ML20134E726
| ML20134E726 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 08/16/1985 |
| From: | Bloch P, Grossman H, Jordan W, Mccollom K Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | Citizens Association for Sound Energy, NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD), TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| References | |
| CON-#385-269 79-430-06-OL, 79-430-6-OL, OL, OL-2, NUDOCS 8508200408 | |
| Download: ML20134E726 (4) | |
Text
.__
% (M:#/
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 00tdETED Before Administrative Judges:
uwc
\\
Peter B. Bloch, Chairman Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom 85 AUG 16 P2:47 Dr. Walter H. Jordan Herbert Grossman, Esq.
cFF n v 3EC.<. x cocuilt<G & SEM BRANCH
)
In the Matter of
)
Docket Nos. 50-445-OL & OL-2
)
50-446-OL & OL-2
)
TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY, et al.)
)
ASLBP No. 79-430-06 OL (Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station,
)
Units 1 and 2)
)
l
)
August 16, 1985 l
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER SERVED AUG161985 MEMORANDUM (Current Status of Discovery)
The existence of Texas Utilities Electric Company, et al.'s (Appli-cants') " Current Management Views and Management Plan for Resolution of 1
All Issues," (Management Plan) June 28, 1985 shall not excuse responses to discovery requests.
Applicants cannot unilaterally narrow the scope of discovery by filing its Management Plan.
At the present time, a large part of the Technical Review Team's inspections and analysis of Comanche Peak appears to be completed.
The rationale for interrupting discovery is gone.
The parties should facilitate discovery in the interest of avoiding delays later in this case.
1 Citizens' Association for Sound Energy (CASE) responded on July 29, (Footnote Continued) 8508200408 850816 PDR ADOCK 0D0004 5 D3a t
4 r
Status of Discovery:
2 Meetings should continue to be held among all the parties, both to make periodic progress reports and to discuss significant developments or completed documents.
Documentation for ongoing work should be made available to CASE on a cooperative basis, neither unduly burdening the project nor unduly delaying legitimate requests for information.
The parties should seek to avoid unnecessary technical disputes about discovery.
If discovery disputes do arise, the parties should stipulate to the nature of the dispute in order to facilitate prompt resolution by this Board.
Discovery shall now be in order if it relates to the activities or findings of the Staff's Technical Review Team (TRT) or the Applicants' l
I Comanche Peak Response Team (CPRT) that are directly or indirectly related to Contention 5.
Additionally, discovery shall be in order if it is now directly or indirectly relevant to Contention 5 because of new information derived from those findings or this discovery process.
Discovery about the comparatively recent reorganization of Applicants' management team shall be in order.
The Board has Applicants' management plan under further considera-tion.
(Footnote Continued) 1985 (Initial Response) and on July 16 (Mootness Response) and the Staff of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Staff) responded on August 2, 1985 (Staff Response).
2 Discovery will also be appropriate where new information highlighted the importance of information that did not previously seem important.
Status of Discovery:
3 0RDER For all the foregoing reasons and based on consideration of the I
entire record in this matter, it is this 16th day of August 1985 ORDERED:
The parties may recommence discovery pursuant to the procedural l
rules of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Outstanding discovery requests that have not been responded to because of Board orders issued in 1985, other than our recent order about the MAC Report, shall be considered to be filed today and shall be responded to anew.
Discovery shall now be in order if it relates to the activities or findings of the Staff's TRT or the Applicants' CPRT that are directly or indirectly related to Contention 5.
Additionally, discovery shall be in order if it is now directly or indirectly relevant to Contention 5 because of new information derived from those findings or this discovery process.
Discovery shall be in order if it relates to the comparatively recent reorganizations of Applicants' management team.
l
o e
Status of Discovery:
4 THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARDS Peter 8. Bloch, Chairman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Walter H. Jord ADMINISTRATIVE GE I
6h Kenneth A. Ficcollom v
ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE L
L AW-Herbert Grossman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Bethesda, Maryland f
i
_ _ _. _.,, _