ML20002D267
| ML20002D267 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 01/16/1981 |
| From: | Olmstead W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, ISSUANCES-OM, NUDOCS 8101200210 | |
| Download: ML20002D267 (4) | |
Text
bM1.Ib^! ?l' UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION s
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
[d L
3 In the Matter of CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
)
Docket Nos. 50-329-0M & OL b
~ '$
)
50-330-0M & OL n
3 (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2)
)
{'
j NRC STAFF REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY On December 4,1980 the NRC Staff filed a " Motion for a Protective Order" pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 6 2.740(c). The motion was filed to prevent further deposition of Joseph Kane by Consumers Power Company. The motion was made necessary by the provisions of 10 C.F.R. 5 2.740(f) which states in applicable part that:
" Failure to answer or respond shall not be excused on the ground that the discovery sought is objectionable unless the person or party failing to answer or respond has applied for a protective order pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section."
At the time Staff counsel requested Consumers' counsel to participate in a conference call with the Board and parties sa that a speedy resolution of the matter might obtain. Consumers' counsel refused and instead sought an extension of time until January 9,1981 from the Board. Absent objection from Staff and other parties the Board granted the requested extension.
On January 9,1981, Consumers filed a " Reply to Motion for Protective Order."
Consumers argues that the Staff's motion is inadequate as a matter of law basically because it does not "... cite or demonstrate any instances where questioning of Mr. Kane was argumentative, abusive or oppressive as boldly claimed." Of course, at the time the Staff sought the protective order a set of transcripts was not available to it and the Staff presumed time was of the essence. Consumers now has filed a reply a month later 81032004/O G
I after carefully reviewing the transcripts at its leisure. The Staff there-fore requests leave to file a reply to Consumers' response.
(See Detroit Edison Company (Enrico Fermi Unit 2), ALAB-469, 7 NRC 470 (1978).
It should be noted in this regard that although Consumers compiles a numerical count of occasions where it alleges Mr. Kane was not responsive, a review of Appendix II to Consumers reply shows the code "A" appearing I
559 times in 708 entries. Code A is entitled "Mr. Zamarin repeated question or asked reporter to repeat question in order to get answer to it."
- Yet, Consumers numerical count in the footnote on page 5 alleges that Mr. Kane failed to answer the question asked "on at least 1225 occasions". Consumers is apparently double counting its own numbers to reach such obviously inaccurate results. Although the Staff believes this particular error is obvious, other portions of Consumers' reply will require additional effort to fully review and respond.
As the Board is aware, principal Staff counsel assigned to Midland are engaged in continuing deposition discovery out of the office for the better part of this month. Thus, the Staff requests leave of the board to file a reply to Consumers' response on January 27, 1981. This will enable the i
board to have the pertinent papers in its hands before the prehearing l
conference and it will be able to decide this matter as well as other dis-covery matters which are outstanding at that time.
Respectfully submitted,
/
5lilliamJ.flmstead Assistant Chief Hearing Counsel Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 16th day of January,1981.
r o-
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY Docket Nos. 50-329-0M & OL
)
50-330-0M & OL (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereoy certify that copies of NRC STAFF REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class, or, as indicated by an asterisk, through deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system, this 16th day of January 1981.
- Charles Bechhoefer, Esq.
Ms. Mary Sincla'r Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 5711 Summerset Street U. S. Nuclear Regulatory / Commission Midland, Michigan 48640 Washington, D.C. ' 20555
- Mr. Gustave A. Linenberger Michael I. Miller, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Ronald G. Zamarin, Esq.
V. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Alan S. Farnell, Esq.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Isham, Lincoln & Beale One First National Plaza Dr. Frederick P. Cowan 42nd Floor 6152 N. Verde Trail Chicago, Illinois 60603 Apt. B-125 Boca Raton, Florida 33433
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Frank J. Kelley U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Attorney General of the State Washington, D.C.
20555 of Michigan l
Steward H. Freeman
- Atomic Safety and Licensing l
Assistant Attorney General Appeal Board Panel Gregory T. Taylor U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Assistant Attorney General Washington, D.C.
20555 Environmental Protection Division 720 Law Building
- Docketing and Service Section Lansing, Michigan 48913 Office of the Secretary U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Myron M. Cherry, Esq.
Washington, D.C.
20555 1 IBM Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60611
j a
.o.
l James E. Brunner, Esq.
i Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Ms. Barbara Stamiris 5795 N. River Freeland, Michigan 48623 Mr. Steve Gadler J
2120 Carter Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55108 Wendell H. Marshall, Vice President Midwest Environmental Protection Associates RFD 10 Midland, Michigan 48f,40 CP Ms. Sharon K. Warren 636 Hillcrest j
Midland, Michigan 48640 l
l O
/
f&w William J. timstead Assistant Chief Hearing Counsel L
.,