ML20151C276
| ML20151C276 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 07/19/1988 |
| From: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-#388-6829 OL, NUDOCS 8807210295 | |
| Download: ML20151C276 (18) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. 013 \A l l UNITED STATES
- O NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1
i s e an e um um se e a um as e as an a su a rz .s se as a m um as um an um as um um a m as as e e um en ' as as as am as em as as as an a um us . In the Matter of: . )
) Docket Nos.
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF ) 50-443-OL NEW HAMPSHIRE, et al., ) 50-444-OL
) OFF-SITE EMEEGENCY (SEABROOK STATION, UNITS 1& 2) ) PLA.NNING
)
TELECONFERENCE ) O l Pages: 14266 through 14281 Place: Bethesda, Maryland ~ l Date: July 19, 1988
..... .... ...... ... . .............s,.... ........ ... ..c j - Oh o\ HERITAGE REPORTING CORPORATION OfidelReporters O 1220 L Street, N.W., Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20005 8807210295 880719 PDR (202) 6M T
ADOCK 05000443 PNU
._. .-. .. . . _ _ . _ _ . . - _ . . . . . . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ - - - - - - ~ _ _ _ _ - . . . _ - - _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ - . . _ . _ . . .
A V UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of: )
) Docket Nos.
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF ) 50-443-OL NEW RAMPSHIRE, et al., ) 50-444-OL
) OFF-SITE EMERGENCY (SEABROOK STATION, UNITS 1 & 2) ) PLANNING
)
TELECONFERENCE Tuesday, July 19, 1988 Room 453 East-West Building 4350 East-West Highway Bethesda, Maryland The above-entitled matter came on for hearing, [} pursuant to notice, at 3:02 p.m. BEFORE: JUDGE IVAN W. SMITH, CHAIRMAN Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 JUDGE GUSTAVE A. LINENBERGER, JR . , MEMBER Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 JUDGE JERRY HARBOUR, MEMBER Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 l l () Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 I l
1 14267
/7 V APPEARANCES:
For the Applicant THOMAS G..DIGNAN, JR. ESQ. Ropes & Gray 225 Franklin Street Boston, Massachusetts 02110 For the NRC Staff: SHERWIN E. TURK, ESQ. MS. CHAN, ESQ. Office of General Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Eor the Commonwealth of Massachusetts: STEPHEN OLESKEY, ESQ. Commonwealth of Massachusetts One Ashburton Place, 19th Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02108 For the New Encland Coalition acainst Nuclear () Pollution: ELLYN R. WEISS, ESQ. Harmon & Weiss 2001 S Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20009 For the Seacoast Anti-Pollution Leacue: JANE DOUGHTY, DIRECTOR Seacoast Anti-Pollution League 5 Market Street Portsmouth, New Hampshire 03801 For the Town of Hampton: MATTHEW T. BROCK, ESQ. Shaines & McEachern 25 Maplewood Avenue P.O. Box 360 Portsmouth, New Hampshire 03801 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l l 14268 l l
~ ,!
(\_) 1 PROCEEDING'S 2 JUDGE SMITH: We are on the record. ! 3 MS. WEISS: Your Honor, we are asking for an 4 extension of time for filing our remaining findings on the New 5 Hampshire Plan -to August 12th. I calculate that they are now ! 6 due the 28th. We received them in our office, the applicants-7 for bnth findings in our offices the 18th. 3 Basically the reasons are that it's a very, very l 9 lLrge job. For us in particular, we've basically having to 10 kind of weave a thread through a lot of cros -a:: amination and 11 we attempted to divide those possibilities amongst ourselves j 12 in general areas, and we've been in communication with each 13 other a great deal. We' re finding that there is a need to
) 14 coordinate among ourselves to send out the drafts for the I j
15 input and review of the other parties and we aren't able to , l 16 accommodate that within the time schedule that we've been I 17 given. Other people may want to add. 18 MB. OLESKEY: As I think the Board is aware, we have 19 had Terrell Snyder pretty much fully responsible for the bulk 20 of the work in this area on a day to day basis. But it's -- i 21 for me, the person who's responsible now for pulling it 22 together. -- otherwise occupied by the offices involved. 23 JUDGE SMITH: Mr. Oleskey, I think there is a defect 24 in, you're using a speaker phone, aren't you? 25 MR. OLESKEY: Yes, b(_/ Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
14269 ( 1 JUDGE SMITH: Would it be too much if you used a 2 regular telephone? Could you do that? 3 MR. OLESKEY: Okay. It's a brand new phone, Judge. 4 Can you hear me now? 5 JUDGE SMITH: Yes, that's fine. Your speaker phone 6 is cutting your words short. We could hear you all right, but 7 your words were just abbreviated. Go ahead. 8 MR. OLESKEY: In any event, it's largely Terrell 9 Snyder's responsibility and it's a massive responsibility 10 which the exercise somewhat disrupted because we had to have 11 her and have the other lawyer involved in that for the period 12 of time it took to prepare it. 13 We all talked this morning and feel that we can meet 14 a date which is essentially a two week extension. We think we 15 need it because it's a very important area, a point obviously 16 on which we've spent a lot of time and we want to do it right. 17 Probably, in fact, some of the same reasons that Sherwin Turk 18 seems to have, the same kind of concerns that he expressed to 19 the Board back a month or so ago. 20 MS. WEISS: I should add that I have contacted the 21 adverse parties and the staff told me they have no objections, 22 Public Service does object. 23 JUDGE SMITH: You say Ms. Chan or Mr. Turk had no 24 objections to the extension? 25 MS. WEISS: Ms. Chan has no objections. O (_/ Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 \
-l 14270 m
k,) 1 E'F . CHAN: No objections provided we have a proposed 2 schedule before the Board now in response to the applicant's 3 motion for schedule, and we have proposed for a pre-hearing , l 4 conference on the Massachusetts contingent of August 3 and 4,. ) 5 and the filing of general exercise -- on August 15. I wasn't 6 sure whether or not tha extension of the proposed finding 7 deadline for intervenors would -- the schedule the staff had 8 proposed on other parts of this meeting. 9 JUDGE SMITH: The Board plans to set a pre-hearing 10 conference on the SMBC and any other matter that's ripe for 11 the 16th of August. So that would cut right into your l 12 response time, to your finding time. I 1 13 Mr. Dignan, do you want to be heard? 14 MR. DIGNAN: Yes I do, Your Honor. 15 You'll recall when we were studying these tapes I j 16 asked to shorten my time and give them a ten day interval. 17 The Board denied my view saying they had -- and therefore 18 should have the full 40 days, gave them the full 40 days, and -l 19 now they want more time. I object. 20 JUDGE SMITH: We have a reporter here who has never 21 covered this before. Would you please remember, I'll try to 22 remember too, to identify yourselves. 23 All right, you object. 24 MR. DIGNAN: I do, Your Honor. You gave them a full 25 40 days, you overruled my shortening the time up. I was () Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
1 l
- 1 l
14271 l l 1 x_) 1 willing to go 10 days and go out. They've had the full 40 2 days and now it's more time. I don't know what they've been 3 doing all these last 30 days, but I don't see any need to 4 allow this. It's obviously in your discretion, and with that' 5 I subside. ! 6 JUDGE SMITH: We'll consult and go off the record 7 for a moment. Anything further on that point? 1 l 8 MS. CHAN: Not from the staff, Your Honor. 9 (Discussion held off the record.) 10 JUDGE SMITH: We're back on the record now. 11 We're back in the same situation as before. We 12 simply cannot ourselves use those proposed findings until 13 after the pre-hearing conference up in Boston. On the other , 14 hand, and also we're concerned that the delay that it may i 15 cause the staff because we probably can use those proposed l 16 findings before the staff would be required to respond if we j) 17 gave the staff 10 days. If we gave the staff 10 days after 18 the 12th, they would not have to respond to those proposed 19 findings until August 29th. If the staff can shorten up that i 20 period it would be very helpful. 21 MR. TURK: We can, Your Honor. 22 JUDGE SMITH: It would be very helpful to us. But 23 one of the commitments we want from the intervenors on this, 24 and it is not a quantitative commitment, it's a qual 3tative 25 commitment, is that this additional time is as Ms. Weiss and () Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
}
l l 14272 1 Mr._Oleskey alluded to, used for better coordinated 2 submittals. That would ?>e very helpful to us if the3're not 3 redundant intervenor by intervenor. 4 MR. OLESKEY: We want very much to do that. 5 JUDGE SMITH: You'll have a more effective product 6 if you do. And that.the time is simply not used to add on and 7 add on and add on, because there is absolutely no limit to the '1 l 8 amount of things you can think about to put in proposed 9 findings. Proposed findings have been very heavy. 10 We raally urge you to not do that and to sharpen. b 11 your proposed findings. If you do that you'll have more 12 effective ones. But we can't use them, we simply cannot get 13 to them until after the pre-hearing conference on the 16th. I 14 MR. OLESKEY: On that point, Judge, may I ask a 15 question? 16 JUDGE SMITH: Yes. 17 MR. OLESKEY: Mr. Traficonte I believe is going on 18 vacation the evening of August 12th for a couple of sceeks. 19 He's wondering if that conference possibly could be done on 20 the 12th so that he could be part of it before he goes on 21 vacation, it being his special responsibility here. 22 JUDGE SMITH: I know he does. Both Judge Harbour 23 and I have longstanding, incidentally, in my case pre-paid 24 vacation commitments for the week of the 8th through the 12th, 25 and there is simply no way that that can be changed. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
14273 1 Again, I'm very much aware thit Mr . Traficonte has 2 been he principal person involved here. . don't know what to 3 do. 4 MP. DIGNAN: If it will make Traficonte feel any 5 better, I'm going to have to come back from my vacation to 6 make the 16th. 7 JUDGE SMITH: Let's hold this open for a minute and 8 eee what -- 9 MR. DIGNAN: No, Your Honor. I want it the 16th. I 10 want to move this case. I'm prepared to sacrifice my vacation 11 to do it. 12 JUDGE SMITH: Okay, you just won because I was 13 thinking about moving it up to the 2nd. O
\"# 14 (Laughter) 15 JUDGE SMITH: You have argued very eloquently, Mr.
16 Dignan. 17 MR. DIGNAN: What I don't want to do is let my 18 vacation interfere with it moving. 19 JUDGE SMITH: I understand. 20 MR. DIGNAN: I want Mr. Oleskey to tell that he can 21 tell my friend Traficonte, no sympathy. 22 MR. OLESKEY: Were you talking about the 15th or the 23 16th, Judge? 24 JUDGE SMITH: The 16th. Let's back up a minute. We 25 plan on two days, the 16th and 17th. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
- . . ~ -- - -- ._. __ .
14274 ( 1 Let's back up a minute and-we'll tell you where we 2 are and how we arrived at that date. 3 We have ruled on every contention now by the 4 Attorney General, NECNP, .9APL and SAPL. We are substantially 5 through Amesbury, but we have not done much on the-other 6 towns. And Newbury Port. I had not looked at any of the 7 cities and towns, but we have done in, well to cut it short, 8 we hope to have by express mail out this week part one of our 9 ruling on the contenti>ne t,nich will be for the Attorney 10 General, NECNP ar d S A' 8L . j 11 That will be accompanied by an order authorizing 12 discovery to begin except where there is a bonafide need for 13 clarification as to the issues. We don't think there's going 14 to be a lot of need for that because we have gone to a lot of 15 trouble to explain our concept of the applicable law, who has 16 the burden of proceeding with the evidence on the various 17 presumptions, and that type of thing. 18 The pre-hearing conference will be for the purpose 19 of seeking additional guidance and not to argue contentions, 20 as I understand Mr. 'traficonte thought, but to correct errors, 21 mistakes, flat out mistakes, and to begin the consolidation 22 process. 23 MR. BROCK: Your Honor, this is Matt Brock. As I 24 understand it then, the Board in this order will not be 25 issuing a ruling on the admissability of Town of Amesbury
) Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
'q A4275
() r~'N 1 contentions? j l 2 JUDGE SMITH: That's right, Mr. Brock. We cut it 3 off at the towns and cities to get out part one as quickly as 4 we can because part one gives the legal guidance that the 5 parties need. 6 MR. BROCK: All right. Would I understand then that 7 any discovery period obviously that would begin to run would 8 not be applicable to towns and cities? 9 JUDGE SMITH: That's right. It does not follow, 10 however, that we add that much time on the end of the 11 discovery period. We look at it as to the absolute needs. 12 But we want to get this cut so that the respective parties and 13 all of te.e parties and participants will have advance notice 14 as to what type of contentions we are accepting and rejecting, 15 what our legal standards are, and just our general approach to 16 contentions. Then we hope to have the cities and towns out by 17 the end of next week, or before if possible. 18 That would leave open, theoretically, the 19 possibility, and I haven't discussed this with the Board 20 members, but we could possibly go up to Booton on the 2nd and 21 3rd and take a goud shot at it. 22 JUDGE LINENBERGER: I don't think that's enough l 23 time. 24 JUDGE SMITH: It's not enough time for the cities 25 and towns. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1 i
. - . . -, _ , , , . . , ,.c- .- - - ,
- I
. , l l
I
. 1 14276 O 1 MS. WEISS: And that would take the time out of -- \_/
2' JUDGE SMITH: The time that you need for findings. j 3 It looks like the most practical way is to have a 4 pre-hearing conference on the 16th and 17th. I just hate to 5 upset vacations. They're hard enough for you people to plan 6 and to keep. 7 MR. DIGNAN: I'd go for the week of the first any 8 time, Your Honor. But if the only choice is the 16th and 9 17th, the applicant will take that. 10 MR. OLESKEY: I guess we'd go for the week of the 11 first too, Your Honor. 12 JUDGE SMITH: Ms. Weiss, I might note that with 13 respect to your, what was that last comment? I didn't hear. 14 MR. OLESKEY: I said that this office, the Attorney 15 General's office, would also be willing to do it the week of l 16 the first. We recognize it might very woll impose a very l 17 great burden on Ms. Weiss. l 18 JUDGE SMITH: Ms. Weiss, I don't see a great burden l I 19 on you. You only have four contentions, two of which are l 20 purely legal contentions, and I understood that Ms. Curan was 21 the lead person from your firm on that. 22 MS. WEISS: On this --? 23 JUDGE SMITH: Yes. I 24 MS. WEISS: She is. She hasn't been able to-travel. ) 4 25 I wJil probably be doing the traveling. l Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
e __ ._ _ I
)
14277 1 JUDGE SMITH: We haven't arrived at any decision on 2 this, but let me say that we'll try to accommodate the 3 parties. I think you'll see that your part of it with respect 4 to your contentions could be handled very quickly. 5 MS. WEISS: And it's perfectly all right with me if 6 it's better for the other people to do it that week, and then 7 maybe tack a day or two on-- 8 JUDGE SMITH: And there's a possibility we can come 3 back up the 16th and 17th, too. 10 MS. WEISS: Or have the findings due the 14th 11 instead of the 12th, just so I don't lose the two days. 12 JUDGE SMITH: Let's leave it go at that and let the 13 Board consult to see if that is a practical proposal. We are O 14 eager to get it going and we also would like to avoid 15 disrupting vacations if possible. 16 If the parties can sort of mark out the 2nd and 3rd 17 of August, and you can come and go as you see fit, Ms. Weiss. 18 We can come and take up your business or not, as it might be. 19 MS. WEISS: This would be in Boston? 20 JUDGE SMITH: Yes, it would be in Boston. But 21 definitely the 16th and 17th. We will see if the 2nd and 3rd 22 is practical. 23 MR. OLESKEY: Judge, to be clear, the 2nd end 3rd 24 would be instead of the 16th and 17th, is that right? 25 JUDGE SMITH: Well, no. We would, the reason we're
) Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
14278 s_) 1 going with the 2nd and 3rd is we would like to get the
,2 - Attorney General and NECNP and SAPL off to an early 3 understanding of what they have in and out of the case'and so
~~
4 that they can begin discovery and as a secondary thing, so 5 that Mr. Traficonte doesn't destroy his vacation, and while 6 we're at it, Mr. Dignan. Mr. Traficonte can decide whether or 7 not he wants to come back on the 16th and 17th for the towns 8 and cities. 9 MR. OLESKEY: Okay. 10 JUDGE SMITH: Mr. Dignan, I don't know. Maybe we 11 can get it all done. I don't know. Maybe we can put the 12 towne and cities off to the 23rd and 24th. 13 MR. DIGNAN: That would change it for me. If it's O 14 going to be the 16th and 17th, I'd rather do that than then 15 23rd and 24th. 16 JUDGE SMITH: You would. You would rather do the 17 16th and 17th rather than the 23rd and 24th. 18 MR. DIGNAN: Yes, Your Honor. I was going to go 19 from the 15th on. 20 JUDGE SMITH: What if we came up the 15th? 21 MR. DIGNAN: That's better than the 16th and 17th. 22 The other thing I wa.s wondering is, maybe there's 23 some magic to this but what if we went later in the week of 24 the first, say the 4th and 5th. Does that help anybody? 25 MR. OLESKEY: That's fine with us. I think that's a
) Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1
{
\
- 1 l
l 14279 1 I'T (/ 1 little more convenient, in fact. 2 JUDGE SMITH: I think that's a little bit more 3 achievable. j 4 MR. DIGNAN: If we did the 4th and 5th, I don't know ^l i 5 what the Board's intention is on the second part of that 6 order, but if it came out, as I understand it the Board is l 7 planning this week to get out the first part of the order. l 8 JUDGE SMITH: Which will include a rather lengthy in l i 9 revenge discussion of the law. I 1 10 MR. DIGNAN: Right. So if all that's coming in the 11 second order really -- 12 JUDGE SMITH: Facts. In or out, in or out. j l 13 MR. DIGNAN: l'm thinking if that came out even some 14 time late in the week of the 25th we all ought to be able to 15 do whatever yowling we want to on the 4th and 5th without so 16 much strain. 17 MR. TURK: If we go a little bit later in the week 18 I'd ask that we do it the 3rd and the 4th rather than the 5th. i 19 I have a vacation starting the 5th. 20 MR. DIGNAN: That's fine with me, 3rd and 4th. 21 JUDGE SMITH: Can the parties nail that 3rd and 4th 22 down, and we'll get back to you as promptly as we possibly l 23 can. We have to get a room. I understand that the bankruptcy j j 24 people up there were very hospitable, and I think we can j 25 probably get a room all right.
'1
() Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1 l i
J-1 14280 (.s_/ 1 Let's mark that 3rd and 4th down and we'll get back j! to you as soon as we possibly can. 3 MR. BROCK: Judge Smith, just so that I'm clear, for 4 the cities and towns including Amesbury, we're still to be 5 marking out the 16th and 17th? 6 MR. DIGNAN: No, you go the 3rd and 4th, 7 MR. BROCK: I'm asking the Judge. 8 JUDGE SMITH: Yes, that was what we had in mind. I 9 Now und..rstand, you're going to have a rull understanding of 10 our legal reasoning in your hands by the end of this week, we 11 hope, or it will be in express mail at least by the end of 12 this week, and remaining will be a factual in and out. 13 MR. BROCK: But the actual conference for cities and i N- 14 towns will be the 16th and 17th? 15 JUDGE SMITH: No. We're now thinking about the 3rd-16 and 4th for the whole bit, if we can make it. We may have to l 17 split. We don't know. We'll see. 18 MR. BROCK: Okay. 19 MR. DIGNAN: Your Honor, to put on my calendar then l 20 the intervenors' time for proposed findings on the -- issues l 21 is extended to when? 22 JUDGE SMITH: The 12th. 23 MR. DIGNAN: Thank you. 24 JUDGE SMITH: When will your reply be Mr. Turk or 25 Ms. Chan? () Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
14281 f~) ( <' 1 MR. TURK: Ten days from there I suppose would be 2- the 22nd. 3 JUDGE SMITH: I thought you could move it up a 4 little bit, but that's all right. That's fine, the 22nd. 5 That in fact, if you went the 22nd, that is not moving it up. 6 That's not even taking full-credit for your time. You don't 7 count the 13th and 14th. 8 MR. TURK: Will that make it the 24th? 9 (Laughter) 10 JUDGE SMITH: Yeah, that's all right. The 24th. 11 We'll get back to you as soon as we possibly can, 1 12 and we're going to shoot for the 3rd and 4'ch. And informally, 13 as we're sitting here right now, that seems to be practical. C' 14 We'll try to accommodate the particular needs of the parties l 15 in and out if you want to. Walk in rulings. Take a number / l 16 and get your ruling. [ l 17 MR. DIGNAN: Thank you.
-{
18 MR. OLESKEY: Thank you. . 19 MS. WEISS: Thank you. I 20 JUDGE SMITH: Good bye. 21 (Whereupon, the conference was adjourned at 3:26 22 p.m.) 23 24 25 () Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
F I REPORTERS' CERTIFICATE 2 3' DOCKET NUMBER: 50-443-OL 4 -CASE TITLE: Public Service Company of New' Hampshire, et al. (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2)
$ HEARING DATE: July 19, 1988 6
LOCATION: Bethesda, Maryland 7 I hereby certify that the proceedings and evidence 8 9 are contained fully and accurately on the tapes and notes repor+3d by me at the hearing in the above case before the 10 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 11 12 Date: July 19, 1988 14 15 O 16 l 17 Offjcial# W Reporteri d ~ Th'omas Copher 18 { HERITAGE REPORTING CORPORATION j 1220 L Street, N.W. 1 19 washington, D. C. 20005 i 20 1 21 f 22 23 24 O ,
, \\
0 [ Heritage Reporting Corporation u - - - ,}}