ML20037D129
| ML20037D129 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 05/20/1981 |
| From: | Goldberg S NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8105220035 | |
| Download: ML20037D129 (4) | |
Text
9 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA S/20/81 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of Docket Nos. 50-250 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY 50-251
)
(Proposed Amendments to Facility (Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Operating Licenses to Pem Unit Nos. 3 and 4)
SteamGeneratorRepair)
)h NRC STAFF MOTION TO STRIKE INTERVEN0R'S AFFIDAVIT AND PREFILED TESTIMONY OF DR. GORDON EDWARDS 9
g
- y INTRODUCTION 3
At the prehearing conference held in this proceeding on Mafcq 2&y 1981, the Licensing Board directed the parties to file direct tes y%
in written question and answer fom on May 15, 1981 consistent with the hearing schedule adopted for the proceeding. On May 15, the Intervenor served a document, entitled " Affidavit and Testimony of Dr. Gordon Edwards on Contentions 1 and 4b."
In actuality, the document is neither.
While the document is signed, it is not properly notarized.
Nor does the document contain testimony, let alone in question and answer fom.
Rather, the document consists of an outline of the testimony Dr. Edwards apparently intends to provide at the hearing.
In both fom and substance, this oucline is fatally deficient and in coltravention of the Board's orde r.
Accordingly, the Staff moves that it te stricken and the proposed testimony rejected.
DISCUSSION The present outline typifies the piece-meal approach taken by the
~~tervenor in the presentation of his position on the merits of the contentions at issue. While the positions of the Applicant and Staff 810522GO35 Cr
have been fully known for sometime, the Intervenor's position remains sketchy and incomplete.
Now, on the eve of the scheduled hearing, and over two years since the initial intervention petition, litt 2 more is known about the basis for the remaining contentions.
Dr. Edwards is a professor of mathematics and science at a Canadian college. According to his outline, Dr. Edwards has reviewed the Staff Final Environmental Statement and found it inadequate in five subject-areas:
health impacts, offsite radiological consequences, ultimate disposal of the solid radioactive waste generated as a result of the repair, the costs of the repairs and alternatives to the repair. On the subject of health impacts, the outline refers to a Canadian document which is neither identified nor provided and with which the Staff is unfamiliar.
The Interveno"'s continuing disagreement with the Staff consideration of offsite releases and repair costs is somewhat anamolous since the Intervenor did not oppose a Staff motion for sucinary disposition of former Contention 6 concerning offsite radiation releases nor an Applicant motion for summary disposition of Contention 7 conce:ning, in
(
part, repair costs. The outline could well be construed as a tardy attempt to reintroduce issues already eliminated from the proceeding.
Under the Commission's rules of practice, testimony is to be prefiled in written form.
10CFR92.743(b). An cutline of one's proposed testimony will not suffice.
It provides no substantive information upon which the Board and parties can pre 9are meaningful l
rebuttal testimony and cross-examination. The brevity of the present l
outline also prevents the Board and parties from ascertaining whether l
Dr. Edwards is an expert in the areas in which he purports to testify.
1
--er
. The proposed testimony of Dr. Edwards is objectionable on other grounds as well. On September 14, 1979, the Staff propounded interrogatories to the Intervenor regarding Contention 1.
Dr. Edwards was not among the prospective witnesses identified in the Intervenor's response to the interrogatories, dated December 17, 1979.
In a January 29, 1981 letter, Staff counsel reminded Intervenor counsel of his obligation to supplement the earlier responses to discovery, under 10 CFR 52.740(c), with the identification of any additional witnesses. The
' t.
Staff received no response to this letter. The Staff was thus deprived of the opportunity to conduct further relevant discovery, including possible deposition of Dr. Edwards. The overall effect of the Intervenor's failure to supplement his discovery response or to file substantive testimony of Dr. Edwards is to foster trial by " surprise" on the affected issues. This is fundamentally unfair to the other parties and should not be countenanced.
CONCLUSION In light of the above, the Staff moves to strike the affidavit and
)
prefiled testimony of Dr. Gordon Edwards from the proceeding.
Respectfully submitted, A
Steven C. Goldberg Counsel for NRC Staff Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 20th day of May,1981.
UNITED STATES OF AERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COP 91ISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of Docket Nos. 50-250 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY 50-251 (Proposed Amendments to Facility (Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Operating Licenses to Permit Unit Nos. 3 and 4)
SteamGeneratorRepair)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of NRC STAFF MOTION TO STRIKE INTERVENOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND PREFILED TESTIMONY OF DR. GORDON EDWARDS 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 i
deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Comission's internal mail system, p
i.his 20th day of May, 1981.
l Marshall E. Miller, Esq., Chairman Norman A. Coll, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Steel, Hector & Davis Panel Southeast First National Bank U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Building Washington, D.C.
20555
- Miami, Florida 33131 Dr. Emeth A. Luebke Neil Chonin, Esq..
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Counsel for Intervenor Panel Suite 1400 Amerifirst Bldg.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission One S.E. 3rd Avenue Washington, D.C.
20555
- Miami, Florida 33131 **via express mail Dr. Oscar H. Paris Henry H. Harnage, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Peninsula Federal Bldg., 10th Floor Panel 200 S.E. First Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Miami, Florida 33131
!~
Washington, D.C.
20555
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Mr. Mark P. Oncavage Panel 12200 S.W. 110th Avenue U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Miami, Florida 33176 Washington, D.C.
20555
- Harold F. Reis, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Lowenstein, Newman, Reis, Axelrad Board Panel
& Toll U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20555
- Washington, D.C.
20036 Docketing and Service Section Burt Saunders, Esq.
Office of the Secretary Assistant Dade County Attorney U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission 1626 Dade County Courthouse Washington, D.C.
20555
- Miami, Florida 33130
.Nu dXI Steven C. Goldberg e
l Counsel for NRC Staff l
.