ML16340A816
| ML16340A816 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 02/25/1980 |
| From: | Bishop C NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| ALAB-580, NUDOCS 8003040315 | |
| Download: ML16340A816 (16) | |
Text
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION~
I ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD Richard S. Salzman, Chairman Dr. N. Reed Johnson Thomas S.
Moore
)
In the Matter of
)
)
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
)
)
(Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant,
)
Units 1 and 2)
)
)
cj,4 (p
~ eP g+@0% Ql P gi.
Docket Nos.
50-275 OL 50-323 OL FIRST PREHEARING'ONFERENCE
'ORDER February 25, 1980 On February 15,
- 1980, we held in ALAB-580 that we would hold a hearing to consider
'de novo the question of the adequacy of the Diablo Canyon security plan and that the intervenor would be permitted to participate in that proceeding.
In mov-ing toward this end, a
rehearin conference will be held on 3rd 1980 at. 9:30 A.M. at, the Old County 'Courthouse, Room 2
De artment.
No.
3 Palm and.Osos
- Streets, San Luis -Obispo, "1 "9-<
I facilities, this 'date is final; )
Among other things, we 'intend at
~w
~ A It
that time to apprise the parties of. our own questions about some of the operative details of the security plan.
For this rea-son (among others),
the conference necessarily must be closed to the general public.
Only the attorneys for the staff, the applicant and the intervenor (upon executing suitable non-disclosure affidavits and subject to a protective order) may attend.
To expedite matters, we first outline the procedures we contemplate following and request that the parties respond by written memorandum to be in our hands no 1'at'er 'than March 24, 1980, with any additional suggestions.
In order that the prehearing conference may be most beneficial,
- however, the matters set forth in items IIB; 'IIC(1); IIC(2); IIC(3) and IID(l) are firm and must be done immediately.
Accordingly, we order the'arties to file the appropriate documents or take the prescribed action by the dates set forth.
Several matters deserve preliminary mention. 'irst, as we stated in Florida Power 6 Light Co.
(St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 2), ALAB-543, 9
NRC 626, 628, fn.
5 (1979),
"[w]henever we conduct a hearing as part of our appel-late review function, we must fashion time periods and procedures for discovery different from those contemplated by the Rules of
- Practice, which are structured in terms of licensing board hear-ings";
we will do so here.
- Second, the principles laid down
4
earlier in this proceeding in ALAB-410, 5
NRC 1398 (1977),
are the law of the case and control the security proceeding.
Third, we reiterate the importance of conducting the security hearing with dispatch:
requests for extensions of time or postponements will be viewed with disfavor; unexcused delays-will not be permitted.
Finally, we urge all parties to co-operate with one another in exchanging information and testi-mony and in scheduling and.conducting such limited discovery I
as is permitted in 'order to eliminate the delays inherent in obtaining formal rulings from this Board.
Subject to the foregoing comments, the following instruc-tions shall govern this proceeding:
A.
Parties.
The only parties to the security plan hearing are:
(1) the applicant, Pacific Gas and Electric Company; (2) the in-
- tervenor, San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace (SLOMFP);
and (3) the staff of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
B.
Counsel.
Whether or not counsel have formally done so before, all counsel for each party shall file by March'4,
- 1980, a
notice of appearance with the Secretary of this Board containing
the information specified in 10 C.F.R. 52.713'(a) of the NRC Rules of Practice.
Nhere any party is represented by more J
than one attorney, one of them shall be designated "lead counsel" on the appearance form.
That, counsel shall be principally responsible for the conduct of the proceeding on behalf of that party.
Except upon a timely advance motion filed with this Board, there will 'be no substitutions of counsel or changes'f
.lea'd counsel':'.
Protect'ive Ord'er'A'ffi'davit'f"Non'-'di'scl'o'sure; Rel'ease of'ecurity Plan 'In'format'i'on.
(1)
The physical security plan and information regard-ing it is confidential information within the meaning of the Commission's regulations, 10 C.F.R. 12.790(d).
As such, it may not be released to intervenor's counsel or witnesses until they have executed an appropriate affidavit of non-disclosure that we have approved by incorporation into a protective order.
The staff shall, after consulting with the other parties, take the lead in drawing up such an agreement and order.
The staff shall then file the proposed agreement and order in time k6 have I
it in our hands b
March 24
'1980.
Intervenor's counsel should be prepared to. execute
.su'ch documents at 'the prehearing conference.
ln this regard, we call to the;parties'ttention (and paren-thet'ically. note the appropriatenes's of many of the 'provisions of~)~
the protect'ive order'et forth 'in our opinion.in Ka'nsas
Ga's
'and Elect'ric:Comp'an'and'an'sas City Power andi ht Company (Wolf Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Unit No. 1),
ALAB-307, 3
NRC 17, 18 fn.
2 (1976).
The security plan (and our own concerns regarding the adequacy of certain of its de-tails) will not be. released to individuals or counsel (other C
than to counsel for the applicant and the staff). who have not exe-cuted an appropriate affidavit and who are not subject to a protective order.
(2)
The law presumes that counsel will abide by their oaths and comply with protective orders.
Therefore, if any party has reason to believe that any counsel is not likely to abide by the terms. of a protective order., it shall bring the information upon which its belief is founded to our attention at the prehearing conference in a written motion to exclude that. individual
. from the hearing and from receiving the de-tails of the security plan.:
See ALAB-410, 5
NRC at, 1406.
(3)
Applicant and staff should immediately prepare a
"sanitized" version of the security plan "together with a general description of the types of information omitted from each section of the plan from which information has been de-letedg ALAB 410I 5
NRC at 1405-06, so that interven-or's counsel will have access to that plan ('at the'ocation
6 specified in the.protective order) fol'1'owing the'rehearing conference.
(But see instruction C(l).)
The sanitized version of the plan should be tailored to the latest version of intervenor's contentions previously accepted by the Licensing Board.
(4)
After intervenor's counsel has had an opportunity It to study the sanitized version of the security plan, inter-venor shall, no later than April 16,
- 1980, amend its security plan contentions to set forth with detailed particularity the exact aspects of the plan intervenor challenges.
Intervenor shall file its amended contentions under seal as may be directed in the Second Prehearing Conference Order.
D.
Witness'istsand Witn'ess Qu'alifications.
(1)
All parties shall file and serve so that it is in our hands by March 24,
- 1980, a list of their proposed witnesses.
For each person expected to be called, there shall be included with the witness list (a) a statement of his educational background, experience, publications and any other information establishing the foundation for his testimonial qualifications and, if appropriate, his expertise, and (b) a statement of the subject matter on which the person t
is expected to testify.
0
(2)
Discovery by any party concerning the qualifications of any proffered expert witness must be completed by April 23, 1980.
Therefore, an art seekina...discovery of a proffered expert's qualifications shall be prepared to establish a
schedule for such depositions at the prehearing conference.
Any objections to the qualifications of any proffered witnesses must be filed and served by May 7, 1980.
Similarly, any objections (and supporting information) that any parties'it-nesses are not likely to abide by the terms of an affidavit of non-disclosure and a-protective order must be filed by the same date.
All parties'irect testimony shall be filed within two weeks of the date of our ruling on those objections.
If no objections are made to the qualifications of intervenor's prof-fered witnesses, all parties'irect testimony shall be filed and served by May 21',
1980.
No discovery other than that permitted by item IID(2) will be permitted.
F.
Hearing.
A hearing in camera on the adequacy of the security plan will begin sometime during the week of June 15, 1980 at a time and place to be announced.
A.
We have attempted to anticipate as many contingencies as possible in the foregoing list but we realize that we may
, not have touched on all of them. 'n order to be able to enter r
a further. prehearing conference order.as soon as. possible after the conference, we again request that the parties have in our hands no later th'an March 24, l980, their proposed additions or modifications to the schedule and procedures set forth l
above.
We strongly encourage counsel to cooperate in this expedited process and to reach reasonable agreements on these matters.
A negotiated solution to procedural problems is almost always better than an imposed one.
B.
In conclusion, we repeat that the matters set forth above in items IIB; IIC(l); IIC(2); IIC(3) and IID(l) are firm and are to be carried out in accordance with the schedules specified.
It is so ORDERED.
FOR THE APPEAL BOARD C. J an Bz.s op Seer tary to the Appeal Board