ML20023A833
| ML20023A833 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 10/13/1982 |
| From: | Bishop L HARMON & WEISS, SINCLAIR, M.P. |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8210200061 | |
| Download: ML20023A833 (5) | |
Text
.__
4pr.1 yyycrv. C'v' 00CKETED USHRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REULATORY COMMISSION M 00118 Mt:18 Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board CFFICE OF SECRETART C0CKETtMG & SERVICE BRANCH
)
In the Matter of:
)
)
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
)
Docket Nos. 50-329 l
)
50-330 l
(Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2)
)
Operating License i
)
RESPONSE OF MARY SINCLA7R TO APPLICANTS' MOTION TO COMPEL a RESPONSE TO REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION On September 28, 1982, the Applicant filed a " Motion to Compel a Response.
to Requests for Admissgon" from Mary Sinclair to its August 30, 1982 Requests for Admissions,
)
claiming that Ms. Sinclair was " evasive" in her answers.
Motion to Compel at 2.
This characterization is incorrect.
As we explain below, Ms. Sinclair's September 14 Response raised appropriate relevance objections to numerous of the requests for admissions, clearly an allowable objection under 10 CFR S2.742 (a). Moreover, she preperly refused to admit or deny the truth of statements which were either vague or called for a judgment of the motives or analysis of the staff.
- See, e.g., Johnstone v. Cronlund, 25 FRD 42 (E.D. Pa. 1960).
Request #1.
Table 4.1 found at page 4-7 of the DES and at page 4-24 of the FES presents the same data as that found in Tables V and VI on pages 53 and 54 of the attached " Cooling Pond Thermal Performance Summary Report; Midland Plant Units 1 and 2," prepared for Consumers Power Company, August 1973, with the exception of the deletion'of a column entitled Equilibrium Temperature.
82 A o zo 0 O(,( &
3s03
2 Consumers does not object specifically to Ms. Sinclair's o
response to this request.-*/
Consumers statec, however, that the objective of the requests in general is to " establish" the sources for the staff's analysis of thermal performance and fogging and icing at the Midland cooling pond.
Motion to Compel at 3.
To the extent that this generalized comment applies to Request #1, Ms. Sinclair's relevance objections are proper.
While Ms. Sinclair acknowledges that the two charts appear to be similar, this acknowledgment is irrelevant to the issue of whether the staff's analysis was proper.
See September 14, 1982, Response at 11-2.
Request #2.
The data referred to in paragraph 1 of this Request for Admission is the result of analytical and physical thermalhydraulic model studies undertaken to determine the thermal performance of the Midland cooling pond.
Ms. Sinclair acknowledges only that the data in Request #1 were used by the applicant and Staff in an attempt to determine the thermal performance of the Midland cooling pond.
- However, this is irrelevant to her contention, which asserts that the Staff's analysis of thermal performance and fog and ice generation is improper.
See September 14 Response at 2.
- /
The Applicants' Motion is extremely vague in its objections.
Nowhere are specific requests and responses cited.
Ms. Sinclair will endeavor to respond to any objections whenever a specific objection and argument can be identified ir. the applicant's Motion.
f L
Request #3.
The data referred to in paragraph 1 of I
this Request for Admission is not derived from studies of cooling pondo in Arizona, New Mexico, or a climatic region of the country different from the Midwest.
Again, while Ms. Sinclair acknowledges that the data in Paragraph #1 appears to be derived from a similar climatic region to the Midwest, this is irrelevant to her contention that the best available information--that derived from the Dresden pond--was not used; thereby distorting the analysis.
See September 14 Response at 2.
Request #4.
The NRC analysis of fog and ice generation in the DES and FES was based mostly on data collected at Dresden.
(FES at pages 5-6, 9-35, and 9-36)
This request was properly objected to by Ms. Sinclair as ambiguous.
She can admit that the FES says that the staff's analysis was based "mostly" on Dresden data, but she does not know what "mostly" means or whether the FES's statement is accurate.
Wherefor, for all the above-mentioned reasons, Applicants Motion to Compel should be denied.
Resp tfully submitted, 7
~
Lee L. Bishop Attorney for Mary Sinclair I
IIARMON & WEISS 1725 I Street, N.W.
Suite 506 Washington, D.C._
20006 (202) 833-9070 October 13, 1982
7 UNIIED 9 Ali N di A's id Cis NU;L!.AF
.! X AiORY t 7,iZ10N 1:.r i ORE THE ATONIt 5 'J f li
',: 1 v. I n' E i ( A:1 In the Matter o'
)
CONSUMERS F0WER COMPAra
)
)
50-330 DM A OL (Midland Piant, Units 1 and 2)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing RESPONSE OF MARY SINCLAIR TO APPLICANTS' MOTION TO COMPEL A RESPONSE TO REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION have been mailed, first class, postage paid, this 13th day of October, 1982, to the following:
Charles Bechhoefer, Esq.
Frank J. Kelley Administrative.ludge Attorney Gencral of the State Atcmic Saf ety and Licensing Board of Michigan U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comissinn Steward H. Freeman Washington, D.C.
20555 Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Division 525 W. Ottawa St., 720 Law Bldg.
Lansing, Michigan 48913 Ms. Mary Sinclair 5711 Sumerset Street Dr. Frederick P. Cowan Midland, Michigan 48640 Administrative Judge 6152 N. Verde Trail william D.
Paton Apt.-B-125 Michael N. Wilcove Boca Raton, Florida 00400 Office of the Executive Legal Director Dr. Jgrry Harbour Nuclear Regulatory Commission Administrative Judge Washington, D.C.
20555 Atomic Safety-and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D.C.
20555 James E. Brunner, Esq.
Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201' m
v
-v * :.
7 Ms. Barbara Statiris' Att.aic Scfety ind Litenting Lot.rc 5795 ti. River U.S. Nut h.ar Reculatery Cominion Freeland, Michipcn UG?
Washinoton D.C.
'20E55
' James R. tates t waic ha:ety and Licensing Appeel 203 5. Wasnington Aver.ae Pa r.c!
Saginaw, Michigcr. 4iRf U.S. Ncc icer Reculatory Cocinissicr.
Wahington, D.C.
20555 Wendell H. Mershall, President Mapleton Intervenors Docte'.ing nnd Service Lection RFD 10' Office of the Secretarj Midland, Michigan 48540 U.S. t;uclear Regulatory Comission Wehinnten, D.C.
20555 Wayne Hearn Steve J. Cadler, P.E.
. Bay City Times
- 120 Carter Avenue
-311 Fifth Street St. Paul, tin 55108
-Bay City, Michigen 48706 Frederick C. Williams Paul C. Rau Isham, Lincoln & Beale Midland Daily tiews 1120 Connecticut Avenue, IN j
124 Mcdonald Street Washington, D.C.
20036 Midland, Michigan.48640 Myron M. Cherry, p.t.
fiichael I Miller, Esq.
~Peter Flynn, p.c.
. Ronald G.
Zamarin, Esq.
Cherry & Flynr.
Alan S.
Farnell, Esq.
~
Three First National Plaza David M.
Stahl, Esq.
Suite 3700 Isham, Lincoln & Beale Chicago, IL 60602 Three First National Plaza 52nd Floor T. J. Creswcil Chicago, Illinois 60602 Michigan Division Legal Department Dow Chemical Company Midland, Michigan 48540 f,d f
J Lee L.
Bishop j
October 13, 1982 s
i
'l s
s c
_ _ _,