ML20066C630

Supplementary Response to NRC & Util Interrogatories on Palmetto Alliance Contentions 8,16 & 27.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20066C630
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	11/06/1982
From:	Lowe M PALMETTO ALLIANCE
To:	DUKE POWER CO., NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD)
References
NUDOCS 8211100192
Download: ML20066C630 (8)

Text

.

00LKETED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA MW NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0!?tISSION BEFORE THE AT0!!IC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOAR -9 A10:56 U$f CF 5ELFmov In the "atter of "C

• Ijjpgj %

DUKE POWER C0'1PANY, et al . )

) Docket No. 50-413 (Catawba Nuclear Station, ) 50-414 Units 1 and 2) )

) November 5, 1982 PAU1ETTO ALLIANCE SUPPLE'!ENTARY RESPONSES TO APPLICANTS' AND STAFF'S INTERROGATORIES REGARDING PAUtETTO CONTENTIONS 8, 16, and 27.

Intervenor Palmetto Alliance herewith submits supplementary responses to discovery by Applicants and Staff as directed by the Board at the most recent Prehearing Conference of October 8,1982 and reaffirms its previous Responses and Motion for Protective Order of August 30, 1982.

Applicants assert in their Motion to Compel of September 9,1932, that their interrogatories are designed to enable Applicants to understand how Palmetto Alliance defines the material terms in its contentions; what the areas of safety concern (if any) raised by Palmetto Alliance encompass; what actions (if any) Applicants should take, according to Palmetto Alliance, to assure the safe operation of Catawba; and what the technical bases (if any) for Palmetto Alliance's positions are.

Applicants' Motion to Compel at p. 647.

Palmetto Alliance does not dispute the legitimacy of these areas of inquiry or that such information is properly discoverable. Palmetto asserts no objection to responding to any of these questions by Duke Power Company on relevance grounds. But Palmetto does insist on its right to say "we don't know" at this stage of litigation and to be free 8211100192 821106 PDR ADOCK 05000413 2)S03

from sheer harassment at the hands of either Duke o the NRC Staff. Defining such terms as "sufficiert", Applicants' Interrogatory No. 7, " reactor operators", Interrogatory ?!o. 22, and "have experience", Interrogatory flo.

61, beyond stating that the wo, is' common meaning should control, represents at least sheer make-work if not harassment.

By contrast Applicants and Staff have asserted numerous objections to answering questions by Palmetto Alliance on these same contentions.

Palmetto Allaince Motions to Compel and to Require Answers from Applicants and Staff respectively on contentions 8,16 and 27 remain pending.

The flRC Appeal Board has approved the following Licensing Board formulation of a party's duty to respond to discovery.

In responding to discovery requests, a party is not required to engaged in extensive research. It need only reveal information in its possession or control (although it may be required to perform some investigation to deter-mine what information it actually possesses.) Assuming truthfulness of the statement, lack of knowlcige is always an adequate response.

Pennsylvania Power and Light Company,'elal. (Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2), ALAB 613, 12 NRC 317 at 334 (1980).

l Palmetto Alliance has agreed to produce for inspection all non-privileged documentary information in its possession on tne subjects in question; and in the body of its contentions, on the record of the Pre-hearing Conference and in its previous responses has endeavored to the best of its ability to disclose what it knows on the questions asked. The following answers supplement that information.

APPLICANTS' INTERR0GATORIES Contention No. 8

1. Active participation in operation.

7. As much as is needed.

14. Do not have.

20. A power reactor of a size comparable to Catawba in which heat is trans-ferred from the core to a heat exchanger by high temperture water kept under high pressure in the primary system.

22. Any individual who either manipulates a control of a reactor or directs another to manipulate a control of a reactor.

24. Same meaning as employed by Applicants.

27. Capable of functioning.

40. While Intervenor no longer has copy of FSAR examined in preparation of this contention, the FSAR at the South Carolina State' Library reflects as follows: Table 13.1.3-1, pp. 2-7-40 sumarizes the quali-fications of Shift Supervisors and Assistant Shift Supervisors William H. Miller, James F. Beattie, Gail B. Ice, B.A. Sigmon, John M. Hill, Reginald E. Kimroy, 'lichael J. Brady, Phillip J. Loss, Thomas Baumgardner, Robert W. Smith, Stacy S. Cooper, and Charlie Skinner.

41. See answer to No. 40,

43. See answer to No. 40.

47. Principal duty to direct.

53. Funtioning of the facility in a manner so as not to endanger.

61. Participation in operation.

72. While Intervenor no longer has copy of FSAR examined in preparation of this contention, the FSAR at the South Carolina State Library l sets out License Requirements, Section 13.2.3, and License Variances, Section ~13.2.4, reflecting experience requirements for Reactor Opera-tors and Senior Reactor Operators. No names of operators are set out in this copy of the FSAR.

73. See answer to No. 72.

78. Nearly but not exactly the same absence of participation.

l  !

t

Contention No.16

1. Have not shown by reasoning, proved, or made clear.

9. Skill, power to do, expertness, talent.

17. So as not to endanger.

25. To put aside, accumulate, safekeep as is reflected by Applicants' plans and application.

29. Clusters of fuel rods which have been exposed to radiation as is reflected by Applicants' plans and application.

38. Other power reactors owned or operated by Duke Power Company as is reflected by Applicants' plans and application.

Contention No. 27

1. Call for as necessary.

26. Having the qualities necessary for.

47. Position in various places near the location of the facility.

55. The location of the facility.

78. To give an acceptable level of confidence.

STAFF It! TERR 0GATORIES Palmetto Alliance has previously responded to the questions of NRC Staff in its August 30, 1982 Res ponses by asserting

... answers to Interrogatoes of the NRC Staff are fully provided in the following answers to Appli-cants' interrogatories.

Id. at p. 3.

In its Motion to Compel, NRC Staff has identified three of its interrogatories not the same as Applicants:

...although there is some overlap between Applicants' and Staff's interrogatories on these contentions, there are

~

several Staff interrogatories which are clearly not included in Applicants' interrogatories (e.g. Interrogatories 6,10, 14), as to which there is no response whatsoever.

1 NRC Staff Motion to Compel Answers to Staff Interrogatories and Response to Palmetto Alliance Motion for Protective Order, dated 9/15/82 at p. 3.

Palmetto Alliance provides the following supplementary responses to these interrogatories.

6. - Not to our knowledge.

i 10. Intervenor lacks sufficient knowledge to answer.

14. Intervenor lacks sufficient knowledge to answer.

1

I

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of DUKE POWER COMPANY, et al. ) Docket Nos. 50-413

) 50-414 (Catawba Nuclear Station, )

Units 1 and 2 )

AFFIDAVIT OF MICHAEL F. LOWE I, flichael F. Lowe, do affirm as follows:

1. I am employed as Staff by Palmetto Alliance, Inc. at 21351s Devine Street, Columbia, South Carolina, 29205.

2. I an duly authorized to participate in answering interrogatories and requests for production regarding Palmetto Alliance contentions 8,16, and 27, and I affirm that the responses given are true to the best of my knowledge.

gichaelF.L'og l

l AFFIRMED AND SUBSCRIBED I B ME THIS DAY OF NOTARY PUBLI 'F j0RS@THCAROLINA V

UNITED STATES OF A?! ERICA NUCLEAP, REGULATORY C0!?ilSSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of ) >

DUKE POWER COMPANY, et al.

Docket No. 50-413

) 50-414 (Catawba Nuclear Station, )

Units 1 and 2) )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of Palmetto Alliance Supplementary Responses to Applicants' and Staff's Interrogatories Regarding Palmetto Contentions 8, 16 and 27 in the above captioned matters, have been served upon the follow-ing by deposit in the United States mail this 6th day of November,1982.

James L. Kelley, Chairman William L. Porter, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Albert V. Carr, Jr., Esq.

Board Panel Ellen T. Ruff, Esq.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Duke Power Company Commission P.O. Box 33189 Washington, D.C. 20555 Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 Dr. A. Dixon Callihan Chairman Union Carbide Corporation Atomic Safety and Licensing P.O. Box Y Appeal Board Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Dr. Richard Foster Washington, D.C.20555 P.O. Box 4263 Sunriver, Oregon 97701 Henry A. Presler Charlotte-Mecklenburg Environmental Chairman Coalition Atomic Safety and Licensing 943 Henley Place Board Panel Charlotte, North Carolina U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.

Washington, D.C. Debevoise & Liberman I

1200 Seventeenth St., N.W.

George E. Johnson, Esq. Washington, D.C. 20036 Office of the Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Richard P. Wilson Scott Stucky Assistant Attorney General Docketing and Service Station State of South Carolina U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washinton, D.C. 20555 Jesse L. Riley 854 Henley Place Charlotte, North Carolina 28207 Rollprt Guild j Attorney for( tto Alliance l

. _ . _ _ , _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ . . _ ._. ..-.- __ .-.-. __ _____,._ -..._,, ..._.--___.~ ____, _ _ _ _ _ _ , - - _ . _ , . , - . _ . . . . _ . _ .