ML20236D378

Affidavit of Wj Daley.* Supports Applicant Response to Commonwealth of Ma Atty General cross-motion for Particular Relief

ML20236D378
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	03/13/1989
From:	Daley W PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20236D344	List: ML20236D341 ML20236D375 ML20236D378 ML20236D394 ML20236D415
References
OL, NUDOCS 8903230076
Download: ML20236D378 (5)

Text

-__--- -_ . - - . -

t

't-WCHT T U:

og

'89 MM 20 P3 :17 March 13,.1989 UNITED STATES lOF AMERICA unn , >>

NUCLEAR REGULATORY' COMMISSION p

before the ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD

)

In the Matter of )

)

PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF ) Docket Nos. 50-443-OL NEW HAMPSHIRE, et al. ) 50-444-OL

)

(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2) ) (Off-site Emergency

) Planning Issues)

)

AFFIDAVIT OF WILLIAM JAMES DALEY, JR.

I, William James Daley, Jr. on oath, depose and say as j follows: I

1. I am a Senior Licensing Engineer for Yankee Atomic Electric Company and presently assigned to Emergency Planning Licensing for Seabrook Station as Licensing Counsel Liaison.

I make this affidavit in support of Applicants' Response to

"[ Mass AG's] Cross-Motion for Particular Relief."

2. Prior to the filing of Applicants' Motion for Sanctions in Response to Mass AG's Deliberate Misuse of Protected Information on February 23, 2989, I gathered and transmitted to Applicants' counsel all information available to Applicants concerning telephone calls made by Mass AG 8903230076 890316 PDR ADOCK 05000443 G PDR

personnel to the homes of ORO volunteers and service providers. .This information included notes from individuals who were contacted, and notes of conversations between these individuals and NHY personnel. j

3. Both before and after February 23, I spoke personally with a number of individuals who were called by Mass AG. Specifically, I have interviewed eleven individuals (i.e., nine bus drivers, one traffic guide and one sampling team member) who were called at home by individuals from the Massachusetts Attorney General's Office. I understand that the affidavits of three of these individuals are being filed along with this affidavit.

4. Most of the individuals interviewed by me (all of j whom reside in Massachusetts) told me that they wert extremely concerned with what further retaliation Mass AG would take against them for having come forward to help Seabrook. They said that they were afraid that they could i receive more telephone calls, that their taxes could be audited, that they might be dragged into court or even to l

jail. The manner of these people, as they made these j statements to me, was very serious and anxious. Repeatedly they said, "You must remember, we live in Massachusetts," and "the Attorney General is very powerful." They also expressed I

l the fear that, if they gave us affidavits concerning the calls they had received, they would be particularly targeted for retaliation by the state government. j

\

5. Of the eleven persons interviewed by me, ten indicated that Mass AG's caller had not advised them that their participation in the telephone call was voluntary. In fact, I was told by the interviewees that in a number of  !

cases, Mass AG's caller tried to continue the survey even after the individual contacted had indicated that they did not want to continue the conversation further. They also told me in some of these situations it became necessary for them to terminate the telephone call with the Mass AG.

6. One conversation, in particular, stands out from the rest. This woman told me that the Mass AG caller had asked her if she would respond to an emergency at Seabrook Station and did she realize that she could be going into a dangerous area. She said that she had responded affirmatively to the question. She told me that that question was then repeated, with minor variations, a number of times during the phone call, leaving her with the impression that the caller was trying to get her to change her answer (i.e., to say that she would not respond to an emergency at Seabrook).

7. This woman also told me that after the call was

)

i completed, she felt very upset about being called by someone from the Attorney General's Office. Furthermore, she said she had been left with the impression that her willingness to respond to an emergency, to help people, was something the Attorney General's Office regarded as being wrong. I believe

Lt ,

her statement to me was that she was made to' feel like she 1

was doing something that was wrong. I

8. As this person recounted her telephone experience  ;

to me, she became visibly upset. Her exact words, in summing i up her experience with' Mass AG's call to her, were "I feel 1 i

intimidated." I asked her if'she would give us an affidavit, to describe to the judge what had happened to her, so that y<

' hopefully these calls could be stopped. She said that she i was reluctant to come forward any further than she already had, because her. personal circumstances made her, in her estimation, especially vulnerable to retaliation. I-respected her wishes, and did not press her for.an affidavit.

i i

I l

l l

l l

1

i.

. ' PO .

', ~

.p

'l 1

h&v r m.a. h William Jap Daley, Jr. dd 1

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS-March 13, 1989 The above-subscribed William James Daley, Jr. appeared before ne and made oath that he had read the foregoing affidavit and that.the statements set forth therein are true to the best of his knowledge.

Before me, MW M Notary Public/

My Commission Expires: 3b3 7f l

l.

l

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