/ i~ ÃM~~hZ CO~~SSZOH RZGVZATORY /~ gi7 Za M MaW af:. PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2) 10 22 80 PAGZS': 462 - j'up San Luis Obis o California MZN2i:6X 400 V'~ Ama, S.R. Hasi -'za~, D. C. ZOOS.4 Ta~ahaaa: (202} 5="4-2 45 8011 080 4Qf 0 463 p2 APPEARANCES: (Continued} On behalf of Pacific Gas and Electric Company: NORTON, Esq. 77 Beale Street in San Francisco, California 94106 cic I 'RUCEOn behalf of Joint Intervenors: VS DAVID FLEISCHAEER, Esq. cii REYNOLDS, Esq. 'OSEPH cia RICHARD HUBBARD, Esq. 4 8 1735 I Street, N. W. cv Washington, D. C. 20006 cv 9 On behalf of the State of California and 10 Governor Brown: LAWRENCE C. LANPHER, Esq'. HERBERT H. BROWN, Esq. cn 12'3 Hill, Christopher, and Phillips 1900 M Street, N. W. Washington, D, C. 20036 15, 16 17 1$ cn 19 ''n 20 l 21 C I ?2'3 24 25, A~EBsoi4 aK~ORi.NQ CCMP4i4Y. li4C L 463A CONTENTS Witnesses: Voir Dire Direct Cross Redirect Recross G. Frazier ) 472 H. Seed ) 4 S. Smith. ) J. B lume ) R. Edwards ) 7 8 N. Newmark ) 432 562 9 J. Knight ) 10 P. Kuo ) 11. R. Rothman ) 12 13 i J. Brune ) 599 G.. Young. )s 608 EXHZBZTS / For Zn Number Zdentification Evidence 17'$ Governor Brown' 19, 471 R-7 4'72 20 '1 R-8 473 475 23 24 25 463B E X H I B I T S (Continued) For In Number Identification Evidence Joint Intervenor's R-10 508 W cv I R-11 525 41 R-12 610 7 R-13 611 8. R-14 611 9'0 R-15 611 CJ 12 CO 13,'5 I 16 17: 20 ', 21 C: I 23 24 Minson Tpl 464 PROCEEDINGS SALZMAN: The hearing will reconvene. We have some preliminary matters. The first one we will 10'HAIRMANis that since we are starting early this morning, v7 break for lunch at noon rather than one o'lock. cv I I believe the second matter is that Mr. Lanpher IA has something. C 7 CV ~ 8. MR. LANPHER: Yes, Mr. Salzman, I would like to ns C R-5. was CV. 9 offer in evidence Governor Grown's Exhibit It a 1973 Newmark, Blume and Khapur article. I have checked with counsel, and there aze no objections. VI 12 CHAIRMAN SALZMAN: Hearing no objection, the CO R-5. 13; document, is admitted as Governor Brown's Exhibit (The document previously, 15 marked as Governor Brown's '7 Exhibit R-5 was received in evidence.) MR LANPHER: This is our only preliminary matter. 20 CHAIEQRN SALZMAN: Mr. F leis chaker. 21. C MR. FLEISCHAKER: Mr. Chai.rman, I have: a very C Pl i quick preliminary matter. We requested on the first day of hearing that Dr. Smith plot the exhibits, I think it is Applicant's Exhibits R-2 and R-2, the location of the data. I believe 465 he was going to do that., I was wondering if we could get agreement that we would obtain that at the first break. MR. NORTON: Excuse me. That was not my under- 3 standing of. the agreement. He was to be able to identify certain of the stations on the graph, and that he can do. But there is not room, obviously, to write the identifica- on So you 7 tion of all the stations the plot itself. Qill something, and show them 8. have to put a viewgraph up, or "This such and such." 9 with a pointer, and say, is station We don't have a new with the name of all 10 plot the stations. MR. FLEISCHAKER: Mr. Norton and can work 12. I out at the first recess the best way to have the 13 < informa.ti on., CHAIRMAN SALZMAN: think you could do that. 15 I Hearing no further; preliminary matters. 16 MR. NORTON: Mr. Salzman, there was one other 17 lg that we discussed last night at the end of the day. We We were going to 19, talked about the order of rebuttal. address morning the thing. 20 that'his first 'l CHAIRMAN SALZMAN: As I recall, the request was that you be allowed to rebut the following morning. MR. NORTON: Yes. ,'/ b~ CHAIRMAN SALZMAN: Why don't you state it again. AmKBSQN RK~ORT'.NG CCMPANYr INC 466 MR. NORTON: The problem is that there are four 2 areas of inquiry.. The way it was established the first day, 3 we would rebut as the first area of inquiry was completed, and 4 so on. The problem with that is, if':that area of inquiry vt CP ends in the middle of the day, or any time during the day, we I lil vl will not have time to prepare rebuttal, because the last part hsi 7 of the last part of the case is, of course, Governor Brown's CV and Dr. Luco and cv Trifunac, and the intervenors. So we would 9 not have the opportunity to prepare rebuttal until overnight. CD CL 10 What I would suggest is that we do the rebuttal of C l the first two areas the first full day after those first two CD 12 areas are completed. CCl 13 I CHAIRMAN SALZMAN: By the first two areas, do you 14: mean Questions l through 7? he I 15 MR. NORTON: That'is';the first area, Questions. 1 'JT '6 through 4 and 7q and then 5 and 6. CD l, 17 CHAIRMAN SALZMAN: I am not quite sure E am lg ' Vl following.. Did you say you wanted rebuttal the day following 19; the completion of each of those? Ca Vl 20 MR. NORTON: It seems to me to make sense not to I '1 make any rebuttal until each of these areas is completed. c Pl' The second area, there is no witness, so there is going to we 23'4 no rebuttal. So we could do it before start the second area, or between those two areas, or even after those two 25 areas, whatever is convenient. But we would need at least 467 overnight to prepare any rebuttal. CHAIRMAN SALZMAN: 'r. Olmstead. MR. OLMSTEAD: My view of that is that it should depend. upon the circumstances as to what the nature of rebuttal is going to be. I don ' know exactly what it is going to be at this point. But, I am not sure that it is 7 going to be. a problem.. 8. CHAIRMAN SALZMAM: Apparently Mr. Norton thinks it 9 is going to be. 10 MR. OLMSTEAD: * I hear him say that it is a problem, and. I guess the pxoblem I have with it is, if in order to 12: give him overnight to prepare rebuttal, it means that this 'earing goes on for an additional week, I am not interested. i 74 CHAIRMAN SALZMAN: Mr. Pleischaker. 15 . MR.. PLEISCHAKER: I share Mr. Olmstead's view. In addition, it seems to me to make sense to have 17 rebuttal immediately following the discussion of the issues 'Q in each. area, because that is when the matter is freshest in '9 I . our minds. 20: So, for example, after we finish issues l, 2, 3, 4 21 and 7, it would make. sense, then, to have rebuttal on the issues. in connection with those Board questions. So I think 23 the Applicant ought to present his rebuttal upon completion 24 of the case for each of the areas. CHAIRMAN SALZMAN: Mr. Lanpher, do you want to 468 address that? MR. LANPHER: I would like to ask for a clarifica- tion. First of all, is this rebuttal by PGaE, or is it an. opportunity for rebuttal by all the parties? CHAIRMAN SALZMAN: Rebuttal by PGGE only. That is 7 what the rules provide. 8. MR. LANPHER: It is my recollection that we held 9 that in abeyance on the first morning. 10 CHAIRMAN SALZMAN: I don't think that that is quite 'ight. It is rebuttal by PG&E only, sir, otherwise we would be here until the middle of next: year. 13 i Mr. Lanpher, I presume that your own witnesses 1g i will comment, when you put. them on. They will be entitled 15 to comment on the testimony that has gone on before, and that '6 is why they have been here. 17: MR. FLEISCHAKER: That is the discussion that we had yesterday. I 19: CHAIRMAN SALZMAN: The rebuttal is in. response to 20 your cri.ticism. 21 clari:fication. C MR. LANPHER: I thank you for that Pl CHAIRMAN SALZMAN: Mr. Olmstead. l MR. OLMSTEAD: I think that while things are fresh 2< immediately, we ought to have the rebuttal immediately following the completion of a subject matter area. /V~KBBCN a~~~QRi.NQ ccMPANY. li4c 469 '- CHAIRMAN SALZMAN: Just one moment. (Pause. ) CHAIRMAN SALZMAN. Gentlemen, two observations. One of them is that it is a highly technical matter; two, that everybody has been very active. No one wants to delay the hearing any longer than possible, but I think that it 7 would. be very difficult for Mr. Norton to immediately start getting up and rebut without some time to talk to his wit- 9- nesses, and to indicate what he is going to do, otherwise 10 we are likely to be here while he thinks on his feet. Why don't we, as usual, split the baby,, and wait 12 until the first panel of witnesses is finished, then see what 13: time it is, and when it would be appropriate to have rebuttal, and what sort of'roblems Mr.