|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20196J3291999-06-28028 June 1999 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Industry Codes & Standards ML20206M7291999-04-30030 April 1999 Comment Supporting Draft RG DG-1083, Content of UFSAR IAW 10CFR50.71(e). Licensee of Listed Plants in Total Agreement with Comments Provided to NRC by NEI HL-5717, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50,52 & 72 Re Changes, Tests & Experiments.Util in Total Agreement with NEI Comments to Be Provided to NRC1998-12-18018 December 1998 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50,52 & 72 Re Changes, Tests & Experiments.Util in Total Agreement with NEI Comments to Be Provided to NRC HL-5715, Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Nuclear Power Plants.Util Is in Total Agreement with NEI Comments1998-12-14014 December 1998 Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Nuclear Power Plants.Util Is in Total Agreement with NEI Comments HL-5702, Comment Supporting NEI Comments Totally on Proposed Draft RG DG-4005, Preparation of Supplemental Environmental Repts for Applications to Renew Nuclear Power Plant Ols1998-10-23023 October 1998 Comment Supporting NEI Comments Totally on Proposed Draft RG DG-4005, Preparation of Supplemental Environmental Repts for Applications to Renew Nuclear Power Plant Ols HL-5695, Comment Supporting Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Comments on 10CFR50.55(a) Pr, Streamlined Hearing Process for NRC Approval of License Transfers1998-10-13013 October 1998 Comment Supporting Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Comments on 10CFR50.55(a) Pr, Streamlined Hearing Process for NRC Approval of License Transfers HL-5690, Comment on Integrated Review of Assessment Process for Commercial Nuclear Plants. Util in Total Agreement with NEI Comments Provided to NRC1998-10-0505 October 1998 Comment on Integrated Review of Assessment Process for Commercial Nuclear Plants. Util in Total Agreement with NEI Comments Provided to NRC HL-5983, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Reporting Requirements for Nuclear Power Reactors. Snoc in Total Agreement with NEI Comments,To Be Provided to Nrc.Requests That NRC Provide Guidance to Application of NUREG-1022,rev 1 as Listed1998-09-21021 September 1998 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Reporting Requirements for Nuclear Power Reactors. Snoc in Total Agreement with NEI Comments,To Be Provided to Nrc.Requests That NRC Provide Guidance to Application of NUREG-1022,rev 1 as Listed ML20153B2391998-09-15015 September 1998 Comment on Draft NUREG-1633, Assessment of Use of Ki as Protective Action During Severe Reactor Accidents. Endorses NEI Comments HL-5682, Comment Opposing Draft NUREG-1633, Assessment of Use of Potassium Iodide (Ki) as Protective Action During Severe Reactor Accidents, & Endorsing Comments Submitted by Nuclear Energy Institute1998-09-15015 September 1998 Comment Opposing Draft NUREG-1633, Assessment of Use of Potassium Iodide (Ki) as Protective Action During Severe Reactor Accidents, & Endorsing Comments Submitted by Nuclear Energy Institute HL-5602, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Industry Codes & Stds1998-04-0303 April 1998 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Industry Codes & Stds HL-5586, Comment on Proposed Generic Ltr, Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Sys at Npps1998-03-0404 March 1998 Comment on Proposed Generic Ltr, Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Sys at Npps HL-5582, Comment on Draft Reg Guide DG-5008, Reporting of Safeguards Events1998-02-27027 February 1998 Comment on Draft Reg Guide DG-5008, Reporting of Safeguards Events HL-5564, Comment on Draft NUREG 1555, Updated Environ Standard Review Plan1998-01-30030 January 1998 Comment on Draft NUREG 1555, Updated Environ Standard Review Plan HL-5554, Comment Supporting NEI Comments on PRM 50-63A by P Crane Recommending Emergency Planning Standard for Protective Actions Be Changed to Require Explicit Consideration of Prophylactic Use of Potassium Iodide for General Public1998-01-15015 January 1998 Comment Supporting NEI Comments on PRM 50-63A by P Crane Recommending Emergency Planning Standard for Protective Actions Be Changed to Require Explicit Consideration of Prophylactic Use of Potassium Iodide for General Public HL-5546, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule & Direct Final Rule on 10CFR50.68 & 10CFR70.24, Criticality Accident Requirements1997-12-31031 December 1997 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule & Direct Final Rule on 10CFR50.68 & 10CFR70.24, Criticality Accident Requirements HL-5529, Comment Opposing Rule 10CFR50 Re Codes & Standards,Ieee National Consensus Standard1997-12-0101 December 1997 Comment Opposing Rule 10CFR50 Re Codes & Standards,Ieee National Consensus Standard ML20199J0031997-11-24024 November 1997 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule Re Financial Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Power Reactors & Draft RG 1060 HL-5424, Comment on NUREG-1606, Proposed Regulatory Guidance Re Implementation of 10CFR50.59 (Changes,Tests or Experiments). Encourages NRC Not to Abandon 30 Yrs of Effective Implementation of 10CFR.50.59 for New Positions1997-07-0707 July 1997 Comment on NUREG-1606, Proposed Regulatory Guidance Re Implementation of 10CFR50.59 (Changes,Tests or Experiments). Encourages NRC Not to Abandon 30 Yrs of Effective Implementation of 10CFR.50.59 for New Positions ML20148N0741997-06-19019 June 1997 Comment on Proposed Suppl to Bulletin 96-001 Re Control Rod Insertion Problems.Util in Complete Agreement That Incomplete Rcca Insertion Not Acceptable HL-5407, Comment Opposing NRC Proposed Strategies to Address Licensees Need to Establish & Maintain safety-conscious Work Environ1997-05-27027 May 1997 Comment Opposing NRC Proposed Strategies to Address Licensees Need to Establish & Maintain safety-conscious Work Environ ML20137C2581997-03-18018 March 1997 Summary of Director'S Decision Under 10CFR2.206 of Mb Hobby & AL Mosbaugh, ML20137C4261997-03-18018 March 1997 Director'S Decision Under 10CFR2.206 Re Petition Re Allegation of Illegal Transfer of OLs to Southern Nuclear Operating Co.Petitions Filed by Mb Hobby & AL Mosbaugh Denied HL-5268, Comment Supporting Draft RG DG-1047, Std Format & Content for Applications to Renew NPP Ols1996-11-27027 November 1996 Comment Supporting Draft RG DG-1047, Std Format & Content for Applications to Renew NPP Ols ML20133H1131996-11-25025 November 1996 Petition for Enforcement,Per 10CFR2.206,to Revoke Northeast Utils Operating Licenses for CT Nuclear Power Stations Due to Chronic,Systemic Mismanagement Resulting in Significant Violations of NRC Safety Regulations ML20129J5481996-10-30030 October 1996 Order.* Extends Time within Which Commission May Take Sua Sponte Review of Memorandum & Order LBP-96-16 to 961129. W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 961030 ML20129K4291996-10-0202 October 1996 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR25 & 95, Access to & Protection of Classified Info HL-5247, Comment on Proposed Generic Communication, Primary Water Stress Corrosion Cracking of Control Rod Drive Mechanism & Other Vessel Head Penetrations1996-10-0101 October 1996 Comment on Proposed Generic Communication, Primary Water Stress Corrosion Cracking of Control Rod Drive Mechanism & Other Vessel Head Penetrations ML20128K2791996-09-30030 September 1996 Order.* Time within Which Commission May Take Sua Sponte Review of Memo & Order LBP-96-16 Extended Until 961030. W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 960930 ML20116J8921996-08-0202 August 1996 Withdrawal of AL Mosbaugh.* AL Mosbaugh Voluntarily Withdraws Intervention,Opposition & Contention in Proceedings.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20116J8551996-08-0202 August 1996 Joint Notice of Termination.* AL Mosbaugh Voluntarily Withdrew Intervention,Opposition & Contentions in Proceeding.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20116J8431996-08-0202 August 1996 Intervenor Response to Georgia Power Motion for Reconsideration.* Intervenor Supports Motion for Reconsideration.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20116N5881996-07-31031 July 1996 Comment Re Proposed Rule 10CFR26, Mods to Fitness-For-Duty Program Requirements. Supports NEI Comments ML20116A4931996-07-15015 July 1996 Georgia Power Company Motion for Reconsideration of 960628 Memorandum & Order Or,In Alternative,For Certification.* Gpc Requests That Board Not Require Submittal or Approval of Settlement Between Gpc & Mosbaugh.W/Certificate of Svc ML20115H2671996-07-0808 July 1996 Comment Supporting Final Rule 10CFR51, Environ Review of Renewal of Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses HL-5195, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Financial Assurance Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Power Reactors1996-06-24024 June 1996 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Financial Assurance Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Power Reactors ML20114E6491996-06-20020 June 1996 Joint Motion to Defer Issuance of Initial Decision.* Requests That ASLB Defer Issuance of Decision in Proceeding Until 960920,in Order to Allow Gpc & Mosbaugh to Reach Settlement Agreement.W/Certificate of Svc IA-95-211, Transcript of 920507 Interview of Mc Wilkins in Waynesboro, Ga.Pp 1-391996-05-0707 May 1996 Transcript of 920507 Interview of Mc Wilkins in Waynesboro, Ga.Pp 1-39 ML20129H7151996-05-0707 May 1996 Transcript of 920507 Interview of Mc Wilkins in Waynesboro, Ga.Pp 1-39 HL-5103, Comment Supporting NEI Comments on Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-63 Re Planning Std for Protective Actions for General Public Includes Stockpile or Predistribution of Ki for Prophylactic Use1996-02-0606 February 1996 Comment Supporting NEI Comments on Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-63 Re Planning Std for Protective Actions for General Public Includes Stockpile or Predistribution of Ki for Prophylactic Use ML20096A4911995-12-22022 December 1995 Georgia Power Co Reply to Intervenor & NRC Staff Proposed Findings of Facts & Conclusions of Law.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20095D9821995-12-12012 December 1995 Georgia Power Co Motion to Correct Record of Exhibits of Diesel Generator Reporting Issues Allegation Hearing.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20095D9771995-12-0808 December 1995 Comment on Proposed Generic Ltr Boraflex Degradation in Spent Fuel Pool Starage Racks. Request for Licensees to Demonstrate Subcriticality Margin in Unborated Water,Seems Inconsistent W/Stated Benefit of Borated Water ML20094S2751995-11-30030 November 1995 Intervenor Final Statement of Fact & Conclusions of Law.* Board Finds That Util & Applicant Failed to Meet Burden of Proof Re Ultimate Issue of Character,Competence & Integrity. W/Svc List ML20094S2411995-11-22022 November 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Intervenors Motion for Continuance.* Intervenor Motion Unjustified & Prejudicial & Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20094S2931995-11-21021 November 1995 Intervenor Motion for Continuance for Good Cause.* Requests Deadline for Filing Post Hearing Brief Be Extended Until 951130.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20094K1161995-11-0909 November 1995 Intervenor Motion to Admit Supplementary Exhibits.* Moves That Naslp Admit Encl Documents Into Evidence for Listed Reasons.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20094J9301995-11-0606 November 1995 Georgia Power Company Motion to Correct Record of Diesel Generator Reporting Issues Allegation Hearing.* Moves Licensing Board to Order That Corrections Be Made to Transcript.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20094J9281995-11-0606 November 1995 Gap Proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law on Diesel Generator Reporting Issues.* Findings of Fact & Conclusion Accepted.W/Certificate of Svc ML20094J9201995-11-0101 November 1995 Affidavit of Ck Mccoy to Correct Info Contained in Intervenor Exhibit II-97,which Consists of Portions of Deposition in a Mosbaugh Complaint Against Gap 1999-06-28
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20133H1131996-11-25025 November 1996 Petition for Enforcement,Per 10CFR2.206,to Revoke Northeast Utils Operating Licenses for CT Nuclear Power Stations Due to Chronic,Systemic Mismanagement Resulting in Significant Violations of NRC Safety Regulations ML20116J8431996-08-0202 August 1996 Intervenor Response to Georgia Power Motion for Reconsideration.* Intervenor Supports Motion for Reconsideration.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20116A4931996-07-15015 July 1996 Georgia Power Company Motion for Reconsideration of 960628 Memorandum & Order Or,In Alternative,For Certification.* Gpc Requests That Board Not Require Submittal or Approval of Settlement Between Gpc & Mosbaugh.W/Certificate of Svc ML20114E6491996-06-20020 June 1996 Joint Motion to Defer Issuance of Initial Decision.* Requests That ASLB Defer Issuance of Decision in Proceeding Until 960920,in Order to Allow Gpc & Mosbaugh to Reach Settlement Agreement.W/Certificate of Svc ML20095D9821995-12-12012 December 1995 Georgia Power Co Motion to Correct Record of Exhibits of Diesel Generator Reporting Issues Allegation Hearing.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20094S2411995-11-22022 November 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Intervenors Motion for Continuance.* Intervenor Motion Unjustified & Prejudicial & Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20094S2931995-11-21021 November 1995 Intervenor Motion for Continuance for Good Cause.* Requests Deadline for Filing Post Hearing Brief Be Extended Until 951130.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20094K1161995-11-0909 November 1995 Intervenor Motion to Admit Supplementary Exhibits.* Moves That Naslp Admit Encl Documents Into Evidence for Listed Reasons.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20094J9301995-11-0606 November 1995 Georgia Power Company Motion to Correct Record of Diesel Generator Reporting Issues Allegation Hearing.* Moves Licensing Board to Order That Corrections Be Made to Transcript.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20093F9171995-10-13013 October 1995 Georgia Power Co Position on Effect of DOL Case 90 ERA-30.* Recommends Board Should Refrain from Considering or Giving Any Effect to Secretary of Labor Determination in 90 EAR-30. W/Certificate of Svc ML20093F9441995-10-13013 October 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Intervenor Motion to Conduct Discovery Re Dew Point Instruments.* Recommends That Intervenor Motion to Conduct Discovery Re Dew Point Instruments Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20093F8681995-10-13013 October 1995 Intervenor Response to Board Memorandum & Order (Effect of DOL Case 90-ERA-30).* Bloomburg & Comanche Peak Precedents Demonstrate Applicability of Issue Preclusion to Matl Fact Containing to Hobby Decision.W/Certificate of Svc ML20093F9901995-10-12012 October 1995 Ga Power Company Response to Intervenor Motion to Admit Certain Admissions of Ga Power.* Intervenor Motion to Admit Certain Admissions of Ga Power,Dtd 951006,should Be Denied. W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20093G1081995-10-12012 October 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Intervenors Motion to Conduct Further Discovery Against NRC Staff.* Motion to Conduct Further Discovery Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20093F9751995-10-12012 October 1995 Ga Power Company Response to Intervenors Motion to Admit Exhibit II-247 (Transcript of Tape 99B).* Intervenor Motion to Admit Intervenor Exhibit II-247 Into Evidence Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20093F9541995-10-12012 October 1995 Ga Power Company Response to Intervenor Motion to Strike Affidavit of H Handfinger.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20093B9301995-10-0606 October 1995 Intervenor Motion to Admit Certain Admissions of Georgia Power.* Intervenor Requests That Admission Responses & Corresponding OI Paragraphs Listed Be Admitted Into Record. W/Certificate of Svc ML20093B8901995-10-0606 October 1995 Intervenor Motion to Conduct Discovery Re Dew Point Instruments.* Intervenor Requests to Conduct Addl Discovery & to Obtain Further Relief.W/Certificate of Svc ML17311B3631995-10-0505 October 1995 Intervenor Motion to Admit Exhibit II-247 (Transcript of Tape 99B).* Intervenor Requests That Intervenor Exhibit II-247 Be Admitted Into Evidence.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20093B7101995-10-0505 October 1995 Intervenor Motion to Complete Discovery Against NRC Staff Expert Witness (Mgt Panel).* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20093B8291995-10-0505 October 1995 Intervenor Motion to Strike Affidavit of H Handfinger.* Affidavit of H Handfinger Should Be Stricken,In Entirety, from Record of Proceeding.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20098B7981995-10-0303 October 1995 Georgia Power Company Supplemental Response to Intervenor Addl Discovery Request Dtd 950905.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20098B4671995-10-0202 October 1995 Intervenor Request for Continuance to File Response to Georgia Power Co Petition for Review.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20098B4691995-10-0202 October 1995 Intervenor Opposition to Georgia Power Company Petition for Review of Order to Produce Attorney Interview Notes.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20092M6071995-09-26026 September 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Intervenor Addl Discovery Request Dtd 950905.* Request Granted.W/Certificate of Svc ML20092H6571995-09-11011 September 1995 Georgia Power Company Opposition to Intervenor Motion to Strike Testimony of Hill & Ward & to Conduct Addl Discovery.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20092H6771995-09-11011 September 1995 Ga Power Company Motion for Stay of Licensing Board Order Requiring Production of Attorney Notes of Privileged Communications.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20092A4821995-09-0505 September 1995 Intervenor Motion to Strike Expert Testimony of Hill & Ward & to Conduct Addl Discovery.* Intervenor Requests That Hill & Ward Testimony Be Stricken & Gap File Expedited Responses to Requested Discovery.W/Certificate of Svc ML20091S3861995-08-22022 August 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Intervenor Motion to Admit Certain Admissions & Sections of OI Rept Into Evidence.* Georgia Power Neither Admit Nor Deny Admissions.W/ Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20087K2911995-08-15015 August 1995 Response to Licensee Motion for Reconsideration Re Notes of E Dixon Noted & Brief on Attorney Client Privilege.* Requests That Board Order Immediate Production of Interview Notes.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20087K2801995-08-14014 August 1995 Intervenor Response to Georgia Power Company Motion to Exclude Admission of OI Conclusions.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20087K4731995-08-0808 August 1995 Gap Opposition to Intervenor Supplemental Motion to Compel Interview Notes & Other Documents Known to Gap Counsel When Preparing Response to Nov.* Informs That Motion Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20087K4021995-08-0808 August 1995 Georgia Power Co Motion for Reconsideration of Order Re Request for Discovery Re E Dixon.* Believes That Board Should Deny Intervenor Motion.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20087K3501995-08-0404 August 1995 Licensee Position on Admissibility of Staff Exhibits II-5 & II-10.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20087A6961995-07-28028 July 1995 Georgia Power Company Motion to Exclude Admission of OI Conclusions.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20087A6871995-07-28028 July 1995 Ga Power Company Motion for Issuance of Subpoena.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20087A5711995-07-24024 July 1995 Intervenors Supplemental Motion to Compel Interview Notes & Other Documents Known to Ga Power Company Counsel When Preparing Response to Nov.* Board Should Order Production of Notes of E Dixon.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20086P7801995-07-17017 July 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Intervenor Motion to Compel Production of Licensee Notes of Interview of Ester Dixon.* Intervenor Motion Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20086P5961995-07-10010 July 1995 Intervenor Motion to Clarify Record.* Requests Board to Clarify Record to Reflect That on 950517,exhibits Identified in List of Stipulated Exhibits,Were Received Into Evidence. W/Certificate of Svc ML20086H2271995-06-30030 June 1995 Intervenor Motion to Compel Production of Licensee Notes of Interview of Ester Dixon.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20085C8871995-05-29029 May 1995 Intervenor Response to Motion to Quash Subpoenas of C Coursey,M Hobbs & RP Mcdonald.* Motion to Quash Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20084L2871995-05-24024 May 1995 Motion by Georgia Power Company Cl Coursey,Ml Hobbs & RP Mcdonald to Quash Subpoenas of C Coursey,Ml Hobbs & RR Mcdonald.* W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20083R0291995-05-18018 May 1995 Georgia Power Company Brief on Inadmissibility of OI Rept or in Alternative Motion for Certification to Commission.* Advises That Exhibits Should Not Be Admitted Into Evidence in Proceeding.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20083C8421995-05-12012 May 1995 Intervenor Response to Util Motion for Order Preserving Licensing Board Jurisdiction.* Intervenor Requests That Commission Deny Util Motion for Order Preserving Licensing Board Jurisdiction.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20083C8461995-05-10010 May 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Board Question Re 900410 IIT Questions.* Licensing Board Requests That Util Advise Board of Response to a Chaffee 900410 Request for Calcon Sensor Data.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20083C8241995-05-0909 May 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Board Question Re Diesel Testing Transparency.* Util Believes That Cash Did Not Include Start 128-131 Since Starts Were Not Included on Typed List.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20083L7781995-05-0909 May 1995 Georgia Power Co Response to Board Question Re Definition of Successful Start.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20083L7251995-05-0707 May 1995 Intervenor'S Response to Gpc Motion to Strike Partially Intervenor'S Prefiled Testimony.* Requests That Gpc Motion to Strike Partially Intervenor'S Prefiled Testimony Be Overruled in Entirety.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20083K2971995-05-0202 May 1995 Intervenor Motion for Enlargement of Time.* Requests Enlargement of Time to Respond to Georgia Power Co Motion to Strike Partially Prefiled Testimony.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List ML20082T3871995-04-27027 April 1995 Georgia Power Co Motion for Order Preserving Licensing Board Jurisdiction.* Requests That Commission Grant Relief Request.W/Certificate of Svc & Svc List 1996-08-02
[Table view] |
Text
W=.
., : H E U U t D G o d ESt w u ,+.r $
. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ::ccern:p USMC NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 15 TPF -3 A11 :57 Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board: ,:c- p g; n 3 - . qp f.civ
,5
,.g. -
l In the Matter of: ) .
GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, ET AL. Docket Nos. 50-424 O b' (Vogtle' Electric Generating )59-425 o c__
Plant, Units 1 and 2 ) (OL),
L INTERVENORS' BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND RESPONSE TO APPLICANTS' MOTION TO COMPEL In a Memorandum and Order filed March 9, 1984, this Board found that CPG and GANE had fulfilled the requirements of 19 C.F.R. '2.714 and established their respective interests to participate as intervenors in this adjudicatory proceeding.
Full party status for each group was dependent on the -
submission of at least one litigable contention. At a Special Prehearing Conference held on May 30th, the Board heard a
. discussion of the vari ous contenti ons submi tted by both CPG and GANE.
On. September 5, 1984, the Board issued a Memorandum and
-Order on Special Prehearing Conference Held Pursuant to i
19 C.F.R. 2.715a. This order admitted both CPG and GANE as i party intervenors. Pursuant to the Order, CPG and GANE j consolidated their efforts. The Order also set forth a l 8504040347 850401
{DR ADOCK 05000424-PDR y 1
~
discovery schedule regarding those contentions which were neither withdrawn nor dismissed. Pursuant to this Order the parties have exchanged various sets of Interrogatories and.
produced documents.
In the context of this discovery, the applicants sought to take deposition of Tim Johnson. Mr. Johnson, the Executive Director of Campaign for a Prosperous Georgia, had previously been designated as a possible witness regarding contention 14.
Despite this fact, the applicants desired to take Mr. Johnson's deposition regarding "all contentions". See attached Notice of Depositions. At the present time, joint intervenors do not plan to call Mr. Johnson as a witness for any of the contentions admitted thus far. .
Mr. Johnson's deposition took place on March 12. On t' hat day he was questioned for several hours by the applicants who were represented by three individual attorneys from two different law firms. The transcript of the deposition runs 184 pages. Mr. Johnson testified fully and cooperated fully with the interrogation except when he was directed by his personal attorney not to answer.
The applicants seek to compel answers to five specific sets of questions which relate to:
(1) CPG's past and present membership; (2) CPG's finances; (3) Mr. Johnson's sources of income; (4) ECPG; (5) - CPG's relationship to ECPG and Southern Regional Council.
2.
It is the position of the joint intervenors 5 hat these matters are inappropriate for discussion for discovery in this proceeding; that they are irrelevant to this proceeding; and that they are privileged matters. For these reasons, the applicants' Motion to Compel should be denied, and intervenors' Motion for a Protective Order pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 7. 74 0 (c) should be granted.
The remainder of this brief will discuss the position of the joint intervenors on this matter, and then examine the specific questions and the joir.t intervenors' concerns about each. The joint intervenors seek a protective order to preclude the applicant from questioning Mr. Johnson or others regarding these matters.
Position of Joint Intervenors The joint intervenors join in the objections of individual counsel to Tim Johnson. It is the understanding of the undersigned that it would be inappropriate for the joint intervenors to have objected to any questions at the deposition. See 10 C.F.R. 2. 74 0a (d) , Rather, this section suggests that the appropriate time to object is when the information sought is to be used, i.e., Applicants' Motion to Compel and joint intervenors' subsequent Request for a l
Protective Order. See Pennsylvania Power and Light Co.
(Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2) ALAB-613, 12 NRC 317, 322-23 (1980). The applicants' Motion seems to make much of the fact that the joint intervenors did not join in the objections; objections would have,been premature by the l
intervenors at the deposition itself.
The applicants sought to depose Tim Johnson regarding the contentions that had been admitted by this Board. None of the five sets of questions about which the applicants complain are related to any of the contentions. For this reason, the objection of relevance by Mr. Johnson's counsel was correct.
The issues before this Board are complex enough without raising cdditional issues and burdening the record with additional matters unrelated to the specific contentions at issue. While the applicants may be very interested in knowing the financial resources of CPG, or the membership of GANE, these matters have nothing to do with the contentions before this Board. Arguably they might have been relevant prior to the Board's determination that CPG and GANE were party intervenors.
However, this Board has already determined that CPG and GANE cre appropriate parties to this proceeding, and granted each full intervenor party status.
The intervenors do not disagree with the applicants as to 1
interpretation of the Commission's discovery-rules by reference I
(
to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Moore's Federal
' Practice 26.72,26-474 suggests that the 1983 amendments to Rule 26 (b) (1) was designed to limit burdensome and abusive discovery, and that courts may be more likely to grant orders that certain matters shall not be inquired into. Moore cites Marrese v. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 706 F2d 1488 (7th Cir. 1983) as an example. In considering such orders the court must balance the competing interests and hardships involved; consider whether a less burdensome means of acquiring
+
necessary information exists; and consider whether the claim has any possible merit. We believe if the Board considers the instant discovery, it will conclude that the applicants do not need the information they seek to discover; the information is irrelevant to the contentions; and it is privileged.
The joint intervenors suggest the information sought by the applicants is for a collateral purpose. Specifically, the joint intervenors fear that the information is sought to attack CPG and GANE before the Georgia-Public Service Commission, Internal Revenue Service ~and various private foundations and the press.
Joint intervenors fear that applicants will use this information to intimidate supporters of the intervenors, most l of whom must do business with one or another of.the applicants.
Such purposes are impermissible, See Moore's Federal Practice -
t 26.54, p. 26-88.
With this overview, we examine the specific information sought by the applicants.
CPG's Past and Present Membership The applicants seek to identify the past and present membership of CPG. Discovery of membership lists has been disallowed. In a leading case, Bates v. City of Little Rock 361 U.S. 516 at 524, 86 S.Ct. 412 at 417 (1966), the Supreme Court held
[4] On this record it sufficiently appears
- that compulsory disclosure of the membership
, lists of the local branches of the National l Association for the Advancement of Colored I People would work a significant interference
! with the freedom of association of their
! members. There was substantial uncontroverted evidence that public identification of personu in the community as members of the organizations had been followed by harassment and threats of S
bodily harm. There was also evidence that fear of community hostility and economic reprisals that would follow public disclosure of the membership lists had discouraged new members from joining the organizations and induced former members to withdraw. This repressive effect, while in part the result of private attitudes and pressures, was brought to bear only after the exercise of governmental power had threatened to force ,
, disclosure of the meubers' names. N.A.A.C.P.
- v. State of Alabama, 357 U.S. at page 463,.
78 S.Ct. at page 1173. Thus, the threat of substantial government encroachment upon important and traditional aspects of individual freedom is neither speculative not remote.
See also Moore's Federal Practice 26.69 (3] at 26-208.
The Georgia Power Company is known to have an extensive and intrusive security system. The news media has reported serious incidents of harassment of critics of Georgia Power including members of both CPG and GANE. See attached articles.
Furthermore, business supporters of joint intervenors have expressed the fear that Georgia Power Company will push them
-into a higher rate bracket, if they are identified. See attached affidavit of Tim Johnson. For these reasons, disclosure of the membership list of CPG or GANE would have a chilling effect on the enrollment and membership of the organizations. Moreover, the membership is irrelevant given 3
that both organizations have been adjudged parties to this proceeding.
CPG's Finances .
The applicant seek to discover CPG's finances (Motion
, p. 4-5). They ask whether CPG receives private contributions; Whether CPG receives grants from any organizations; and whether 6 . - - - _ .
CPG receives financial assistance from any other organizations?
The joint intervenors object to these questions on the basis of relevance. This Board itself has ruled that the financial qualifications of the applicants are irrelevant to this proceeding. It is hard to see why the financial resources of i the intervenors have any relevance. Moreover, assuming that CPG's finances are relevant to this proceeding, the joint
~
intervenors object to the questions on the basis of privilege, as this information constitutes proprietary information. See Natural Util. Serv., Inc. v. Wisconsin Centrifugal Foundary, Inc. 52 FRD 539 (E.D. Wis. 1968) where customer lists were protected; and Korman v. Shull 184 F.Supp. 928 . (W.D. Mich.
1969) where productions of documents for inspection was not O
required because of trade secret privilege.
Donors to organizations such as CPG or GANE have the right to privacy. Disclosing their identity may preclude future donations. In any case, other individuals may solicit these donors to the detriment of the joint intervenors. For these reasons, the information sought is both privileged and
' irrelevant to this proceeding.
l
! Mr. Johnson's Financial Affairs l The applicants seek to discover whether Mr. Johnson l
receives his paycheck from CPG and otherwise identify his l
sources of income. Again, this inquiry is not relevant to the contentions with which this proceeding is concerned. On the one i
l hand, the applicants suggest the sources of Mr. Johnson's paycheck may bias him, but on the other they concede they were 7 - . - . - . ... .- - -
. . o 4
not deposing him as a witness for CPG (See Tr at 31, lines
- 9-12). See New York Stock Exchange v. Sloan 22 FR Serv. 2d 500 (S.D. N.Y. 1976) where accounting firm's personnel files were held not discoverable because an expectation of privacy existed. At any rate, since joint intervenors do not plan at this-time to call Mr. Johnson as a witness in this proceeding, the sources of Mr. Johnson's finances, like the sources of CPG's finances discussed supra, are both privileged and irrelevant to this proceeding.
4 ECPG and SRC 1
The applicants have asked questions regarding the relation-ship between CPG,and two other organizations--Educational Campaign for a Prosperous Georgia (ECPG) and Southern Regional Council (SRC). These latter two entities are not parties to j this proceeding. Applicants assert at page 8 of their Motion that questions regarding these latter two organizations are i intended to illicit information bearing on Mr. Johnson's j credibility or bias. Mr. Johnson has not submitted direct testimony. The applicants have made no showing as to how the relationship, if any, among these three organizations has anything to do with Mr. Johnson's t'estimony, if any, about contentions in this proceeding. Even if Mr. Johnson were the chief executive officer of all three organizations it is i difficult to see how that is relevant or would lead to relevant
\
l information regarding his credibility in whatever testimony he provides. The applicants suggest that a statement by ECPG may be an admission by CPG. CPG is not required to produce any f
- V e evidence in this proceeding. CPG does not contest the applicants' right to ask questions about CPG. However, other organizations such as ECPG and SRC have nothing to do with this proceeding. The relationship, if any, is irrelevant to these contentions.
Conclusion For the reasons discussed above, intervenors request the Board to deny Applicants' Motion to Compel and grant Intervenor's Motion for a Protective Order regarding CPG's past and present membership, CPG's finances, Mr. Johnson's source of income, and CPG's relationship to ECPG and SRC.
Respectfully submitted, Laurie Fowler Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation 1102 Healey Building 57 Forsyth Street NW Atlanta, GA 30303 Counsel for Campaign for a Prosperous Georgia and Georgians Against Nuclear Energy Qpty Flack 1515 Healey Building 57 Forsyth Street NW Atlanta, GA 30303 Counsel for Tim Johnson 4