ML20076A704

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards 830801 Agreement Ltr Between Counsel for Applicant & Hartsville Group & Applicant Answer to Hartsville Group Motion to Compel.Applicant Will Withdraw Objection to Interrogatories 42-53 by 830830
ML20076A704
Person / Time
Site: Robinson Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 08/15/1983
From: Trowbridge G
CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.), SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE
To: Hetrick D, Kline J, Margulies M
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML20076A708 List:
References
83-484-03LA, 83-484-3LA, ISSUANCES-OLA, NUDOCS 8308180287
Download: ML20076A704 (6)


Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

~

8 e 3..

DOCKETED SHAW, PITTMAN, PoTTs & TROWBRIDGEDSNRC a pantates .e or amortssioNAL compomanons 1800 M STREET. N. W. ,

WASHINGTON, D. C. 2OO36 mEC@'ta taoas saa-soes a saa-see CFFICE OF SECF.E fTutx 00CXEimat-asan waw'a* *=ai gggett

  • law" TELtpHoNE GEORGE V. TROwnRIDGE, P.C. ' **3 ' **MCl*

August 15, 1983 Administrative Judge Morton B. Margulies Chairman, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

{

Administrative Judge Jerry R. Kline l l

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Administrative Judge David L. Hetrick Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Professor of Nuclear Engineering University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona 85721 In the Matter of I CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY (H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2)

Docket No. 50-261-OLA ASLBP No. 83-484-03LA Gentlemen:

In connection with the Hartsville Group Motion to Compel Applicant Responses to Interrogatories and Requests to Produce Documents, dated July 11, 1983, I enclose copies of the following documents:

1. Letter agreement dated August 1, 1983, between counsel for Applicant and the representative of the Hartsville Group withdrawing the Hartsville Group motion to compel with respect to certain of the interrogatories and incorporating Appli-cant's commitments with respect thereto. The 8308180287 830015 PDR ADOCK 05000261 O PDR hhs

l~

SHAw. PITTMAN, PoTTs & TROWBRIDGE A PANfNEWSMir OF PeOFEtedoesAL CompomatrOMs Administrative Judge Margulies Administrative Judge Kline Administrative Judge Hetrick August 15, 1983 Page Two copy of the letter agreement which is enclosed has been signed only by Applicant's counsel.

The representative of the Hartsville Group has assured Applicant's counsel, however, that he signed a copy of the agreement over a week ago and gave instructions for mailing a fully signed copy to Applicant's counsel. This mailing has not yet been received.

2. Applicant's answer to the Hartsville Group motion to compel with respect to the remaining interrog-atories covered by the motion.

In addition to the items covered in the August 1 letter of agreement, Applicant has decided to withdraw its objection to Interrogatories 142 through 53 (Contention 3) contained in Hartsville Group's First Set of Interrogatories and will answer those interrog-atories not later than August 30, 1983. Applicant's answer to the Hartsville motion to compel therefore does not address these inter-rogatories. Applicant's withdrawal of its objection is without prejudice to Applicant's right tc object to introduction at the evidentiary hearing of the information sought by the interrogatories on the ground that the information is outside the scope of Hartsville Group's allowed contentions.

Respectfully submitted, SHAW, ITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE 6 as>sA 'u Geo[geF. Trowbridge P.C.

Enclosures l

l

i SHAW, PITTMAN, PoTTs & TROWBRIDGE A pamTNEasMap or poortssioNAL ComponATeoms 1800 he STRCET. N. W-WASMINGTON. D. C. 20036 mAMser o. poTTs. p C JoMM A. McCuuouo.4.

  • C. 20M 822-8000 JErrEav L vastoM ANontw O. Etus eTEuAmt L. p J DAfa' cam *C=Ev.pC. - JACK **cmAv "'CMano A SAM
  • OEcmog r To'TTM AN. p C.p C owemeoot, otomot
  • M'CMAELv.sm.* C TMoneAs M McConMeca TMoMAs E. CoocmER.Ja eTE eMIN O poTTs.
  • C J twoMAs LENo4Amt, p C. T g LgCoptt p JoMN L CARM.Jm. *ENDEUN A. WMaTE semALo CMAmNorr, S C. steven L. ME LTrEm. p C. PM,vp J. sea mVEv sTANLEven eAmo PM ue.so coerwsCm.* C. oEANO AuuCa.*C, (202) 822 ioes & s22-Hse acetar7 M oonDose messTiL uMso e v,MoTMvMANLoN.OC. JoMN ENORL e C SAmeARA J MonGEN Lgsyg n, sugTM ecomet es mootes.Ja. p C CMAmLE s S. Ts umaN. p C. soNN*E s. coTTuEs ~

rmE3 A UTTLE. p C STEPHEN e MUTTLER p C wooiN.As.nuTLEcoE coew G eM*NE LAseOEn. p C. wesefMmop N. SnowN.

  • C.- maperaspoo Mowa#OM sMArrE RMAN gayggggggy gyggg otsonAMs.SAustm JANICE LEMmEn STEIN teuC3 w CMumCMcLL
  • C. JAME S e MAMUN.
  • C. (2021482 soft SCOTT A ANENetmG LEftut A NsCMcLeoN. Jm. p C. MANoALe RELL 8C ' J n' esam?IN 4. MmALL p C feoeENT E. IAMLER. p C. -

CAs**Stu meLLErEm sETM M MoOGAstAN meCMamO J. mENDALL p C. #O8E 47 e moeSINs.

  • C. gyg u ueg u m gy sTEpMEN e.MEIMANN Jay C. 6 ALSE NG. A C. STEVEN se LUCAs. p C. TELEX OEUssa A. m*OGway sANOmA E, emusCA*

aAmeama es nossoTTI.

  • C. oAwoM mustNsTEIN. p C. ESLEEN L enowNEU.

Riono 1 V ALLEN. Ja . p C. meCMan E GALEN DAMELAM ANoEnsoN ret a omanNE n.

  • C. LvmN w.O..TTLEsty

. webso" CASLE "see AwLaw"

^* ' ***"**"'"*"

l A fWXAv we sett a. p C. Mafias r. TaawEso-OsA2 WE DE m'*Cm L RLON ALEUp

,e g ,x*NoEmg O,,. To,Maszczum sTEVEte

  • PfTLE R*

NAYM1 KEEL F emEED.am p c. vecTomeA J. pt RsUNs -

Mamm LuoENebtCa. p C. JoMN M o NEILL Jm. "'OMA*C d 'A ""',"O E sseE 7 7 L eLAp t. J R . S C Jav A. Eps? TEN ELbENA*FREDEL gLggg gggg,py CARLRToM s jones. PC. mANO L ALLEN "" " ~U "

TMoe*10 A. SANTER.

  • C. TruoTMY e Mesmoog dCMoer OEALv' sANomA E.' robsoM EILEEN M GLEIMEm JAte 23 M sunOE n. F C. ELisAeETM ts. *ENOLETON Couse sE L Juo8TMA.sANOLER OAvlOm sAMm se*ELooN J wElsEL
  • C. Mammv M. OLAssetEoEL ECWARO O. ToufoG. lH C..-..

Sowoo1N e a E TRAeN August 1, 1983 weiTEm n oimECT oeAL MuMeta 822-1026 l B. A. Matthews The Hartsville Group P. O. Box 1089 Hartsville, SC 29550

Dear Mr. Matthews:

This will confirm our telephone agreements with respect to a number of the Hartsville Group interrogatories to which Licensee objected and with respect to which Hartsville Group has filed a motion to compel. No agreements were reached with respect to the remainder of the interrogatories covered by the motion to compel, and Licensee will answer the motion to compel with respect to the remainder of the interrogatories.

General Interrogatory No. 1 (Persons Answering Interrogatories).

Licensee answered and did not object to this interrogatory.

The motion to compel-i's withdrawn.

General Interrogatory No. 2 (Witnesses).

Licensee has not yet 'dentified any of its witnesses. As and when witnesses are seier- id Licensee will identify those wit-nesses to Hartsville Group and provide a brief written description

1 e.

SHAw, PITTMAN POTTs 6. TROWCRIDGE ,

A pamwegneseep our anosPeemaa*=** ComeOmaf10 pet ,

i B. A. Matthews August'1, 1983 Page Two 4

l of the area of their testimony. In addition, as to any witness )

Licensee intends to qualify as an expert entitled to give opinion evidence and on whose opinions Licensee intends.to rely, Licensee will provide the information sought by this interrogatory. Based on these commitments the motion to compel is withdrawn.

General Interrogatory No. 3 (Calculations).

Licensee withdraws its objection to this-interrogatory and will respond by-August 15, 1983, with respect to those calculations oon which Licensee presently intends to rely. Licensee is unwilling t

to accept a blanket obligation to supplement its response but will

, entertain requests as to the existence of and its willingness to produce specific. categories of additional calculations on which i Licensee will rely. If Licensee is unwilling to produce such addi-

! tional calculations, Licensee will not object on grounds of timeli-ness to a motion by Hartsville Group to the Licensin quire Licensee to supplement its answers to,this int'gerrogatory Board to re-with respect to such calculations. Based on these commitments the motion to compel is withdrawn.

(

General Interrogatory No. 4 (Communications).

Licensee will by August 15, 1983, identify to Hartsville i Group all documents (including memoranda of conversations and con-sultations) on which Licensee presently intends to rely. Licensee

is unwilling to accept a blanket obligation to supplement its re-

! sponse but will entertain requests as to the existence of and its willingness to produce specific categories of additional documents-l on which Licensee will rely. If Licensee is unwilling to produce such additional documents, Licensee will.;not object on-grounds of timeliness to a motion by Eartsville Group to the Board to require Licensee to supplement its answer to this interrogatory with're-spect to'such documents. Based on these commitments the motion to l compel is withdrawn.

Contention 1 - Interrogatory-No. 31 (Severity Level IV Violations).

Licensee will provide theLfull text of documents previously .

provided to Hartsville Group in answer to this-interrogatory. .

Based'onLthis commitment and Licensee's: commitments below with-re-

-spect to Interrogatory No. 35, Hartsville Group's motion to compel

-is withdrawn.

l

SHAW. PITTMAN. PoTTs & TROWZRIDGE

. .r . ..o, . co . ...

B. A. Matthews August 1, 1983 Page Three Contention 1 - Interrogatory No. 35 -

(Violations).

Licensee withdraws its objections and will respond to this interrogatory, on the basis of a file search, by August 15, 1983, with respect to all violations or claims of violation since January 1, 1978. Licensee will provide to Hartsville Group copies of.

Licensee's responses identifying and responding to each violation.

Based on this commitment the motion to compel is withdrawn.

Contention 2 - Interrogatories 1 through 114 (Environmental' Impact Statement).

Licensee agrees that in the event the NRC Staff fails to issue an EIS or the Licensing Board fails to strike Contention No. 2, Hartsville Group may renew its Contention 2 interrogatories and Licensee will not object on timeliness grounds to their renewal.

Based on this commitment the motion to compel is withdrawn.

Contention 3 - Interrogatory 5 (Reactor Embrittlement).

Because patent applications have now been filed covering matters contained in Licensee's letter to the NRC dated April 1, 1983, Licensee no longer considers the letter to be proprietary.

Licensee wi-ll furnish a copy of the letter and its enclosure to Hartsville Group by August 15, 1983. Based on this commitment the motion to compel is withdrawn.

Contention 3 - Interrogatories Nos. 126 and 127 (Supply Demand Forecasts).

-Hartsville Group will review the materials already furnished by Licensee, including materials supplied in response to these interrogatories and to Interrogatories Nos. 158 through 160, to determine whether further data respecting PROMOD or Licensee's PROMOD. calculations is required. If so Hartsville Group will re-quest such data in follow-on interrogatories by August 1, 1983.

If Licensee objects to or fails by August 15, 1983, to answer the follow-on interrogatories, Hartsville Group may by August 30, 1983, file a motion to compel Licensee to produce the data. Licensee will not object to such motion to compel.on grounds of timeliness.

Based on these commitments the motion to compel is' withdrawn.

Q< , . - . , 4 -

r a

SHAW. PITTMAN, PoTTs & TROWERIDGE" A pantNgmemp Osr pmOFEteaONAL CompO#AMONS B. A. Matthews August 1, 1983 Page Four Contention 3 - Interrogatories Nos. 130 through 167 (Attorney General Interrogatories).

Licensee will by August 15, 1983, furnish to Hartsville Group an affidavit stating:that the answers provided to the Attorney General's interrogatories were true and correct to the best of affiant's knowledge, information and belief as of the date the same answers were provided to Hartsville Group. Based on this commitment the motion to compel is withdrawn.

Contention 3 - Interrogatories Nos. 76, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 104, 105, 107, 108, 109, 110, 118, 119 and 120 (Calculations and Studies Not Previously Performed).

Licensee objected to these interrogatories insofar as they called for new studies or calculations not previousl'y performed.

Licensee is unwilling to accept a blanket obligation to supplement its response but will entertain requests as'to the existence of and its willingness to produce specific categories of new studies or calculations of the type requested in these interrogatories.

If Licensee is unwilling to produce such new studies or calcula-tions, Licensee will not object on grounds of timeliness to a motion by Hartsville Group to the Licensing Board to require Licensee to supplement its answers to these interrogatories with respect to such new studies or calculations. Based on these commitments the motion to compel is withdrawn.

If this letter accurately reflects our agreements, please so indicate by signing and returning the enclosed copy. Licensee's counsel will submit a copy of the signed' agreement to the Licensing Board at the time Licensee submits its answer to Hartsville Group's motion to compel.

Sincerely, SHAW TTMAN a & TROWBRIDGE b 'N 4/

"jGrgp/F. ' Trowbridge /

Tounsel for Licensee /

Accepted:

i Representative for Hartsville Group