ML20053D626
| ML20053D626 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 06/02/1982 |
| From: | Kelley J Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8206070140 | |
| Download: ML20053D626 (5) | |
Text
.
.s($
erraETED emot.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 32 JJi-3 A11:00 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD L T r : r. ' EE U.C '
,;c 4i:pp 3,p -
BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGES James L. Kelley, Chairman Dr. A. Dixon Callihan SERVED JUN 031982 Dr. Richard F. Foster In the Matter of Docket Nos. 50-413
)
50-414 DUKE POWER COMPANY, ET AL.
(Catawba Nuclear Station,
)
Units 1 and 2)
-- June 2,1982 ORDER (Soliciting Comments on Draft Order Staying Discovery)
In a telephone conference initiated by the Board Chairman on May 27, 1982, the Board and counsel for the parties discussed the possibility of staying all discovery in the case pending the Board's rulings on ttje motions for certification and pending Appeal Board rulings on questions certified to it.
There was general support for the concept of such a temporary stay of discovery, with only the Palmetto Alliance expressing significant reservations about the idea. The telephone conference ended with the Board Chairman's suggestion that he would draft a proposed order d' l 0206070140 820602 I
{DRADOCK 05000413 PCR
. ?
on the question and submit it to the parties for comment.
Such a proposed order is attached hereto.
Please supply any comments you may have on this draft order by June 15, 1982.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD hs.
CA2/Q
[Jaf es L. Kel'iey; Chairmjf f
W)MINISTRATIVE JUDGE V Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 2nd day of June, 1982.
f o
s ii ii
p,p r. Fy UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UONIi O U C
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
?
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGES James L. Kelley, Chairman Dr. A. Dixon Callihan Dr. Richard F. Foster In the Matter of Docket Nos. 50-413
)
50-414 DUKE POWER COMPANY, ET AL.
(Catawba Nuclear Station,
)
Units 1 and 2)
June
, 1982 PROPOSED ORDER (Staying Discovery Pending Rulings on Certified Questions)
The Board's Order of May 25, 1982, temporarily stayed discovery on specified contentions pending our rulings on requests for reconsideration, motions for certification and related matters. That temporary stay was based upon the Staff's extension of its expected issuance dates for certain documents, particularly the six month extension with respect to the Safety Evaluation Report. The SER in this case is now scheduled for issuance in February 1983.
Hearings normally begin about three or four months af ter the SER issues. However, in light of the information supplied by the Applicants in Mr. Carr's letter of May 10, 1982 to the Board --
particularly an initial fuel loading date of October 1984 for Unit 1 -- it appears that the hearing in this case could begin somewhat later than the Staff's SER issuance date would normally indicate, if necessary to allow adequate time for discovery, without the risk of this becoming an
" impacted" p*cceeding.
- ?
In these circumstances, the Board believes that all mandatory discovery in this proceeding should be stayed pending more definitive determination of the contentions. We expect to rule on the pending requests for consideration and motions for certification later this month.
We anticipate certifying to the Appeal Board at least some of these rulings, regardless of t)w we resolye the legal issues.
In particular, the legal question whether a vague contention can be conditionally admitted, pending availability of a particular Applicant or Staff document will be certified because it:
(1) is debatable, (2) has a pervasive effect on this case, and (3) has generic implications for other cases.
We cannot of course predict how or when the Appeal Board will act on the certified questions.
- However, it seems reasonable to expect Appeal Board action sometime in the fall. Discovery could then be resumed promptly thereafter on the basis of more firmly settled contentions.
With the foregoing considerations as background, the Board orders that:
(1) All mandatory discovery in this proceeding is sta; 'd pending further order of the Board. This stay applies to all pendint metters in the discovery process, including, for example, motions to compel, motions for protective order, and the like.
(2) This stay of discovery is not to jeopardize the right of all parties to an adequate opportunity for discovery in this proceeding.
The Board intends to nodify or rescind this stay order promptly af ter the Appeal Board rules on questions certified to it or after the Appeal Board has declined certification.
a.
1--,
a e,-
,r y
3-
?
The Board encourages the continuation of informal voluntary discovery i
among the parties while this stay of mandatory discovery is in effect.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD I
James L.- Kelley, Chairman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this day of June, 1982.
f e
e l
l
~
I i
1 3
...._.,,.._m._.____.,___,
_,,. - _.,.,.. _,.. _.,.,. _,,,. _ _.. _.. _ _ _. _. _ _.. _... _.. _... _.. =. _,. _