ML20211A166

Requests All Documents in Possession of Pg&E,Consultants, Contractors or Agents Re Addl Parametric Studies Conducted for Facility High Density Racks.Related Correspondence

ML20211A166
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	02/12/1987
From:	Lowry E GRUENEICH, D.M. (FORMERLY GRUENEICH & LOWRY)
To:	Norton B PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
References
CON-#187-2516 OL, NUDOCS 8702190104
Download: ML20211A166 (2)

Text

y,

- =

2.5/4

'"wm connewouoem.,

GRUENEICH M LOWRY Q gg y-y,jm.g  %

,} '

DIAN M CRtit NLICil 345 FRANmuN STREET *A AntA CODE 46s

[DWIN F LOWRY SAN FRANC 15CO. CALIFORNIA D4102 tetrawoNr 880 =G930

'87 FEB 17 P6 :15 February 12, 1987 U F F. . m 4 00Cr.* W L 'F3!

is h !'

Mr. Bruce Norton c/o Philip Crano Pacific Gas & Electric Co.

P.O. Box 7442 San Francisco, California 94120 Re: Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2, Spont Fuel Pool Reracking Docket No's 50-275, OL-DPR-80; 50-323, OL-DPK-82.

Dear Mr. Norton:

I have received a copy of a letter dated February 6, 1987 from J.D. Shiffer to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l Document Control Desk which responds to an NRC staff letter dated January 22, 1987 esking for further information concerning I additional parametric studies conducted for the Diablo Canyon high donsity racks.

This letter requests copies of all documents in the posses-sion of PG&E, its consultants, contractors, or agents, relating to the analysis described in Mr. Shiffor's letter. The three page summary provided with the letter is completely inadequate for analysis by our expert. I believe that the failuro to provide information concerning the existence of this additional study and backup data violatos the NRC discovery regulations which provido for continuing discovery. This additional study relates to virtually ovary one of the 23 interrogatories served on and answorod by PG&E in this procooding.

Additionally, this letter requests copies of all other analysos done by PG&E, its consultants or agents, including Joseph Oat Corporation and Krishna Singh that relato to the contentions at issue in the Diablo roracking proceeding.

In our discussion concerning the January 22, 1987 NRC lotter, you told me that it had not boon your intention to disclose the existance of the study referred to therein. Since it had boon accidentally disclosed, you were providing the information upon the request of the NRC. You stated that you bo11oved the study was protected by the attorney work-product privilogo as you felt you did not have to disclose work done by an export in preparation for a hoaring. I do not believe this states tho applicablo law. I bolieve, at a minimum, that any study soon by any export you intend to call, whether or not he intends to refor to it in his testimony, is relevant and not 0702190104 070212 3 PDR 0

ADOCK 05000P75 J54 PDR

l Page Two Mr. Bruce Norton February 12, 1987 privileged. Confirmatory and contradictory analyses certainly have a bearing on the confidence and bases for . an expert's testimony. If the studies are confirmatory, they can be examined r on the basis of whether they constitute adequate inquiries or reveal analytical deficiencies in the expert's analysis; if they contradict the expert's conclusions, they can be used to impeach his views. Of course, any comments or annotations on any documents which reflect your (or other counsel's) opinions, conclusions, or theories would be excludable.

I do not know whether any other documents exist concerning additional studies or reports done to confirm or test the conclusions reached by PG&E or its contractors concerning the reracking; nor do I know whether you consider them privileged.

Given that the hearings are scheduled to begin on March 9, I am requesting that you immediately disclose the existence of any i other documents and indicate whether you~ believe them to be privileged. If a privilege is claimed, we can take steps to have the NRC determine whether production should be required. If there are no other documents (whether privileged or not), your so indicating will save both of us the trouble of writing and l responding to a discovery motion.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

Sincerely, Edwin F. Lowry cc: NRC Docket Office Jay McGurren Presiding Judge Cotter i

I

'