ML20052B644
| ML20052B644 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000142 |
| Issue date: | 04/28/1982 |
| From: | Frye J Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8205030407 | |
| Download: ML20052B644 (3) | |
Text
i O
Q
- t G
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'8'2 FR 29 N E-ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges:
U John H Frye, III, Chairman p m &.
e$
Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke
(
p Dr. Oscar H. Paris v
, % u cig) h 7
2, gp $IMW sh r
)
~
E bid In the Matter of Docket No. 50-142 P'
(Proposed Renewal o THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY
)
Facility License) g 0F CALIFORNIA
)
~
(UCLA Research Reactor)
April 28,1982 ORDER MmendingOrderofApril 16,1982)
This Board's Order of April 16, 1982, among other things required that, within ten days of the date of service of that Order, e) CBG is to file and serve on the parties its draft proposed affidavit of nondisclosure and protective order to govern proceedings on Contention XX, along with an identifi-cation and qualifications of the experts it wishes to have access to security information, as well as an identification of any attorneys or other representatives whom it also wishes to have access. Within ten and 15 days of the service of this information, UCLA and Staff, respectively, may respond.
Mo'h 6 # 1 8205030407
=
. On April 23, 1982, nine days in advance of the date for filing and serving the material contemplated above,*/ CBG filed a proposed pro-tective order and affidavit of nondisclosure and a motion to defer the identification of individuals whom CBG wishes to have access to sensitive material. This motion, among other things, seeks to require all parties,
'not just CBG, to identify such individuals.
CBG also filed a memorandum in support of its proposed protective order and affidavit and its motion.
Attached to a letter to the Board was a sealed envelope containing the names and qualifications of the individuals in response to the Board Order. This information was not served. The letter explains why CBG adopted this procedure in seeking to comply with the Board's Order.
In light of the foregoing, it is this 28th day of April,1982, ORDERED That the following dates are suspended:
The date for serving on UCLA and Staff of the identities and qualifications of the. individuals CBG wishes to have access to sensitive information; and The dates for UCLA and Staff to respond to the above information, the proposed protective order, and affidavit of nondisclosure.
\\
-*/ The Board's Order of April 16, 1982, was served by regular mail on that day.. Thus, under 10 CFR 5 2.710, five days is added to the ten day period provided in the Order. The first day of this 15 day period is April 17, and the last is May 1, a Saturday. Because under 5 2.710 the last day may not be a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday, the period extends to include May 3,1982.
. UCLA and Staff are directed to respond to the substance of CBG's Motion of April 23, 1982, within the time provided by the rules.
In its ruling on this Motion, the Board will reestablish dates for the service of CBG's identification of the individuals it wishes to have access to
~
sensitive information and for the service of UCLA's and Staff's responses to CBG's list of individuals as well as its proposed protective order and affidavit.
THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND
~
LICENSING BOARD (ADMif]RATIVEJUDGE John HiFrye, III, Chairman
~
Bethesda, Maryland April 28, 1982 9
9 4
e
,