ML20214G634
| ML20214G634 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 11/21/1986 |
| From: | Ellis J Citizens Association for Sound Energy |
| To: | Counsil W TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| References | |
| CON-#486-1664 OL, NUDOCS 8611260157 | |
| Download: ML20214G634 (5) | |
Text
KEW EOcogggy9,wu a
~ C A S E==
v9 9
(CITIZENS ASSN. FOR SOUND ENERGY)
CMI[D November 21, 1986
'86 NOV 25 P4 :42 p--.-
...,. 9 thk[L. FAC" *
"*w S
GFfih -
Mr. William G. Counsil Ph00.
Executive Vice President gng g o Texas Utiltties Generating Company Skyway Tower 400 North Olive Street, L.B. 61 I
Dallas, Texas 75201
Dear Bill:
Subject:
In the Matter of Texas Utilities Electric Co., et al.
Application for an Operating License for Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2 In further clarification o'f the letter of November 7,1986, from Mr. Roisman to Mr. Gad, that letter was not intended to supersede or alter the August 19, 1986, Agreement signed by you and me on behalf of Applicants and CASE (copy attached).
Mr. Roisman's letter was triggered by a discovery matter between him snd Mr.
Gad, and this is the extent of the letter's tpplication; it was not meant to apply to any other aspects of the licensing proceedings.
In his letter, Mr.
Roisman set out the general guidelines as to which issues are being covered by CASE's three representatives, although his list was not intended to be complete and there are also some areas in which there is some overlapping n/'(e.g., Mr. Roisman and/or Ms. Garde filed Sets 1 tnrough 11 of the CPRT adequacy discovery, and I filed Set 12; some other discovery requests have been filed by Mr. Roisman and/or Ms. Garde, and others have been filed by me).
If Applicants' counsel wish to discuss extensions of time or other questions regarding a specific set of interrogatories, it seems reasonable that a good faith effort should be nade to first contact the CASE representative who filed the request before taking other steps. This is not because of any desire by CASE to be uncooperative, but rather so that a mutually agreeable extension time can be set, and any other helpful discussion may take place, between the representatives of CASE and Applicants who are actually working with those particular interrogatories.
(For instance, should Applicants need additional time to respond to set 12 of the CPRT adequacy discovery, '_
M/ Settlement of any issues on behalf of CASE would hive to be approved by me, as CASE's President, and by a resolution of the CASE Board of Directors on any major issues.
8611260157 861121 I
PDR ADOCK 05000445 G
PDR I ?)C.b
- 4 would not anticipate that I would have any problem with an extension; but I might perhaps request that they go ahead and respond to one or two particuler interrogatories or document requests more quickly than the others.
I'd like to have that opportunity, if possible.)
I hope this clarifies Mr. Roisman's November 7 letter and its relationship to our August 19, 1986, agreement, which I know that you and I believe has saved both Applicants and CASE time, money, and aggravation and which has been mutually beneficial. Please let me know if you feel that we need to discuss-this further.
Sincerely, CASE (Citizens Association for Sound Energy) s.) Juanita Ellis President Attachment cc: Service List m.
l e
+
a e
2 t
- w i-
.-w
--g.-.,
9-m v w
- 4
--m
.y y-y
---+---m-
1
~ C A S E==
(CITIZENS ASSN. FOR SOUND ENERGY)
August 10, 1986 AGREEMENT BETWEEN CASE AND APPLICANTS REGARDING DISCOVERY MATTERS RELATING TO COMANCHE PEAK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT:
As the Licensing Board was advised during the prehearing conference on August 18, 1986, CASE and the Applicants have reached the following agreements regarding discovery matters relating to the Comanche Peak nuclear power plant:
1.
Applicants agree to provide CASE with copies of everything relevant and supplied on discovery in accordance with the following schedule of copy costs, to be mailed at Applicants' expense:
three (3) free copies, up to 500 pages per calendar month.
501 pages or more per calendar month:
one free copy; a second copy at 3c per page; a third copy at Ic per page.
2.
In instances where CASE identifies a particular document as one which it oefinitely wants a copy of, it is to be mailed without CASE's
~
representative (s) having to come look at it first.
(If the document is very large, Applicants can discuss it with CASE first to see if CASE really wants the entire document.) Copies are to be mailed as follows: documents requested by CASE in Dallas, three (3) copies mailed to CASE President Mrs. Juanita Ellis; documents requested by Tony Roisman or Billie Garde (or other authorized representatives working with Trial Lawyers for Public Justice), I copy mailed to Mrs. Ellis, and 2 copies mailed to Trial Lawyers for Public Justice.
3.
Accessibility to documents on week-ends for review onsite or in Dallas on weekends will be provided with 48-hour notification to Susan Palmer in advance.
4.
Accessibility to documents retained in the vault where the hours are normally inconvenient for CASE's representative (s) will be provided with 48-hour notification to Susan Palmer in advance.
5.
Three copies (as designated in item 2 above) will automatically be mailed to CASE of printed items (such as procedures, etc.) at the same time they are supplied to the NRC, at no charge to CASE.
6.
One copy of other letters, etc., will continue to be sent to Mrs. Ellis as they have in the recent past of all correspondence by Applicants to the NRC, at no charge to CASE.
7.
One copy of telecoms will continue to be sent to Mrs. Ellis regarding Cygna's discussions, etc., oack and forth with Applicants. This is to be at no charge to CASE.
, 8.
Three copies of all letters, including those responding to specific Cygna questions, from Applicants to Cygna will be sent to Mrs. Ellis, at no charge to CASE, at the time they are sent to Cygna by Applicants.
If the attachments are extensive and contain very large volumes of calculations, Applicants 'can advise CASE and inquire as to whether or not CASE really wants the entire package; CASE retains the option of answering "yes."
In such event, the requested documents will be supplied. This is to be at no charge to. CASE.
9.
CASE's Mrs. Ellis is to be sent one copy, at the rates indicated in item
- 1. above, of each document supplied to CASE's other authori;:ea recre-sentatives.
If the documents are extensive, Applicants may contact Mrs.
Ellis and inquire if she really wants a copy of each page; however, it is very unlikely that she will not want a copy of each.
- 10. CASE's contact person for reviewing or obtaining copies of documents will be Susan Palmer, wno will report either directly to Mr. William Counsil or to an individual who reports directly to Mr. Counsil (to be designated by him).
- 11. Any disagreements regarding documents, ccpying, etc., will be discussed between Mr. Counsil and Mrs. Ellis, who will make a good faith effort to resolve the matter at issue prior to going to the Licensing Board.
(This applies after any le' gal battles have been fought over interrogatories and requests for documents, and the Board has ruled on Motions to Compel eruvM%444 m:& M'$ 7)Le.
12.
In the futur all objections to discovery re(uests will be feviewed by./J,.
Mr. Counsil rior to their being filed, and Mr. Counsil will stand behind all such a jections.
CASE believes that this will lessen many of the current obstructions we are encountering on discovery and lessen the need to con-tinually have to involve ttie Board in discovery disputes unnecessarily.
(CASE also notes that we are all under continuing and long-standing Board
['Tg Orders to attempt to cooperate on discovery.)
- 13. Once it has been established that CASE is entitled to view a document or receive a document on discovery, Susan Palmer will attempt to facilitate CASE's getting to view or receive such documents.
14.
In some special instances, such as extensive calculations needed by Messrs.
Walsh and/or Doyle on design issues (including, but not limited to the pipe support design issues, cable tray design issues, etc.), Applicants can advise CASE of the extent of the copying required.
In the event that copying is extensive, one copy would be accepted by CASE as being suffic'ient, to be delivered to Mrs. Ellis, at a cost to be negotiated between Mrs. Ellis and Mr. Counsil, but not to exceed Sc per page.
It should be noted that generally CASE will not require complete calculations of such extensive documents; however, we retain the option to ask for and receive one copy of any calculation which our design witnesses /
consultants Delieve they really need.
For the most part, however, on computer print-outs, we expect to need only the input pages and maximum-minimum stresses from tne outout, and the model, and the basic calculations u
- _m_,
3-14.
(continued):
(approximately 100 pages). However, it is impossible at this time to know exactly how many instances will recuire more complete calculations, since we do not know enough at this time about what has been done to date. CASE will be as selective as possible, and we do not want and are not asking for every single calculation print-out; however, we will not give up the option to ask for and receive any that we believe we need.
(This applies only to very large, computerized calculations; relatively small calculations without an excessive number of pages should be treated the same as other documents, with three copies being supplied in accordance with 1. above.)
~
- 15. Generally, Applicants and CASE will attempt to work together on discovery raatters, without giving up any due process rights.
- 16. Applicants will reduce the cost of those items which have already been copied f~or CASE, which have already been billed (with the exception of one or two recent billings) at 15c a page, down to 7c per page. Applicants will provide CASE's Mrs. Ellis with a revised billing through 8/18/86 at 7c per page.
17.
It should be recognized that CASE's discussions here do not address other costs which we are also having to incur, such as: making copies of documents which are introduced into evidence; costs of lost wages or time; or other actual costs.
CASE reserves the option of also addressing these costs in any discussions before the Board should the occasion warrant it.
18.
It is understood and agreed between Applicants and CASE that i.he underlying purpose of any agreement discussed herein is'to make the discovery process work more smoothly, without the necessity of continually involving the Board, and that Applicants will facilitate CASE's ability to review and receive copies of what CASE is legitimately entitled to.
- 19. CASE and Applicants will continue to attemot to work together to try to reach agreement and smooth the discovery process regarding:
(a) CASE's use of computerized listing and sorting of documents to search for specific items or groups of items; there is a need to have access to some sort of usable indexing; (b) How to minimize documents being split in several places (Dallas, several places onsite, etc.); (c) Some documents are not being provided anywhere; (d) How to minimize wasted time waiting for documents to be brought to CASE representatives while reviewing documents onsite (this is a separate issue from documents being split).
6,vd
- 20. Any agreement reached will be in writing, signed by both Appl _icants' an CASE's representatives (Mr. Counsil and Mrs. Ellis).
CASEfretains the option of providing such agreement to the Board and parties should it deem it necessary in the future, in any event.
g/h fldL l%.V Lem W. G. Counsil, for Applicants
. ) Juanita Ellis, Tor CASE Phe/%
fr-/9m Date signeo Date sig'ned '
l l
l-