ML20126K774
| ML20126K774 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Bailly |
| Issue date: | 05/11/1981 |
| From: | Whicher J PORTER COUNTY CHAPTER INTERVENORS, VOLLEN, R.J. & WHICHER, J.M. |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8105210312 | |
| Download: ML20126K774 (8) | |
Text
.
4 QHhi h TELCo.yaSPoxDE.vc5
,/&'-~' * : ; ;,';\\
' v,y,N -
,, s.
\\
M\\
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA D'
- - 3.'f
Ui
~ r..,
!/,3 $. g.a..o.. i..
d NUCLEAR. REGULATORY COMMISSIO::
....v
,uAC...-_,,.,
o.,nn.
. e.m..
A f
. Br : v R:, ih.
,.,,0,,,I C S a, r E.,.y e
r n.
- ..s :...
r.
..- W /yi A - -- Q
/g,/ j,., i g s 9 w
In the Matter of
)
'O /
~.
)
NOR~BER:: INDIA::A PUBLIC
)
Docket No. 50-367 SERVICE COMPAP.' (Eaillv.
)
(Construe:icn Pe:=i6s' ^
ff Generating Station, Nu' ele ar-
)
Extension)
,;.Z, '
4
./.; f f lP f t) 8 1)
)
j,b h,LJ %'
c, n t. JL
,/ ?
PORTEP. COU::TY CHAPTER INTERVENORS ' MGTION
!J L.,'s M 981 > p.
r-TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS BY NI?SCO
- u. m. L 6 l3 PURSUANT TO PCCI'S THIRD REQUEST TO
"* '" Sd D
NI?SCO FOR ?RODUCTION OF DOCUVENTS o'/
..sN L s.'
- tA Porter County Chapter of the I
- aak Walton League cf America, Inc.. Concerned Citizens Against Bailly Nuclear Site; Eusinessmen fer the' Public Interes t, Inc.; Ja.es E. Newman and Mildred Warner
("?CCI"), by their. actorneys, move the Board :o enter an order, on suant r,1 In ero s ? nn tes a s
. - elli-
- ee-a er, reduce $cce of :he decurents recues:.ed in para;;raphs 2, S,
IL, 15. 16 and 17 of PCCI's Third Reques t ' to NIPSCO for Production of Docu-ents,
da:ed March 20, 1981 (" Third Request") which Northern Indiana Public Service Company's Response.co Por:er County Chapter Intervencrs Third Request :o SI?SCO for Production of Documents
(" Response"), dated April 24, 1931, states that NI?SCO is vi:hho'_ ding frc= produerion.
We show belew :ha: PCCI are entitled.:: production of these documen:s and :ha: NI?SCO's ch.'ections are withou merit.
l 1.
Pararra:hs 2. 8 and 16.
The documents
$o3 requested in Paragraphs 2, 8 and 16 rela:e :o SI?SCO's 3
//
stessiosin
1 i
I
.7
- erec2s:r ;:. demanc. on
- s system'and :. s pre;. e::: ens c:. :ne neec.
.ee.. w.. e, 3 s e
. w, 1
.e.gc.ne a.eu 3
- 3. e
,e
,c. o s e d e.'.'.'."e..,....
1 y.
- c.. :.: c -. c..,e c wo o3;4 ec. tono, k -
- s. o.4
-a m
-e..
w w
. n.. c.,
a e....,...
...e. <..
.s.. m u..
.,.. e c,
- rst ob ' e c t s to :w..e s e,.- ara.r ra o..ns on res.ecancv erounds.
. 1
. o c o... e.. d.d. 3-
~.'ma* t'me.eq".es ed dv u...en.s a.e. "..e.
e.'e",a...
m aa; e.
contention admi: ed in this proceeding."
(Response at pp. 2,3).
Such an assertion is simply beside the point'and is an attenpt to lici: discovery to
.mpermiss,...oly narrow scope.
1 The scope of this proceeding is whether NI? SCC can shew the
,, good cause,, require
.cy section,tes or t..;e
- e. cm c energy Act.
a
-wy
.: 2 a
_ e v.
u.4.suv,,.e y i s " a-,.. o.
..a.. e.,,,
-. e \\. 4, e g e d',
"a 5..' C '.. ' s-v o..
y
.a.' e.c-...
. m,
. '.. e s ".'. ;4 e w- ".
.a. t e. 4 r. ". c i.ved
'"a
. '.4e
.. w e e. 4..g
'4 '.. e. h. e.
-d.
- re a:es to :.ne c,la = cr ce:ense c:. c e " ear:v see.in -
4.ncoverv or :o a c.,a:=
r ce ense c:. an:. c:her party...o
,0 c,..ra f.. s, 0 03 ).
1
", e. v c..-, a.4....c.
.h=.*.
g o o d. c a ". s e c'. x. 4 e. o-
." c e.v.. G ".,s
.^ ".
6--
.'.. e :..= '. '. '. ',
d o
e-....#
, c "..d,
C "r ". e ". a # l.
- . "o ". 'u. s p. o c e e # # ". 3, "" c ". sC s '..
- w ".".. m" e *.
4
.. ~
f sechion I5's'of the Act.
Neither the scope of this proceeding ner
~
~
s::,e of discovery is limited to ecniantions admitted.
The only i
proeer beund is "IPSCO's claim of goed cause.
If "IFSCO does not
,ec:
.w ca....-4,,,,
.w
...a w 4-e. c 4,... e,. e s. a..
.w s
...e "geo.
w..e. owe.
t.
.s n.
r cr.use" incuiry.
NI?SCO's " relevancy" objection is obviously
- s.. o... C e.,.
u.
..w.
b w i
".. peer.-os oas a1..ead,/
.,1. 4....s.eL, k.
. k.. n n.
k o
4ee.:...,..
....,w r.
. 6. e w
w.
~
J.,._-..v, w e.. w e.4 3 2
.a...L. e. o x,,, e s...
2
- a. o C... e.. e
...c.
c.. o n e..:.
2 e.
m
.u o
.c.
....v....c c ~. "... e. ". o =c a
^w ". d.es i na..d '.' C.# 0 ^ ".. e.
Cw..."; C'..:"y.o.*.
~. "..G". "+ e ".. c. o" '
.w
=.2 n.
2
~nwe o6"wo.4.es
.C '.T.:.Sut.
-a
.e;e -,.c
.c,a.
e,o 2..s
.es o ee en
.s.,
- e. o.
n-.
r...
. e. e. c.c. e w
nose..,_.
. n e.. c
.u.. e..
nm c-a a4 c-s Public Service Cocoany, dated "ovember 2', 1950 and attached v-c.w G'.s. : o n - 1
.a 7 :,.
.n.v....ct,.-e.vu n e n, c-..a :,
.wn e :v a.1 7.,. r n.C.,es-.
_C.
~
-t.
a w.
oc f
v.
g
..3
... e n c. v,,. ".
u-OSCG gmoo'1;
,o.
.,. a e
w se
..e3.;.c
-k.je-..o
,e...
w v
.s..
.m C.. t g
- u. e C'C v L, e..e n. s..u.a.- k.
na.
- 2.,u,.: n n....s wC..-....c...
n aa au..g v
o.
O 4
.. -gCn. s second obj ect.on to production o:. cocuments 4
... - v recuested_in Paragraphs 2, S and 16 is the assertion :hct "public cisseminaticn,, (a terr whicn.,: does not ce:ine.. c:. some c:. ene infcrmation contained in the documents could be detrimental
- c SIPSCO's cus:omers.
NIPSCO's assertions of har: to others are unsupported by facts or logic and purely speculative.
- However, in an effcrt to avoid potentially unnecessary disputes, PCCI are willing to have MIPSCO produce the docunents, a: least prelinin-arily, with the identity of the customer concealed.
PCCI's richt to know the identity of the customer could be litigated wnen, anc it, we conc,uc.e tnat we desire
.nat in:ornat.on.
4 Accordingly, the documents recuested in Paragraphs 2, 6 and 16 shculd he ordered :c be produced, wi:h 5IPSCO being given
,. m.
.....u....c.
2.
Parazraon Paragraph 14 cf the Third Rec.uest see's the ninutes af those meetings of S PSCC's heard of directors at which Bailly was discussed.
NIPSCO has objected c : hat request as "beyond the scope of the conten: ions admitted".
(Respense at p. 6).
In spite of NIPSCO's asser:icns as to sccpe, the documents are clearly discoverable.
As with ir.s cbj ec:icns Pararrach 2, S and if, it ha s sico. lv. miscons: rued the sec e of r
discovery in this "gcod cause" proceeding.
The recuest ob vio u s '. :.
falls scuarely wi:hir the standard of 10 CFR s2.'a0(b)(1) as bein;
" reasonably calcula:ed :c lead to the discovery of admissible
l l
J
.u.
e..e s,
.s ",.
. i s 3,
. u. c,m. a.., a
, e... a.
t o e.,.. ; e.
c e o.:
w,
.-e..~
4.
.c.
. c l
l
, a i t _ '..
_.ne sec:e 0:. t,ni s reasons :c: :ne ra11ure :o cons:ruct c
j
... o c c. e c' '.. -..~.... c' e =..'.. e u ~...- d....'. e "." c... e ~.. ~ '. c..,.
~..=
1 e
_ 3 defined bv. whether acod cause for ar ex:ension of the Baillv I
^
constr :ction permit exists.
SIPSCO has excerpted certain portions of minutes of some of its b:ard mee-ins.c and Preduced onlv. those excere:s.
Such a practice o., ea10:ng a cocument is not contemp,ia:e d ner pernitted by the SRC discovery rules, absent an order of this 3:ard or agreement of the parties, neither of which SIFSCO has rec.uested or received.
If such a o.ractice as SIPSCO has
.... c.. e i.1.,,,
4..
1 A
s pqrm, - n_. A.
c r. c e s. M...,.
,.4*
4
+
4
.n.
a.ec we e
.o.e,..em,
-.e.
a.
.u.. u c
- p. v... <...
.e. u4 e.A 4
- eye v,
m.o dy e d do C""...e n. "..
T. #.
c' d.' C '.. c. ".. *.
- ..C.
y.
...).
.........-~...
7..--.-.-.
...y,......
'. e,.. - -.. C c. c.
..o jusu
.. e e o., n o.
.N 1.y, LL.
... - r o-
,,..c. r.
auu 7.su-v g
...t
..w o ;. c-..... p.
- 1. -.t 4., s <
- u. v....
e.4.,
.p, :.., e, _.
- v...s. e..... v e _i, e.-. 4 -..
u v..
3.=
and it shculd be ordered c produce the entire minutes cf
- ne mee:Ings at wn:ch Eality was discussed.
e
..e-. seer.s
- 2. c.
g. c-,y o,.
pa ag. cpu..,5 c. :u.e
..,.2 4
3.
a e.
.a s
~
..:.... ~.
vg o,.-....o. 4 gg
.m. e e.en'aunc,
.. e.
e.e c.n a.
-....e. s m.. o n.e
.nn.
- o a
m e
. l
>7 t g w
- u..c a-s *. a *. 8 # " ' 2 ". ". ~.
en c.,. e., 3 e.e.
- k. u.
".'. O. c n.
e..r. e.,,.m. o g.
v j
- u.. c. - _. od,n8C. u..o s e D. C. :..n.n..s
%..e- ?oC, Den :-
.u. v. a,. u. "s.oce,
.. vu i
o u..
- ,c.,
e ec as " p e.. m-4.. 4_. 3 o
a-..v a ".. '
e."...-.. e.. ". -.. " c n. c
'. ar obj ected to the remainder as " overly b road" a.d "beyond j
- .e s ecpe of the conten: ions admitted. "
(Respense a: pp. 6-7)
I
1 3
A:..cith the other paragraphs to whiir it objects. '.:I? 5C0 has i
I
~.... <. o... u n. g a.. e g ope a. t a e e. o e c u...
c.
3...
.a i..
.,8 c. ;v u
~;
.eu
..ne cocuments rec.uestec,o rez,are :o :ne sur.ec:
.s::er a:.
n;s.
ce leve they wi.,
.ead to evidence of the Orcceeding, ruu.
i
.-.... p 1 a...
..o. c. e, e o n.e
.#c. N ". R C*~ ' s r#a d.lu. e
.v-c w-.. s.. ". -.
and of whether NIPSCO can show " good cause" for the extension
.s
..otes o:. conversations may weit revea, evidence no:
1: seens.
contained in core :crmal commun.4 ca:Lons.
...,:dC0 s cu,d not be o.ermi::ed to withhold documents solelv because it claims they do not per:ain to an admitted contention.
~he recues; is
-..pe c.,d..To.dCA s '.. o u't c' ' e -. de e.. o o,. o A " e
.b.. e d. -" e r.. ~. e.
d e
v e
L.
D. a. a c. a c.S
- 1. '..
.' F. D. S C O
- k. ~n.e n '. 4. e c. a. d. c
. o d "...' ^.. o.#
v.
w
- r. u.. c..c : 1 e. e ",v.e.c. e d '.
D. a. a g. an, 'r.
'. '. c.' ~ '.. e ~. '..'.. d
=..c ~,~ e'.=. c n
.k.. e n......
- s....
1.
. a...::..
...s
._o...
cocument out ra:ner rerers to an un. centi:le.
- 2.e
- ron.
.... n u... a._..x..o. a,. v... a.: -. e 1. e n, 'n c o e v...', e..c a. '. -.. *. a c.
e u-. '..' e -
+<
-n a~,
a
,. s- ; u,,, e J ", c.. d ~. '. a.
- . *m ' doe.e n O *. c. ~. e ~.p ~. t o. u# e.*..d.#,"
...V
~~
3, sucject ca :er or spect:1c type or cocument,.
(, response a: p.
e i
. k.. o, e a s.= e. -. '. c....= a. e.s 4 - '. v.
e o.,e-"s,
~.. e. e. ". a. s.. c. # e..c
- r..
.~e and incorpcrates a col,oquy c.ur.n; :ne ceposit or a: zurene
.,e.
".. e. s n ' e.
- r. e.. o-. v 4.. e-
- n.. e-
>. m'e...
..,. 2 4. o- - ~. c s. -.. k v e
cr e...-.'.
s.
v a
- z. c - ~.
u-,... m e... e. c e.. c i....
- n. e :...
- i s.
~ :
...se.
- c.. m. : u.n a.. a.o.
-u
, u. :..,
u -.
c,.. %..
~..
....,.u~.,<.c.
,, s o, e.,> 0. v..
s
. 3 oc
....v...
c.
fcur times referred to ": hat file" cr "the fi'.e" sc'..cw' edgin; n
..s.denr2..,;,
<ser,s.
4.v,n
,e r..,o..e 4
4 v
.4..
s.
w e. s :. a _... :,. 4.a. 4..
s s~
.mf
...SCO.-
._eoe...
~.m.a.
. u.. m,.. u.. e : <, e
- a. c an c
- nor. a. c o..
ar--u.;
o
" unidentified" simply lacks credibili ;.
The fac:
I si w ww ye-er
=
. that production of the " file",rather than all documents in the
- lle, is rec.ues ted obviousiv is not a valid.c.rounc. :cr co.ectier
- ~?SCO's objection to the breadth of the recues:
s unsupper:-
able.
The recuested file clearly contains docu.ents relevant tc the scope of this proceeding as defined by section 185 ef the A omic Energy Act.
MIPSCO should be ordered to produce the file requested in Paragraph 17 of :he Request.
v v,.4 C1,S m.v.s.
s u
Fcr :he foregoing reasons, this action should be ~ ranted and e
N!?SCO should be ordered to produce all of the documents rec.ucs:ed in Paragraphs 2.
5, 14, 15, 16 and 17 of PCCI's Tnird Request.
Da:sd:
May 11, 1901 Respe:: full:. submittec,
,~n..
Jane M iTn i che r Y\\ l
\\
\\ [AAA{10 %
n l
Sy: _ ----<=LC - ' ' i Jane M. Knicher Attornevs f.or Porter County. Char.ter Intervenors 3 bert.~.
VC11en
+..
s.*
- .,L..,,.
w' s.. a A.....c.
on....
" e dtwb n
i n. G
'3
.b w
.gv.
s S..i:e 1300 -,w-r, C s.,c.
wa a.
.r....aa
.a
( a..,.
'an-::>u w
9 RE'.LTF.D CORFSSPO.NDE.NCF s
. 2, A
,; j 1
.- \\ :.
e i\\
,Y Y
- D
/
7.....,
q]s'~< O :yt,e.
a a,.. r,.
O
... :. u n; 2 u: e. u :. u.-.
vu..,
g
.. a En.-a., - -,.. A - s u,r.,v..o:.0 a: u u Avn
.tc 2
m
% v.
1 e..,.eol s k n:
- c.. m....T.-
a
,...n.r-...~.
-+...
f c^ !
....s
. ~
..q.,
.~n.9
/
.e..
.v. 2.
..e
)
6%
W
\\
s
)
..q., t. t y
.. c) 'r. '..".:'. n'.".
".~.,'.'.~'..'.'c'.
.T
)
s :. c..i C :.
m.m.... -
ua s.. -.
..o.
c.
s - n,r
.e
)
(Co.s..3, 4nn 3e
...4 (Ea:.lly Generating Station,
)
Suclear-1)
Ev.te ns ion)
)
)
C "r D. a- '. ~ ' Cn' ~i r. O ' d r'. "n"s ' .
~
r u:
I hereb.v certif.y that I served cc:ies of the follo'rint do c=e n t s
.. ce
.~.a s v.
p q Or
.o r R7. r ~a LOIntl t m
v
. C r.,. p : e. O.r a
v...
.r2
. c.c.n k... 7 v a..
, :.. r. ; V.;
n.Na ; p i o n,
, n v l.,
. wn r.
- 7. u a.N L.., L L' e.
-.o
. J
. +. ?.; ".b c^
a o...
s O
e*T
..y,.,n. T \\.,
,..un.."C*
. = L, v..
,s 7
.4 n
.A D.1.
Q.
v,o
- w. s.. v iw.
u
.o
.e n,..
m
...- 7 e-;.
+..p
..2:.2 2a...
,v A.g, S c.
u
- c.. w.... nod s,77n---
t.
.o w
.r
.e a.a
.. :2.> a n :.. n
.,aJ uI.DSCO'S.pTp3e o
q;T. O.; *. o* * *..r..O. M,. a c*. *r
? ; O.. c
,.a v a.
o n,v, o,,.,.
...o an.
r_
..,.,......c,
- s..
....-at..
.u..
?... O.r *
..,q u g !C 1 _ G a,9 m;
r
- n 7
.s r
,c'"***
., ~.'.-.. u:,*
. e
.T C ' Ci v.
.et....
t u.a C r - '.e.
- u. T.:;s'.r rn er S.. n,.
u A
.. - c,a.
O:.,, G.. ~. c., r. : Dn C u. :.....e c.sv u u a
.-. %.... c...s,.....:...
a.. m. %.,,.4.%
,am,.
4c.
.., -..e e..<,r.,
a.e
. :.,.,, c
,a
.. a. w.
2
' '... 34 1.,
? 4..q..-. '3c --
o u
n
.gbe
- E a*'d r---
i
..,4_
_.. c c.,
- r..:
g-z a. :.,..
u aose-1
- 4.,,., e..
.e
., m e
'n, 4
.. h 3.,
t h
f\\
s.s_,\\,e 9 p(. ~.t N
\\t Ey J-2 %
b
. a n u.
..u.
n., -. e,.. ;
.e
.~,%....
,.. e., _
,..... c a.. c.
. n.,
.v ien i
a..e
.,e.,e s
s..e,
..,J ~.
, n. c..~,.w... sea o-.
.c.
ee.
, s
- c. 4 vs.,sw
- Chicago, T..' i no i s 60602
\\
( J,. J )
Ow.-33/0 i
)
+
S1xV,1C c2: i i
i l
., e r.oer: urossman, -tsc.
vecrge a e.nna Grabewsh.-
n
.Adminis:rstive Judge 71.3 W.
136th Lane
- e.. -,. 4.. S. c_.: e.,,
f.
1_4. c e u o-4,
Ce2__
._,.e,
,d4.ana en
-esu-uu..
2..
o
..3 c.
scarc panet U.S. Nuclear Recula cr.v Dr. Geor e Schult:
e Commission ev. _
Coo, spring Roa, Washington, D.C.
20555 Michigan City, Indiana 46360 Dr. Robert L. Holton Richard L. Robbins, Esq.
Administrative Judge Lake Michigan Federation
.e C..e
- e. a.t owes-..,.a-.u,y...,
.?
u
.s w a CP. s o. 3 c" ' e". w..d T
a Oregon S: ate University Chicago, Illinois 60604 Corvallis, Oregon 97331 Mr. Mike Ols:anski
- v.,
C 1 4 c.:o a. vie _,o
.m Local 1010 - United Steelwerkers Dr. J. Venn Leeds of America Adminis trative Judge 3703 Euclid Avenue 10807 A:.eell East Chicago, Indiana 46312
-. n. r c.
h,o us ton, _2exas s<
Steven C. Goldberg, Esq.
0 :...::ce o:.
.tne executive Legal Directer
".S.
Nuclear Regula cry Ccmmissiot Maurice Axeirad, Esq.
Washing:en, D.C.
20555 Kathleen H. Shea, Esq.
' cw e..s. e '.n.,
"m r4....-.., Re'.s, e'.... e :...- r. 4.., 2.s s.......-... y- -.. -... -.
r-
/.xelrad and Toll Jchn Van Vranken, Environmental 1025 Connecticut Ave.,
N.W.
Centrol Division
' ashington, D.C.
20036 133 W.
Randolph - Suite 2315 Chicazo, Illinois 60601 William H. Eichhorn, Esq.
Eichhorn, Eichhorn & Link Docketing & Service Secticn 5243 Hohman Avenue Cffice of the Secretary
- u...-......o.. >,,n><a a
-o,s C
..c.
~.eu-.
.% C n.., - --
i-o C,... t e4
.sa.o,.
3.. c. y s. f w
w o.
- 9. v.; ; s; 6
t - - w a.. 3 -...
m.>. C.
a s s..
Diane 3. Cohn, Esq.
,,443, r_ t C..
u
- *4 1 1 4. cp..
b, u..,w,1..,
r-q. 2. r.. p..
Lc w
^
w
_og n11' r.,...u. e.1. c-.. A c.a.a ou..e '/0 r;
- 4
....o m.~
JJ i.es,J.
1.e, T. n.s a-..c-A n ? e, 4*
.S. 'a n O ; c. v. e e,... ^.
v "a a s '.. 4. 3. -..,
D.r.
.S.nO~A s
.. -. c
.=.==.."
u' '_'"=...o'.'..='
3 card Panel 2
t.e..e.
- e., c.,. e o.
p e,,. c-.,.,.
C,....
s w
3 Washington, D.C.
20555 c..,...i..-
.c : e... cn;-
. e..s;..g c.
Appeal Scard Panel n e 3.. a,. o.,. C.....e.. s s..- n 4,
.s...,,., e c.
- s. c.
Washington, D.C.
~.0555
--