ML19332B122

Motion for Protective Order Due to Applicants' 800813 Voluminous First Set of Interrogatories & Request for Production of Documents Consisting of 167 Basic Demands. Certificate of Svc Encl

ML19332B122
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	09/18/1980
From:	Hart J, Mccoll A, Mills T CITIZENS FOR FAIR UTILITY REGULATION
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8009260008
Download: ML19332B122 (7)

Text

_

7; f l(,l910 '

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Elizabeth S. Bowers, Chairman Dr. Richard F. Cole Dr. Forrest J. Remick In the Matter of ,

TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING Docket Nos. 50-445-OL COMPANY, ET AL.

50-446-OL (Comanche Peak Steam Electric Units 1 and 2)

N 6~ tBNRC' S ~ \

~

22 -

k "c)4 y o> e CFUR's MOTION FOR PROTECTION pso3

" 5

-[. /0 8 00926 noes g

gr Comes now CFUR, one of the Intervenors in the above styled and numbered proceeding, and files this Motion for Protection pursuant to 10 C.F.R. S2.740(c), and states:

I.

On June 16, 1980, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ( " Boa'rd ") issued its Order adopting certain Contentions and Questions which the Board oJtermined to be relevant at the hearings in this proceeding. All parties involved, including the NRC Staff, havs objected to various Contentions and Questions being included in and/or excluded from the Board's June 16, 1980, Order. The Board has not yet ruled on these objections and consequently has not finalized the Contentions and Questions relevant to the upcoming hearings.

II.

The Board's June 16, 1980, Order concluded by stating:

"We have not been asked by the parties to adopt 1 a set schedule for discovery requests and responses I but'would urge th:*. discovery requests be submitted with reasonable promptness and also responses thereto." l Despite the pending objections to the Board's Order, discovery was begun'by CASE, one of the Intervenors herein. on July 7, 1980, CASE filed its First Set of Interrogatories to Applicants which consisted of a total of thirty (30) interrogatories and re' quests for production of documents. On July 28, 1980, Applicants filed their initial response to CASE's First Set of Interrogatories. This response, Applicants' Answers to CASE's First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Clarification, objected to and requested clarificat-ion of several of CASE's Interrogatories.

I i

III.

On August 1, 1980, four days after filing their Answers to CASE's First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Clarificat-ion, Applicants filed Applicants' First Set of Interrogatories to CASE and Requests to Produce. This set of Interrogatories and Requests consisted of one hundred ninety-eight (198) inquires, nct counting subpar,ts and mutiple questions.

IV.

On August 13, 1980, Applicants filed t.imilar voluminous sets of interrogatories on both of the other Intervenors in this proceeding, ACORN and CFUR.

Applicants ' First Set of Interrogatories to ACORN and Requests to Produce consisted of two hundred fifty-eight (258) interrogatories and requests, not counting subparts and multiple inquiries.

Applicants' First Set of Interrogatories to CFUR and Requests to Produce consisted of one hundred sixty-seven (167) interrogatories and requests, not counting subparts and multiple inquiries.

V.

On September 15, 1980, CFUR filed its Answers to Applicants' First Set of Interrogatories to CFUR and Requests *.o Produce.

VI.

It is a substantial burden on CFUR to respond to such voluminous and burdensome Interrogatories as were served on it by Applicants.

In fact, from August 16, 1980, the date of service of said Interrogatories on CFUR, until September 15, 1980, when its Answers were filed, CFUR's meger resourses were devoted almost

exclusively to preparing said Answers. CFUR has been completely unable to prepare any of its own discovery requests or otherwise prepare for the hearings in this proceeding.

Due to CFUR's limited manpower and even more limited financial resources, it is simply impossible for CFUR to respond to Applicants' voluminous Interrogatories and also make any progress in its own preparation for the upcoming hearings in this matter.

Should CFUR continue to receive discovery requests such as Applicants' First Set of Interrogatories to CFUR and Requests to Produce, one of two results will occur: the scheduled hearings will need to be delayed or CFUR will be effectively precluded from any meaningful participation. Neither result is desirable. Delay in the hearings is the goal and hope of no one involved in this proceeding. Denying CFUR the right to effectively participate violate not only the Nuclear Regulatory Commissions' Regulations, but also rises to the level of violation of CFUR's Constitutional rights of due process and J

free speech.

Regardless of Applicants' purpose in serving such a vol-uminous set of Interrogatories on CFUR (as well as similar sets simultaneously on the other Intervenors) , the above described effect of such Interrogatories must be protected from occurring again in this proceeding.

VII.

Applicants' First Set of Interrogatories to LPtO 3r d Requests to Produce are improper for the further reason that such discovery is premature.

i The factual preparation of CFUR for the upcoming hear-

)

i ings depends to a great extent on t:e discovery that it will be able to conduct in this proceeding. Moreover, due to its fine.n-cial limitations, CFUR's direct testimony for the hearings can be prepared only after the relevant issues are finally determined and substantial' discovery is obtained.

Before CFUR can respond to inquiries regarding its l anticipated participation in the upcoming hearings, it first must be given an opport. unity to obtain information and prepare such anticipated participation. Again, CFUR should 'ae protected from discovery from Applicants during its preparat!.ons.

Wherefore, Premises Considered, CPU.R prays that the' Board enter a Protective Order pursuant to 10 C.F.R. S2.740 (c) which orders that:

1. CFUR be relieved of any responsibility to supplement its Answers to Applicants' First Set of Interrogatories to CFUR and Requests to Produce;

2. Applicants conduct no discover / from CFUR until allowed to do so by subsequent Order of this Board;

3. Any future written discovery requests to CFUR from Applicants be limited to not more than thirty (30) Interrogatories and Requests to Produce, including subparts, for any forty-five l

(45) day period; and l

4. CFUR be awarded such further relief to which it may be entitled. l Respectfull submitted,

0 Counsel for CFUR:

Jeff Hart 4021 Prescott Dallas, Texas Tom Mills 1 Turtle Creek Village Dallas, Texas Arch McColl Katy Building Dallas, Texas l

l

y

'i ,

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE s

I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing Motion for Protective Order in the captioned matter were served upon the following persons by deposit in the United States mail, first class postage prepaid this 18th day of September, 1980:

Valentine B. Deale, Esq. Chairman, Atomic Safety Chairman, Atomic Safety and and Licensing Board Panel

• Licensing Board 1001 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Washington, Commission D.C. 20036 Washington, D.C. 20555 Chairman, Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel Marjories Ulman Rothschild, Esq.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Office of the Executive Legal Director Commission ,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory  !

Washington, D.C. 20555 l Commission Dr. Forrest J. Remick, Member Washington, D.C. 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing David J. Preister, Esq.

Board 305 E. Hamilton Avenue Assistant Attorney General State College, PA 16801 Environmental Protection Division Dr. Richard Cole, Member P.O. Box 12548 Capitol Station Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Austin, Texas 78711 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory fir. Geoffrey M. Gay Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 West Texas Legal Services l 100 Main Street (Lawyers Building)

Ms. Juanita Ellis Fort Worth, Texas 76102 l President, CASE 1426 South Polk Street Mr. Chase R. Stephens l Dallas, Texas 75224 Docketing & Service Branch U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Nicholas S. Reynolds, Esq. Commission Debevoise & Liberman Washington, D.C. 20555 1200 Seventeenth Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036

1. i 1 9 p ,

/ /, f'Y' We Tom Mills Z~

- sun

.D C.C p a

> T

~3 b.

4.mqc':.wa s% %

b n .: