ML20008G197

Informs That ASLB 810310 Order Did Not Grant Motion to Compel Further Answers to Past Interrogatories,In Response to 810421 Ltr.Order Admonished Licensee for Less than Frank Interrogatory Responses.Related Correspondence

ML20008G197
Person / Time
Site:	05000142
Issue date:	05/01/1981
From:	Woods G CALIFORNIA, UNIV. OF, LOS ANGELES, CA
To:	Pollock M POLLOCK, M.
References
NUDOCS 8107020430
Download: ML20008G197 (2)

Text

l t ..

M

. L RI~. m co " ,8?".. ,O CE TTHE REGENTS OF THE I

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA _. ,o e ae;dhaar 3 GEN Ena L CotMEL

/P- ASSISTANT COUN5EL CN 7 i OC1 it AWg. N e cutssti Phily. E. S piekerman

[ h } h II$$$^[f0CI^U en B a ner h// 4 US),'g  %!ihon H. Gordon Chrntine Helmick y Suun Amateau ddt.V* jA AV George L Starchand s

N g ,' ;Ag 4-gtg [ Jh$' g .j 6

i Assoc; ATE cotMEL Lawrence B. Carcia Clauda Care 6  %

Romulus B. Portmood blartha >!. Chaw OFFICE OF THE GENER AL COL'NSEL %D Cf @ g$7 Kar! E Droese.Jr. Patrdi K. 31oore 59u L'imersity Hall

%* I NNCS David A. Dorinson Fred Takemiva Glenn R. Woods Susan N!. Thomas 2200 Unisersity .hesive g John F. Lundberg 51arv E. StacDonald Berkeley. C.alifornia 94700 Garv Storrison stelvin W. Beat h James N. Odie (413) 642 2822 May 1, 1981 Mr. Mark Pollock POLLOCK & WILLIS l 1724 North La Brea Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90046 Re: NRC Docket No. 50142(UC*da Research Reactor) 9

\

Dear Mr. Pollock:

i

! This is written in rc pens t: ycur ictter of April 24, 1981, regarding the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board's " Order Relative to Intervenor's Supplemental Motion To Compel", dated March 10, 1981.

Basically, the Board's Order found the , University at fault for not having responded to CBG's first set of interrogatories by providing to CBG & copy of its letter of May 13, 1980 to the staff. The Board went on to state as fellows:

"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 infor-mation or engage in a work effort to l 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 9 51 4h 0

\

810 7< o 20 9]' o g

I l

.e , .

• l sr. Mtrk Pollack May 1, 1981 -f

? age 2 ,

e Intervenor's interrogatories, and the Intervenor shall take advantage of the opportunities provided it by UCLA to inspect and copy relevant documents." ,

". . . 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 S 2.707.".

The Order of the Board stated as follows:

"That UCLA shall respond to CBG interrog-atories with a complete disclosure of all relevant information."

If you read the Board's Order carefully you will see that, unlike its previous Order (December 22, 1980) which' stated that "The Motion to Compel is . . . GRANTED,"

there is no such directive here. We believe that The Board was admonishing the University for what the Board considered "less than frank" past interrogatory responses and directing the University to be fully responsive to future discovery requests. We intend, of cor.se, to etepl'; with the Beard's direction.

It is theref. ore clear that you are simply incorrect

_ .in statins-that the " Board granted (your] Motion to Compel further answers . . . regarding interrogatories on Contention II."

If you are really serious about bringing this matter to the Board at this late date, you should reread the Board's Order of March 10, 1991 and the present order. I think that once you do this you will ag>:ee that the Board's Order of March 10, 1981 did not contemplate further answers to your past interrogatories dealing with Contentien II.

Sincerely, M _ (uhJ Glenn R. Woods cc: service list b

- - , - , w .- .- n -e- er - - , = ,e-% %, ,, --- , -- y,w y *