ML19331A833
| ML19331A833 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 11/01/1974 |
| From: | Jenny Murray, Olmstead W US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-SC, NUDOCS 8007230865 | |
| Download: ML19331A833 (4) | |
Text
.
1 90 D3 MSS:'cn
, g'I
.y, m
"Q)'o
.,3)
U.*lITED STATES OF Al: ERICA
..:)
,.,e, AT0!!IC E!!IRGY C0:711SSIO:1
- 1. 3
~
5.-
BEFORE THE ATO?!IC SAFETY N!D LICE:: Sit:G BOARD q.A
. 2,
s(f.
.e In the ftatter of
-)
Wi~ ~
/
^*
%'"7 Q '
)
Construction Permit C0:lSU'-1ERS FO'.!ER CD:-IPA:1Y
)
!!os. 81 -and 82
)
(Show Cause)
(ftidland Plant, Units 1 and 2)
)
STAFF'S RESPO::SE TO SAGI::All'S i;0 TIC:t FOR DISCOVERY I:: AID OF ORAL AC70."E;!T On October 22, 1974 Intervenor (Saginaw) moved this Board to order discovery of cactain Consumers Power Company and Cechtel docu. cats so that 'Saginaw will be able to preser.t adegrate oral argum:nt on llovember 18, 1974 on its notion for reconsideration or to reopen the record.
This new notion ;parently represents en ad;.1ission by Saginaw that the notion to reopen or reconsider is subject to suTr.ary denial without the aid o# discovery.E Sagincu nust demonstrate with seca particularity thitt discovery is likely to develop the basis for avoiding sur.Tary disposition-of its motion to reopan.E At this time Saginaw has failed to show that the items it seeks to discover will develop such a basis.
The show cause hearing is limited to the issues specified in the shou 4
cause order.
In this proceeding the issues are:
_ 1] In the itatter of Vermont Yankee iluclear Power Corporation, ALAB-133, RAI-73-7 at 524 (July 31,1973).
~
2/ Id.
fb 1
h g
s
4
[
2-(1) Uhether the licensee is implemen' ting its quality assurance
~ program in compliance with Commission regulations; and -
(2) Uhether there is a reasonable assuran.ce that such imple-mentaticn will continue throughout the construction proces's.
These issues relate to the itidland facility and not to the Palisades facility.
Saginaw has already been denied discovery of matters in-volving the Palisados facility during the course of this procccding and no shouing has acen made in the instant motion to warrant granting the rcqucst for documents relating to the Palisades facility.
Howeve,' Saginau not only sechs to discover the contracts and corre-spondence which are' the subject of the complaint. involving Palisades but also seeks. to discover centracts between Cachtel and Consumers regarding Midland.
Saginaw (.oes not explain why such contracts could not have been requested earlier in the course of this proceeding while the record was open.
A request. Saginaw cakes which could have merit is one for " correspondence if any, between Consumers and Bechtel (or any Cechtel affiliate) con-cerning the application to the flidland facility, if anv, of any of the allegations or underlying facts alleged or asserted in the complaint dealing uith the Palisades case..."
(emphasis added) But, by use of such terms as "if any" saginaw fails to establish with particularity 4
grounds for believing -the quality assurance program at Midland is not-continuing to comply with Commission regulations.
e e
4
%g
-.n
+- -. - -.,
~
Finally, it should be noted that, as the Co:=issicn stated in connectica with another of Saginaw's requests for reopening "It is almost'inevita';1e that particular facts raay change... betwecn the close of administrative hearirgs, final agency action, and judicial revieu.
If such chang-es
~
were to trigger rehearings, 'there wculd be little hope that the cdmin-istrative process could evcr ba censu: ated in an order th:t w uld not
~
be subject to reopening'." 3/
Respectfully submitted, Aj)
/-
(,U. W,.
%'...y
~:_,s_ L%.- z W :'{
Uilita= J. 01 cst:2d Counsel for AEC Regulatory Staff Q..,
-n,
/,
3 i
James P. - !Nrr.'y, k..
Chief Rule:-ding and Enforcement Counsel Dated at Bethesda, bryland this 1st day of I ovecber,1974.
J 4
3f.In the flatter of Consumers Poue'r Company, !!cmorandum and Order, CLI-74-7, PAI-74-2 at 148 (February 5,1974) citing ICC v. Jersey City, 322 J.S. 503, 514 (1944).
a.
.~
UNITED STATES OF A!: ERICA ATOMIC EiERGY C0'D11SSION BEFORE Tl;E ATO'11C SAFETY A!!D LICEi!SI'lG- 00 RD In the flatter of
)
)
CONSUMERS PU!ER C0::PA'lY
.)
Construction 'erai t
)
flos. 81 and 82
(!lidland Plant, Units 1 and 2)
)
(Show Cause)
CERTIFIC.'.TE OF SEh? ICE I hereby certify that coutes of " Staff's Respense co Saginaw's liotion for Discovery in Aid of Oral Arct' rent" dated !!3veM,cr 1,1974 in the captioned natter have been served on the following cy hand delivery or by daposit in tha Uaited States mail,;first class er air tail, this 1st day of l:0va.-be r, 1974.
Ilichtel Glaser, Esq., Chairr.On flichael I. Miller, Esq.
Atomic Safety & Licensing Ecard Ishan, Lincoln & Scale 1150 - 17th St., ::.U.
One First !!ational Plaza
!!ashington, D.C.
20035 Chicage, Illinois 60570
!!r. Lester l'ornblith, Jr.
Laurence ". Scoville, Jr.
Atonic Safety :nd Licensing Clark, Klein, Win ter, Parst s & -
Board Penal Preuitt U.S. Atomic Energy Ceraission 1600 First Federal-building Washington, D.C.
20545 1001 Ucoduard Avenue Detroit, Michigan 48226 Dr. Emnath A. Luehke Atomic Safety and Licensing' Myron it. Cherry, Esq.
Board Panel Suite 4501 U.S. Atomic Energy Commission One IBit Plaza Washington, D.C.
20545 Chicago, Illinois 60530 Docketing and Service Section Atomic Safety and Licensing Office of the Secretary Appeal Bocrd U.S. Atomic Energy Connission U.S. Atomic Energy Commission liashington, D.C.
20545 liashington, D.C.
20545 John G. Gleeson, Esq.
The Don Chemical Co.
2C30 Dou Center
!!idland,liichigan 48640 i
e
/
r_
~
,l'i
- ~,l r
Willian J. Olmstead Counsel for AEC Regulatory Staff O
e
~
m 7
.. ~,