ML20246J402

Requests Confirmation,As Followup to 890510 Telcon,That Town of Newbury No Longer Asserting Listed Bases & Still Intends to Litigate Basis H in Light of Fact That Map Objected to Has Been Withdrawn from Spmc.Related Correspondence

ML20246J402
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	05/11/1989
From:	Trout J PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, ROPES & GRAY
To:	Hillwhilton R LAGOULIS, HILL-WHILTON & ROTONDI (FORMERLY LAGOULIS, NEWBURY, MA
References
CON-#289-8603 OL, NUDOCS 8905170068
Download: ML20246J402 (2)

Text

_ _ _ _ - _ . _ - - _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - - _ _ -

ggIED CORRE.SPOND!ihn Q3 ROPts & GRAY ONE INTERNATIONAL PLACE y, r t BOSTON. MASSACHUSETTS O2tlO-2624 30 MENNEDY PLAZA (617) 9517000 '00f PENNSMANIA AVENUC. N. E o , ,, , TELECOPIER: (617) 951-7050 '89 MY 15 P C.T .',,"; ,,*,' ,,*',

T ELE C O pre R: (dM 621-09:0 TELECC pie R: (202) 626 3961 CF' DOCK! ,

May 11, 1989 FEDERAL EXPRESS R. Scott Hill-Whilton, Esq.

Lagoulis, Hill-Whilton & Rotondi 79 State Street Newburyport, MA 01950 Re: Public Service Company of New Hampshire, et al.

Docket Nos. 50-443-OL and 50-444-OL

Dear Scott:

This note is the promised follow-up to our telephone conversation of May 10, 1989. As we discussed, Applicants are in the process of preparing an updated contentions compilation to circulate to the Board and parties. In previous discussions we had determined that Town of Newbury.

(TON) no. longer intended to pursue some of the manifold bases and sub-bases of JI Contention 7, on bus routes, but we had been unable to determine exactly which parts are no longer in dispute. During our May 11 conversation, we agreed that it would be helpful if I reviewed TON's testimony in conjunction with the text of the contention, and then submit to you a written list of the bases'and sub-bases that seem abandoned.

Accordingly, I have compared pages'13-16 on TON's final testimony, Tr. ff. 17801, with JI Contention 7 Bases D through I. Upon comparison, it seems that TON is no longer asserting the following:

i Basis D sub-bases 3, 4, 5 a-c, 6 b (Bus Route 1).

Basis E sub-bases 1, 2, 3, c-e, 4 (Bus Route 2).

Basis F sub-bases 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 b (Bus Route 3).

Basis G sub-bases 1, 2, 3, 4 a-c, f (Bus Route 4).

l i 8905170068 890511 l PDR ADOCK 05000443

G PDR 3)$d

\ - - - - - - - .---_--_----_- - - - - - -

.. u l

. ROPE 0 & GRAY R. Scott Hill-Whilton, Esq. May 11, 1989 In addition, I query whether TON still intends to litigate Basis H,-in light of the fact that the map objected to has been withdrawn from the SPMC. Egg App. Reb. No. 9, Tr. ff.

17333 at 100; E23 also Tr. 17401-02.

Please call me as soon as possible to confirm that those are in fact the bases which TON no longer is litigating.

Once we have a final list memorialized in writing, I will make the appropriate adjustments to the contentions ,

compilation and distribute that document to the Board and parties.

Thanks for all your efforts in this matter.

Very truly yours, i

v-r

.Jeff y P. Trout JPT/pd :an.tsau.we cc: Service List i

I I

J

.n. ....._.............~.--..s -

+-._..w._-. , . . . . . . . . . . -.<,...,..,m,-.. ..%~.. ~4 , _