ML20073D687
| ML20073D687 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 04/11/1983 |
| From: | Guild R GUILD, R., PALMETTO ALLIANCE |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8304140115 | |
| Download: ML20073D687 (6) | |
Text
.
~7._,
UMITED STATES OF AMERICA
~
NUCL3AR REGULATORY COMMISSION 33 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD flPR J3 gg,
In the Matter of
)
)
Docket Nos. 50-413.
DUKE POWER COMPANY, et al.
)
50-414
)
(Catawba Nuclear Station,
)
April 11, 1983 Units 1 and 2)
)
PALFETTO ALLIANCE MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM APPLICANTS Pursuant to 10 CFR Sections 2.740(f) and 2.744, Palmetto Alliance hereby moves to compel discovery from Applicants with respect to its " Follow-Up Interrogatories and Requests to Produce", served March 16, 1983, on the grounds that Applicants' Responses of March 25, 1983, are evasive, incomplete or other-wise not fully responsive to the interrocatories and recuests posed.
On or about Wednesday April 6, 1983, counsel for Palretto and counsel for Applicants, Mr. Carr, conferred by telephone in an effort to resolve by acreenent the production of further or more responsive answers to these subject interrogatories and requests for production.
Counsel for Palmetto is informed and believes that the bulk of these matters have been resolved by such agreenent and awaits only the confirmation of such of agreement either by a further written response or by further identification and production of documents by Applicants.
F304140115 830411 PDR ADOCK 05000413 s
O PDR
Subject to such agreement and further response, and reserving its richt to seek further relief in the absence of such agreement or response, Palmetto Alliance hereby moves to compel discovery on such matters as remain in dispute between it and Applicants.
Palmetto moves to compel answers to the following Interrocatories and related Requests to Produce:
Contention 6 Interroaatories 2,3,4 and 5.
Contention 7 Interrogatory 1 Each of these interrocatories on Palmetto's Quality Assurance and track record Contentions represents intervenor's effort to respond to this Board's criticisms of earlier dis-covery cuestions to Applicants which have been unanswered and objected to by Applicants generally on the grounds of burden and relevance.
The Board has sustained these objections by Applicants, at least in part, and in the absence of "more specific follow-up ouestions in this area," have directed that the burden of digesting those reports must fall on Palnetto, notwithstanding its limited resources.
Order of February 9, 1983, at p.
3.
In the face of these narrowed and revised interrogatories Applicants continue to refuse to provide any responsive answers, direct Palmetto to their earlier answers and reassert their earlier objections to providing any additional information.
A I
l l
Palmetto asks this Board to direct Applicants to answer these revised interrogatories.
Contention 6 Interrogatory 2 reflects a narrowing of earlier question 12 to limit the subject of inquiry to each " deficiency in *<lant construction reflecting faulty workmanship or deficiency in plant design change control," which coextensive with the now narrowed scope of this contention as admitted.
Interrogatory 3 reflects the same narrowing of earlier question 13.
Interrog-atory 4 reflects this same narrowing of earlier question 14.
i Interrogatory 5 seeks identification of persons termin-ated by Applicants from QA programs "for reasons related to deficienc.les in the performance of their quality assurance 1
or quality control duties."
This reflects a narrowing of l
earlier question 22 in response to the. Board's criticism that such termination information, if not so limited, "might have j
had nothing to do with QA or QC matters."
Order of February 9 at p.
5.
This Follow-Up Interrogatory is now clearly I
within the scope of the contention and should be answered.
Contention 7 Interrogatory I reflects Palmetto's effort to respond to the Board's criticism of earlier questions on this track record contention the focus of which the Board has character-l ized as follows:
...it is the attitudes and practices of the Applicants' management, as evidenced only in part by the ways in which they have dealt with problems that are most germane to this contention.
Order of February 9 at p. 6.
This interrogatory is further limited to instances of non compliance "known to senior management of Duke Power Company" whose attitudes, knowledge of compliance with NRC regulation and practices in this area bear directly on proof of Palmetto contention 7.
As to all of these revised Follow-Up Interrogatories Palmetto Alliance seeks some measure of relief from the absolutely overwhelming physical and financial burden of sifting through masses of the Applicants' own records at great distance and copyina them at great expense.
Palmetto has already made extensive efforts to perform such a review as best it can.
However the answers by Applicants to a specific factual cuestion in effect says ' search several thousand pages of paper and the answer to your question "would be reflected in at least one of four documents: an Incident Report, a Reportable Occurence Report, a Quality Assurance audit, or an NRC IE Inspection Report," Applicants' March 25 Response at pp. 24-25,
'see if you can find it!'
Palmetto concedes that providing any answers to discovery involves burden in searching records, inquiring of staff personnel, assembling and compiling materials in non-customary formats.
Such burden is relatively lighter on Applicants themselves who have developed and control virtually all the primary source material containing such discovery i
answers.
Further, this burden of compilation falls u. ore appropriately on Applicants rather than Palmetto Alliance
- i
I on the basis both of relative resources and hardship.
Finally it is Duke Power Company that seeks entitlement to this license i
to the detriment of the interests of Palmetto and its members who must defend in this forum.
The relative equities amona the parties warrant. imposing this slight burden upon Applicants, 1
ever assuming all other factors are equal.
Palmetto Alliance therefore, respectfully requests that responsive answers and production of documents be com-pelled by Applicants as herein urged.
h L
April 11, 1983 RobebtGuild
[
Counsel for Palmetto Alliance t
P.O. Box 12097 l
Charleston, S.C.
29412 i
't I.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the matter of
)
Docket Nos. 50-413
)
50-414 DUKE POWER COMPANY, et al.
)
)
(Catawba Nuclear Station,
)
April 11, 1983 Units 1 and 2)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of PAIJEI'IO ALLIANCE FDTION 'IO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM APPLICANTS l
in the above captioned matters, have been served upon the follow-f ing by depositing same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, on this lith day of April 1983.
James L. Kelley, Chairman Chairman Atanic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Atanic Safety and Licensina Aopeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccmnission U.S. Nuclear Reculatory Ccmnission Washington, D.C.
20555 Washincton, D.C.
20555 I
Dr. A. Dixon Callihan Henry A. Presler Union Carbide Corporation Charlotte-Mecklenburg Envirornnental Coalitic P.O. Box Y 943 Henley Place Oak Ridce, Tennessee 37830 Charlotte, N.C.
28207 Dr. Richard R. Foster J. Michael bk:Cerry, III, Esc.
P.O. Box 4263 Debevoise & Liberman Sunriver, Orecon 97701 1200 Seventeenth St., N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 Chairman Atanic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Jesse L. Riley U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccmnission 854 Henley Place Washington, D.C.
20555 Charlotte, N.C.
28207 George E. Johnson, Esc.
Scott Stucky Office of the Executive Leoal Director Docketing and Service Station U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccmnission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccmnission Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Willia:n L. Porter, Esc.
Carole F. Kagan, Attorney Albert V. Carr, Jr., Esq.
Atanic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Ellen T. Ruff, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccmnission Duke Power Ccinpany Washington, D.C.
20555 P.O. Box 33189 Charlotte, N.C.
28242 Richard P. Wilson, Esc.
Assistant Attorney Cencral
, g-g State of South Carolina Robeh Guild
[
h P.O. Box 11549 Columbia, S.C.
29211 Attorney for Palmetto Alliance, Inc.