ML20071N401

Motion to Compel Util to Respond to Palmetto Alliance 820903 Second Set of Interrogatories & Requests to Produce. Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20071N401
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	10/04/1982
From:	Guild R GUILD, R., PALMETTO ALLIANCE
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
NUDOCS 8210080081
Download: ML20071N401 (5)

Text

_. . . . _- _ - - . _. _ - _ .. . . . _ . . .__._. ...._ _ -_

i 00gf I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA .

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION -

g g 4 P 7 ,3*l BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD' In the Matter of ) $0 36 DUKE POWER COMPANY, et al. ) Docket No. 50-413 l

50-414 (Catawba Nuclear Station, i Units 1 and 2 ) ) October 4, 1982 a PALMETTO ALLIANCE MOTION I TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM APPLICANTS i,

l Pursuant to 10 CFR Section 2.740(f) , Palmetto Alliance hereby ,

moves for an order compelling the Applicants, Duke Power Company, et

, al, to respond fully to " Palmetto Alliance Second Set of Interrogator-1 l

ies and Requests to Produce" filed September 3, 1982, which dealt with Palmetto Alliance's Contentions No. 8 and 27 on the subjects of oper-h ator qualifications and-real time radiation monitors, respectively.

Applicant's Motion for Protective Order and Responses dated I September 22, 1982, assert numerous unsubstantial and unwarranted ob-I jections to Palmetto Alliance's interrogatories and requests, and cer-tain numerous evasive and incomplete answers and responses. Duke ob-jects to answering at least 12 of Palmetto Alliance's 36 specific in-terrogatories on its operator qualification contention No.8;_and 17 i

of 29. specific interrogatories on Palmetto Alliance's real time radia-i tion monitoring contention No. 27. The Applicants assert that the in-formation sought is not relevant to the subject matter of the conten-tions as they choose to read them and that response would cause them annoyance [ oppression,undueburdenandexpense. They assert that communications with respect to these contentions are privileged and i not subject to discovery.

(

^" " '

4 il isi! .

T)563

.-- _ _ . - . . - _ - - - . - . _ . . - ~.

i s

l l

i More fundamentally Applicants choose to respond only to those questions which they deem relevant to their characterization of Inter-venor's concerns,"in light of their own reading of Palmetto Alliance's ,

l l contentions" Applicant's Responses, p. 4. l l

With respect to contention No. 8 regarding operator qualifica-tions, Applicants "have provided only that information which relates l

' to the direct and related work experience, as a component of operator ,

1 qualification, of those persons for whom information is sought."

l Applicant's Responses, p.5. Yet even as to direct questions concern-i ing the benefits, advantages and disadvantages of actual " hands on"  ;

, i operating experience or the training program to provide equivalent l qualification, Duke provides only evasive responses:

The advantages of direct and related work experience with large PWRs for reactor operators and senior reactor operators is that they gain additional experience with large PWRs. Any disadvantages that might exist are not l

' relevant to the subject of this contention.

Applicant's~ Responses, p. 18. See responses to interrogatories 13, i

i 14 and 23.

on the subject of real time radiation monitering, Palmetto Alliance contention 27, Applicants responses are " limited to infor-mation regarding measurement of offsite dose rates under emergency conditions," Applicant's Responses, p. 28. They refuse to provide non-evasive answers to questions regarding the selection process  ;

followed and components selected for Catawba's offsite monitoring f system, Interrogatory 7, Applicant's Responses, p. 34; their know-l lege of alternative methods, Interrogatory 4, Applicants Responses,

p. 32, the costs of the system chosen and its operations, Interrog-l l

atory 6, Applicant's Responses, p. 33; the systems used by Duke at their other nuclear facilities, interrogatories 10, 11 and 12, 1

_ . - . . . ~. - . - . . . . - . . - - . .

Applicant's Responses, pp. 35, 36; and Duke's knowledge of available real-time monitors and the disadvantages regarding their use at the 4 '

facility, interrogatories 21, 22 and 23, Applicants Responses, p. 38. .

Discovery in NRC licensing proceedings is available to a party i

"regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the subject b

matter involved in the proceeding, whether it relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense ,

i of any other party.... reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." 10 CFP Sections 2.740 (b) (1) .

Palmetto Alliance respectfully urges the Board' to compel t

Applicants to fully respond in order that it may " ascertain the facts" in this complex litigation, " refine the issues, and prepare adequately for a more expeditious hearing or trial." Pennsylvania Power and Light Company, (Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units

[ l and 2) , ALAB-G13, 12 NRC 317 at 322 (1980).

October 4, 1982 l .

(

kobert ild 314 Pal all Columbi SC 29201 Attorney for Palmetto Alliance l

l

[

cb , - .

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0fMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of L

' '~

, DUKE POWER COMPANY,'et'a1. -

Docket No. 50-413 -

l 5J-414 (CatawbaNuclearStation,

Units 1and2) October 4, 1982 l

I CERTIFICATL OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of PALMETTO ALLIANCE MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM APPLICANTS in the above captioned matters, have been served upon the following by deposit in the United States mail this 4 th day ofoctober 1982.

James L. Kelley, Chairman George E. Johnson, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Office of the Executive Legal Board Panel Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Comission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. A. Dixon Callihan William L. Porter, Esq.

Union Carbide Corporation Albert V Carr, Jr. , Esq. -

P.O. Box Y Ellen T. Ruff, Esq..

Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Duke Power Company P.O. Box 33189 Dr. Richard R. Foster Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 P.O. Box 4263 Sunriver, Oregon 97701 Richard P. Wilson, Esq.

Aseistant Attomey General Chaiman State of South Camlina Atomic Safety and Licensing P.O. Box 11549 Board Panel Columbia, South Carolina 29211 l U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

.,.~.

~

Chaiman Jesse L. Riley Atomic Safety and Licensing 854 Henley Place Appeal Board Charlotte, North Carolina 28207 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Connission Scott Stucky Washington, D.C.~ 20555 Docketing and Service Station U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Henry A. Presler Connission -

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Washington, D.C. 20555' ,

Environmental Coalition 943 Henley Place Charlotte, North Carolina 28207 J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.

Debevoise & Liberman 1200 Seventeenth St., N.W.

Washington, DC 20036 hk Robert G uild' (

Attorney for Palmetto Alliance et

, < , - - - - - - - - - - - - . - , . - _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -