ML20151X054
| ML20151X054 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Braidwood  |
| Issue date: | 02/06/1986 |
| From: | Berry G NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | ROREM, B. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20151X058 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-#186-050, CON-#186-50 OL, NUDOCS 8602120275 | |
| Download: ML20151X054 (6) | |
Text
. _ _ _.
t 06d
"'WED CORRESPOG t
C0CMETED UNITED STATES OF' A?1 ERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMP!ISSION 1M RB 10 P3 :11 BEFORE THE' ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
'~
OFFIE ;
in the Matter of
)
ha;$
)
COMMONWEALTII EDISON COMPANY
)
Docket Nos. 50-456gt
)
50-457 (Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
NRC STAFF OBJECTIONS TO INTERVENORS' THIRD SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST TO PRODUCE I.
Introduction On January 24, 1986, Intervenors Bridget Little Rorem, et al'
("Intervenors")
propounded a
third set of
" Quality Assurance Interrogatories and Request to. Produce" to Applicants and the NRC Staff.
The Staff objects to Specific Interrogatories 10,11,13, and 14 in their entirety on the grounds that answers from the Staff to these interrogatories either are not necessary to a proper decision in this proceeding or the requested information is reasonably obtainable from other sources.
In addition, the Staff objects to General Interrogatory 2 on the ground that it is premature in light of the Licensing ' Board's January 27, 1986 prehearing conference ruling.
In that prehearing conference, the Board ruled that the parties need not identify the witnesses they intend to call at the hearing until February 28, 1986. See Tr. at 655 (January 27, 1986).
8602i20275 060206 PDR ADOCK 050004S6 O
i II.
Standards for Discovery Against the Staff In general, 10 C.F.R.
S 2.740(b)(1) limits discovery to "those matters in controversy which have been identified by... the presiding officer in the prehearing order...."
The regulations further ~ require that "the information sought appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." 10 C.F.R. 5 2.740(b)(1).
Where the Staff is concerned, discovery "is on a different footing" than is discovery against other parties.
Pennsylvania Power and Light Co.. et al. (Susquehanna Steam Electric Station), A LA B-613, 12 NRC 317, 323 (1980).
Most Staff records and documents relevant to licensing s
proceedings are required by regulation to be made available to the public for inspection and copying in the NRC Public Document Room..10 C.F.R.
S 2.790(a).
The Appeal Board in Susquehanna, noting that Staff documents which are relevant to a proceeding are made publicly available except where there is a compelling justification for nondisclosure, observed that one of the purposes of this rule is to " disclose the basis for the Staff's position, thereby_ reducing any need for formal discovery."
12 NRC at 313; accord Commission Statement of General Policy and Procedure, 10 C. F. R. Part 2 Appendix A, 5 IV(d).
In furtherance of this policy, the Commission's Rules of Practice provide that before the Staff can be compelled to answer written interrogatories, the presiding officer must find "that answers to the interrogatories are necessary to a proper decision in the proceeding and that answers to the interrogatories are not reasonably. obtainable from any other source."
10 C.F.R S 2.720(h)(2)(ii).
h-
- An interrogatory is objectionable, in whole or in part, where the requestectinformation either: (i) is not necessary to a proper decision in the proceeding or (ii) is publicly available or pertains to Applicant's organizations, activities, or earlier responses to interrogatories and thus is readily known to Applicant, or is otherwise reasonably obtainable from sources other than the Staff.
With these principles in mind,
the Staff objects to General Interrogatory 2 and Specific Interrogatories 10,' 11, 13, and 14.
Without waiving any of its rights under 10 C.F.R. S 2.720(h)(2)(ii) and in the interests of expediting this proceeding, the Staff will, under separate s
cover, respond to General Interrogatories 1,
3, and 4 and Specific Interrogatories 1
through 9 and 12 of Intervenors' third set of interrogatories.
III. NRC Staff Objections A.
General Interrogatories 2.
Please identify each and every person whom you are considering to call as a witness at the hearing in this matter on this contention, and with respect to each such person, please:
a.
State the substance of the facts and opinions to which the witness is expected to testify; b.
Give a summary of the grounds for each opinion; and c.
Describe the witness' educational and professional background.
NRC Staff Objection The Staff objects to this interrogatory on the ground that it is premature.
Intervenors should note that the Licensing Board ruled during the. January 27, 1986 prehearing conference that none of the
t t parties need identify the witnesses it intends to call at the hearing until February _28, 1986.
See Tr. at 655.
The Staff fully intends to comply with the Licensing Board's ruling.
At this writing, however, the Staff has not -completed its evaluation regarding the most effective manner in v hich to present the Staff's position on Intervenors' Amended Quality Assurance contention.
10.
Please identify and describe in detail any and all studies,
inquiries, reviews oc evaluations of the effectiveness of, results and conclusions of the Braidwood Construction Assessment Program (BCAP); the " top twenty" corrective action programs at Braidwood identified in the April 8, 1985, correspondence-,*
from David H.
Smith to James G.
Keppler; and the " Ongoing Corrective Action Program" identified in Appendix B to the BCAP June 1984 program description transmitted by James J.
O'Connor to James G.
Keppler by letter of June 22, 1984.
As to each please detail the purpose and objectives, organization, methodology, procedures, staffing, implementation, results and conclusions of each.
Please identify any documents which reflect these answers.
NRC Staff Objection The ' Staff objects to this interrogatory because the requested information is reasonably obtainable from other sources, the information is publicly available in Applicant's response to Interrogatory 58 and any details regarding the response should be readily available from Applicant.
11.
Please identify _and make available for inspection and copying any and all documents which relate to the corrective actions and programs described in response to Intervenors' Second Set of interrogatories served October 21, 1985.
In its November 15, 1985, First Partial Response Applicant stated that "an index of numbered docum en ts" related to the Material Traceability Verification and Corroded Pipe' corrective action programs would "be provided in the near future," p.2.
Intervenors are unaware of any document identification or index for these or any other corrective action program except BCAP.
[-
t T
, NRC Staff Objection The_ Staff objects to this interrogatory because the requested information is reasonably obtainable from other sources.
The information so'ught relates to one of Applicant's earlier responses to Intervenors' interrogatories.
The details regarding that response should be readily available from Applicant.
13.
Describe in detail any and all work performed by Torrey Pines Technology, or other organization of similar name, with respect to quality assurance at Braidwood, the subjects of Intervenors' quality assurance contention, or any corrective action program including but not limited to the Safety-Related Mechanical s
Equipment corrective action program.
As to such work please detail the purpose and objectives, organization, methodology, procedures, staffing, implementation, results and conclusions.
Please identify any documents which reflect these answers and make available such documents for inspection and copying.
NRC Staff Objection This interrogatory is applicable only to applicant.
The information sought relates to work performed on behalf and at the request of Applicant, and thus should be readily available from Applicant.
14.
Please describe in detail the factual basis for Commonwealth Edison Company's forecasts, projections or estimates of construction schedule and completion including fuel loading and start-up testing for Braidwood Units 1 and 2, including but not limited to any such forecasts, projections or schedules provided to the Licensing Board,
Appeal
- Board, Commission or Commission S taff.
Please describe fully the methodology, assumptions and factual data relied upon in sufficient detail to permit independent. verification and replication of Edison't results and conclusions.
Please identify and make available for inspection and copving any and all documents which. reflect these answers.
NRC Staff Objection
n t This interrogatory is applicable only to Applicant.
The information sought.lly this interrogatory reintes to previous representations or statements made by Applicant, and thus is readily available from Applicant.
IV. Motion for Protective Order On the basis of the above stated objections and for good cause shown, the Staff respectfully requests the Licensing Board to issue a protective order pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 5 2.740(c) that further discovery on General Interrogatory 2 and Specific Interrogatories 10,11,13, and 14 s
of "Rorem, et al.,
Quality A'ssurance Interrogatories and Requests to Product, Third Set," to which the Staff has objected, not be had.
V.
Conclusion For the reasons set forth above, the Staff objects to General Interrogatory 2 and Specific Interrogatories 10, 11, 13, and 14 and requests the Licensing Board to issue a protective order regarding these interroEatories.
Res pectfully submitted, Wl G
Gregor: Counsel g\\la Berry j
or NRC Staff Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this day of February,1986
-.