ML19256G289

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Orders Extension Until 800127 for J Doherty to Serve Interrogatories on Nrc.Interrogatories Must Be Generated from NRC 791206 Responses to Four Sets of Interrogatories Re Doherty Contentions 3 & 5-9
ML19256G289
Person / Time
Site: Allens Creek File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png
Issue date: 12/19/1979
From: Wolfe S
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To: Doherty J
AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
References
NUDOCS 7912280662
Download: ML19256G289 (3)


Text

y t% I y NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[j g \\S10 yL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA g

THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 5

E a

In the Matter of HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER COMPANY Docket No. 50-466 CP (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating

)

Station, Unit 1)

)

ORDER (December 19, 1979) 1.

On December 3,1979, Mr. John Doherty, an intervening party, filed a Motion To Compel Answers From Staff To Interrogatories Dated May 25, July 17, July 31 and June 6,1979. On December 10, 1979, the Staff opposed the instant motion in that its responses to the interrogatories had been filed on December 6,1979.

In a letter dated December 15,.1979, conceding error, Mr. Doherty requested leave to withdraw his Motion. The request is granted.

~

2.

On December 3, 1979, Mr. Doherty filed, in effect a Motion For Exten-sion Of Time. Therein, he requested an extencion of time from December 6, 1979 (the due date for the completion of discovery prescribed on October 19, 1979, during the special prehearing conference at transcript page 1623) to January 27, 1980, within which to complete discovery via the serving of inter-rogatories upon the Staff and Applicant regarding his Contentions 3, 5, 6 7,

8 and 9.

In responses of December 11 and December 17, 1979, theApplicant;Thd Staff respectively opposed the granting of the instant mothn.

We note that Mr. Doherty's Contention 8 was admitted in the Order dated March 15, 1979, that his Contentions 3, 5, 6, and T were admitted in the Order dated April ll,1979, and that his contention 9 was. admitted in the Order dated' 1650 331 7

7912g8p c__.

6.

May 3, 1979.

Each Order directed the parties to initiate discovery procedures imediately.

Further we note that, during the special prehearing conference, the Board observed that enough time had passed to enable the parties to have made sufficient and substantial headway toward completion of discovery and that requests for extensions of time to complete discovery upon the older con-tentions would not be granted unless there was a showing of very good cause.

In support of his request, Mr. Doherty asserts that (1) the Staff had not timely answered four sets of interrogatories, and that these answers when filed will occasion the submission of additional interrogatories, (2) he has requested both Staff and Applicant on December 3, 1979 to produce documents, and that production will occasion the submission of additional, follow-up interrogatories, and that (3) he will be preoccupied in taking examinations between December 8 and December 19, 1979. The second and third reasons do not show good cause - at most said reasons evidence that he has been less than diligent in scheduling discovery in order to comply with the Board's orders.

However, the first reason does evidence good cause for granting the extension of time for the serving of interrogatories only upon the Staff. While we appreciate the pressures under which the Staff has been laboring since the Three Mile Island accident and that it has been responding informally to Mr.

Doherty's discovery requests (rather than requiring compliance with 5 2.720 (h)(2)(1) and (ii)), the fact is that Staff did not respond to Mr. Doherty's four sets of interrogatories (one set of which had been served as early as May 25,1979) until December 6, 1979.

Accordingly we partially grant Mr. Doherty's motion for an extension of time. He shall have until January 27, 1980 within which to serve written 1650 332

~

~

3-interrogatories upon the Staff only. These interrogatories on their face must clearly show that they were specifically generated by the Staff's December 6,1979 responses te the aforementioned four sets of interrogatories and relate only to Doherty Contentions 3, 5, 6, 7, 8.and 9.

No further exten-sions of time will be granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD hed.4 %

Sheldon J. W61fe, Esquire Chairman Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 19th day of December, 1979.

0 1650 333