ML19259B170
| ML19259B170 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Black Fox |
| Issue date: | 01/05/1979 |
| From: | Wolfe S Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7901170006 | |
| Download: ML19259B170 (7) | |
Text
..
a fi 1 e.
m J.
~
...,: 1 t.u.n.
/
~
,r>
st?
.L; o.y sw.-
N O/
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA i'
0; 6' ~
h, l - ',
\\,.. "M e T,cI C
\\>$@ jp NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
e
'o
's JI j g4 I'l THE MATTER OF
)
)
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF
)
Docket Nos.
OKLAHOMA, ASSOCIATED ELECTRIC
)
Sri 50-556 COOPERATIVE, INC., and
)
ST'I 50-557 WESTERN FARMERS ELECTRIC
)
CCOPERATIVE, INC.
)
)
(Black Fox Stations,
)
Units 1 and 2)
)
PROTECTIVE ORDER on October 13, 1978 this Board issued a subpcena duces tecu= to the General Electric Cc=pany (GE), the reactor manufactu-er for Black Fox Station Units 1 and 2, directing GE cc produce the Nuclear Reacecr Study regarding GE's 32 Nuclear Ste2= Supply Syste= (NSSS) which had been prepared under the direction and supervision of Dr. Charles Reed in 1975 ("The Reed Repor:")
GE appeared specially and coved :o quash this subpoena on Oc:ober 30, 1973, asserting, inter alia, tha: the subpoena was unti=ely and everly broad and tha: production cf :he report could resul; in cc=petitive har= to GE because che repor contained confidential cen=er-cial information.
The Applicants and Interrencrs filed responses to :his no:icn on Neve='oer 7, 1973 and the 'IRC Staff responded en Nevancer 9, 1973.
The 3 card heard cral 7 9 0117 0 0 og
-2 argument on GE's motion to quash on December 13, 1978 in Tulsa, Oklahoma.
In response to a suggestion made by the Board during the course of this oral argument, shortly thereafter GE resumed negotiations with the other parties to this pro-ceeding in an attempt to reach a settlement agreement with respect to the production of the Reed Report.
In a conference call among counsel for all parties and the members of the Board on January 2, 1979, GE, in order to avoid the poasibility of protracted litigation on this issue, made an offer of settle-ment regarding the production of this report.
This offer of settlement was formalized in GE's letter of the same date to the Board and all parties.
Under the basic terms of this settlement, GE offered to:
- 1) make the entire Reed Report available to the Board in confidence, 2) prepare a verbatim extraction of the Report in-sofar as it relates to intervenor's contentions and Board ques-tions and make this extraction available to counsel for all parties cubj ect to a protective agreement, and 3) make the Reed Report available to counsel, again subj ect to a protective agreement, for the purposes of evaluating the faithfulness of this extraction.
Moreover, GE also offered to consult with counsel and, if necessary, seek rulings from the 3 card in order to resolve any disputes over the fai:hfulness of GE's extraction of the report.
GE also offered ec extract and make available to
-4 NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to 10 CFR S 2.720(f) and 2.740(c),
1.
IT IS HERE3Y ORDERED that since a rational basis exists to treat as confidential the Nuclear Reactor Study prepared under the direction and supervision of Dr.
Charles Reed of the General Electric Company in 1975 ("The Reed Report") and there are no countervailing considerations militating in favor of public disclosure of this report which clearly outweigh the potential harm to the General Electric Company which might arise from such disclosure, the scope of discovery of said report shall be limited to protect against disclosure of the infornation contained in the report to the general public.
2.
IT IS HERE3Y FURTHER ORDERED that, subject to paragraphs 3 and 4 of this Order, those portions of the Reed Report, whien are relevant to Intervenor Citizen's Action For Safe Energy's contentions and Board questions or otherwise necessary for consideration in this proceeding in accordance with the procedure specified in paragraph 3 of this Order, shall be produced.
3.
IT IS HERE3Y FURTHER ORDERED that the discovery granted herein be conditioned as follows:
-3 counsel and consultants for all parties, again subj ect to a protective agreement, these and any other portions of the Reed Report which the Board determined to be necessary for consideration in this proceeding.
The Board was advised during the conference call that the parties were in agreement on all aspects of the GE offer of settlement except one; namely, whether the entire Reed Report should be made available to counsel for the sole purpose of evaluating GE's extraction of the report with re-spect to the existing intervenor contentions and Board ques-tions and other matters which the Board determined to be neces-sary for consideration (the view expressed by counsel for GE, the Applicants, and the NRC Staff) or whether the report should also be made available to counsel for the purpose of enabling counsel to independently propose additional =atters to the Board for consideration in this proceeding (the view expressed by counsel for intervenors).
Upon consideration of the views expressed by counsel for all parties, the Board concluded that the entire report should be cade available only for the former purpose and so ruled.
Subj ect to that ruling, the 3 card finds the proposed offer of settlement to be entirely reasonable and acceptable and adopts it without change, thereby rendering noot GE's motion to quash the subpoena.
-5 a.
GE will =ake the Reed Report and the related Sub-Task Force Reports avail-able to the Board in confidence.
b.
GE will prepare a verbatin extraction of the Reed Report and the related Sub-Task Force Reports, insofar as those documents relate to the intervenor's contentions and Board cuestions in the Black Fox proceedings, and will =ake it available to counsel subj ect to the provisions of this Order and the protective agreement containec in Attachment A hereto.
c.
GE will =ake the Reed Report and the re-laced Sub-Task Force Reports available to counsel subj ect to the provisions of this Order an~d the protective agree =en:
con:ained in A :achnen: 3 here:c for the purpose of evalua:ing the fai:hfulness of GE's verSatis extraction.
d.
Upon review by counsel, GE will consult with counsal for all parties in an at:e:p:
to resolve any disputes concerning the faithfulness of extraction, and failing resciution on any ma::er or matters, counsel
-6 will participate in oral argument in camera before the Board in order to obtain Board rulings resolving any dis-puted matters.
e.
In the event that the Board's review cf the Reed Report and the related Sub-Task Force Reports raises any additional catters beyond the existing intervenor contentions and Board cuestions which the Board determines to be necessary for consideration in these proceedings, GE will =ake available to counsel, subjec:
to the provisions of this Order and the protective agreement contained in A::ach-ment 3 hereto, a verbatic extraccion of those docu=ents insofar as they rela e :o any such additional na::ers.
The parties will undertake the steps identified in sub-paragraphs c. and d. above in regard to tha =acters identified in sub-paragraph e.
f.
GE will nake portions of the verbatic ex-tractions of the Reed Report and related Sub-Task Force Reports ul:'~nnely resul ing from Board rulings or agreements of counsel
-7 in accordance with sub-paragraphs
- d. and e. above available to consul-tants for the parties subj ect to the provisions of this Order and the pro-tective agreement contained in Attach-ment A hereto.
4.
IT IS HERE3Y FURTdER ORDERED that in the event Intervenors need to utilire any of the infor=ation discovered pursuant to this protective order during the evidenciary hearing in this proceeding, the information'shall only be dis-closed M camera under the conditions set forth in paracrac.h C
3 hereof and the protective agreements attached hereto and the transcript of such portion of the evidenzian hearing shall be sealed.
FOR THE ATCMIC SAFETf AND LICENSING 30ARD
$2L!sn 0W Sheldon J.
.volfe, Esc,uire Chairman Dated a: Bethesda, Marvland this 5th day of January 1979
,