ML20024F911
| ML20024F911 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 12/05/1990 |
| From: | Lazo R Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | VERMONT, STATE OF |
| References | |
| CON-#490-11156 89-595-03-OLA, 89-595-3-OLA, OLA-4, NUDOCS 9012270140 | |
| Download: ML20024F911 (5) | |
Text
.
i
. ?lll b bN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA I Xhi ;IT NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION:
N ATOMIC. SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 90 DEC -5 P4:39
~
Before Administrative Judges:
CIT'Cf.M d M iM V Robert M. Lazo, Chairman Oh IM a M W Jerry R. Kline Frederick J.
Shon-F
, SERVED DEC - 6 GOD In the' Matter of:
Docket No. 50-271-OLA-4 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR ASLBP No. 89-595-03-OLA POWER CORPORATION (ConstructionLPeriod Vermont. Yankee Nuclear Recapture)
Power S,tation December 5, 1990 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Concerning State of Vermont Motion for-Leave To File Reply To NRC Staff's Response To Vermont Yankee's Motion to Compel)
I.
Introduction The Licensee, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation,
. filed a motion to compel production of documents on its
'ocument-request Set No. 1 on September 12, 1990.
The d
motion seeks to compel the State of Vermont-(SOV or. State) to identify the documents-which support each of SOV's 14
. admitted bases to contention VII.
.It also seeks a further response to Licensee's request No. 15.
.The NRC Staff has not previously involveu itselfLin discovery disputes in this case where it was not a direct-
- party to the-dispute.
However, it filed'a response to-Licensee's motion in this instance, asserting that it was b
2
-))gD' 9012270140 902205
-PDR ADOCK 05000271 O
1 concerned about the integrity of the Commission's adjudicatory process.
The Staff supported Licensee's motion to compel.
The Staff's response prompted the State to file for leave to reply on October 18, 1990.
The State asserted that if permitted to reply it would show that the Staff's citations are applicable to contentions not bases, the Staff citation to the Shoreham case is unwarranted, and the Staff faileid to recognize the role of the prehearing conference specified in 10 C.F.R.
S 2.752 for adjusting the scope of contentions at the conclusion of discovery.
The Licensee replied on October 29, 1990.
The Licensco's answer appeared to be a rebuttal of the State's substantive reasons for opposing the Staff.
The Licensee's answer was somewhat premature however, because the only issue before us is whether the State should be permitted to reply to the Staf f's respor se.
The Staff responded to the State's motion on November 1, 1990, stating that it does not oppose the State's request.
The Staff urges that we limit the State's response to five pages to be filed within five days of the Board order.
l
. II.
Opinion The Staff's reply to Licanr.ee's motion to compel introduced the issue of the integrity of the Commission's proceedings into this case for the first time.
The State did not address that issue in its response to the Licensee.
We see no basis for thinking that it could have known prior to the Staff's reply that such an issue would be raised by the Staff.
Moreover, the issue of integrity of our proceedings is a serious one which should be fully ventilated.
While we ordinarily do not look with favor on extended cycles of argument in discovery disputes, we cotic' ude that in this case the nature of the issue requires that we permit a response from the Etate.
We agree with the Staff however that the State's response need not be lengthy or long in coming.
Accordingly, we instruct the State to limit its reply to five pages and to file it within five business days of the date of this order.
The State's reply is to be confined to the issues it asserts it will "show" in its motion.
The Licensee has already filed substantive argument in opposition to the State.
Accordingly, the Board does not require nor will.it permit further filings on this matter.
Upon receipt of the State's reply the Board will rule on the
_ - _ =. -. - _ _ - -. -.
_4 i
4 Licensee's original motion to compel based on the record then before us.
I III.
Order For all of the foregoing reasons it is hereby ORDERED.
4 1.
The motion of the State of Vermont dated October 18, 1990 for leave to file a reply to the NRC Staff is granted.
2.
The State shall limit its reply to five double spaced pages and shall file its response within five business days of the date of this order.
3.
The State's response shall address-only the matters listed in paragraphs 4a. through 4d. in its motion.
l 4.
The Board will accept no other responses on this matter.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Y *.
f' C &
Robert M. Lazo, Chairman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Issued at Bethesda, Maryland, this 5th day of December 1990.
. _. ~ _ _ _.
-. _ ~
1 WN!TEC $TATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REQULATORY COMMISSION 5
In tne Matter of I
1 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR F0WER I
Docket No.(s) 50-271-OLA 4 CORPORATION (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power I
Station) i l
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
! hereby certify that cocies of the forecolno LB M60 (RE VT MOTION FOR...)
have been served ucon the f ollowino eersons by U.S. mail. f!*st classe exceot as otherwise noted and in accordance with the recuirements of 10 CFR Sec. 2.712.
Atomic Safety and Licensino Aeotal Administrative Judce Board Robert M. Lato. Chairman U.S. Nuclear Reculatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensino Board Washinoton. DC 20555 U.S. Nuclear Reculatory Commission Washinoten. DC 20555 Administrative Judae Administrative Judos Jerry R. Kline F :derick J. Shon Atomic Bafety and Lic6nsino Board atomic Safety and Licensino Board U.S. Nuclear Reoulatory Consission U.b. Nuclear Reculatory Commission Washincton. DC 20555 Washincton. DC 20555 Ann P. Hododon R. K. Dad. !!!. Escuire Office of the General Counsel Ropes b Grav U.S.-Nuclear Reculaterv Commission One Inte. national Place Washinoton. DC 20555 Boston. MA 02110 Anthony 2. Roissan. Escuire Jaees Vols. Escuire Cohen. Milstein & Hausfeld Interte Director for Pub. Advocacy 1401 New York Avenue. Suite 600. NW Vermont Decartment of Public Service Washincton. DC.
20005 120 State Street Monteelier. VT 05602 Dated at Rockville. Md. this 6 day of December 1990
!k.0lMAhd.................
Office f the Secretarv of the Commission l
l B-l l
.,