ML101450254
| ML101450254 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 05/24/2010 |
| From: | Stephen Burns NRC/OGC |
| To: | Monrad P - No Known Affiliation |
| Mullins C | |
| References | |
| CGC-07-467956, TR-10-01 | |
| Download: ML101450254 (3) | |
Text
May 24, 2010 Philip Monrad, Esq.
Leonard Carder, Esq.
1330 Broadway, Suite 1450 Oakland, California 94612 RE:
Mark Taylor, et al. v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co., No. CGC-07-467956, San Francisco County (Ca.) Superior Court; NRC File No. TR-10-01.
Counselor:
On May 12, 2010, pursuant to your discussions with this Office, you submitted a subpoena and affidavit in compliance with the NRCs regulations at 10 C.F.R. § 9.200, et seq.
The subpoena and affidavit request the testimony of Mr. Michael Peck, the NRC Senior Resident Inspector at the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant at a court hearing on the above-captioned matter in San Francisco on Tuesday, May 18, 2010. The Office of the General Counsel has assigned the processing number TR-10-01 to your request. Please refer to that request in any future correspondence regarding this matter.
Pursuant to my authority under 10 C.F.R. §§ 9.201 and 9.202(c) I had denied your request for the testimony of Mr. Peck. After reviewing your affidavit and the materials associated with the case, I concluded that Mr. Peck is not an appropriate witness to describe the NRCs oversight of the activities at Diablo Canyon that are in dispute in your lawsuit.
Instead, I concluded that Mr. Troy Pruett, a supervisor in the NRC Region III Office in Arlington, Texas, is the appropriate witness because he is directly involved with those activities.
In addition, I do not wish to distract Mr. Peck from his important duties at the plant.
Given that Mr. Pruett is available and is an appropriate witness to discuss the inspection programs that are at issue in the case, I find that the need for Mr. Pecks testimony does not outweigh the disruption that the testimony would cause to the NRCs regulatory programs at the Diablo Canyon facility.
I understand that my decision permitting Mr. Pruett to testify was communicated to you, that you agreed that Mr. Pruett was an acceptable substitute for Mr. Peck, and that you served a replacement subpoena on Mr. Pruett that was accepted by this Office. I am also advised that you recently withdrew your request because subsequent developments in the case made Mr.
Pruetts testimony unnecessary.
2 Accordingly, this office considers your request to have been fulfilled and that NRC File No. TR-10-01 is now closed.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Stephen G. Burns General Counsel
2 Accordingly, this office considers your request to have been fulfilled and that NRC File No. TR-10-01 is now closed.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Stephen G. Burns General Counsel Distribution:
S. Burns Chron C. Mullins J. Cordes ML101450254 Office:
C. Mullins J. Cordes S. Burns Date:
5/ 21/10 5/24/10 5/ 24/10 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY