ML19350A309
| ML19350A309 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000142 |
| Issue date: | 03/10/1981 |
| From: | Bowers E Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | CALIFORNIA, UNIV. OF, LOS ANGELES, CA |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8103130453 | |
| Download: ML19350A309 (3) | |
Text
5 k
., ~
fT ;,
je'
- $$c h.
2 8.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2
.g g g ggg p, ;
N NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0r411SSION 9
Ctfite et the SN d
(
' ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Dc#{3)ydN N, pY
.5 t
C k
gi bqS Before Administrative Judges:
ye
/
Elizabeth S. Bowers, Chairman oA 888PE0 Dr. Oscar H. Paris j
Dr. Emmeth Luebke 4/4g g
IS8f I
In the Matter of:
Docket No. 50.142 OL (Proposed Renewal of THE F.EGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY
)
Facility License) 0F CALIFORNIA
)
(UCLA Research Reactor) f March 10, 1981 ORDER RELATIVE TO INTERVENOR'S SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION TO COMPEL On February 6,1981, Committee to Bridge the Gap (CBG) moved for the Board to compel UCLA to further respond to Interrogatories 4, 5, 6 and 9 propounded to UCLA on or about October 20, 1980. CBG alleges that UCLA does have the requested information and attached two UCLA documents to support the allegation. On February 23, 1981, UCLA requested the Board to deny the motion on the basis that it had cooperated fully and CBG had not followed through on its offer to review relevant records. The NRC Staff filed in support of the motion on February 27, 1981 on the bases that UCLA did have records relevant to CBG interrogatories and that the University has not fully answered the discovery requests.
It appears to the Board that UCLA has, in fact, been less than frank in its responses to CBG's interrogatories related to reactor usage and financing. Staff points to the letter dated May 13, 1960 from UCLA to the Staff (Attachment B to the CBG motion) as merit to CBG's assertion that UCLA has not been open and candid as directed by the Board's order of December 22, P
YNo I
81031 so'W3 G
1 1980. UCLA claims that it had assumed that the aforesaid letter had been
~
provided to CBG by the Staff, pursuant to a stipulation between the parties.
CBG said that the letter became available to it only after the letter was placed in the public document room following the filing of CBG's first motion to compel.
In our view, by the NRC rules for the production of doe ments (10 CFR S 2.741) and the Supreme Court's decision in Hickman v. Taylor (329 U.S. 495, 91 L. Ed. 451), that letter should have been made available to CBG bl UCLA in response to CBG's first set of interrogatories.
Once' again, we direct UCLA to be open and candid as to the details of all existing records. At the same time, we again advise CBG that the Applicant is not required to create new information or engage in a work effort to reshape its records to the Intervenor's categories. Put more bluntly, UCLA shall not hold back any information it possesses which is relevant to the Intervenor's iiiterrogatories,and the Intervenor shall take advantage of the opportunities provided it by UCLA to inspect and copy relevant documents.
This Board is charged with the responsibility of obtaining a complete record on which to base a decision. We will not allow this duty to be compromised, or the proceeding to be further delayed, by gamemanship.
Failure of the parties to fully cooperate in responding to discovery requests in the future may well result in the imposition of sanctions by the Board under 10 CFR 5 2.707.
It is this 10th day of March 1980 ORDERED
l
}
o' i
l t
3-4 That UCLA shall respond to CBG interrogatories with a complete l
disclosure of all relevant information FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD i
s alm 1&no Eliztbeth S. Bowers ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE 1
4 4
4 1
y -,.,
,c,--
---,1, w--
.,-e,
,,.y.,m.
ien.
.,,-