ML20077G182
| ML20077G182 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 07/29/1983 |
| From: | Eddleman W EDDLEMAN, W. |
| To: | Bright, Carpenter, Kelley J Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8308030403 | |
| Download: ML20077G182 (2) | |
Text
,
7 11 St.
v 705 P
y 29 1
gMJ Y6 Re: NRC Docket 50-100/l401 0.L.
9 4
tek I
Chairman James Kelley and Judges Bright and a
U ASLB Panel 7
dfp T
4 USNRC Washington, DC 20555
\\g
Dear Administrative Judges,
Concerning the letter Thomas Baxter, attorney for Applicants, wrote you on July 22, it appears he is saving all of us time and effort.
My reasons for not providing certain information are in my July 25 letter to him (copies to entire service list in this case) and I see no need to restate or elaborate them absent a motion to connel.
In so saying, I do not concede that his legal theories or characteriza-tions of facts are necessarily correct.
Applicants have still shown no unusual circumstances which night make these names discoverable.
There are a couple of matters touched on in his footnotes that it might be helpful to clarify.
In footnote 1 (page 2), Baxter compares the 21 pseudonyms given to my argument that intervenors have access to a very limited pool of experts.
In fact, the pool of experts available to an aintervenor on any,given contention is quite.limitei.-
usuahto a handful or less. This is in sharp contrast to the large number or experts of ten available to applicants for NRC licenses.
However, when I originally answered the interrogatories of the Applicants in this case, made objections, and argued their first motion to compel, I had been interpreting interrogatory G-2(a) as asking for the identities of persons who were providing information (and opinions) for the purpose of answering those interrogatories.
This impression was consistent with my conversations with Applicants' attorneys during this time.
But on receiving Baxter's June 16 letter and prenaring to answer i
the question, it occurred to me that a more literal interpretation of General Interrogatory 2(a) might well be what Annlicants intended, i.e. to ask who provided any information you used in answering these interrogatories, regardless of when theyprovided it or whether they l
provided it for the nurpose of answering interrogatories.
That literal interpretation produced the list of pseudonyms to which Baxter refers I
l in his July 22 letter to you.
These persons were consulted as experts on matters of strategy, opinions, impressions and legal theories, all informally and all in anticipation of trial.
Where I recalled that a fact had been provided (often incidentally) by such a person, I gave that person a pseudonym in my 6-25 supplement to interrogatory responses.
om g
I may in this way have given Applicants more than they asked for.
No og In his second footnote (page three) Baxter states he assunes that en these non-witness experts are not expected to be called as witnesses.
O n
This is correct.
I now expect t o call none of them, and have no plans y
to do so.
I definitely expect that most of them will never be witnesses.
i However, there is a possibility that one or nore of the three persons oo l
with whom I have the "no-fee unless significant work done" arrangement l
g, might become a witness.
Whenever any such nerson is exnected to testify or retained to be a witness for me I will promobly reveal their no ma.o name and the other requested information.
I stress that right now and for the foreseeable future none, even of these three, is expected to h
ells Eddleman
~D$C3
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLTAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the matter of CAROL'GA POWER k LIGHT CO. Et al. )
Dockets 50-k00 Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant. Units 1 and 2
)
and 501:401 0.L.
CEltrIFICATEOF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of MNk bk b
W Y Cll hjN NAS W S h ktfft % M Ch bNSL<>W j
AgpI e capts a s+GFG YL PEzS Cw+enM Cwd /J!rffR 7
+ VE been served this 2 day of JM4 V 1953,,bydepositin HA l
the US Mail, first-class postage prepaid, upon all parties whose names are listed below, except those whose names are marked with c
an asterisk, for whom service was accomplished by _
Judges James Kelley, Glenn Bright and Jae.es Carpenter (1 egy each)
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555 George F. Trowbridge (attorney for Applicants)
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge ILuthanne G. Miller 1800 M St. NW ASLB Panel Washington, DC 20036 USNRC Wast %gton DC 255 5 l
Office of the Executive Legal Director Phyllis Lotchin, Ph.D.
Attn Docke ts 50-400/401 0.L.
108 Bridle Run Washington DC 20555 NC 2751h USNRC Chanel Hill I
Dan Read Docketing and Service Section (3x)
CEAMT/FLP Attn Docke ts 50-k00/h01 0.L.
Waleigh,7/07 Waveross Office of the Secretary NC 27606 USNRC Dr. Linda W. Little Washington DC 20555 Governor's Waste Mgt. Bd.
51 Albemarle Eldg.
John Runkle Karen E. Long 32 N. Salisbu St.
CCNC Box 991 Raleigh, NC 2 611 307 Granville Rd Raleigh NC 27602 Chapel Hill Nc 2751k Bradley W. Jones USNRC Region II
~Travi s Payne 101 Marietta St.
Edelstein & Payne Atlanta GA 30303 Blox 12601 Maleigh NC 27605 Richard Wilson, M.D.
Certified by h
729 Hunter St.
Apex NC 27502
-