 First Set of Interrogatories & Request for Documents Re Commission Questions 1 & 2 ML20067B2391982-12-0202 December 1982 Response to Interrogatories & Document Requests Re Commission Questions 2 & 5.Related Correspondence ML20028B2981982-11-24024 November 1982 Replies to 820718 Interrogatories.Certificate of Svc Encl. Related Correspondence ML20028B4011982-11-22022 November 1982 Supplemental Response to First Set of Interrogatories Re Questions 1 & 2.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20066J2611982-11-19019 November 1982 Responses to Interrogatories & Document Requests on Commission Question 2,Contention 2.2.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20066J0411982-11-19019 November 1982 Responses to First Set of Interrogatories & Document Requests on ASLB Questions 1,2 & 5.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20028A0491982-11-0303 November 1982 Response to 820526 Interrogatories & Document Requests Re Question 6.Interrogatories Received on 821015 ML20058D5921982-07-23023 July 1982 Response to First Set of Interrogatories Re Commission Question 1.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20058G5211982-07-23023 July 1982 Response to Final Set of Interrogatories & Document Requests Re Commission Question 1.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20058D5681982-07-21021 July 1982 Response to 8206221 Interrogatories,Objecting to Interrogatories 1-11 as Irrelevant,Beyond Scope of Permissible Discovery & Beyond Scope of Commission Question 6.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20058D5791982-07-20020 July 1982 Response to Second Round of Interrogatories Re Commission Questions 1,2 & 5.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20055B8621982-07-19019 July 1982 Interrogatory on Question 2,Contention 2.2.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20069C8621982-07-19019 July 1982 First Set of Interrogatories & Document Requests on Board Questions 1,2 & 5 ML20055A9981982-07-16016 July 1982 First Set of Interrogatories & Request for Documents Re Commission Questions 2 & 5.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20055A9961982-07-16016 July 1982 First Set of Interrogatories & Request for Documents Re Commission Questions 1 & 2 ML20055A9901982-07-16016 July 1982 First Set of Interrogatories & Request for Documents Re Commission Question 1 ML20063E4491982-07-0707 July 1982 Response to First Set of Interrogatories on Commission Question 6.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20054L5771982-07-0202 July 1982 Responses to First Set of Interrogatories on Question 6. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054L7991982-07-0101 July 1982 Addl Response to Interrogatories Under Commission Questions 3 & 4 Per ASLB 820625 Order.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054L5201982-07-0101 July 1982 Supplemental Response to Licensee 820503 Interrogatories. Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20054M1791982-06-30030 June 1982 Reply to Interrogatories.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20054L5501982-06-30030 June 1982 Supplementary Responses to First Set of Interrogatories Re Questions 1 & 2.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20054J9301982-06-25025 June 1982 Final Response to Util Interrogatories.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20054J5871982-06-25025 June 1982 Responses to First Set of Interrogatories Re Questions 1 & 2.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20054H8901982-06-24024 June 1982 Second Set of Interrogatories Re Commission Questions 1,2 & 5 ML20054H8941982-06-24024 June 1982 Second Set of Interrogatories Re Commission Questions 1,2 & 5.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054J1221982-06-22022 June 1982 Response to Ucs/Ny Pirg Requests for Admissions.Details Surrounding TMI-2 Accident Would Require Burdensome & Oppressive Research.Affidavits & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054J1471982-06-21021 June 1982 Interrogatories on Contention 6.2.Related Correspondence ML20054H5661982-06-17017 June 1982 Responses to NRC Interrogatories & Document Requests. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054H5411982-06-17017 June 1982 Responses to NRC Interrogatories & Document Requests. Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20054H5301982-06-17017 June 1982 Responses to NRC Interrogatories & Requests for Documents. Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20054H2601982-06-17017 June 1982 Reply to NRC 820526 Interrogatories ML20054F9801982-06-16016 June 1982 First Set of Interrogatories & Document Requests Re ASLB Contention 1.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20054H6081982-06-16016 June 1982 First Set of Interrogatories Re Commission Question 6 ML20054H2631982-06-16016 June 1982 Reply to Licensee First Set of Interrogatories,Question 6. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054H5811982-06-16016 June 1982 Response to West Branch Conservation Assoc Supplementary Interrogatories.Related Correspondence ML20054H5881982-06-16016 June 1982 Response to Ucs/Ny Pirg Supplementary Interrogatories. Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20054F6251982-06-14014 June 1982 Answers & Objections to Interrogatories & Document Requests. Certificate of Svc Encl 1983-04-22
[Table view] Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARJPN-99-029, Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 72 Re Reporting Requirement for Nuclear Power Reactors1999-09-20020 September 1999 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 72 Re Reporting Requirement for Nuclear Power Reactors ML20212E4181999-09-15015 September 1999 Petition Per 10CFR2.206 Requesting OL for Unit 2 Be Modified or Suspended to Prevent Restart Until Reasonable Assurance That Licensee in Substantial Compliance with Terms of OL & Has Proper Consideration for Public Health & Safety JPN-99-022, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Requirements for Industry Codes & Stds1999-06-22022 June 1999 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Requirements for Industry Codes & Stds ML20202J6321999-01-20020 January 1999 Transcript of 990120 Meeting in Peekskill,Ny Re Decommissioning.Pp 1-132.With Related Documentation ML20198E9721998-12-21021 December 1998 Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC-Licensed Activities. Orders That Wh Clark Prohibited for 1 Yr from Engaging in NRC-Licensed Activities JPN-98-052, Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50,52 & 72 Re Changes,Tests & Experiments.Util Endorses & Supports Position Presented by NEI & Commends Commission for Initiative to Address Disconnects1998-12-21021 December 1998 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50,52 & 72 Re Changes,Tests & Experiments.Util Endorses & Supports Position Presented by NEI & Commends Commission for Initiative to Address Disconnects ML20198L2731998-12-21021 December 1998 Comment Supporting NEI Re Proposed Rules 10CFR50, 52 & 72 Re Changes,Tests & Experiments JPN-98-050, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Nuclear Power Plants.Encourages NRC Staff to Withdraw Proposed Change & to Work with Nuclear Power Industry & Other Stakeholders to Accomplish Goal1998-12-14014 December 1998 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Nuclear Power Plants.Encourages NRC Staff to Withdraw Proposed Change & to Work with Nuclear Power Industry & Other Stakeholders to Accomplish Goal ML20155F4561998-08-26026 August 1998 Demand for Info Re False Info Allegedly Provided by Wh Clark to Two NRC Licensees.Nrc Considering Whether Individual Should Be Prohibited from Working in NRC-licensed Activities for Period of 5 Yrs ML20238F5271998-05-20020 May 1998 Partially Deleted Transcript of 980520 Enforcement Conference in King of Prussia,Pa Re J Stipek.Pp 1-46 IA-98-261, Partially Deleted Transcript of 980520 Enforcement Conference in King of Prussia,Pa Re J Stipek.Pp 1-461998-05-20020 May 1998 Partially Deleted Transcript of 980520 Enforcement Conference in King of Prussia,Pa Re J Stipek.Pp 1-46 ML20238F5241998-05-0606 May 1998 Transcript of 980506 Enforcement Conference Held in King of Prussia,Pa Re Con Edison,Indian Point.Pp 1-75 JPN-97-037, Comment on Final Direct Rule Changes to Paragraph (H) of 10CFR50.55a Codes & Standards. Effective Date of New Rule Should Be Delayed Until Listed Concerns Can Be Resolved & Appropriate Changes Incorporated1997-12-0101 December 1997 Comment on Final Direct Rule Changes to Paragraph (H) of 10CFR50.55a Codes & Standards. Effective Date of New Rule Should Be Delayed Until Listed Concerns Can Be Resolved & Appropriate Changes Incorporated ML20148M6471997-06-19019 June 1997 Comment Opposing Porposed NRC Bulletin 96-001,suppl 1, CR Insertion Problems ML20133N0511997-01-0505 January 1997 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Draft Policy Statement on Resturcturing & Economic Deregulation of Electric Util Industry ML20149M4621996-12-0909 December 1996 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Draft Policy Statement on Restructuring & Economic Deregulation of Electric Utility Industry ML20077G3481994-12-0808 December 1994 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR2,51 & 54 Re Nuclear Power License Renewal ML20070P0561994-04-19019 April 1994 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re NRC Draft Policy Statement on Use of Decommissioning Trust Funds Before Decommissioning Plan Approval ML20029C5771994-03-11011 March 1994 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR20 Re Draft Rule on Decommissioning.Informs That 15 Mrem/Yr Unreasonably Low Fraction of Icrp,Ncrp & Regulatory Public Dose Limit of 100 Mrem/Yr ML20059C3031993-12-28028 December 1993 Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-21-2 Re Definition of Commercial Grade Item ML20045H8751993-07-19019 July 1993 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR55 Re Exam Procedures for Operator Licensing.Supports Rule ML20045F2451993-06-28028 June 1993 Comment on Proposal Re Radiological Criteria for Decommissioning NRC-licensed Facilities.Opposes Proposed Criteria ML20044F5681993-05-20020 May 1993 Comment on Draft Commercial Grade Dedication Insp Procedure 38703,entitled Commercial Grade Procurement Insp. Endorses NUMARC Comments Dtd 930517 JPN-02-034, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50.54 Re Receipt of Byproduct & Special Nuclear Matl1992-07-0606 July 1992 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50.54 Re Receipt of Byproduct & Special Nuclear Matl JPN-91-021, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR71,170 & 171, Rev of Fee Schedules;100% Fee Recovery. Endorses NUMARC Comments. Approx 300% Increase in NRC Fees for FY91 Will Have Major Impact Upon Operating & Maint Budgets of Plants1991-05-13013 May 1991 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR71,170 & 171, Rev of Fee Schedules;100% Fee Recovery. Endorses NUMARC Comments. Approx 300% Increase in NRC Fees for FY91 Will Have Major Impact Upon Operating & Maint Budgets of Plants JPN-91-005, Comment Re SECY-90-347, Regulatory Impact Survey Rept. Util Concurs W/Numarc Comments.Analysis of Info from NUREG-1395 Insufficient to Complete Evaluation.Root Cause Analysis of Seven Themes Listed in SECY-90-347 Recommended1991-01-28028 January 1991 Comment Re SECY-90-347, Regulatory Impact Survey Rept. Util Concurs W/Numarc Comments.Analysis of Info from NUREG-1395 Insufficient to Complete Evaluation.Root Cause Analysis of Seven Themes Listed in SECY-90-347 Recommended ML20066G4411991-01-23023 January 1991 Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR2,50 & 54 Re Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal.Substantive Typo in 901015 Filing on Behalf of Licensee Noted ML20058G6341990-10-30030 October 1990 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re fitness-for-duty Program JPN-90-068, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR51 Re Renewal of Nuclear Plant OLs & NRC Intent to Prepare Generic EIS1990-10-22022 October 1990 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR51 Re Renewal of Nuclear Plant OLs & NRC Intent to Prepare Generic EIS JPN-90-067, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 54 Re Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal.Endorses Comments Submitted by NUMARC1990-10-15015 October 1990 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 54 Re Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal.Endorses Comments Submitted by NUMARC ML20065H7541990-10-15015 October 1990 Comment Re Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 54 on Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal.Commission Assessment of Four Alternatives Should Be Expanded to Include Not Only Safety Considerations But Other Atomic Energy Act Objectives JPN-90-052, Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-55 Re Revs to FSAR1990-07-0909 July 1990 Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-55 Re Revs to FSAR JPN-90-050, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR55 Re Operators Licenses Mod for fitness-for-duty.Proposed Rule Will Place More Stringent Restrictions on Licensed Operators & Unnecessary1990-07-0202 July 1990 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR55 Re Operators Licenses Mod for fitness-for-duty.Proposed Rule Will Place More Stringent Restrictions on Licensed Operators & Unnecessary ML20012C6491990-03-0909 March 1990 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection Against PTS Events. Any Utilization of NRC Proposed Application of Reg Guide 1.99, Rev 2,would Be Inappropriate W/O re-evaluation by NRC ML20005F6521989-12-13013 December 1989 Comment on Proposed Draft Reg Guide DG-1001, Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants. Util Concurs w/industry-wide Position Presented by NUMARC & Offers Addl Comments ML20246P6061989-07-0707 July 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Significant & Independent Industry Efforts Already Underway to Address Issue ML20245K1941989-06-16016 June 1989 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites JPN-89-008, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants1989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20235V9011989-02-24024 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants. Supports NUMARC Position.Proposed Rule Will Hinder Important Initiatives to Improve Maint JPN-88-063, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program.Util Has Constitutional Concerns Re Proposed Random Testing Which Should Be Fully Addressed Prior to Rule Being Promulgated.Endorses NUMARC & EEI Comments1988-11-18018 November 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program.Util Has Constitutional Concerns Re Proposed Random Testing Which Should Be Fully Addressed Prior to Rule Being Promulgated.Endorses NUMARC & EEI Comments ML20205L8521988-10-21021 October 1988 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR20 Re Cleaning or Disposing of Nuclear Waste.Incineration of Radwaste Oil Should Not Be Allowed JPN-88-015, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Licensee Announcements of Inspectors.Rule Includes Requirement Contrary to Mgt Notification Practices.Rule Should Clarify Length of Time Applicable Once Inspector Arrives on Site1988-04-18018 April 1988 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Licensee Announcements of Inspectors.Rule Includes Requirement Contrary to Mgt Notification Practices.Rule Should Clarify Length of Time Applicable Once Inspector Arrives on Site JPN-88-002, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Proposed Policy Statement on Integrated Schedules for Implementation of Plant Mods.Concerns Re Schedule as License Amend Expressed1988-01-25025 January 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Proposed Policy Statement on Integrated Schedules for Implementation of Plant Mods.Concerns Re Schedule as License Amend Expressed JPN-87-062, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR4,11,25,30,31,32,34,35,40,50, 60,61,70,71,73,74,75,95 & 110 Re Retention Period for Records.Proposed Changes Ineffective in Reducing Record Vol & Rule Remains Inconsistent & Complex1987-12-31031 December 1987 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR4,11,25,30,31,32,34,35,40,50, 60,61,70,71,73,74,75,95 & 110 Re Retention Period for Records.Proposed Changes Ineffective in Reducing Record Vol & Rule Remains Inconsistent & Complex JPN-87-053, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Revising Backfitting Process for Power Reactors.Minor Alterations Urged Re Conditions Under Which Backfit Needed to Assure Adequate Protection1987-10-15015 October 1987 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Revising Backfitting Process for Power Reactors.Minor Alterations Urged Re Conditions Under Which Backfit Needed to Assure Adequate Protection JPN-87-051, Comment Opposing Draft NUREG-1150, Reactor Risk Ref Document. Reduced Uncertainty in Risk Assessment Found to Be Significant W/Respect to NUREG-1150.NUREG Also Does Not Consider Value of Operator Actions.Addl Comments Encl1987-09-28028 September 1987 Comment Opposing Draft NUREG-1150, Reactor Risk Ref Document. Reduced Uncertainty in Risk Assessment Found to Be Significant W/Respect to NUREG-1150.NUREG Also Does Not Consider Value of Operator Actions.Addl Comments Encl ML20235Y9911987-07-20020 July 1987 Notice of Issuance of Director'S Decision Under 10CFR2.206 Re Emergency Planning for School Children in Vicinity of Indian Point.* Request to Suspend OLs Denied ML20151C5061987-02-18018 February 1987 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Licensing of Nuclear Power Plants Where State &/Or Local Govts Decline to Cooperate in Offsite Emergency Planning ML20093H6421984-10-15015 October 1984 Comments on Staff Presentation at Commission 841002 Meeting. Commission Should Conclude Proceedings Due to Inescapable Conclusion That Facility Safe to Operate & Poses No Undue Risk to Public.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20098D2721984-09-26026 September 1984 Comments on Commission 840905 Meeting Re Facilities,Per Sj Chilk 840911 Memo.Licensee Agrees W/Staff That Further Mitigative Features or Plant Shutdown Unnecessary Due to Low Risk.Certificate of Svc Encl 1999-09-20
[Table view] |
Text
-
i DELATED CORRE9}"JNDS7'CF
. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA D NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f g ATOMIC 5AFETY AND LICENSING BOARD [ ;
E Administrative Judges; JUL 0 G82 $' 4 2g jtn C. :
Louis 3. Carter, Chairman 0$ce O't ge#r -
Dr. Oscar H. Paris 0 DWd$s C <
?
In the Matter of Frederick 3. Shon CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK 4 [/
(Indian Point, Unit 2) Docket Nos. 50-247-SP 50-236-SP i POWER #""*
(IndianAUTHORITY Point, Unit 3)OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
- WEST BRANCH CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION'S REPLY TO INTER-ROGATORIES OF LICENSEES Enclosed is reply to some of the 182 interrogatories posed by the Licensees without specifying which is di-rected to WBCA. We have replied to those for which we are responsible in the phase of above captioned case
.g_. involving Questions THREE and FOUR, as lead intervenors.
- EG We have also responded to any directed to WBCA specifi-cally and to those we are doubtful about but are willin'g to reply since it may be that we are the only intervenors using those bases. We have gone beyond the call of duty in the latter regard because the references in the Board's Order of April 23 refer _ to contentions by number albeit not to the entire contention, as can be deduced by reading ..
the questions framed by the Board. Licensees have stepped' far beyond the Board's questions.
Those questions not shown by number in what follows are purposely omitted by WBCA as not germane.
We refer to witness by name and number in the compen-dium submitted by the Intervenors on June 7 J'
for West Branch Conservation Association k' 443 Buena Vista Road New City, N.Y.
914/634-2327 b
by UZipporah
- S. F1eisher Secretary 8207120064 820630
{DRADOCK05000 g
_QUESTION 9 I the Plan are in Appendix A, page . A-31 paragraph B. TheFor h a
' numbers them. of vehicles are insufficient for those needing The supply of drivers of vehicles is not assured.
dix A, The defects in travel times described in Appen-pages Brinkerhoff (PB) A-3,4 and 5, II, are illustrated by Parsons ;
charts Figures 26 and 27 in what is now, j Exhibit UCS #1, showing critical bottleneck links for }
" School In Session" and " Nighttime Scenario". '
shows routes 306 and Little Tor Road as equal Neither to or worse than other major routes for bottlenecks. ;
bottlenecks sufficient to override the travel time esti-Both maps show mates.
This is a defect due to PB.
OUESTION 10 I is not a consideration.There is no response to this in the Plan. Triage equal basis is WBCA's contention.The safety of all people on an -
QUESTION 17 ;
tervenor. This question does not apply to WBCA as Lead In -
k ASLB added 3.2 after the April 14 conference. Noting the absence ,, 5 ggg Utilities We hope to have a witness from Orange and Rockland -
pared setting of a subpoena a time. on June 25 for a judge's signature and i Pres. of WBCA spoke to Mr. Tom Griffin, Pres.On June 25 Mr. Walter Fle o f ORU.
~
June 29 Mr. Frank Fischer, On spoke to Mrs. Fleisher, Sec. of WBCA.a Vice-Pres. of OR; called and testimony and a witness. We again requested be filed late through no fault of WBCA.If these are forthcoming they will Q
_UESTIONS 27 and 29 g.
Blattstein #59, See testimony of Gladys Burger #63, Barbara John Moore #51. M f:
nesses but they don't seem to be known.We asked for more details from d Q
_UESTION 28 h Ed
~
sa fib About 125 cards were returned from the brochure the 10 mile EPZ.out of a total population of disabled of dbout 16,000 in ,
is d_a
- 2
- .'.Y::.
=5
- 4 kms
l I
It is not clear how a person standing at a bus stop would know if the bus had been by or was yet to come.
, :S.. Notification by radio that a bus had completed its route I "E' would depend on hearing the route number correctly and on i knowing it. Additionally, one would have to decide where to i wait if no portable radio was available. Confusion could l be bad enough for the able but exceedingly disturbing to the disabled.
For the above two reasons the brochure has not been read and understood and does not satisfy the require-ments of 50 CFR 50.47 (b) (10).
See reply to Questions 27 and 29 above.
QUESTION 30 (a) Spanish (b) Don't know OUESTION 33 50 CFR 50.47 (b) is deficient as it applies to Rockland County under (1) "each principal response organi-zation has staff to respond and to augment its ihitial re-sponse on a continuous basis." Not so for Rockland County.
Same for (b)(5)
(b)(6) 75% of emergency personnel cannot be reached during the day. Witnesses Schnakenberg 27, Bower 443.
(b)(7) not done (b)(9) Rockland County Health Department asks for 12 monitoring kits but was only promised 3 by NYState REPG on May 28, 1982 - see testimony of Rockland County witness James McGuire.
(b)(10) Not in Rockland County (b)(11) see testimony 41 and 42 (b)(12)
King and Galdone (b)(14) " major portions". There has been no drill of buses and individual automobiles.
(b)(15) is not (b)(16) is not QUESTION 34 See reply to 33 above. ,
OUESTION 35 see (b)(9) in reply to 33 above OUESTION 54 see reply 33 (b)(14) above i: -
iC QUESTION 55 There haven't been any in regard to roads.
<r; ,
c::.
QUESTION 58 ,See 33(b)(14) and 55 above. '
1 j
QUESTION 68 There is no way of knowing how many buses will be available. See testimony of Rockland County witnesses Lebovsky and Bull.
QUESTION 69 See testimony witness Rochard Bower 43.
QUESTION 70 See maps of bottlenecks, Exhibit UCS-1 QUESTION 75 l kn effective drill would be one of the buses and autos to see how they would move on the roads without panic.
WBCA contends that the road network and movement over it is the Achilles heel of the Plan. Until it is tested, nothing will be known. that comes near it in importance.
QUESTION 85 WBCA knew the views in 1980 and 1981 of witnesses Seeger 26, Holland 29, Scurti 25, Schnakenberg 27, Tomkins 47 and Rockland County witness James Kralik.
1 CUESTION 86 See answer to 17 above.
CUESTION 96 Answer to 85 above. The road system in Rockland County is unusual in that North-Sou:th ridges discourage East-West traffic and conditions are exacerbated due to the density of population.
CUESTION 98 See reply to 85 above CUESTION 107 Not a subject for Questions 3 and 4.
CUESTION 108 WBCA understood the PB model was developed for handling road system loading and was not designed for radio-logical emergencies. There has been no real live radio-logical accident to follow. The simulation is questionable.
QUESTION 109 Public reports of the Palisades Interstate Park Commission, later confirmed by data from Chief James W.
Donnelly, Chief of the Park Police, on February 3. (This ct .
should have been an attachment to Robert Johnson's testi- -"
=eny 17, he will prepare it for submission July 6.-) .
The summer peak instant capacity is 59,800 people in Bear Mountain and Harriman State parks, plus ,
(n. 1,700 at Hi-Tor, 9,800 at Rockland Lake and 800 at Stony VEF Point Battlefield. If one allows 3 persons to a car it would equal 50,000 cars. Additionally there could be up to 2,500 people brought to the park by the dayliner.
QUESTION 110 See testimony of Myles Lavelle 24, Chief
. Scurti 25, Stanley Brooker 151, Kenneth Ingenito 22.
QUESTION 111 See RERP Plan Appendix A-53,54 & 55. Testi-mony of Holland 29 and Seeger 26 and Jan. 11 WBCA bases for Question 1.
QUESTION 121 Not enough East-West roads in Rockland.
North-South is all that's left.
QUESTION 127 What is the definition of " Indian Point area"?
If it is the ten mile EPZ then Caspar Hill Road is an ex-ample of topographic impossibility; as well as the infamous two right turns on Route 202 going south off 9W in West Haverstraw and Wayne Avenue in Stony Point. See brochures
- 8 and #9 routes to evacuate and also see WBCA January 11 contentions pages 6 and 7.
.=_ )
QUESTION 145 PB data supplied by Licensees shows no account for traffic entering major routes from the side streets and it does show bottlenecks which were not offered in the RERP Rev. 1 as called for in NUREG 0654-FEMA Rep 1 - Rev 1 page 4-9 regarding the area map.
QUESTION 158 l
Because there are no feasible off site procedures Rockland County rejected the Plan. Primary is our inability to discover in the Plan, or by interrogatory of the Licen- ,
sees to PB, how many volunteers total that would be needed for an emergency and how many might be available, for such as directing traffic, drive buses and supply ambulance teams.
Emergency personnel in Rockland County have felt ill equipped and have no faith in the Plan made by PB. They do not work to enforce it. See testimony of Bower 43, Rev.
Fred Johnson 32 and those listed in the replies above.
QUESTION 160 See bottleneck maps of PB Figures 26 and 27 in d@h Exhibit UCS #1. All major evacuation routes excepting the Palisades Interstate Parkway would need widening and straight-ening to move traffic to the PB evacdation time standards. It is not feasible because no one has the money to pay for road
i redesign. i l
- 41. !
character that still remaina.The residents of Rockland County covet the rural 99?
road " improvements". They have voted down many ness William Chase and Fred Seeger 26.See testimony of Rockland County wit-straightening roads a reality,Because the Planit isoffers impossible to un-only an make leveling an reality.
.County.
made but it is eminently unrealistic to redesign RocklandOn p homes on the curves of roads alone would be beyond the cost to which any agency would be willing to subscribe. [L Q
.UESTION 161 I:
v See reply to 85, 96, 108, 110, 121. and 160 (a) =l antiquated roads are routes 202,as306, listed pages A-53-56, Little Tor, 45,in9RERP Appendix W, Middletown/ A, and Main Street in New City.Caspar Hill Road, Wayne Avenue, Kings Highwa '"
~~
QUESTION 162
~
TU Wein,51.Gladys Burger 63, Barbara Blattstein 59 and JohnSee tes
~
Bi Moore "
too be may little equipment alone at home. to warn the deaf and the blind whoThere are All within the 10 mile EPZ. ;_
OUESTION 163 r71 See reply to 162 above, a OUESTION 165 h evacuation. All persons should have equal opportunity for Wi not believe in Notriage.
lives should be sacr ificed. NBCA does @
Certainly in weighing hm-oa life ==
versus the supply of electricity there should be no .tuch thoughts. ti f
condition is not for us to judge. Human life in its best or least advantaged ((i Le ME is also reflected in the number of handicapped,The including density of@Ip the Helen Hayes Rehabilitation Center, E5 by the Association for Retarded Children,the school conducted EE County Health County CenterComplex For the Physically Handicappedthe Rockland @2 the Rockland many persons at home., the many nursing homes, and the EE3 EE.8
> f._f._
C5 EE 55
==.-;
I.N
=...,.a
_6_
\
q
._ x_ ,. l OUESTION 166'See Blattstein 59, Burger 63 and Rockland
,y.g County witnesses. Ruth Northrup and Wein. ,
OUESTION 168, Lack of sufficient buses.
QUESTION 172 See7 reply to 166 ,
i
. QUESTION 173 See isply to 166. ,
OUESTION 178 See reply to 166 OUESTION 180 See WBCA list sub:nitted June 22 and testimony book.
QUESTION 181 WBCA is Lead Intervenor on 3.9 and 4.4 QUESTION 182 (e) see reply to 181 above.
AFFIDAVIT I, Zipporah.S. Fleisher, Secretary of West Branch Conservation Association, being duly sworn, do hereby affirm that the attached answers to Interrogatories of the Licensees in above captioned case, are true and correct to the best of my knowl3dge.
? 12h ri E r Mipporah S. Fleisher Sworn before me this 30th day of June /f/A NothyPubl[c .
DOLORES CAMPIONE
( Notary Pubhc, State of New YoAt No.4527041 i 4
Quahfied in Rockland Cour i
Term Espues Marcn 30,1 e .
j f
l l
i
e UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION G
- =.
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING 80ARD Before Administ rative Judges:
Louis J. Carter, Chairman Frederick J. Shon
. In the Matter or Dr. Oscar H. Paris
)
CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF )
NEW YORK, INC. (Indian Point, )
Unit No. 2) ) Docket Nos. 50-247-SP
) 50-286-SP POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF )
NEW YORK, (Indian Point, June 30,1982
)
Unit No. 3) i CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that I have this 30th day of June placed in the U. S. Mails first class a copy of the REPLY TO INTER-ROGATORIES OF LICENSEES to each of the parties listed below.
h A" . --
Omrtse 1 asemang gas. -
Desasemme end Seresse erwen LJaagumma O>====a-conse as se Saarenerf , surg Amewruy as feev vare see , tee 3ener Charte A. 3spammer. Co.Chaarperuse LLE pensame Reyednaary Csendumme m % ,, pe,e y,g, nun, Wasse=meer Possenes Acusa Caes& mag las.
4emesgung DC J5333 e Phsm Che Deus Treme Cameur p, g, 3,, egg m g pry gege3 M** 78% My scene yuan, pi,,,,, gy gesag
--- 3emame L nemme
... w a,, an c ,s,.Esq. g g,g, P*d p* w g,, .- Aased E. Omeetas Aaen t enen, g.g,
',Tll naC 3-se C===es T - _ Caiawy tamers"
- ee seuse Ortes OtEkse e, wasa . Laget Derene, 3"*'"
% I ,sessmen, "E'mn'. *** *- C8'8"?
'"4 tsa"ese 14 r Aeoese C.- -
_ NT 19738 tLL ressmar E.gissem7 h "=
Utege Puran, NY loest e = =>n . , - . . Larea Satsseen Lose 3. Carer tas. Chearenen '*884"h* U ,,,,._,a,.
5 esse Lamma. Esq.
=g ,,, = ,
2as Wem 43m Seset I
towe w Yet.W Amu Ame.ne se.ssigy one m C2 1 - -
pm a a w w , Pa. 1.9111
, . _g'8" ,g"*" o, e. .m., e, ,new ve, 2 vase Sese Genered
, .e i.,
gg e - _-% see Tape, pry geoe7 ..,,
Or. Ch Bt. Peru New Ten.W &M19 gg,,,, g,, g,g, g,,,,
3 IT# - .nsweru.u- Eme.Emies
- a g ,,h 10996 l Amsene Se sus
Lt.L %stasar f.egiseseey Cassensman
- Aseirenees 8p Alewesensue I. Set AerWD l'al*8' " '9" 250 Part Aewee ggg,y t'asseagum. DC aJ33 *'" Tung, ed Bissmum 3,,, g, p 8*** T8% M' 3838'O De Team Aewese ner. Freesten 3. Shoe **'"'8""' M 3"' 3eassy A suaser #
- s.Oe':1
%staaer Cai-mimm 2 ,ma, e ,,,,~,sa- M - "<t- ==-
g,,
,y g,,,,,,,g,,, what.3 PlaAme, n:^E.T.::'I.
10401 2
mee re .vr ..n ^--7.
- . ne. sa,.
0'#;",;;,: ::- '- - "
- ve. ,, - - C, .c.,e
. oe
,e ev C u - rs.--
C--aare ,.,",;"C ':::;'".ec ev h*Ur"U 'UM*"
tee CeuwesA me Mee Taru L>wurett7 o.e e 9meto Pinene. MY 16604 Cry penal e.,,,,,,,,.,i,..
34 Saareenese $m pose Targ NY 100. P.O. 5.a 344
'" r
%g g Ttflage Statten I
l Mew Tert Lewswnsey Law larmed newt L. Parra. Lan. , Scie Th rsen, East, see vers, new fare D014
.u t-. Aeummes u.3. a ma.eSass,er.and Larouse, teere Pweel Cene Aw aa a a-re-- c--*=8**=== ,,,vi, ,. ,
ng ,i,,J g,q, gg,,,,,g,,3,, g.g w a-appeal B.ard Fan.3 17. MY 19, now Tert, 5. 7. 1W j
g6Mr '"g]e;
- - =h- Joen Miles '
. ,. . . . , . : . ., i i .i,..
- - - - - . _ _ _ ,,y i.,a , v.,e C:,, so...,
- e.,
4tr e saw eae oce ras were s. .i TM) q r D4 7ee ou ppf, :.ee sve,.u,e see. s
..n acais un"5 'a.v.
c+ar 8+t :m r :- -'uier.
- ::1:a for' West Branch Conservation Association y s -
443 Buena Vista Road, New City, N 7. 10956 W4,rth '. ,'
914/634-2327 *> d F$g
- k. _ by Zipporah 5. I'le J.s her Secretary
-_ _ _ _ . - - .