ML20038A418
| ML20038A418 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 09/10/1980 |
| From: | Fitzgerald NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20038A409 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-92-436, TASK-CA, TASK-SE SECY-A-80-136, NUDOCS 8110290519 | |
| Download: ML20038A418 (5) | |
Text
- =
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 September 10, 1980 SECY-A-80-136 COMMISSIONER ACTION
- For :
The Commissioners From:
James A. Fitzgerald Assistant General Counsel
Subject:
Review of ALAB-609 (In the Matter of Houston Lighting and Power Company)
Facility:
Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1.
To inform the Commission of an Appeal Board deci-
Purpose:
gy I sion(which, in our opinion,
.__-a-Review Time Expires:
September 24, 1980.
Discussion:
Intervenor David Marrack sought.to appeal from an unpublished interlocutory order entered on June 27, 1980 which denied in part Marrack's l
Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories because portions of the discovery request sought information which should have been sought from the NRC staff.
The Appeal Board dismissed the appeal as unauthorized under the CommissioJ1's Rules of Practice.
10 CFR 2.730(f). */ r
- c. / b
- ~
Recommendation:
~
~
^
fgg g
/,
1, James A. Fi'tzgerald Assistant General Counsel
Attachment:
ALAB-609
~e/
The Appeal Board also saw no reason here to exercise its dis-cretion to review interlocutory orders of Licensing Boards under 10 CFR 2.718(1).
See Houston Lighting & Power Company (South Texas Proj ect, Units 1 and 2), ALAB-606, 12 IGC (August 22, 1980.).
Information in this record was dcted in actotdance with the Freedcm cf :nictmation 7
yt;mmgyy[-
x0e, c:;:
I 2
1 1
Comissioners' comments should be provided directly to the Office of the Secretary by c.o.b. Wednesday, September 24, 1980.
Commission Staff Office coments, if any, should be submitted to the Comissioners NLT September 17, 1980, with an information copy to the Office of the Sec'retary.
If the paper is of such a nature that it requires additional time for analytical review and coment, the Comissioners and the Secretariat should be apprised of when coments may be expected.
1 DISTRIBUTION Comissioners Comission Staff Offices Secretariat 1
i i
i
L See ic -ci E j)
~
~^-
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i) w t
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPFAL BOARD Alan S. Rosenthal, Chairman i
Dr. John H. Buck 4.0,
' 'fo W
)
GgO In the Matter of
)
/Qy
)
HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-466
)
(Allens Creek Nuclear Generating
)
Station, Unit 1)
)
)
Dr. David Marrack, Bellaire, Texas, appellant ErE S.1-M ORANDUM AND ORDER August 25, 1980 (ALAB-609)
By a filing dated August 18, 1980, intervenor David Harrack endeavors to appeal f rom a portion of the Licensing Board's un-published June 27, 19 80 order in this construction permit pro-cceding.
Recognizing that almost two months have elapsed since the entry of that order, Dr. Marrack represents that the appeal was not more seasonably prosecuted because he had failed to re-ceive the copy of the order which had been served upon him by the Docketing and Service Branch of the Commission on June 30, 1980.
(We are told that he had obtained the order from applicant's counsel earlier this month.)
pl_,,/,;
-v
i i
2-1 4
i J
The principal difficulty with the appeal is not that it is late but, rather, that it is impermissible.
The June 27 order was entirely interlocutory in character; insof ar 'as here rele-it dealt with certain discovery requests directed to the
- vant, As such, un-j applicant by Dr. Marrack and another intervenor.
der the plain terms of the Commission's Rules of Practice, b!-
it is not subject to appeal p.ior to the rendition of the See 10 CFR 2.730 (f). 2/ -
Licensing Board's initial decision.
We take this occasion to stress anew the imperative
_1/
necessity that all participants in NRC adjudicatory proceedings -- whether lawyers or laymen representing themselves or organizations to which they belong --
f amiliarize themselves at the outset with those Rules.
By doing so, participants will both (1) enhance their ability to protect adequately the rights of those they represent; and (2) avoid the waste of time and resources j
which inevitably accompanies the taking of action for-bidden by the Rules.
Notwithstanding Section 2.730 (f), we have the authority 2/
to review interlocutory orders of licensing boards as
~~
a matter of discretion.
10 CFR 2.718 (i) ; Public Service C_o. of New Eampshire (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2),
1 NRC 478, 482-83 (1975).
As very recently aLAB-271, reemphasized, however, our general policy is not to exercise that discretion in connection with discovery controversies.
Houston Lighting and Power Co. (South Texas Project, Uhits 1 and 2), ALAB-608, 12 NRC (August 22, 1980).
No reason to depart from that pol-icy is apparent in this instance.
6 i
I
-s r,_-,
r
,-ec
-m.,
. 6 Appeal dismissed.
It is so ORDERED.
FOR THE APPEAL BOAPS*
b.bw
.x M C. Je$ Bishop ~'\\
Secretary to the Appeal Board Michael C. Tarrar was previously a merber of this Board.
16, 1980, he resigned his position as a Effective August permanent legal member of the Appeal Panel and simulta-neously withdrew from all but one of the Appeal Boards to which he was then assigned.
Accordingly, this matter was ruled upon by the remaining merbers of the Board un-der the quorum rule.
At an appropriate date, another Appeal Panel member will be designated to serve on the Board in Mr. Farrar's stead.