ML20009G831
| ML20009G831 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 07/29/1981 |
| From: | Mark Miller Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | CITIZENS FOR FAIR UTILITY REGULATION, NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8108050110 | |
| Download: ML20009G831 (3) | |
Text
4 NN UilTED STATES OF AMERICA h
$1[/p NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 0 1981 ?
SI.N J
/
ATOMIC SAFETY AtiD LICEtiSIfiG BOARD t
f,ua 0 4 gggle 12 Before Administrative Judges:
T Marshall E. Miller, Chairman ch 9
g
\\{
u.s. g i%
Dr. Forrest J. Remick I
Dr. Richard F. Cole s
JUL 30199;
)
In the Matter of
)
Docket flos. 50-445
)
50-446 TEXAS UTILITIES GEllERATIriG COMPANY, ET AL.
)) (Application fo Operating License)
(Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station,
)
Units 1 and 2)
)
July 29, 1981
)
ORDER The Staff filed a motion March 31, 1981, to compel responsive answers to certain interrogatories it had filed upon CFUR on January 19, 1981. Answers were filed by CFUR to those interrogatories on Marcn 11, 1981.
A series of orders and a schedule c:.tered by the Board durine the last month have indicated that this proceeding is being expedited, both as to the conclusion of discovery and the commencement of evidentiary hearings. Those rulings should assist all parties in obtaining promptly relevant discovery.
A.
The following responses to discovery requests made by CFUR are held to be insufficient and nonresponsive answers:
Interrogatories Cl-2, Cl-3, Cl-5, C2-7, C3-2, C3-4, C3-5, C3-10, C3-11, C3-12, C3-19 through C3-22,
$fRADOCK0eo5o110 810729 I
05000445 g afS o
< C4-10, C4-12, C4-15, C4-17, C6-2 through C6-6, C6-7 a through c, C6-10 a through e (1-iii), h, C6-11 a through e, h, C6-12 a through e, h, C6-13 a through e, j, C7-3, C7-5, C9-1, C9-3, C9-4, C9-6, C9-7, C9-8, C9-9 and C9-11.
Accordingly, CFUR is directed to provide full, direct and responsive answers to the interrogatories or the parts thereof 'isted in this paragraph.
B.
However, there are other interrogatories as to which the Staff's motion to compe answers is denied. Most of these interrogatories inquire what CFUR " contends the Applicants (or the Staff) must do" to remedy various objections, or "to demonstrate" that certain things have been done. As we have previously ruled, Intervenors should fully describe all of the deficiencies complained of, and the bases for and evidence supracting their conclusions. But the Intervenors are not required to develop an affirmative scenario of what the Applicants or the Staff must do. A full and complete description of alleged deficiencies does not require an Intervenor to go further and tell the Applicants or Staff how to cure such deficiencies, or to make appropriate proof on such issues.1I For the above reasons, the Staff's rnotion to compel answers is i
denied as to the following interrogatories or portions thereof:
l 1/ emorandum and Order entered July 20, 1981, p. 3.
M l
l I
a
.d
. Inierrogatories C3-13 through C3-18, C4-6 through C4-9, C6-7 d and e, C6-8, C6-9, C6-10 e(iv, v), f, g, C6-11 f, g, C6-12 f, g, C6-13 f, g, h, i, C9-14.
It should also be noted that Contention 8 was dismissed as a contention by our Order entered July 23, 1981, as a result of defaults regarding discovery orders (Order, pp. 6-7, 12). Accordingly, the Staff's motion for discovery as to C8-1, C8-3, C8-7, C8-12 and C8-16 is now moot.
ORDER For the foregoing reasons, it is this 29th day of July,1981 ORDERED (1) That the Staff's motion to compel responsive answers from CFUR is g anted as to those interrogatories or portions thereof listed in paragraph A, supra.
(2) That further responses are not required as to those interro-gatories or portions thereof listed in paragraph B, supra.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD b,
Marshall E. Miller, Chairman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE i
V