ML17339A523
| ML17339A523 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 01/22/1980 |
| From: | Bowers E Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | Oncavage M ONCAVAGE, M. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8002060366 | |
| Download: ML17339A523 (8) | |
Text
gO
@Q QCI gc)M a
~%<~ pic+
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Elizabeth S.
- Bowers, Chairman Dr.
Emmeth A. Luebke Dr. Oscar H.. Paris 1/22/80 In the Matter of FLORIDA POKER AND LIGHT COMPANY (Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Units Nos.
3 and 4)
Docket Nos.
50-250 50-251 (Proposed Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses to Permit Steam Generator Repair)
ORDER RELATIVE TO THE NRC STAFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY On December 27,. 1979, the NRC Staff filed a motion to compel discovery on Intervenor. Mark P.
Oncavage.
A response to the motion was due within ten (10) days or January 7,
- 1980, in accordance with 10 CFR 5 2.730(c).
No response was received.
Florida Power and Light (FPL) responded to the Staff's motion on January 9,
1980.
The Staff's motion was based on its interrogatories and a request for the production of documents filed on September 14,
- 1979, and supplemented on October 4, 1979.
After being granted a time extension, the Intervenor filed his response on December 17, 1979.
The Intervenor failed to respond to some interrogatories and raised objections to others.
The interrogatories were seeking an explanation from the Intervenor as to why he thinks the FPL's Steam Generator Repair Report (SGRR), the NRC Staff's Safety
. 8002060
Evaluation
.(SE) and Environmental Impact Appraisal (EIA) ax e deficient.
The Intervenor responded by identifying sections in the documents that he claimed were deficient but refused to C
state the bases for these claims on the grounds "that the request calls for trial preparation materials, opinions and analysis made in anticipation of the hearings without any special showing of substantial need as required by 10 CFR 5 2.740(b)(2)."
This response or a similar response was given to Interrogatories 1-5, 1-10,,2-5, 3-5, 6-5, 9-5, 11-5, 13-5 and 14-5.
In addition 1-10 is referred to as "argumentative".
The Staff is entitled to know the reasons why the contentions were drafted and submitted.
What was the basis for the allegation that the documents were deficient?
Simply citing numerous sec-tions of the documents is not responsive.
The interrogatories are not seeking trial strategy information but the bases for the submittal of the contentions.
The above-enumerated inter-rogatories are proper and Intervenor is directed to answer them.
Considering this determination on the merits of the inter-rogatories, we need not reach the question of Intervenor's failure to request a protective order since the Staff prevailed in this matter.
The Intervenor ignored Interrogatories 4-1 through 4-12, and 5-1. through 5-10.
The Intervenor is directed to respond to these interrogatories to the best of his ability.
The Staff included Interrogatory 7-5 with the other inter-rogatories Intervenor declined to answer on the basis of "trial
il
preparation material" etc., but the Intervenor's response is not in that categaory.
The response was:
"7-5.
The
- SGRR, SER, and EIA are inadequate since in the SGRR and EIA there is no mention of installation of a Condensate Polisher Demineralizer System andthe reference in the SER,consists of a one sentence mention of the system with no analysis of its effects,
- costs, or details of the system and its installation."
The Board has determined that this is an adequate response and Intervenor has answered the question.
The.motion to compel.is granted for Interrogatories 1-5, 1-10, 2-5, 3-5, 6-5, 9-5, 11-5, 13-5, 14-5, 4-1 through 4-12, and 5-1 through 5-10, but not for 7-5.
The answers should be served not later than ten (10) days after receipt of this order.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Elizabeth S. Bowers, Chairman Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 22nd day of January 1980.
0
c 1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION B'efore the Atomic Safet andi:censin Boar Elizabeth S.
- Bowers, Chairman Dr. Oscar H. Paris, Member Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke, Member oo~ +ac u~
gqV 0
~"
/J f.c~y6o~4 In the Matter of
)
)
FLORIDA POWER 6 LIGHT COMPANY
)
)
(Turkey'Point Nuclear Generating,
)
Units 3 and 4)-- '
Docket Nos.
50-250-SP 50-251-SP (Proposed Amendments to Facili;ty Operating License to Permit Steam Generator Repairs)
ORDER RELATING TO LICENSEE'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION 'OF TIME On December 17, 1979, Licensee filed a document entitled I
"Licensee's Responses and Objections to Interrogatories to, and Request for the Production of Documents from Licensee, Florida Power and Light Company".
In a response filed the same day, the Intervenor requested that, the Board compel Licensee to answer cer-tain interrogatories to which Licensee had objected.
On December 21, 1979, Licensee filed a motion advising that it wished to respond to Intervenor's December 17 filing and requesting, an extension of time in which to respond, to January 14, 1979.
Licensee said that it planned to withdraw some of its objections, but its determination of which objections to withdraw would require recommendations from technical personnel who would not be available during the upcoming holid'ay season.
Licensee represented that counsel for Intervenor stated that he had no objection to the extension of time, and counsel for the NRC Staff likewise has stated that he does not object.
For good cause
- shown, and there having been no objections, Licensee '- motion is quarante.d.
IT IS SO ORDERED FOR THE ATOMIC'AFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
( %ca ~ lA
<, (~~,)
~A FOR: ]H:czar.t'ai 8'. Bowers, C hz.~In Dated in Bethesda,
- Maryland, this 21st day of December,.
19~79.