ML19262C076
| ML19262C076 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/16/1980 |
| From: | Mark Miller Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| PROJECT-564M NUDOCS 8001280249 | |
| Download: ML19262C076 (2) | |
Text
- \\' *
- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA c
th NUCIFAR REGULNIORY COMMISSION O
OM..n
)\\
-3
.q Q.?
L THE ATCHIC SAFELY AND LICENSING BOARD L
j g# #tt hO# [p/
Marshall E. Miller, Esquire, Chairman g'
t Sheldon J. Wolfe, Esquire, Member G
Seymour Wenner, Esquire, Member
~ 2L '
~
In the Matter of
)
)
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECD C COMPANY
)
Docket No. P-564A
)
(Stanislaus Nuclear Project,
)
Unit 1)
)
ORDER DENYING NCPA FMION FOR RECONSIDERATION OR FDDIFICATION OF ORDER OF NOVEMBER 1,1979 (January 16, 1980) e By Order dated November 1,1979, the Board directed the Northern California Power Agency and its members (NCPA) to permit representatives of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to conduct a preliminary inspection of the filing arrangements of NCPA member cities and a cooperative, and to " green dot" file folders located in the central files of relevant departments other than law departments. A motion for reconsideration or modification of this order dated November 9,1979,wasfiledbyNCFA.E IC&E was granted leave to file its opposition to this motion and tbn opposition was filed as of December 5, 1979.
We have examined the moticn for reconsideration or nodification of our Order of Noverber 1,1979, and decline to grant it. Although there may be some ambiguities in the stipulation concerning production of documents dated April 26, 1978, that stipulation did establish a " green dotting" procedure for the central files of PG&E which was followed in connection with many thousand documents. That stipulation also provided that " comparable procedures which U opies of this mtion were apparently subject to. vagaries of the U. S. mails, C
as scoe copies were not received until nuch later and at least one copy was not received at all. Of course, this.does not affect tha merits of the motion.
1816 011 soomo 249 are substantively similar will be agreed to for the production of documents frcxn the files of the NCPA, its Iranber cities... (Stipulation, p. 6).
The statement in the stipulation that comparable procedures "will be" agreed to concerning NCPA documents is not the same as the language NCPA now urges in its tretion for reconsidem..
1 -- namely, "could be" agreed to (Motion for reconsi-deration, p. 3, footnote 1). W do not construe this language to give NCPA a unilateral option as to the use of green dotting of its members' files.
NCPA has apparently exa:nined the files of approximately half of its members and tenders the docunents thus obtained as a complete response to the requested docunent production. However, we cannot hold that this is necessarily comparable with or substantively similar to the green dotting procedure followed as to PG&E central files. There is even controversy whether PG&E has been granted a preliminary inspection of NCPA's filing arrangements, even though it is undisputed that under the stipulation, PG&E reserved "the right to a preliminary inspection of [NCPA's] filing arrangenents..." (Stipulation, p. 6).
Fairness requires that the parties follow essentially the same rules in discovery. Accordingly, as to the central files of NCPA's members, PG&E shall forthwith be given a reasonable opportunity to make a preliminary inspection of their filing arrangements.
If the parties cannot agree that the available document production by NCPA is comocrable with or substantially similar to the prior green dotting procedure (and we encourage reasonable efforts to avoid unnecessary duplication), then PG&E shall have the right to ecumence the green h dotting process within 14 days thereafter.
'D It is so ordered.
N FOR THE A'ImIC SAFEIY AND D
LICENSING B(MFD
,e
)
- 1. d k ?, 1-p.
L Marshall E. Miller, Cbnirnnn Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 16th day of January 1980.