ML19209A833
| ML19209A833 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png |
| Issue date: | 08/02/1979 |
| From: | Gray J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7910050458 | |
| Download: ML19209A833 (5) | |
Text
,\\y' pIMT,TC pegMT %
i 08/02/79 4
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
\\
In the Matter of
)
)
Docket No. 50-344 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, ET AL. )
(Control Building)
)
[-
(Trojan Nuclear Plant)
)
NRC STAFF'S RESPONSE TO LICENSEE'S MOTION TO DISMISS CONSOLIDATED INTERVENORS AS A PARTY I.
INTRODUCTION In a motion filed on July 13, 1979, the Licensee in the captioned proceeding requested that the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board dismiss Nina Bell and Consolidated Intervenors (Intervenor) from the proceeding for Intervenor's failure to fulfill its obligations with. regard to disecvery directed to it by the Licensee. The Licensee's motion is substantially similar to a Staff motion to dismiss Intervenor filed on July 12, 1979.
For the reasons set forth below, it is the Staff's view that Licensee's =otion should be granted.
II.
STAFF'S POSITION In the instant motion, Licensee recounts a pattern of continuous failure by Intervenor to fulfill its responsibilities with regard to discovery.
Inter-venor's actions this vein include responding to Licensee's interrogatories only after being c.epelled to do so by the Board as well as an outright failure
-1/ In the past in this proceeding, the Staff has generally not taken a position with regard to disputes involving discovery between other parties.
The Staff is taking a position with regard to the instant motion of the Licensee since that motion is based on essentially the same grounds as a similar Staff motion filed on July 12, 1979 because of Intervenor's continuing and potentially prejudicial failure to fulfill its discovery responsibilities.
1127 106 l
.6 7910050 i
s,.
. to respond to certain interregatories despite an explicit Board order, issued 5, 1979,2/ directing Intervenor to promptly submit responsive answers.
on June The Staff's July 12, 1979 motion to dismiss Intervenor indicates a similar pattern of failures to provide responsive answers to interrogatories and a to comply with an explicit Boar'd order compelling responses.3/
failure The facts set forth in the Licensee's motion to dismiss simply confirm the Staff's assertion in its motion to dismiss of July 12, 1979 that Inte rvenor has consistently neglected to fulfill its duties as a party to this proceeding.
Intervenor is now in default with regard to orders directing discovery responses on all but one of its admitted contentions.
Intervenor's refusal to provide, pursuant to lawful and reasonable discovery requests, information in support of its conclusory and unsubstantiated contentions is an unjustified hindrance to proper and adequate preparation for hearing by the other parties.
It is also a seeming challenge to the Licensing Board's authority in this pro-ceeding. As indicated in both the Licensee's and the Staff's motions to dismiss, the Licensing Board took pains to explain to Intervenor.its responsibilities with regard to discovery and the potential for sanctions in the event Intervenor failed to meet those responsibilites.
Despite those warnings, Intervenor has failed to fulfill its ob1.igations and should be dealt with accordingly.
In 2/
- Order Vacating Hearing Schedule, June 5, 1979, p.3.
E On June 15, 1979, the Licensing Board ordered Intervenors to promptly submit answers to Staff interrogatories on Intervenor's contentions 1, 4 and 11.
The Licensing Board's Order of June 5,1979 directed Inter-venor to submit responsive answers to Licensee's interrogatories on Intervenor's contentions 2, 3, 4/12, 5, 7, 11, and 20.
Intervenor has not complied with these orders and thus is in default with regard to discovery directed to all but one (contention 17) of Intervenor's admitted contentions (contention 1 has not been admitted but is to be accounted for in a security evaluation to be conducted by the Staff).
II27 i07
. the Staff's view, dismissal of Intervenor as a party to this proceeding as well as dismissal of Intervenor's admitted contentions would be both just and warranted.
III. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above and as more fully set forth in both the Licensee's and the Staff's motians to dismiss Intervenor Bell and the Consolidated Inter-venors, it is the Staff's position that the Licensee's motion to dismiss should be granted.
Respectfully submitted, lit.ttk T c 0 W % %
v Gil Joseph R. Gray Ccunsel for NRC Staff Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 2nd day of August, 1979 1127 108
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY CCMMISSION BEFORE THE ATCMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING SOARD In the Matter of
)
)
PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, ~ET AL. )
Docket Nos. 50-344
~ )
(Control Building)
(Trojan Nuclear Plant)
)
~
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF'S RESPONSE TO LICENSEE'S MOTION TO DISMISS CONSOLIDATED INTERVENORS AS A PARTY" in the above-captioned pro-ceeding have been served on the fallowing by deposit in the United States mail, first class, or, as indicated by an asterisk, through deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Co=::21ssion's internal mail system, this 2nd day of August, 1979:
Marshall E. Miller, Esq., Chairman
- Richard M. Sandvik, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Frank W. Ostrander, Jr.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccmmission Counsel for Oregon Dept. of Washington, CC 20556 Energy 500 Pacific Building Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom, Dean 520 S.W. Yamhill Division of Engineering, Portland, OR 97204 Architecture & Technology Oklahoma State University Maurice Axelrad, Esq.
Stillwater, OK 74074 Lowenstein, Newman, Reis, Axelrad & Toll Dr. Hugh C. Paxton Suite 1214 1229 41st Street 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Los Alamos,fCi 87544 Washington, DC 20036 Mr. John A. Kullberg Mr. David 3. McCoy 0.oute One 348 Hussey Lane Box 250Q Grants Pass, OR 9752C Sauvie Island, OR 97231 Ms. C. Gail Parson Mr. Eugene Rosolie 800 S.W. Green d6 Coalition for S fe Power Portland, OR 97206 215 SE 9th Avenue Portland, OR 97214 William W. Kinsey 1002 N.E. Holladay Ronald W. Johnson, Esq.
Portland, OR 97232 Corporate Attorney Portland General Electric Ms. Nina Bell Company 728 S.E. 26th 121 S.W. Salmon Street Portland, OR 97214 Portland, OR 97204 II27 109
. Dr. W. Reed Johnson
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel
- Board U.S. fluclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Washingto.,, DC 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Alan S. Rosenthal, Esq.*
Panel (5)*
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Board Washington, DC 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Docketing and Service Section (4)*
Office of the Secretary Dr. John H. Buck
- U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Washington, DC 20555 Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, DC 20555
./
I J
/
Stuart A. Treby Assistant Chief Hear'ng Counsel 1127 110 e