ML19305B582

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Motion to Quash Tx Utils Generating Co 800221 Subpoena Directed to R Frame of Transcomm,Inc,Consultant of Nrc.Work of non-testifying Outside Consultants Is Not Discoverable Per ASLB 790416 & 0507 Orders.Proposed Order Encl
ML19305B582
Person / Time
Site: Comanche Peak, South Texas  Luminant icon.png
Issue date: 03/11/1980
From: Blume M, Chanania F, Hodgdon A
NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD)
To:
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
NUDOCS 8003190919
Download: ML19305B582 (5)


Text

.?

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY

)

NRC Docket Nos. 50-489A PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD OF SAN ANTONIO

)

50-499A CITY OF AUSTIN

)

CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY

)

(South Texas Project, Unit Nos.

)

1 and 2)

TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING

)

NRC Docket Nos. 50-445A

~

COMPANY, et al.

)

50-446A (Comanche Peak Steam Electric

)

Station, Units 1 and 2)

)

NRC STAFF MOTION T0 QUASH SUBP0ENA 0F MR. RODNEY FRAME The NRC Staff moves, pursuant to 10 CFR ! 2.720(f), to quash the subpoena for Mr. Rodney Frame of Transcomm, Inc., a consultant to the NRC Staff. The subpoena was issued on February 21, 1980 upon application of Texas Utilities Generating Company ("TUGC0"), and calls for the production of documents and testimony on deposition by Mr. Frame.

Transcomm, Inc. is under contract with the NRC Staff to provide economic assistance in the South Texas and Comanche Peak proceedings. Transcomm, Inc. is the _ employer of both Mr. Frame, a non-testifying outside consultant to the NRC Staff, and Dr.' Nonnan Lerner, the HRC Staff's designated expert economic witness.

In response to a multiplicity of discovery requests (interrogatories, requests for document production, and a subpoena to the Keeper of Records of Transcomm, Inc.), the NRC Staff has made available to both TUGC0 and HL&P all the information which Dr. Lerner, as Staff's j

fj/)

8003190

expert, has seen, reviewed, and may rely upon for his testimony in the above-captioned proceedings, based upon present knowledge and infonnation.

In connection with the_ HL&P subpoena directed to the Keeper of Records for Transcomm, Inc., the NRC Staff made it clear that Houston was entitled to discovery of only those documents seen, reviewed, or to be relied upon by Dr. Lerner in the formulation of his testimony. See NRC Staff's Motion to Modify Subpoena, dated February 25, 1980. The Board's Orders are also clear as to the status of non-testifying outside consultants:

they are not subject to the discovery process. Dr. Lerner, to the extent that he has relied upon work of Mr. Frame, has produced those documents, been deposed once already, and is presently scheduled for deposition on March 17-18, 1980, at which time he can be questioned on the bases for his conclusions.

In addition, Dr. Lerner has, through Staff counsel, turned over or made available to counsel for TV and HL&P all documents upon which he has relied or upon which it is his present intention to rely in the course of developing his testimony in these proceedings.

The NRC Staff, under its contract with Transcomm, Inc., has the opportunity to use, and has used, Mr. Frame as a non-testifying outside consultant. The Board's Orders of-April 16,1979, May 7,1979, and October 25, 1979, make it clear that the work of non-testifying outside consultants is not discoverable in this proceeding.

The Board Orders referenced above also make it clear that the Board's rulings on discovery of expert witnesses extend to both oral and written communications which they may have had with counsel and other parties, ostensibly so that the bases of the formulation of their

exp rt opinions on the issues in these proceedings may be discovered. As stated above, the Staff has followed this practice with regard to Dr. Lerner's infomation flow, and there is no reason that Houston and TUGC0 cannot discover the sources of Dr. Lerner's expert opinions directly from Dr. Lerner.

The deposition of Mr. Lerner would have the effect of diluting the protection normally afforded the work product of consultants used to assist counsel in preparation for litigation.

Under these circumstances, the NRC Staff hereby moves the Licensing Board to quash the subpoena of Rodney Frame, issued on February 21, 1980 upon applica-tion of counsel for TUGC0. The Staff further requests that the Board resolve this matter expeditiously, since the present discovery schedule and obliga-tions of counsel for the month of March are extraordinarily heavy. Attached is a proposed Order containing the schedule suggested by the NRC Staff for resolution of this matter.

Respectfully submitted, hM b. Y::sm Fredric D. Chanania Counsel for NRC Staff Michael B. Blume Counsel for NRC Staff 0

futAL o

9 Ann Hodgdon y

Counsel for NRC Staff Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this llth day of March,1980.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of

)

)

HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY

)

Docket Nos. 50-498A et al.

)

50-499A

)

(South Texas Project, Units 1

)

-and 2).

)

)

TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY Docket Nos. 50-445A et al.

)

50-446A

)

(Comanche Peak Steam Electric

)

. Station, Units 1 and 2)

)

ORDER REGARDING RESPONSES TO NRC STAFF MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA 0F MR. RODNEY FRAME On March 11, 1980, the NRC Staff filed its Motion to Quash the Subpoena of Mr. Rodney Frame of Transcomm, Inc., issued on February 21, 1980, upon application of Texas Utilities Generating Company ("TUGC0"). Copies of that Motion were hand-delivered to TUGC0 on that date.

The Board finds that the NRC Staff has stated good cause for a modification of the schedule to respond to its Motion. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 52.711(a), the Board orders that the following schedule be adopted:

March 14, 1980, Responses hand-delivered to the Board by 11:00 a.m.

and the NRC Staff by TUGC0 (and any other responding party).

March 14,1980 Conference call to resolve issues at 3:00 p.m.

raised by the NRC Staff's Motion.

s

-2

-Counsel:for the NRC Staff will be responsible for arranging the conference call 4

between the Board..TUGCO, any other party responding to the Motion, and itself.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

1 FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Dated at Bethesda, Maryland March

, 1980 4

4 N

1 4

(

0

.-,-n=,

--+-e---,--