ML20111C594

Interrogatories to Bl Rorem & Appleseed Alliance Re Contention 1 Concerning Plant Emergency Plans.Related Correspondence

ML20111C594
Person / Time
Site:	Braidwood
Issue date:	03/12/1985
From:	Copeland V COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO., ISHAM, LINCOLN & BEALE
To:	APPLESEED, ROREM, B.
Shared Package
ML20111C599	List: ML20111C594 ML20111C602
References
CON-#185-036, CON-#185-36 OL, NUDOCS 8503150473
Download: ML20111C594 (5)

Text

"

Qbl.s 3/12/85

" ^

gqED COR.

C:t USA fD UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ?fp,4 f

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Gn .. /Fr'3

.6 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOA [A Sfcg, ,

5Afch&l In the Matter of )

COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY

)

) Docket Nos.

50-456 OL

) 50-4570 L (Braidwood Nuclear Power )

Station, Units 1 and 2) )

INTERROGATORIES TO-INTERVENOR BRIDGET LITTLE ROREM AND

• APPLESEED ALLIANCE Applicant, Commonwealth Edison Company, hereby. serves upon Intervenor Bridget Little Rorem and Appleseed Alliance written interrogatories pursuant to 10 C.F.R. S 2.740b. Each interrogatory should be answered separately and fully in writing, under oath or affirmation, within 14 days after service.

ROREM CONTENTION 1

1. Identify the source (s) (documents and/or persons) of Intervenor's knowledge of the emergency plans for Braidwood Station.

2. State with particularity the bases for Intervenor's contention that the energency plans should include the l tnree items specified in Rorem Contention 1. subpara-graphs "a" through "c".

'^~

gor . < ..

3. Inasmuch as the emergency plans for .the Braidwood Station are not available, state the bases for Inter-venor's inference that the three items specified in Rorem Contention 1 subparagraphs "a" through "c" are not or will not be included in the emergency plans for Braidwood Station.

4. State whether the distribution of brochures which inform the public of radiological emergency procedures would satisfy Intervenor's concerns expressed in Rorem Contention 1, subparagraph "a". If not, define the program contemplated by Intervenors for informing and educating the public of radiological emergency proce-l dures.

5. State with particularity the elements of the "public"

! contemplated by Intervenor in Rorem Contention 1, subparagraph "a".

6. Define the nature and extent of a " radiological emer-gency" as contemplated by Intervenor in Rorem Contention 1, subparagraph "a".

1

7. Identify the " response [the public] should take" contemplated by the Intervenors in Rorem Contention 1,

! subparagraph "a".

2 -

es

8. Identify the "means for ob'taining instructions" contem-plated by Intervenor in Rcrem Contention 1, subparagraph "a".

. 9. ' Define the elements of an " assurance . . . that insti-tutions can be evacuated or adequately protected in a radiological emergency" as contemplated by Intervenor in Rorem Contention 1, subparagraph "b".

. 10. Identify the specific hospitals and nursing homes

, contemplated by Intervenor in Rorem Contention 1, subparagraph "b".

11. Identify with specificity all other institutions, if

) any, contemplated by Intervenor in Rorem Contention 1,

subparagraph "b".

12. Define the nature and extent of a " radiological emer-gency" as contemplated by Intervenor in Rorem Contention 1, subparagraph "b".

, 13. Define the nature and extent of "an accident" as contemplated by Intervenor in Rorem Contention 1, I subparagraph "c".

i i

3- -

\

1

14. Define the type and amount of radiation exposure contemplated by Intervenor in Rorem Contention 1, a

subparagraph "c".

15. Define the nature and extent of " radiation casualties"

, as contemplated by Intervenor in Rorem Contention 1, subparagraph "c".

16. State with particularity the persons who comprise

" operating personnel " as contemplated by Intervenor in Rorem Contention 1, subparagraph "c".

31. Define the elements of a " suitable plan" as contem-plated by Intervenors in Rorem Contention 1, subparagraph "c".

18. Identify by name, title or position, and address all persons Intervenor intends to present as witnesses to testify with regard to Rorem Contention 1.

Submitted by:

(.fi One Of The eYttorneys For Applicant COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY 4, -

Joseph Gallo, Esq.

Victor G. Copeland, Esq.

ISHAM, LINCOLN & BEALE 1120 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.

Suite 840 Washington, DC 20036 Rebecca J. Lauer, Esq..

ISHAM, LINCOLN & BEALE Three~First National Plaza Suite 5200

> Chicago,. Illinois 60602 (312) 558-7500 5 -

. . , . - . . . -