ML20051W640

Answer Opposing State of Il 820429 Motion to Allow Discovery on Prairie Alliance Contention 2.Further Discovery Unnecessary Due to Broad Scope of Il Prior Requests & Util Obligation to Suppl Requests.W/Certificate of Svc

ML20051W640
Person / Time
Site:	Clinton
Issue date:	05/12/1982
From:	Fox C ILLINOIS POWER CO., SCHIFF, HARDIN & WAITE
To:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8205180128
Download: ML20051W640 (8)

Text

.

~

C. l

.M

~3

-j 'O<'

g), U. t UNITED STATES OF AMERICAL-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF )

ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY, )

SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC. )

and WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER ) Docket No. 50-461 OL COOPERATIVE, INC. )

)

(Operating License for Clinton )

Power Station, Unit 1) )

ANSWER OF APPLICANTS TO THE STATE OF ILLINOIS' MOTION TO ALLOW DISCOVERY ON PRAIRIE ALLIANCE CONTENTION NO. 2 Illinois Power Company (" Illinois Power"), Soyland Power Cooperative, Inc., and Western Illinois Power Coopera-tive, Inc., (" Applicants"), pursuant to Section 2.730(c) of the Rules of Practice of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the " Commission"), hereby answer the State of Illinois' (the " State") Motion to Allow Discovery on Prairie Alliance Contention No. 2 of April 29, 1982 (the " Motion") and re-quest that the Motion be denied. In support of their Answer, Applicants state as follows:

1. The State alleges in its Motion that further discovery on Contention 2 is necessary to allow the State to prepare for hearings and to litigate Contention 2.

, Motion at p. 1. This is simply untrue. The vast amount of information previously provided by Applicants to the State's first and second round discovery requests on 8206130@ 05 7 , i l

6 Contention 2, together with any supplemental infornation which Applicants must and will produce under 10 C.F.R.

S 2.740(e) to the State's first and second round discovery requests, has provided and will provide the State with all the information it needs to litigate Contention 2. This would include any information relevant to the State's prior discovery requests that post-dates November 11, 1981 (or November 16, 1981, as the date was revised at the Third Special Prehearing Conference held in Champaign, Illinois on May 4, 1982).

2. The State'has already conducted exhaustive discovery on Prairie Alliance Contention 2.

a. On June 26, 1981, the State propounded its First Request for Production of Documents and its First Set of Interrogatories to Illinois Power Company. The State's First Request for Production of Documents contained two broad requests (Document Request Number 2.and 6) for

~

documents relating to Contention 2. The State's.first Set of Interrogatories contained six interrogatories (Interrogatories Number 1-6), which sought great quanti-ties'of information on Contention 2.

b. On November 16, 1981, the State submitted its second round discovery requests. In its Second Request for Production of Documents, the State made seventeen document requests, of which twelve (Document Requests Number 4-10, 12 and 14-17) concerned matters re-

lated to Contention 2. Likewise, the State in its Second Set of Interrogatories to Applicants, asked numerous wide ranging interrogatories (Interrogatories Number 5-24) on Contention 2.

c. On January 6, 1982, the State submitted its Additional Second Round Interrogatories to Applicants.

Three of the five specific interrogatories (Interrogatories Number 5-7) concerned Contention 2.

3. Applicants, with two minor exceptions,1 have fully answered the State's all-encompassing discovery requests concerning Contention 2 and will supplement these requests as required by 10 C.F.R. S 2.740(e).

4. Considering the broad scope of the State's prior discovery requests in light of Applicants' continuing obligation to furnish information, Applicants can envision no reason justifying the State's desire, as indicated in its Motion, to leave discovery on Contention 2 wide open.

4 The State has advanced no such reason. Certainly, if 1

Applicants have, as noted at the Third Special Prehearing Conference, objected to responding to certain of the State's Second Round Document Requests. These document requests are the subject of the State's Supplemental Motion to Com-pel Answers to Its Second Request for the Production of Documents, dated March 31, 1982 (to which Applicants responded on April 12, 1982 in their Answer of Applicants to Illinois' Supplemental Motion to Compel Answers to Its Second Round Request for Production of Documents) or Applicants' Motion for a Protective Order of April 22, if82.

As urged by the Board and indicated in the State's May 6, 1982 Initial Response to Applicants' Motion for a Protective Order, Counsel for the parties will endeavor to resolve the

, latter Motion. The former awaits resolution by the Board.

l any new developments lead the State to believe further i discovery specific to those developments is necessary, a motion based on those developments and presenting these specific requests could be made. Such a motion would be far more appropriate than allowing any kind of discovery limited only by a certain date.

1

5. If the Rules of Practice of the Commission on the continuing obligation to supplement discovery are to retain any meaning and, more significantly, if termi-nation dates for discovery are not to become totally meaningless, the blanket continuation of discovery re-quested by the State on Contention 2 cannot be allowed.

WHEREFORE, for all the reasons listed abcVe Applicants request that the State's Motion to Allow Discovery on Prairie Alliance Contention 2 be denied.

4 Respectfully submitted, 1

bht 1bd -) CX k One of the Attorneys for Applicants Sheldon A. Zabel '

William Van Susteren

.; Charles D. Fox IV i SCHIFF HARDIN & WAITE 7200 Sears Tower 233 South Wacker Drive Chicago, Illinois 60606 (312) 876-1000 Dated: May 12, 1982 j

t . ,

I ,

l l

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that an original and two con-formed copies of the foregoing document were served upon the following:

Secretary of the commission United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Attention: Docketing and Service Branch 1 I

and that one copy of the foregoing document was served upon each of the following:

Hugh K. Clark, Esq., Chairman P.O. Box 127A Kennedyville, Maryland 21645 Dr. George A. Ferguson School of Engineering Howard University 2300 Sixth Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20059 Dr. Oscar H. Paris Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Executive Legal Director United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Philip L. Willman Assistant Attorney General Environmental Control Division 188 West Randolph Street i Suite 2315 l

Chicago, Illinois 60610 i

l Jan L. Kodner Tutt and Kodner 173 W. Madison Street Suite 1004 i Chicago, Illinois 60602 i

l l

=

I i

Prairie Alliance

' Box 2424 Station A t Champaign, Illinois 61820 Herbert H. Livermore RR 1 Box 229A Clinton, Illinois 61727 f

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2

Washington, D.C. 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 in each case by depoist in the United States Mail, postage prepaid on May 12, 1982.

// l('f 1, &ld One of the Attorheys for Applicants i

Sheldon,A. Zabel William Van Susteren Charles D. Fox IV ,-

SCHIFF HARDIN & WAITE 7200 Sears Tower 233 South Wacker Drive Chicago, Illinois 60606 (312) 876-1000 L

l l

l l

L

~;e e !,----

1 T? p, ' j ,j rn 75 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF )

ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY, )

SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC. )

and WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER ) Docket No. 50-461 OL COOPERATIVE, INC. )

)

(Operating License for Clinton )

Power Station, Unit 1) )

NOTICE TO: Hugh K. Clark, Esq., Chairman P.O. Box 127A Kennedyville, Maryland 21645 Dr. George A. Ferguson School of Engineering Howard University 2300 Sixth Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20059

]

Dr. Oscar H. Paris Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Executive Legal Director United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission washington, D.C. 20555 Philip L. Willman Assistant Attorney General j Environmental Control Division 188 West Randolph Street Suite 2315 Chicago, Illinois 60610

^

Jan L. Kodner Tutt and Kodner 173 W. Madison Street Suite 1004 Chicago, Illinois 60602 O

llI

l Prairie Alliance Box 2424 Station A Champaign, Illinois 61820 Herbert H. Livermore RR 1 Box 229A Clinton, Illinois 61727 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have filed with the Secretary of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission ANSWER OF APPLICANTS TO THE STATE OF ILLINOIS' MOTION TO ALLOW DISCOVERY ON PRAIRIE ALLIANCE CONTENTION NO. 2 in the above-captioned matter. A copy of this document is attached hereto and hereby served upon you.

?

r._M.) T 3.e One of the Attorneys for Applicants Sheldon A. Zabel William' Van Susteren Charles D. Fox IV SCHIFF HARDIN & WAITE 7200 Sears Tower 233 South Wacker Drive Chicago, Illinois 60606 (312) 876-1000 Dated: May 12, 1982

.+