ML19305E204
| ML19305E204 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 04/11/1980 |
| From: | Smith I Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | METROPOLITAN EDISON CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8004230115 | |
| Download: ML19305E204 (3) | |
Text
/ (_
Bd 4/11/80 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ca
~
f 4
DOCKETED ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD O!
ustmc 3'
Ivan W. Smith, Chairman APR 111980 > :-
Dr. Walter H. Jordan 6-Omce cf the Sumhn iI Dr. Linda W. Little Dcddint & knice 8*'h g
g N
16 In the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-289
)
(Restart)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear
)
Station, Unit No. 1)
)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON LICENSEE'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY OF TMIA Licensee served Licensee's First Set of Interrogato;ies to Intervenor Three Mile Island Alert, Inc. on January 14, 1980.
The original date for response would have been February 4, 1980, but the board extended until March 17 the time for all parties to respond to discovery requests.
The intervenor, Three Mile Island Alert, Inc. (TMIA) filed no responses.
Under 10 CFR 2.740(f), licensee served its motion to compel discovery on March 24.
TMIA has not answered the licensee's motion to compel discovery.-1/
r The board has examined licensee's interrogatories to TMIA and has compared them to TMIA's contentions.
The interrogatories are relevent to the proceeding and are reasonably calculated to l
1ead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
8004230l $
-1/
By a memorandum and order dated March 19, 1980, the board shortened the time to answer motions to compel discovery to five days following service of the motion.
Under 10 CFR 2.730(c), TMIA would have had ten days following the service of the motion to answer it.
TMIA is in default under both the board's order and under the-provisions of 10 CFR 2.730(c).
See 10 CFR 2.707.
. (b) (1).
If licensee is to prepare carefully to litigate the allegations contained in TMIA's contentions, responses to the interrogatories are very desirable, perhaps essential.
However, there is one aspect of the interrogatories which the board, on its own, modifies in the interest of lightening TMIA's response burden.
With respect to many statements (also
" inadequacies", " allegations", " estimates", " occasions", etc.)
appearing in TNIA's contentions, licensee seeks the identity of all documents and persons having information relating to the statement.
We believe that the purposes of licensee's discovery efforts can as well be served if inquiries such as these are limited to documents and persont having information relied upon by TMIA in support of the statt. ment (or " inadequacy", "allega-tion", etc.).
Examples of interrogatories of this nature are:
1-7 e and d; l-9 e and d,1-10 e and d, and others in every contention category.-2/
-2/
The board similarly modified licensee's interrogatories to Environmental Coalition on Nuclear Power'(ECNP) in an order issued today.
Perhaps " modification" i's not the correct term for our actions which may be in fact a clarification of these questions if we read licensee's discovery purposcs correctly.
Licensee may promptly object to this modification.
e
3-With this modification, TMIA is directed to respond to L
Licensee's First Set of Interrogatories to Intervenor Three Mile Alert, Inc., dated January 14, 1980, within ten days following service of this order.
THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD i
f
/
}
..a,
,,, l<
- jti
,i Ivan W.
Smith, Chairman Bethesda, Maryland
~
April 11, 1980 j
t l
I l
I l
a e
i