ML19336A346

Memorandum in Response to Aslab 800929 Order Re Anticipated Evidence.Will Present Expert Witnesses Re M Chinnery Conclusion.No Direct Case Will Be Given Re NRC Methodology But Reserves Right to cross-examine.W/Certificate of Svc

ML19336A346
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	10/16/1980
From:	Dignan T, Gad R PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, ROPES & GRAY
To:	NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP)
References
NUDOCS 8010220547
Download: ML19336A346 (4)

Text

.

v..

9t W s

\\

C gh UCc;en,,,

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 3-02? -

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION d-[

before the

1. / ;,, ;,

~

ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD

)

In the Matter of

)

)

PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW

)

Docket Nos. 50-443 HAMPSHIRE, et al.

)

50-444

)

(Seabrook Station, Units 1

)

and 2)

)

MEMORANDUM OF THE PERMITTEE IN RESPONSE TO THE BOARD'S ORDER OF SEPTEMBER 29, 1980 On September 29, 1980, this Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board (the Board) issued an order directing the parties to advise the Board as to the evidence which the parties propose to adduce on the issues in this matter, viz:

1.

"[T]he factual validity' of the hypothesis underlying the conclu-sion reached by Coalition witness Dr. Michael Chinnery that the like-lihood of an intensity IX earthquake at the Seabrook alte is approximately 10-J/yr."

2.

"[W]hether the NRC s'.aff's methodology for correlating vitc; tory ground motion (acceleration) is consistent

()}

with the terms and requirements of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 100."

$h 80ioseo S 4 7 G

a In addition, each party is to set forth its "best present estimate as to when it will be able to furnish [its] evidence in the form of written prepared testimony."

The permittee, Public Service Company of New-Hampshire (PSCO), responds as follows:

It is doubtful that PSCO will present any direct case as to Issue No. 2 of any kind.

PSCO does, of course, reserve its rights to cross-examine and~present rebuttal evidence.

As to Issue No. 1:

It is PSCO's intention to present the views of one or more well-qualified experts as to the " factual validity" or lack thereof of the hypothesis which' underlies the prediction of Dr. Chinnery as to the likelihood of an Intensity IX earthquake at the Seabrook site.

This evidence will,'if simultaneous filings are required, in the main, I

though not necessarily exclusively, consist of a rebuttal of 1

l the Chinnery testimony previously filed.

However, PSCO respectfully suggests that, assuming NECNP intends to reoffer Dr. Chinnery as a witness (or someone who supports his theories),

a more expeditious handling of Issue No. 1 would result if that l

l testimony were filed first and then PSCO responded to it.

The issue is.one which, by its statement, places PSCO in the role of rebutter of a stated theory.

If Dr. Chinnery's views have changed at all, or the ongoing development of his theory has lresulted in nuances not readily apparent from his first testi-j

. mony, the-normal practice-of simultaneous direct filings will, of necessity, result in PSCO having to respond with a rebuttal case..

?

I We-do not suggest in any.way a reallocation of the use.al

. burden of proof, rather we are suggesting an' alteration in l

- the usual order of procedure, which this-Board.has: ample 1

authority.to' require. ~ 10 CFR $ 2.731.

k i

In the event PSCO is' required to file a direct' case simultaneously.with NECNP, our best present estimate is that the written prepared testimony would be ready by December 31, 1980.

Respectfully, submitted, Thomas G. Dignan, Jr.

1 J

R. K. Gad III Roces & Gray Thomas G. Dignan, Jr.

R. K.-Gad III Ropes & Gray Attorneys for Permittee October 16, 1980

[

I' 4

k s

6 F

3-

"h,

.....,_...,..,._,e

,.s--

l

~

1 I

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE, l

I, Thomas G. Dignan, Jr., one of the attorneys for the applicants herein, hereby certify that on October 16, 1980, i

I madr service of the within document by mailing copies thereof, postage prepaid, first class or airmail, to:

i l

Alan S..Rosenthal, Chairman Ellyn R. Weiss, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Harmon & Weiss Appeal Board Suite 506 i

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory' Commission 1725 I Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C.

20555 Washington, D.C.

20006 Dr. John H. Buck Robert A. Backus, Esquire Atomic Safety and-Licensing O'Neill Back2s Spielman l

Appeal Board-116 Lowell Etreet U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 l

Washington, D.C.

20555 Office of the Attorney General Ms. Elizabeth H. Weinhold Commonwealth of Massachusetts l

3 Godfrey Avenue One Ashburton Place l

Hampton, New Hampshire'03842 Boston, Massachusetts 02108 l-Atomic Safety and Licensing Edwin T. Reis, Esquire l.

. Board Panel Assistant Chief Hearing Counsel l

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Office of the Executive Legal l

Commission Director Washington, D.C.

20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555 l

Office of the Attorney General i

208 State House Annex-l Concord, New Hampshire 03301 l

Thomas G. Dignan, Jr.

Thomas G.

Dignan, Jr.

i i

4 a

b

.w..,

,..p.,,

.