|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARDCL-99-123, Comment on Prs 10CFR50 & 72 Re Reporting Requirements for Nuclear Power Reactors & Draft NUREG-1022, Event Reporting Guidelines. Util Areas of Concern Includes ESF Actuations, Significantly Degraded Components & Historical Limitations1999-09-20020 September 1999 Comment on Prs 10CFR50 & 72 Re Reporting Requirements for Nuclear Power Reactors & Draft NUREG-1022, Event Reporting Guidelines. Util Areas of Concern Includes ESF Actuations, Significantly Degraded Components & Historical Limitations ML20205N4081999-04-14014 April 1999 Comments Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR2,19 & 20 Re Proposed Repository at Yucca Mountain.Requests Information on How Much Radiation Being Released Now at Diablo & Hanford NPPs ML20205N4601999-03-21021 March 1999 Introduces K Schumann as Representative of Nuclear Waste Committee (Nuwic) of San Lius Obispo County.Informs That Nuwic & Nuclear Waste Management Committee Concerned with Transportation of Spent Nuclear Fuel Rods from Dcnpp ML20195E8841998-11-24024 November 1998 Petition for Mod to OLs to Require Plant Owner to Have Independent Contractor Evaluate Plant Safety Culture ML20236T3011998-07-24024 July 1998 Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC Licensed Avtivities (Effective Immediately).Lh Brooks Prohibited for 5 Yrs from Date of Order from Engaging in NRC Licensed Activities ML20248C2261998-05-22022 May 1998 Comment Opposing Revised Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Protection & Safety Sys ML20129J4191996-10-18018 October 1996 Order Approving Application Re Corporate Restructuring of Pacific Gas & Electric Company by Establishment of Holding Company DCL-95-206, Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-61 Re Improving Fire Protection Regulations1995-10-0606 October 1995 Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-61 Re Improving Fire Protection Regulations ML20091P8721995-08-23023 August 1995 Comment Opposing Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-61 Re Nuclear Energy Institute Proposed Amends on Fire Safety for All NPPs DCL-95-001, Comment on Proposed Changes to Reactor Pressure Vessel Integrity Rule 10CFR50.Endorses NEI Comments1995-01-0303 January 1995 Comment on Proposed Changes to Reactor Pressure Vessel Integrity Rule 10CFR50.Endorses NEI Comments ML20077M7521994-12-30030 December 1994 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Shutdown & Low Power Operation for Nuclear Power Reactors DCL-94-270, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR2,51 & 54 Re Rulemaking for NPP License Renewal.Endorses Comments & Changes Proposed by NEI 941208 Submittal1994-12-0808 December 1994 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR2,51 & 54 Re Rulemaking for NPP License Renewal.Endorses Comments & Changes Proposed by NEI 941208 Submittal ML20149H0851994-11-0404 November 1994 Initial Decision (Construction Period Recovery/Recapture).* Renewed Motion to Reopen Record 940808,denied.Served on 941104.W/Certificate of Svc ML20072L2651994-08-23023 August 1994 PG&E Opposition to San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Renewed Motion to Reopen Record.* Util Opposes San Luis Obispo for Peace Motion Based on Affidavit Stating No Evidence Found in Motion Re Flaw in Program.W/Certificate of Svc ML20072F0291994-08-12012 August 1994 Erratum to San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Motion to Reopen Record.* Intervenors Corrects Error in Renewed Motion to Reopen Record Re Application for License Amend to Extend Term of Operating License for Plant.W/Certificate of Svc ML20072B2651994-08-0909 August 1994 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re FFD Requirements Concerning Random Drug Testing ML20072A5821994-08-0808 August 1994 San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Renewed Motion to Reopen Record Re PG&E Application for Amend to Extend Term of OL for Plant.* Motion to Reopen Record to Introduce Insp Rept Identifying Alleged Problems W/Plant.W/Certificate of Svc ML20071L2061994-07-26026 July 1994 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Changing Current Drug Testing Policies to Exclude All Personnel in nonsafety-related Positions ML20072B8481994-07-26026 July 1994 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Changes to FFD Requirements Concerning Random Drug Testing ML20071L1901994-07-20020 July 1994 Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Relaxing Rule on Drug Testing of Employees Working at NPP DCL-94-134, Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-60 Re Amend to 10CFR50.54 by Changing Frequency W/Which Each Licensee Conducts Independent Reviews of Emergency Preparedness Program1994-06-27027 June 1994 Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-60 Re Amend to 10CFR50.54 by Changing Frequency W/Which Each Licensee Conducts Independent Reviews of Emergency Preparedness Program DCL-94-135, Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-59 Re Proposed Amend to 10CFR50.54(p) Concerning Frequency W/Which Licensee Conducts Independent Reviews of Security Programs1994-06-27027 June 1994 Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-59 Re Proposed Amend to 10CFR50.54(p) Concerning Frequency W/Which Licensee Conducts Independent Reviews of Security Programs ML20064D1791994-03-0707 March 1994 Pacific Gas and Electric Co Reply in Opposition to San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Motion to Reopen Record.* Motion to Reopen Record Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20064D1961994-03-0404 March 1994 Affidavit of Mj Angus Re Motion to Reopen Record ML20063L5721994-02-25025 February 1994 San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Re Util Application for License Amend to Extend Term of Operating License for Plant.* Advises That Record of Proceeding Should Be Reopened to Consider Insp 93-36 Re Util Surveillance of Asw Sys DCL-94-021, Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-21-2 Re Commercial Grade Item Dedication Facilitation1994-01-26026 January 1994 Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-21-2 Re Commercial Grade Item Dedication Facilitation ML20059D2431994-01-0707 January 1994 Package of Intervenor Exhibits Consisting of Related Correspondence Not Admitted Into Evidence.Related Correspondence ML20062N0001993-12-30030 December 1993 PG&E Reply Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law.* Mothers for Peace Proposed Findings & Conclusions Do Not Provide Any Supportable Rationale to Change Findings & Conclusions Previously Proposed by Pg&E.W/Certificate of Svc ML20058P3931993-12-22022 December 1993 NRC Staff Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law in Form of Initial Decision.* Certificate of Svc ML20058K7491993-12-0202 December 1993 NRC Staff Motion for Extension of Time.* Board Has Extended Filing Time for Util Until 931230.W/Certificate of Svc. Served on 931206.Granted for Board on 931203 ML20058K8771993-12-0202 December 1993 NRC Staff Motion for Extension of Time.* Requests That Board Extend Date for Staff to File Findings Until 931222. W/Certificate of Svc ML20059M5291993-11-19019 November 1993 Applicant Exhibits A-21,A-22,A-24,A-25,A-26,A-29 & A-F1, Consisting of Related Correspondence Not Admitted Into Evidence.Related Correspondence ML20058E0741993-11-19019 November 1993 San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law Re Licensee Application for License Amend to Extend Term of Operating License for Plant.* W/ Certificate of Svc ML20059E8931993-10-28028 October 1993 Memorandum & Order (Motion for Extension of Time).* San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace 931018 Request for two-wk Extension of Time to File Proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law Granted.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 931029 ML20059E8531993-10-27027 October 1993 NRC Staff Response to Board Memorandum & Order Re Extension of Time.* Staff Believes That San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Has Shown No Good Cause for Requesting Extension to File Proposed Findings of Fact.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059E8631993-10-25025 October 1993 Pacific Gas & Electric Co Response to Motion for Extension of Time.* Util Does Not Agree W/Board Assessment That Mothers for Peace Request Appears to Be Reasonable But Will Not Oppose Request.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059B2191993-10-19019 October 1993 Memorandum & Order (Responses to Motion for Extension of Time).* Board Believes Intervenor Request for Extension of Time to File Proposed Findings of Fact Appears Reasonable. W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 931019 ML20059B1071993-10-18018 October 1993 San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Motion for Extension of Time for Filing Proposing Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law.* Requests Extension of Two Wks or Until 931119 to File Proposed Findings of Fact.W/Certificate of Svc ML20057D0531993-09-23023 September 1993 Notice of Appearance.* Notice Given That Undersigned Attorney Enters Appearance in Listed Matter & Listed Info Provided.W/Certificate of Svc ML20057B0401993-09-14014 September 1993 NRC Staff Reply to PG&E Response to Staff Motion to Amend Protective Order.* NRC Staff Moves Board to Adopt Language Requested in 930817 Motion as Stated.W/Certificate of Svc ML20056G4891993-08-30030 August 1993 Pacific Gas & Electric Co Response to Motion to Amend Protective Order.* Staff Asks That Protective Order Be Clarified by Adding New Footnote to Paragraph 3 of Order. W/Certificate of Svc ML20059C7361993-08-24024 August 1993 Intervenor Exhibit I-MFP-88,consisting of NRC Insp of Diablo Canyon Units 1 & 2 IR 05000275/19920161993-08-24024 August 1993 Intervenor Exhibit I-MFP-137,consisting of Insp Rept Re Dockets 50-275/92-16 & 50-323/92-16,dtd 920707 IR 05000275/19930111993-08-24024 August 1993 Intervenor Exhibit I-MFP-26,consisting of Re Insp Repts 50-275/93-11 & 50-323/93-11 ML20059M1381993-08-24024 August 1993 Staff Exhibit S-1,consisting of Re 920519 Enforcement Conference IR 05000275/19920131993-08-24024 August 1993 Intervenor Exhibit I-MFP-140,consisting of 920416,mgt Meeting Repts 50-275/92-13 & 50-323/92-13 ML20059D0841993-08-24024 August 1993 Intervenor Exhibit I-MFP-139,consisting of Insp Rept Re Dockets 50-275 & 50-323,dtd 920417 IR 05000275/19920261993-08-24024 August 1993 Intervenor Exhibit I-MFP-118,consisting of Notice of Violation & Insp Rept Re Docket 50-275/92-26 & 50-323/93-26,dtd 921113 ML20059M5041993-08-24024 August 1993 Staff Exhibit S-2,consisting of Re Notice of Violation ML20059M8621993-08-24024 August 1993 Intervenor Exhibit I-MFP-35,consisting of Rept, Self- Evaluation of Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Dtd Jul 1993 1999-09-20
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20195E8841998-11-24024 November 1998 Petition for Mod to OLs to Require Plant Owner to Have Independent Contractor Evaluate Plant Safety Culture ML20072L2651994-08-23023 August 1994 PG&E Opposition to San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Renewed Motion to Reopen Record.* Util Opposes San Luis Obispo for Peace Motion Based on Affidavit Stating No Evidence Found in Motion Re Flaw in Program.W/Certificate of Svc ML20072F0291994-08-12012 August 1994 Erratum to San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Motion to Reopen Record.* Intervenors Corrects Error in Renewed Motion to Reopen Record Re Application for License Amend to Extend Term of Operating License for Plant.W/Certificate of Svc ML20072A5821994-08-0808 August 1994 San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Renewed Motion to Reopen Record Re PG&E Application for Amend to Extend Term of OL for Plant.* Motion to Reopen Record to Introduce Insp Rept Identifying Alleged Problems W/Plant.W/Certificate of Svc ML20064D1791994-03-0707 March 1994 Pacific Gas and Electric Co Reply in Opposition to San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Motion to Reopen Record.* Motion to Reopen Record Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20063L5721994-02-25025 February 1994 San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Re Util Application for License Amend to Extend Term of Operating License for Plant.* Advises That Record of Proceeding Should Be Reopened to Consider Insp 93-36 Re Util Surveillance of Asw Sys ML20058K8771993-12-0202 December 1993 NRC Staff Motion for Extension of Time.* Requests That Board Extend Date for Staff to File Findings Until 931222. W/Certificate of Svc ML20058K7491993-12-0202 December 1993 NRC Staff Motion for Extension of Time.* Board Has Extended Filing Time for Util Until 931230.W/Certificate of Svc. Served on 931206.Granted for Board on 931203 ML20059E8531993-10-27027 October 1993 NRC Staff Response to Board Memorandum & Order Re Extension of Time.* Staff Believes That San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Has Shown No Good Cause for Requesting Extension to File Proposed Findings of Fact.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059E8631993-10-25025 October 1993 Pacific Gas & Electric Co Response to Motion for Extension of Time.* Util Does Not Agree W/Board Assessment That Mothers for Peace Request Appears to Be Reasonable But Will Not Oppose Request.W/Certificate of Svc ML20059B1071993-10-18018 October 1993 San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Motion for Extension of Time for Filing Proposing Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law.* Requests Extension of Two Wks or Until 931119 to File Proposed Findings of Fact.W/Certificate of Svc ML20057B0401993-09-14014 September 1993 NRC Staff Reply to PG&E Response to Staff Motion to Amend Protective Order.* NRC Staff Moves Board to Adopt Language Requested in 930817 Motion as Stated.W/Certificate of Svc ML20056G4891993-08-30030 August 1993 Pacific Gas & Electric Co Response to Motion to Amend Protective Order.* Staff Asks That Protective Order Be Clarified by Adding New Footnote to Paragraph 3 of Order. W/Certificate of Svc ML20056E8951993-08-17017 August 1993 Motion to Amend Protective Order (Governing non-disclosure of INPO Rept).* NRC Moves That Board Add Footnote to Paragraph 3.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20056E8021993-08-12012 August 1993 NRC Staff Opposition to San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Leave to Conduct Discovery on NRC Inquiry Into Allegations Re Pressure to Falsify Fire Watch Logs Motion for Postponement of Hearing....* W/Certificate of Svc ML20056E7371993-08-12012 August 1993 PG&E Response to San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Motion for Further Discovery & for Delay in Hearing Thermo-Lag Contention.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20046D1091993-08-11011 August 1993 San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Request for Leave to Conduct Discovery on NRC Inquiry Into Allegations Re Pressure to Falsify Fire Watch Logs,Motion for Postponement of Hearing on thermo-lag Contention.* ML20046B9181993-07-22022 July 1993 PG&E Request to Defer Briefing Schedule on Ref Ruling Re INPO Documents.* Board Erred as Matter of Law in Ordering Release of INPO Evaluation & Ref Ruling Should Be Reversed by Commission.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20046B9531993-07-22022 July 1993 Pacific Gas & Electric Co Motion to Require cross-exam Plans.* Requests That Board Require cross-examination Plans from Parties That Intend to Conduct cross-examination. W/Certificate of Svc ML20056C8721993-07-16016 July 1993 Pacific Gas & Electric Co Response to 930701 Motion to Compel.* Concludes That Motion to Compel Moot & Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20045G9691993-07-0202 July 1993 PG&E Response to Licensing Board Questions Re INPO Documents.* ML20045G9561993-07-0101 July 1993 Intervenor San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Motion to Compel PG&E to Respond to Third Set of Supplemental Interrogatories & Requests for Document Production,Filed by San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20045G9431993-07-0101 July 1993 Intervenor San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace (Slomfp) Response to Prehearing Conference Order Re INPO Documents.* Slomfp Cannot Provide Info by Affidavit Due to Lack of Info Re Content of INPO Documents.W/Certificate of Svc ML20045D7341993-06-21021 June 1993 Pge Motion for Schedule Change.* Util Moves That Licensing Board Adopt Listed Revised Schedule.W/Certificate of Svc ML20128P1821993-02-12012 February 1993 PG&E Preliminary Response to Discovery Request Filed Per 10CFR2.741(a)(2) & Motion for Protective Order.* Util Agrees to & Will Support Reasonable Discovery Into Issues within Scope of Contentions Admitted by Aslb.W/Certificate of Svc ML20128D8661993-02-0303 February 1993 Intervenor San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Request to PG&E for Entry Upon Facility,Per 10CFR2.741(a)(2) for Purposes of Insp,Measuring & Photographing.* W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20127D5461992-09-0808 September 1992 NRC Staff Response to San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Ltr Request for Hearing.* Presiding Officer Should Defer Ruling on Standing Pending Receipt of Any Amend Petitioners May File.W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20006D7721990-02-0808 February 1990 PG&E Response in Opposition to Application for Stay.* Stay of Random Drug Testing Under NRC Fitness for Duty Rule Should Be Denied on Basis of Untimeliness & Challenge Having No Merit.W/Proof of Svc ML20247Q1531989-07-24024 July 1989 Sierra Club Request to Withdraw Contentions.* Requests That All Outstanding Contentions in Current Proceedings Be Withdrawn W/Understanding That Further Discussion Will Occur Between Sierra Club & NRC Re Nepa.W/Certificate of Svc ML20154E4281988-05-11011 May 1988 Motion to Terminate Proceeding.* Requests Termination of Pending Proceedings on Grounds of Mootness.Supporting Documentation & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20148L9531988-03-31031 March 1988 Response to NRC Staff to Petition for Leave to Intervene Filed by San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace.* Notice of Appearance & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20148L9301988-03-29029 March 1988 Answer of PG&E to Petition to Intervene in License Amend Proceedings of San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace.* San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace Failed to Satisfy Technical Standing Requirements of 10CFR2.714.W/Certificate of Svc ML20237E5071987-12-15015 December 1987 Motion for Leave to File Response of NRC Staff to Appeal of Sierra Club from ASLB Memorandum & Order of 870902 & Initial Decision of 870911,1 Day Late.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20237E6891987-12-15015 December 1987 Motion for Leave to File Response of NRC Staff to Appeal of Sierra Club from Licensing Board Memorandum & Order of 870902 & Initial Decision of 870911,1 Day Late.* Motion Should Be Granted.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20237E8191987-12-11011 December 1987 Response of NRC Staff to Appeal of Sierra Club from Licensing Board Memorandum & Order of 870902 & Initial Decision of 870911.* Staff Opposes Sierra Club Appeal & Urges That Board Decisions Be Affirmed.W/Certificate of Svc ML20236E0031987-10-21021 October 1987 PG&E Answer in Opposition to Sierra Club Request for Stay.* Util Lists Four Arguments Opposing Request for Stay,Issued by ASLB on 870911,re Util Amends to Increase Spent Fuel Storage Capacity.Affidavit & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20236C1831987-10-20020 October 1987 Intervenor Request for Stay.* Sierra Club Requests NRC to Stay Effectiveness of 870902 Order & 870911 Initial Decision of Licensing Board Until Sierra Club Has Had Opportunity to Participate in Proceeding Re Reracking.W/Proof of Svc ML20235T4071987-10-0505 October 1987 Response of NRC Staff to Intervenor Sierra Club Request for Stay.* Sierra Club Failed to Satisfy Requirements of 10CFR2.788 & Request for Stay Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20235R9611987-10-0202 October 1987 PG&E Answer in Opposition to Sierra Club Request for Stay.* Sierra Club 870924 Request for Stay of 870911 ASLB Initial Decision (LBP-87-25) Authorizing Spent Fuel Pool Reracking Amends Should Be Denied ML20235F2951987-09-24024 September 1987 Intevenors Request for Stay.* Seeks Stay of ASLB 870911 Initial Decision Authorizing NRR to Issue OL Amends, Permitting Reracking of Spent Fuel Storage Pools.W/Proof of Svc ML20234D3021987-09-16016 September 1987 Sierra Club Brief in Support of Appeal of ASLB 870902 Order.* Contention Contains Requisite Specificity to Be Admitted to Proceeding.Criteria for late-filed Contention Met.Proof of Svc Encl ML20238A5771987-08-14014 August 1987 Supplemental Brief Re Applicability of ALAB-869 to Inclusion of Zircalloy Cladding Fire Contention.* Sierra Club Believes Focus for Admission of Contentions Must Be Requirements of Atomic Energy Act & Nepa.Proof of Svc Encl ML20238A6521987-08-14014 August 1987 PG&E Supplemental Answer in Opposition to Intervenor Motion to Admit Late Filed Contention.* Sierra Club Motion to Admit Late Filed Contention & Direct Preparation of EIS Should Be Denied.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20238A6001987-08-13013 August 1987 Response of NRC Staff to ASLB Order of 870731 (Directing Parties to File Comments on Applicability of Aslab Decision in Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp,ALAB-869,to Proposed Contentions at Issue in Matter).* Certificate of Svc Encl ML20236B8541987-07-21021 July 1987 Motion on Notification of Meetings,Establishment of Seismic Review Committee & Govt Exam of Design Calculations.* Motion Undated ML20235J1541987-07-10010 July 1987 PG&E Answer in Opposition to Intervenor Motion to Admit late-filed Contention.* Board Requested to Direct NRC Staff to Prepare EIS Re Issues Discussed in Generic Issue 82. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20235J1791987-07-10010 July 1987 NRC Staff Answer to Sierra Club Motion to Admit Contention Re Generic Issue 82 & to Direct Preparation of an Eis.* Denial Urged.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20216J7911987-06-29029 June 1987 Motion to Include Issues Raised in Generic Issue 82 as Contentions in Proceeding & to Direct Preparation of Eis.* Board Requested to Direct Preparation of EIS Re Possibility & Impact of Zircalloy Cladding Fires ML20214A9391987-05-13013 May 1987 NRC Staff Comments on Proposed Order Re Electronic Storage & Retrieval.* ASLB Proposed Order Should Not Be Adopted.If ASLB Agrees,Staff & Parties Could Supply ASLB w/MS-DOS Disks of Prefiled Testimony.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20207P7081987-01-15015 January 1987 NRC Staff Answer in Opposition to Sierra Club/Mothers for Peace Motion for Summary Disposition.* Motion Devoid of Any Factual Support Which Warrants Granting of Summary Disposition Re Environ Claims.W/Certificate of Svc 1998-11-24
[Table view] |
Text
!
S
^
,. < @ D Q HE:1.l,l0 i
g UNITED STATES OF AMER'ICA ,r[N 19 pp g i
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
l 3 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD 4
5
)
In the Matter of )
0
) Docket Nos. 50-275 0.L.
l 7 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY ) 50-323 0.L.
)
, (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power ) -
Plant, Units 1 and 2) )
9 I 10 APPLICANT'S REPLY TO JOINT INTERVENORS' g MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER '
12 The Joint Intervenors, by motion dated June 11, 13 1984, have sought a protective order for Exhibits 3, 4, 7, 14 and 10 which were submitted in support of their reply to 15 PGandt and Staff responses to the Joint Intervenors' latest 16 motion to reopen.
17 Neither the Staff nor PGandE were served copies of 18 those exhibits, and the Joint Intervenors by their motion 19 have requested that access to the substance of the exhibits 20 be denied to the Staf f and PGandt (JI motion pp. 5-6) . It 21 is PGandE's understanding that this Board has received such 22 exhibits but in an edited form with the names of affiants 23 and other identifying material removed. On receipt of the 24 motion for a protective order, this Board issued an order 25 26
requesting response to the motion and certain questions by June 19, 1984.1 2
I* 8 88 #
3 4
Joint Intervenors' motion for a protective order 5
18 predicated on two points. The first is that the informa-6 ti n given in each subject exhibit is conditioned by the 7
affiant that it not be released to the Staff or the Appli-8 cant. The second is that the withholding of the substance 9 f the exhibits is necessary to protect the anonymity of the 10 affiants.2 l 11 12 1 The order requested Staff and PGandE to answer the
' " "98 13 14 (1) What documents were served on the applicant and the staff as joint intervenors' reply?
15 (2) If the same documents, in the same form, as those 16 served on the Appeal Board were received by the applicant and t'1e staff, is there any need for a g protective order?
18 (3) Is the Commission's policy statement of August 5, 1983, 48 Fed. Reg. 36,358, applicable to joint intervenors' request for a protective order? If so, with what 19 result?
20 (4) If the Commission's policy statement is not applicable, is the protective order sought by joint intervenors 21 appropriate in the circumstances presented?
22 (5) If the protective order sought by joint intervanors is g not appropriate, is a less encompassing order suitable?
2 Although Joint Intervenors claim the informers 24 privilege, this Board has previously acknowledged that the 25 privilege may be claimed only by the govotnment. Houston (Footnote continued) 26 2-
3 Joint Intervonors sock to reopen the record based 2 in part on now affidavits, the substance of which they scok 3
L koop from Applicant. Fundamental to the acceptance of 4 such affidavits as evidence upon which this Board may rely 5 is the underlying truthfulness and voracity of the affiants 6 and the factual bania for establishing that the affiants 7 possess the necessary exportino to offor opinion tontimony.
l 8 By the requested terms of their motion.for a protectivo 9 ordor, Joint Intervonora attempt to rostrict thin Board in i
go its function by not allowing the substance of the affidavits 11 fr m sooing the light of day. Such a procons, if allowed, 12 w uld be extremoly prejudicial to Applicant and approachos a 13 trial g abnontia.3 14 15 (Footnoto Continued)
Lighting and Power Company (South Texas Project Unita 1 and 16 2), ALAD-639, 13 NRC 469, (1981), footnoto 26 at 478. Soo Roviaro v. United Staton, 353 U.S. 53, 59 (1957). In thin 37 caso, rather than advancing the intoront of the government in its investigation of the truth, Joint Intervonors seek to 18 uno the privilogo to thwart such investigation.
3 l
19 With this unexamined evidence, Joint Intervonors claim that a " cloud" hangs over the adequacy of the safoty-related 20 donign and construction at Diablo Canyon citing Commonwealth Edison Company (Byron Nuclear Power Station Unita 1 and 2) 21 ALAB 770. That caso in distinguishable from tho instant proconding. First, the " cloud" there was not 22 unsubstantiated claims which had not avon boon examined, but rather the Licensing Board's findings made after hearing and 23 Staff datorminations over a period of years. In this case, Joint Intervonors sock to manufacture a " cloud" with 24 anonymous aff1hvits which they refuse to expose to Applicant or Staff. The uncertainty that existed in Hyron 25 was that which wan the result of findings, not merely (Footnote Continued) 26 e
3 As to the first point, ovary citizen has an 2
bligation to provido evidence, when necessary, to furthur 3
the nystem of justico. Consumorn Pownr company (Midland 4 Plant, Units 1 and 2) ALAN 764, Slip Opinion March 30, 1984.
5 11 unton Lighting and Power Company (South Texan Project,
- , Units 1 aod 2) AtAn 63,, 13 unc 4ee, 473 (1981). weighe v.
7 Joop Corp., 547 P.Supp. 871, 875 (1:.D. Mich. 1982). Soo 8 Branzburg v. Ilayon, 408 U.S. 665, 688 (1972), Hoviaro v.
9 United Jtaten, 353 U.S. 53, 59 (1957). Since ovary citizon i
10 han such a duty which arinos from his citizenship, ho gg cannot, on his own, condition his civic obligation. Thus, 12 affiants cann t toll this nonrd that they will give it 13 int rmati n nly if the Board agroon, contrary to 14 i 15 l
l 16 17 (Pootnoto Continued) unsubstantiated allegations in support of a motion to l
re pen. Second, thin in not a case whorn thoro has not yet 18 boon a hearing on the Applicant'n verification program an was the caso in Byron. lloro, an extensive hearing on Donign l
39 Quality Assuranco and the adoquacy of the verification 20 program which was entablished pursuant to Comminnion ordor, han already been hold. In Byron, Applicant argued that a 21 hearing was not noconnary even while the verification program was not completo. Tho Appeal Doard romanded the 22 case to take evidence on the completed verification program.
lloro the verification program has boon completed and has 23 been already subjected to hearing. Finally, in Byron, the Appeal Board found a hearing was noconnary because one of 24 the principio deficiencies that existed was the established abnonce of adequato cortification proceduren for quality 25 control personnel. Such fundamental abnonce of proper cortification in not pronont hero.
26 i
I 3
requirements of law, not to relay it to a party whose rights 2
r duties are being litigated.4 f As t the second point, Joint Intervenors claim l 3 ,
4 that because of inadequate editing of prior affidavits by [
5 the NRC Staff, Applicant was able to identify three of the anonym us allegers. As t these three allegers, they claim 6
7 in an unsupported allegation that, "Since February 16, all 8 three individuals have been laid off or suffered harassment
, on-site" (6/7/84 Devine Aff. at 3). Curiously, the docu-10 ments executed by the anonymous allagers which disclosed 11 identifying material were not released to Applicant until j April 26, 1904. No person was laid off or harassed as a [
12 result his allegations (Exhibit 1, attached). As a part [
13 of normal reductions of force, two of the three were laid 14 [
15 ff earlier this year, but each was rehired by April'9, I 16 1984e Prior to the date of release of the affidavits to f Applicant. All three are currently employed at the site, 37 t
le and there have been no reports of harassment by any of these individuals from any source whatsoever. Consequently the 3, f 20 21 4 While CAP and Joint Intervenors ma consider 22 themselves as chartered to ensure that t e NBC satisfies its !
statutory duties, they cannot a sponte substitute i
23 themselven for the governmenta y wMeh Congress charged l with the duty to regulate, investigate, and license nuclear 24 Power plants. Consequently, the investigative arm of the commission, its staff, cannot be deprived of the substantive information contained in Exhibits 4, 5, 7, and 10 or the 25 names of the informers.
l 24 I
I g pivotal grounds for the request for the protective order are 2
based, at best, a misleading affidavit.$
As acknowledged by this Board in the case of 3
4 Consumers Power Company (Midland Units 1 and 2) ALAM-764, 5
supra., the informer protection extends only to the identity 6 f the informer and not to the substance of the information 7
provided.' See moviaro v. United States, supra. at 60.
g Applicant has no other means of access to the
, allegations which are contained in Exhibits 3, 4, 7, and 10.
10 It is the substance of those allegations and not the identi-11 ty f the allegers which is of importance to Applicant, Sta f, and this board.
12 13 14 15 5 This pivotal allegation should give the Board cause to question the veracity and forthrightness of Joint 16 Intervenors' allegatlons. While the allegation in the 17 affidavit is that the three individuals were either laid off or suffered harassment since February 16, 1904, it is clear that the layoffs were not related to their affidavits and 18 that the individuals involved were even reemployed prior to l' the release of their affidavits. It is also clear that there is an absence of harassment as a result of their allegations. Given such inclination to stretch the facts, 20 this Board must scrutinise all wlaims of Joint Intervenors.
21 6 As in the consumers Power case ALAB 764 u ., there is no issue of privilege involved here. Any c n . ntiality 22 that may have esisted between Yhomas Devine, affiant, and 23 the anonymous allegers was clearly breached when disclosure was made to Joint intervenors and their counsel. While Thomas Devine has acted, in other matters, on behalf of 24 Mothers for Peace, one of the Joiht Intervenors, he is not 25 counsel of record on behalf of all Joint Intervenors in this action. ,
26 i
.g.
_. - .__ - _ - - _ . - - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ - ---___________---___--__-____-____-__.w
Accordingly, should the Board be ablo to dotormino 3
qualifi ation of the affidavita, the Board should roleano 2
3 Exhibits 3, 4, 7, and 10 in the form they have without a protectivo order.
4 5
II. RESPONSE To noARD CERTIFIED OUEST!oNS 6
A. As indicated above, PGandt did not roccivo l 7 Exhibits 3, 4, 7, and 10 with Joint Intervonors' reply. If, in act, it in the caso that this Donrd rocoived tho exhib-8 9
its without the namos or other identifying matorial as 10 odited by anonymous allogorn, it would appear that consin-gg tont with protwetion of informers' intoront, thin Doard 12 e uld roloano the substanco of the exhibits to the Staff and 13 Applicant, and no protectivo ordor would bo noconnary.
D. Applicant doon not non that the Comminnion 14 g policy statomont of Augunt 5, 1983 (40 rod. Hog. 36358) ,
16 applion ninco the subject information in not in the pon-g nonnion of er originated by tho Staff in its ongoing inven-g tigation or innpoetion.
9 C. The protectivo order sought by Joint 20 Intervonorn far exconds what is required to protect the 21 intoront of the anonymoun informants and if granted as roquestod would prejudico Applicant and Staf f and intorforo 23 g mattorn placed before it.
g E. As acknowledgnd by tho floard in consumar_
power en. (Hidland Unita 1 and 2) Af,Afl 764 nupra., n l
i g protective order which provides for deletion of nanos and 2 other identifying material is appropriate for protection of l 3 informers' interests.
4 Applicant would suggest, however, that the Board should be presented with unedited versions of the Exhibits 6 l""camera so that it can ascertain that the affidavits are, l 7 in fact, of persons other than those who have previously l
g provided affidavits. Thoreaf ter, upon . qualification of the
, affidavits, the Board should <!stermine if the edited version 10 protects the informers identity or whether, on weighing of l 11 the interests of the parties, a further modification should 12 be made prior to release to staff and the Applicant.7 g3 Alternatively, if the Board determines that the affidavits 14 cannot be accepted, then they should be rejected outright.
15 Applicant Would like to point out that while Joint 16 Intervenors are seeking extraordinary relief from this 37 Board, they do not approach the Board with altogether " clean 18 hands." The allegations they submit, beyond being repeti-
- 19 ti us, have been tortiously dragged through the licensing l 20 21 7
22 1f Exhibits 4, 5, 7, and 10 contain new materials, obviously Applicant should be afforded the opportunity to 23 respond since they constitute a new motion and net '. reply to Applicant's prior responne to Joint Intervenora Motion to Meopen. Applicant is in the process of responding, nter_
24 Lia, to the new material contained in the June 11, mygg, 25 Teily" of Joint Intervenors and will submit its responsen to the Moard by June 29, 1984.
26
.g.
l l
l process over in excess of six months time. Affiant 1
2 Thomas Devine has stated under oath that "for the previous seven months," he has "been conducting an investigation of l 3
4 alleged illegal or improper practices at the Diablo Canyon nuclear powerplant" (6/7/84 Devine Af f. at 1) . It is not l 6 inconceivable that Joint Intervenors and their associated 7
representatives would continue this pattern of conduct over i g the next several months even though they have been inves- '
, tigating the matter for over at least six months. Applicant >
10 would submit, therefore, that if Joint Intervenors seek gg equity, they must do equity. That should certainly extend to providing the substance of their claims.
12 13 III. CONC W TON ,
14 Applicant submits that consistent with due process 15 and in the interest of fair play and justice, it is vitally 16 necessary that it have access to the substance Exhibita 3, 4, 7, and 10. Applicant requests that Exhibits 3, 4, 7, and 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 l
25 26 ,
.g.
a
. l y 10 be released to Staff and Applicant, or alternatively be 2 re e ted by the Board if they fail to meet minimal requirements for affidavits.
3 4 Respectfully submitted, 5 ROBERT OHLBACH '
PHILIP A. CRANE, JR.
0 RICHARD F. LOCKE DAN G. LUBBOCK 7 Pacific Gas and Electric Company P. O. Box 7442 8 San Francisco, CA 94120 (415) 781-4211 9
ARTHUR C. GEHR 10 8"*1* ' "II"*#
3100 Valley Bank Center 11 Phoenix, AZ 85073 (602) 257-7288 12 BRUCE NORTON 13 Norton, Burke, Berry & French, P.C.
P. O. Box 10569 14 Phoenix, AZ 85064 (602) 955-2446 15 Attorneys for 6 Pacific Gas and Electric Company 17 .
10 j(N N Dated: June 18, 1984 By \
19 #" * # "
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0fMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD
)
In the Matter of )
) Docket Nos. 50-275 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY ) 50-323
)
(Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power ) (Construction Quality Assurance)
Plant, Units 1 and 2) ) ..
)
AFFIDAVIT OF D.A. Rockwell STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO )
The above, baing duly sworn, deposes and says:
I, D.A. Rockwell, am Special Projects Engineer for the Pacific Gas and Electric Company at the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant. In such capacity, I work directly with management of Pullman Power Products and the H.P. Foley Company who are contractors on site at the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Project. In such capacity I am informed of personnel shifts and force changes of each organization. I have caused that the employment files be reviewed of the three individuals who were identified in the May 17, 1984 submittal of i
PGandE: Mr. J. McDemott, Mr. T. O'Neal, and Mr. J. Phillips. I have also -
' investigated the possibility of the existence of any claims of harassment made i by any of these three individuals as a result of the affidavits. Contrary to the representation of Thomas Devine, no harassment or reprisal by PGandE or its contractors against any of the three individuals has resulted from their R anonymous allegations.
! EXHIBIT 1
1 l
l l
Mr. J. McDennott was hired by Pullman on May 13, 1983. In a scheduled force reduction on January 13, 1984, Mr. McDennott was let go by Pullman. He was rehired by Pullman on April 9,1984. He currently works for Pullman.
Mr. J. Phillips was originally hired by PTGC on March 31,1983 and, as part of a scheduled force reduction, was let go on March 23, 1984. His ranking in March 1984 was 143 out of 147. Subsequent to his layoff by PTGC he was hired by Pullman on April 9,1984. He current 1y' works for Pullman.
Mr. T. O'Neal was hired by Pullman as a QC inspector on July 5,1983 and currently is working for Pullman in that capacity.
The twc individuals who were laid off were let go as a result of legitimate reduction of force, and not as the result of any allegation or affidavit they may have signed. Both were let go prior to April 26,1984, the date when NRC first released the affidavits to PGandE.
Investigation has revealed no reports of harassment by any of these three individuals as a result of their allegations. There have been no reports to their supervisors. There have been no hot-line reports, and there have been no reports by union representatives regarding these individuals.
Mr. T. O'Neal did for the first time come to sqy office on June 12, 1984, the day after the Joint Intervenors motion was filed, to speak to me about his alleged quality concerns. He demanded sqy written response to his concerns.
He did not infom me of any physical threats, social harassment or reprisals of any kind resulting from his allegations.
Dated: June 19,1984 D.A. Rockwell Subscribed and sworn to '
before me this 19th day of June,1984 Nancy J. Lemaster, Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Franciso State of California.
My commission expires April 14,1986.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 00CKETED Ushit In the Matter of ) .g4 yy jg g7 7g
)
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-275
) Docket No/iS0-323. :
Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, ) 0 2 U g [' -
Units 1 and 2 )
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The foregoing document (s) of Pacific Gas and Electric Company has (hnve) been served today on the following by deposit in the United States mail, properly stamped and addressed: .
Judge John F. Wolf "
Mrs. Sandra A. Silver Chairman 1760 Alisal Street Atomic Safety and Licensing Board San Luis Obispo CA 93401 US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555 Mr. Gordon Silver 1760 Alisal Street Judge Glenn O. Bright San Luis Obispo CA 93401 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board US Nuclear Regulatory Commission John Phillips, Esq.
Washington DC 20555 Joel Reynolds, Esq.
Center for Law in the Public Interest Judge Jerry R. Kline 10951 W. Pico Blvd. - Suite 300 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Los Angeles CA 90064 US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555 David F. Fleischaker, Esq.
P. O. Box 1178 Mrs. Elizabeth Apfelberg Oklahoma City OK 73101 c/o Betsy Umhoffer 1493 Southwood Arthur C. Gehr, Esq.
Scn Luis Obispo CA 93401 Snell & Wilmer 3100 Valley Bank Center Janice E. Kerr, Esq. Phoenix AZ 85073 Public Utilities Commission State of California Bruce Norton, Esq.
5246 State Building Norton, Burke, Berry & French, P.C.
350 McAllister Street P. O. Box 10569 i
Sen Francisco CA 94102 Phoenix AZ 85064 Mrc. Raye Fleming Chairman 1920 Mattie Road Atomic Safety and Licensing Shall Beach CA 93449 Board Panel US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. Frederick Eissler Washington DC 20555 -
Scanic Shoreline Preservation [
Conference, Inc.
[ 4623 More Mesa Drive l Stnta Barbara CA 93105 l
l l
l
, _ __~ ,
Chairman
- Judge Thomas S. Moore Atomic Safety and Licensing Chairman Appeal Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Appeal Board Wcshington DC 20555 US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555 Sncretary US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- Judge W. Reed Johnson Washington DC 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Attn: Docketing and Service US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Section Washington DC 20555
- Lrwrence J. Chandler, Esq.
- Judge John H. Buck Henry J. McGurren Atomic Safety and Licensing US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Appeal B,oard Office of Executive Legal Director US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555 Washington DC 20555 Mr. Richard B. Hubbard Commissioner Nunzio J. Palladino MHB Technical Associates Chairman 1723 Hamilton Avenue Suite K US Nuclear Regulatory Commission San Jcse CA 95125 1717 H Street NW Washington DC 20555 Mr. Carl Neiberger Telegram Tribune Commissioner Frederick M. Bernthal P. O. Box 112 US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Scn Luis Obispo CA 93402 1717 H Street NW Washington DC 20555 Michael J. Strumwasser, Esq. +
Susan L. Durbin, Esq. Commissioner Victor Gilinsky Peter H. Kaufman, Esq. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission 3580 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 800 1717 H Street NW Los Angeles CA 90010 Washington DC 20555 Maurice Axelrad, Esq. Commissioner James K. Asselstine Lowenstein, Newman, Reis, and US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Axelrad, P.C. 1717 H Street NW 1025 Connecticut Ave. NW Washington DC 20555 Washington DC 20036 Commissioner Thomas M. Roberts US Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street NW
. :. Washington DC 20555 i
Date: June 18, 1984 A
! / DAN G. 'LtIBBOCK i l *Via Sky Courier Network l l
l
. _. _