|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20126M8141985-05-23023 May 1985 Order Denying Business & Prof People for Public Interest Application for Atty Fees Under Equal Access to Justice Act. Commission FY82 Appropriation Act Prohibited Funding of Intervenors.Served on 850523 ML20058J0861982-08-0606 August 1982 Order Holding Intervenor Business & Prof People for Public Interest Request for Award of Atty Fees & Expenses Under Equal Access to Justice Act Until Question of Availability of Funds Solved.Nrc Will Seek Comptroller General Opinion ML20054J0811982-06-18018 June 1982 Notice of ASLB Reconstitution.H Grossman,Chairman & K Mccollom & Rl Holton,Members ML20054F9471982-06-0707 June 1982 Memorandum Supporting Business & Prof People for Public Interest Application for Award of Atty Fees & Expenses ML20053E6801982-06-0404 June 1982 Application for Award of Fees & Expenses Under Equal Access to Justice Act.Fees Requested for Svcs Re Proceedings on Proposed Amend to CP to Extend Completion Date & Proposed Amend to Allow Foundation of Short Pilings ML20053E6821982-06-0404 June 1982 Affidavit of Rj Vollen Re Costs & Legal Svcs Provided ML20053E6831982-06-0404 June 1982 Affidavit of Jm Vollen Re Costs & Legal Svcs Provided ML20053E6851982-06-0404 June 1982 Memorandum of Law Supporting Application for Award of Fees & Expenses Under Equal Access to Justice Act.Proceedings Pending on Effective Date of Act,Party Prevailed & Amount of Fees & Expenses Compensable.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20053E6841982-06-0303 June 1982 Affidavit of Rl Graham Re Reasonable & Customary Charges of Attys ML20052C7281982-04-29029 April 1982 Answer Objecting to & Proposing Mods to ASLB 820412 Memorandum & Order.Objects to Proposed Order Calling for Immediate Termination of Proceedings.No Assurance Util Will Comply If Proceedings Terminated.W/Certificate of Svc ML20050A5201982-03-29029 March 1982 Response Opposing Porter County Chapter Intervenors 820323 Pleading.No Legal Authority Shown for Intervenor Attempt to Exercise NRC Responsibility for Monitoring Compliance W/Aslb Orders.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20049K0791982-03-23023 March 1982 Motion for Leave to Take Limited Discovery.Suppls Position Re Timing of Termination of Proceeding.Util Refusal to Supply Intervenors W/Info Re Compliance W/Aslb 820129 Order Illustrates Need for Jurisdiction.W/Certificate of Svc ML20049K0821982-03-23023 March 1982 First Interrogatory Re Site Restoration ML20069B8901982-03-0101 March 1982 Response Opposing Util 820210 Motion for Reconsideration of 820129 Order.No Legal Basis Presented for Util Argument That ASLB Exceeded Jurisdiction.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20041A4721982-02-16016 February 1982 Motion for Reconsideration of ASLB 820129 Order Requiring Implementation of Revised Plan.Aslb Course Falls Short of ASLB Responsibility to Issue Timely Rulings,Is Unfair to Util & Exceeds ASLB Authority.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20040C7011982-01-25025 January 1982 Responses Opposing Porter County Chapter Intervenors 820108 Motion for Order Imposing Condition of Withdrawal.Nrc Unauthorized to Require Applicant to Pay Intervenors' Fees & Expenses.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20039G0811982-01-0808 January 1982 Motion for Order Imposing Condition Upon Withdrawal of Util Application.Expenses Incurred by Intervenor Were Substantial & Info Developed in Discovery Cast Doubt on Merits of Util Application.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20039C2601981-12-22022 December 1981 Response Opposing Porter County Chapter Intervenors 811209 Motion to Compel Util to Implement Revised Plan for Restoration.Util Will Act When Termination Order Issued, Weather Permitting.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20062L9641981-12-0909 December 1981 Motion to Compel Util to Implement Revised Plan for Site Restoration.No Valid Reason Exists for Further Delay. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20011A2391981-10-0101 October 1981 Motion for Order Directing Util to Submit Plans to ASLB Re Site Excavation.Excavation Should Be Filled W/Matl Comparable to Removed Matl to Preclude Possibility of Harm to Natl Lakeshore.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20010G5041981-09-10010 September 1981 Response Supporting Util 810826 Motion to Terminate Proceeding.Termination Should Be W/Prejudice to Assure Finality of Util Decision & That Issues Raised Need Not Be Litigated ML20010E0331981-08-25025 August 1981 Response in Opposition to Porter County Chapter Intervenors 810817 Motion to Extend Time for Reply to Util Fourth Set of Interrogatories.Also Submits Motion to Compel Response. Related Correspondence ML20010E0321981-08-25025 August 1981 Motion to Compel Appearance of Ew Osann & Read for Deposition Re Facts Upon Which State of Il Has Based Contentions.Porter County & State of Il Are Attempting to Delay Completion of Proceeding.Related Correspondence ML20010E0171981-08-25025 August 1981 Renewed Motion for Protective Order Providing Hiple & Kulawinski Not Be Required to Appear for Depositions on 810915 & 22,respectively.Refusal to Reschedule Unwarranted. W/Ltrs & Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20010E0341981-08-25025 August 1981 Response in Opposition to State of Il 810820 Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Util Fourth Set of Interrogatories.Requests That Order Be Issued to Compel Response.Related Correspondence ML20010D2381981-08-18018 August 1981 Response in Opposition to State of Il 810813 Motion to File Application for Discovery & Interrogatories Instanter & for Protective Order. General Allegations Insufficient to Extend Deadline.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20010D2291981-08-18018 August 1981 Motion to Compel Answers to 810622 Third Set of Interrogatories Directed to Porter County Chapter,Concerned Citizens Against Bailly Nuclear Site,Businessmen for Public Interest,Et Al.Related Correspondence ML20010D1201981-08-18018 August 1981 Response to Porter County Chapter Intervenors' Third Set of Interrogatories.Related Correspondence ML20010D1191981-08-18018 August 1981 Objections to Porter County Chapter Intervenors' Third Set of Interrogatories 9,10,11 & 42.Requests Protective Order Providing That No Further Response to Interrogatory 42 Is Required.Related Correspondence ML20010D1181981-08-18018 August 1981 Response to People of State of Il Second Set of Interrogatories.Related Correspondence ML20010D2441981-08-18018 August 1981 Objection to State of Il Second Set of Interrogatories, Interrogatories 12(c),13(b) & 13 (C).Matters Already Reviewed in Original CP Proceeding & Irrelevent to Instant Proceeding.Related Correspondence ML20010D2341981-08-18018 August 1981 Request for Motion to Compel Response to 810622 Third Set of Interrogatories Directed to State of Il.Answers Were Nonresponsive.Related Correspondence ML20010C8961981-08-17017 August 1981 Motion for Extension of Time Until 810910 to File Answers or Objections to Util 810730 Fourth Set of Interrogatories. More Time Needed for Adequate Preparation.No Party Will Be Prejudiced by Extension.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20010C8231981-08-17017 August 1981 Response Opposing Porter County Chapter Intervenors' 810810 Motion for Extension of Time to Take Depositions.Intervenors Had Ample Opportunity for Discovery.Board Should Not Allow Delaying Tactics ML20010C8251981-08-17017 August 1981 Response Opposing State of Il 810811 Motion for Extension of Time to Take Depositions.Hardships Under Discovery Schedule Are self-imposed ML20010C5031981-08-14014 August 1981 Second Application for Order Requiring Attendance & Testimony at State of Il Noticed Depositions of Lm Bykoski & Lg Hulman.Exceptional Circumstances Exist & Listed Personnel Should Be Required to Appear ML20010C5881981-08-13013 August 1981 Motion for Leave to File Application for Discovery Re NRC Documents,First Set of Interrogatories Directed to NRC & Third Set of Interrogatories Directed to Util.Discovery Could Not Be Completed by 810811.Related Correspondence ML20010C5911981-08-13013 August 1981 First Set of Interrogatories Directed to NRC ML20010C5181981-08-13013 August 1981 Motion for Protective Order That Ew Osann Deposition Not Be Taken on 810820.Osann Will Be Unavailable for Util Deposition Due to Other Business Commitments.Good Cause exists.W/810813 Ltr to Util Law Firm & Certificate of Svc ML20010C5901981-08-13013 August 1981 Application for Discovery Directed to NRC Re NRC Staff Evaluation of Bailly CP Extension Request. ML20010C5921981-08-13013 August 1981 First Set of Interrogatories Directed to Util.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20010B2941981-08-12012 August 1981 Renewed Application for Subpoenas Directed to Rf Brissette, s Dobrijevic & Personnel at Sargent & Lundy,Ground/Water Technology,Inc & Dames & Moore.Related Correspondence ML20010C3261981-08-11011 August 1981 Third Application to ASLB for Order Requiring Attendance & Testimony at Deposition of Lg Hulman,Lm Bykowski & Wf Lovelace.Exceptional Circumstances Exist.Related Correspondence ML20010C4971981-08-11011 August 1981 First Request for Production of Documents Directed to Util ML20010C4921981-08-11011 August 1981 First Request for Production of Documents Directed to NRC ML20010C5001981-08-11011 August 1981 Notice of Lm Bykoski & Lg Hulman 810824 & 26 Depositions, Respectively,Re Theoretical & Empirical Basis of NRC 810717 Eia & Documents,Info & Personnel Used in Preparing Eia ML20010C5071981-08-11011 August 1981 Amended 810720 Notice of MD Lynch Deposition,Including Listed Matters for Exam ML20010C2391981-08-11011 August 1981 Fifth Set of Interrogatories Directed to Util.Related Correspondence ML20010C5111981-08-11011 August 1981 Motion for Extension of Time for Taking Depositions.Supports Porter County Chapter Intervenors' 810810 Motion for Extension of Deadline Until 810803.Schedule Places Burden on Parties W/O Benifit to Anyone.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20010C2821981-08-11011 August 1981 Conditional Withdrawal of Motions for Protective Orders Re Hiple & Kulawinski Depositions.If Depositions Rescheduled for Suggested Dates,Util Will Withdraw Objections. Certificate of Svc Encl 1985-05-23
[Table view] Category:PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20053E6851982-06-0404 June 1982 Memorandum of Law Supporting Application for Award of Fees & Expenses Under Equal Access to Justice Act.Proceedings Pending on Effective Date of Act,Party Prevailed & Amount of Fees & Expenses Compensable.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20053E6801982-06-0404 June 1982 Application for Award of Fees & Expenses Under Equal Access to Justice Act.Fees Requested for Svcs Re Proceedings on Proposed Amend to CP to Extend Completion Date & Proposed Amend to Allow Foundation of Short Pilings ML20052C7281982-04-29029 April 1982 Answer Objecting to & Proposing Mods to ASLB 820412 Memorandum & Order.Objects to Proposed Order Calling for Immediate Termination of Proceedings.No Assurance Util Will Comply If Proceedings Terminated.W/Certificate of Svc ML20050A5201982-03-29029 March 1982 Response Opposing Porter County Chapter Intervenors 820323 Pleading.No Legal Authority Shown for Intervenor Attempt to Exercise NRC Responsibility for Monitoring Compliance W/Aslb Orders.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20049K0791982-03-23023 March 1982 Motion for Leave to Take Limited Discovery.Suppls Position Re Timing of Termination of Proceeding.Util Refusal to Supply Intervenors W/Info Re Compliance W/Aslb 820129 Order Illustrates Need for Jurisdiction.W/Certificate of Svc ML20069B8901982-03-0101 March 1982 Response Opposing Util 820210 Motion for Reconsideration of 820129 Order.No Legal Basis Presented for Util Argument That ASLB Exceeded Jurisdiction.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20041A4721982-02-16016 February 1982 Motion for Reconsideration of ASLB 820129 Order Requiring Implementation of Revised Plan.Aslb Course Falls Short of ASLB Responsibility to Issue Timely Rulings,Is Unfair to Util & Exceeds ASLB Authority.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20040C7011982-01-25025 January 1982 Responses Opposing Porter County Chapter Intervenors 820108 Motion for Order Imposing Condition of Withdrawal.Nrc Unauthorized to Require Applicant to Pay Intervenors' Fees & Expenses.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20039G0811982-01-0808 January 1982 Motion for Order Imposing Condition Upon Withdrawal of Util Application.Expenses Incurred by Intervenor Were Substantial & Info Developed in Discovery Cast Doubt on Merits of Util Application.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20039C2601981-12-22022 December 1981 Response Opposing Porter County Chapter Intervenors 811209 Motion to Compel Util to Implement Revised Plan for Restoration.Util Will Act When Termination Order Issued, Weather Permitting.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20062L9641981-12-0909 December 1981 Motion to Compel Util to Implement Revised Plan for Site Restoration.No Valid Reason Exists for Further Delay. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20011A2391981-10-0101 October 1981 Motion for Order Directing Util to Submit Plans to ASLB Re Site Excavation.Excavation Should Be Filled W/Matl Comparable to Removed Matl to Preclude Possibility of Harm to Natl Lakeshore.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20010G5041981-09-10010 September 1981 Response Supporting Util 810826 Motion to Terminate Proceeding.Termination Should Be W/Prejudice to Assure Finality of Util Decision & That Issues Raised Need Not Be Litigated ML20010E0331981-08-25025 August 1981 Response in Opposition to Porter County Chapter Intervenors 810817 Motion to Extend Time for Reply to Util Fourth Set of Interrogatories.Also Submits Motion to Compel Response. Related Correspondence ML20010E0341981-08-25025 August 1981 Response in Opposition to State of Il 810820 Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Util Fourth Set of Interrogatories.Requests That Order Be Issued to Compel Response.Related Correspondence ML20010E0171981-08-25025 August 1981 Renewed Motion for Protective Order Providing Hiple & Kulawinski Not Be Required to Appear for Depositions on 810915 & 22,respectively.Refusal to Reschedule Unwarranted. W/Ltrs & Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20010E0321981-08-25025 August 1981 Motion to Compel Appearance of Ew Osann & Read for Deposition Re Facts Upon Which State of Il Has Based Contentions.Porter County & State of Il Are Attempting to Delay Completion of Proceeding.Related Correspondence ML20010D2381981-08-18018 August 1981 Response in Opposition to State of Il 810813 Motion to File Application for Discovery & Interrogatories Instanter & for Protective Order. General Allegations Insufficient to Extend Deadline.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20010D2291981-08-18018 August 1981 Motion to Compel Answers to 810622 Third Set of Interrogatories Directed to Porter County Chapter,Concerned Citizens Against Bailly Nuclear Site,Businessmen for Public Interest,Et Al.Related Correspondence ML20010D2341981-08-18018 August 1981 Request for Motion to Compel Response to 810622 Third Set of Interrogatories Directed to State of Il.Answers Were Nonresponsive.Related Correspondence ML20010C8961981-08-17017 August 1981 Motion for Extension of Time Until 810910 to File Answers or Objections to Util 810730 Fourth Set of Interrogatories. More Time Needed for Adequate Preparation.No Party Will Be Prejudiced by Extension.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20010C8231981-08-17017 August 1981 Response Opposing Porter County Chapter Intervenors' 810810 Motion for Extension of Time to Take Depositions.Intervenors Had Ample Opportunity for Discovery.Board Should Not Allow Delaying Tactics ML20010C8251981-08-17017 August 1981 Response Opposing State of Il 810811 Motion for Extension of Time to Take Depositions.Hardships Under Discovery Schedule Are self-imposed ML20010C5031981-08-14014 August 1981 Second Application for Order Requiring Attendance & Testimony at State of Il Noticed Depositions of Lm Bykoski & Lg Hulman.Exceptional Circumstances Exist & Listed Personnel Should Be Required to Appear ML20010C5881981-08-13013 August 1981 Motion for Leave to File Application for Discovery Re NRC Documents,First Set of Interrogatories Directed to NRC & Third Set of Interrogatories Directed to Util.Discovery Could Not Be Completed by 810811.Related Correspondence ML20010C5181981-08-13013 August 1981 Motion for Protective Order That Ew Osann Deposition Not Be Taken on 810820.Osann Will Be Unavailable for Util Deposition Due to Other Business Commitments.Good Cause exists.W/810813 Ltr to Util Law Firm & Certificate of Svc ML20010C5111981-08-11011 August 1981 Motion for Extension of Time for Taking Depositions.Supports Porter County Chapter Intervenors' 810810 Motion for Extension of Deadline Until 810803.Schedule Places Burden on Parties W/O Benifit to Anyone.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20010C2821981-08-11011 August 1981 Conditional Withdrawal of Motions for Protective Orders Re Hiple & Kulawinski Depositions.If Depositions Rescheduled for Suggested Dates,Util Will Withdraw Objections. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20010C1591981-08-11011 August 1981 Third Application for Order Requiring NRC to Answer Porter County Chapter Intervenor'S Third Set of Interrogatories. Related Correspondence ML20010C3261981-08-11011 August 1981 Third Application to ASLB for Order Requiring Attendance & Testimony at Deposition of Lg Hulman,Lm Bykowski & Wf Lovelace.Exceptional Circumstances Exist.Related Correspondence ML20010B3941981-08-10010 August 1981 Response in Opposition to State of Il Refusal to Produce Designated Agent for Deposition.Util Does Not Object to Rescheduling of Deposition.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20010B2961981-08-10010 August 1981 Motion to Compel NRC Answers to Porter County Chapter Intervenors' First Set of Interrogatories.Nrc Answers Re Interrogatories 8(f)(ii)(iii) & 9(d) & (F) Were Deficient. Related Correspondence ML20010B2951981-08-10010 August 1981 Second Motion to Compel Further NRC Response & Production of Documents Per Porter County Chapter Intervenors' Second Request.Nrc Should Be Ordered to Provide Definitive Response.Related Correspondence ML20010B2901981-08-10010 August 1981 Showing of General Relevance Supporting Subpoena Applications.Persons to Be Deposed Have Knowledge Directly & Immediately Relevant to Proceeding Issues.Related Correspondence ML20010B2921981-08-10010 August 1981 Motion to Extend 810930 Deadline for Taking Depositions. Compliance May Not Be Possible.Schedule Imposes Unreasonable Burden on All Parties.Related Correspondence ML20010B1321981-08-0707 August 1981 Response Opposing Porter County Chapter Intervenors' 810731 Motion for Leave to Initiate Further Discovery.No Good Cause Shown.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20010B2871981-08-0606 August 1981 Motion for Protective Order Providing That Util Requested Deposition Not Be Taken as Scheduled.Job Responsibilities Prevent H Read 810812 Deposition ML20010B3021981-08-0505 August 1981 Response in Opposition to Util 810721 Motion to Compel Answers to Second Set of Interrogatories.Motion Is Filled W/Vituperative Rhetoric,Snide Comments & Personal Attacks on Intervenors.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20009H4681981-07-31031 July 1981 Second Request for Order Requiring NRC to Answer Porter County Chapter Intervenors Second Set of Interrogatories. Answers Relate to Matters Solely within NRC Knowledge. Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20009H4951981-07-31031 July 1981 Motion for Leave to Initiate Further Discovery to Follow Up on Interrogatories & Various Documents.Related Correspondence ML20009G9841981-07-30030 July 1981 Response Opposing State of Il 810713 Motion for Extension of Time.State of Il Excuses Are Insufficient & Should Not Be Allowed to Dictate Pace of Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20009G8241981-07-27027 July 1981 Response Opposing State of Il 810713 Motion for Extension of Time.Counsel Needs to Consult W/Other Personnel to Answer Interrogatories Is Usual & Does Not Justify Delayed Responses ML20009G8301981-07-27027 July 1981 Renewed Motion for Protective Order Re Purcell Deposition & Withdrawal of Motion for Protective Order Re Dunn & Ricca Depositions.No Justification Offered for Late Deposition ML20009F2161981-07-24024 July 1981 Answer to State of Il 810717 Motion for Clarification of Order & Porter County Chapter Intervenors' 810722 Motion for Clarification or Reconsideration of Order.Aslb 810710 Order Is Not Ambiguous.No Clarification Needed ML20009F2181981-07-24024 July 1981 Renewed Motion for Protective Order Providing That Petersen,Hiple & Kulawinski Depositions May Not Be Taken on Dates Specified.No Justification Offered.Aslb Established Final Date for Depositions.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20009G8201981-07-23023 July 1981 Response Opposing Util 810708 Motion for Protective Order That Ah Petersen,Fg Hiple & Kulawinski Depositions Not Be Taken After 810731.Util Motion Seeking 810731 as Date Closing Discovery Was Denied.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20009E3051981-07-23023 July 1981 Response Opposing Porter County Chapter Intervenors' 810710 Motion for Extension of Time to File Answers or Objections to Third Set of Interrogatories.Motion Is Attempt to Delay Completion of Discovery.W/Certificate of Svc ML20009E6521981-07-22022 July 1981 Motion for Clarification or Reconsideration of 810710 Orders.Svc of Subpoenas & Notices of Deposition & Taking of Depositions Cannot Reasonably Be Accomplished by Ordered 810828 Date.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20009E0921981-07-21021 July 1981 Motion to Compel Answers to 810423 Second Sets of Interrogatories Directed to Porter County Chapter Intervenors,Concerned Citizens Against Bailly Nuclear Site & Others.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20009E2131981-07-20020 July 1981 Statement Adopting in Entirety Porter County Chapter Intervenors 810609 Application for Order Requiring O Thompson Attendance & Testimony at Deposition 1982-06-04
[Table view] |
Text
/
. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD ,,
)
M.
Docket No. 50-44HP;c,i V t-In the Matter of S
) t 1 7 -;
NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC SERVICE ) (Construction Permit \ hJ g, /
COMPANY ) Extension) . q. s
) /- ..
" - a ;-
(Bailly Generating Station, ) July 21, 1981
^ ~' ""~
Nuclear-1) ) ,3 gy "
. . . . . . ., . . . :.xud.
) P..c. m ; .m g A NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY'S N/q, MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO ITS SECOND ' ',,
SETS OF INTERROGATORIES TO 8 (l; PORTER COUNTY CHAPTER OF THE IZAAK WALTON N 'e' LEAGUE OF AMERICA, INC. g h(t. I (2) CONCERNED CITIZENS AGAINST BAILLY NUCLEAR o46b k%,g 85 (3)' NESSMEN FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST, INC. y (4) JAM."S E. NEWMAN
\ f',
(5) MILDRED WARNER On April 23, 1981, the Northern Indiana Public Service Company (NIPSCO) served its Second Set of Interrogatories on the intervenors which are frequently denominated " Porter County Chapter Intervenors" or "PCCI." In view of counsel's technical objection that intorrogatories so addressed were directed to a "non-existent entity," NIPSCO reserved on May 29, 1981, a Second Set of Interrogatories on each of the listed organizations or persons: Porter County Chapter of the Izaak Walton League of America, Inc.; Concerned Citizens Against Bailly Nuclear Site; Businessmen for the Public Interest, Inc.; James E. Newman; and Mildred Warner.
- See Answers of Porter County Chapter of the Izaak Walton Dbo?
3 League of America, Inc.; Concerned Citizens Against Bailly Nuclear Site; Businessmen for the Public Interest, Inc.; /
James E. Newman and Mildred Warner to NIPSCO's First Set of Interrogatories, p. 1 (May 11, 1981).
8107270083 810721 PDR ADOCK 05000367 O PDR
- c. .
On Julv 8, 1981,* " Edward W. Osann, Jr., agent of each of the above carties" and " Robert J. Vollen and Jane M.
Whicher. Attornevs for" the listed parties filed a document entitled " Answers and Objections of Porter County Chapter of the Izaak Walton League of America, Inc.; Concerned Citizens Against Bailly Nuclear Site; Businessmen for the Public Interest, Inc.; James E. Newman and Mildred Warner to NIPSCO's Second Sets of Interrogatories" (hereinaf ter " Answers and Objections") .
The few answers provided by these intervenors are largely non-responsive to the interrogatories and the objections stated are not well-taken. NIPSCO therefore files this Motion to Compel.
I. Intervenors' Objections to Interrogatori es
- 1. " Extended Period of Construction."
The objection is made with respect to a number of interrogatories *** that the phrase " extended period of construc-tion" is not " identified or described." This alleged defi-ciency renders the interrogatory "too vague and ambiguous to be answerable." In addition, the term is apparently
- The Answers and Objections were thus filed 76 days after the interrogatories were originally served and 39 days after they were re-served. HRC regulations establish 14 days (plus 5 days for service) as the period within which interrogatories are to be nswered.
The Answe . and Objections are patterned on Answers filed earlier by Illinois. This Motion to Compel is therefore somewhat repetitive of NIPSCO's Second Motion to Compel k answers from Illinois (June 22, 1981).
These include interrogatories 9(a); 10 (a) ; 15(a); 19 (a) ; 19 (b) ;
19(c); 19(d); 20 (a) .
r
' deficient in that "no ' extended period of construction' has been authorized." The phrase is also used in other interroga-tories which were not answered on other grounds.*
The interrogatories are posed in a proceeding to consider NIPSCO's request for an extension of the period for construc-tion of Bailly Generating Station, Nuclear-1 from September 1, 1979, to December 1, 1989. In this context, it is clear that the " extended period of construction" refers to the period between those dates (i.e., September 1, 1979, to December 1, 1989) and the interrogatories are not vague. We note inci-dentally that these intervenors have used strikingly similar terminology: " drastically extended period," "the extended period of site dewatering," 'Bewatering over a longer period of time," "the extended period of construction," "the additional length of construction site dewatering," "the additional period of construction," "the additional years of construction site dewatering," " extended period of construction dewatering,"
"the additional period of time," "the additional period of l
l construction time." (Joint Intervenors' First Supplement to Petition for Leave to Intervene, pp. 9-13 (February 26, 1981).)
l l The objection thus cannot even be called specious; it is I
t totally without merit and cannot have been seriously raised.
l
[ We request that the intervenors be ordered to answer fully these interrogatories and those which stem from the answers (including 9(d), 9 (e) , 10(d), 10(e), 15(b), 16, 17, 19(e),
19 ( f) , 20 (b) ) .
l l
- These include interrogatories 16, 18, 19 ( f) .
L
l
' ~4-
- 2. " Assessed."
e This word is used in several interrogatories to which the intervenors object
- on the ground that they are "too That is to say, "[t]he vague and ambiguous to be answerable."
Interrogatory does not specify or identify whose ' assessment' is referred to nor what is meant by the term ' assessed,' nor what is meant by the term 'in connection with.'"
The interrogatories in question use the term " assessed" with express reference to that action "in connection with Thus, it issuance of Construction Permit No. CPPR-104."
refers to that action by the Atomic Energy Commission, including the Staff, Licensing Board, and Appeal Board, per-formed in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and AEC's implementing regulations. We suspect that these intervenors would count themselves among the contributors in the process by which the assessment was conducted.
Finally, the verb " assess" is (clearly, we believe) intended to be given a usual dictionary meaning- "to analyze critically and judge definitively the nature, significance, status, or merit of: [to] determine the importance, size, or value of . . . .
" (Webster's Third New International Dictionary at 131 (1966).)
- These include interrogatories 9 (c) and 10(c).
- Intervenors correctly state that the " Interrogatory does not specify . . . what 3 meant by the term 'in connection with.'" Nor need it since participation in NRC proceedings necessarily presupposes some modest level of intelligence, reasonable familiarity with the English language, and access to a fair-sized dictionary.
o In short, the interrogatories are not vague and the objection has no merit. We request the Board order intervenors to respond fully to these interrogatories and those which stem from those answers, including Interrogatories 9 (d) and (e),
10(d) and (e), 15, 16, 17, and 18.
- 3. " Environmental Assessment."
This objection is very similar to that discussed in para-graph 2 above. Interrogatory 11(a) expressly refers to the
" environmental assessment at the construction permit stage."
Intervenors object that the interrogatory is "too vague and ambiguous to be anst:erable." That is, the interrogatory "does not identify what ' environmental assessment' is referred to, nor by whom the ' environmental assessment' was performed or prepared." In the context, there can be no question but that l
I the interrogatory refers to the environmental assessment by the Atomic Energy Commission including the Staff, Licensing Board, and Appeal Board. The objection is without merit and intervenors should be ordered to answer fully.
i l
l 4. " Incremental Environmental Impact."
I l The intervenors object to Interrogatory 15(a) on several grounds. One is that "the term ' incremental environmental impact' is not defined, nor is the ' environmental impact,'
( *
!
- The objection was taken to Interrogatory 11(a) and answers to several other interrogatories are dependent thereon s
(e.g., ll(b) and (c), 12, 13, and 14).
[
l
. concerning which information about an increment is sought, defined." A similar objection is stated with respect to Interrogatory 20 (a) . Again, use of a dictionary might have assisted intervenors in responding to these interrogatories.
" Incremental" is an adjective meaning "of, relating to, constituting, or resulting from increments . . . . We assume that intervenors know the meaning of the word " increment" since they use it in stating their objections. The Interrogatory clearly asks whether these intervenors contend that there will be an additional (in quantity or character) environmental impact resulting from the enumerated or other causes. The nature and specifics of any such " incremental environmental impact" are not defined in the Interrogatory; that is the infor.aation which the Interrogatory seeks.
The objection is without merit and intervenors should be ordered to respond fully.'
- 5. " Extra Period of Dewatering."
An additional objection to Interrogatory 20(a) is based on use of the undefined term, " extra period of dewatering."
In the context, we submit that it is clear that the interrogatory refers to the period of dewatering during the requested extended construction period.** There is no vagueness and intervenors
- Answers to Interrogatories 15(b), 16, 17, 18, and 20(b) will also be required.
- Intervenors may assume that general construction dewatering continues for 30 months after construction resumes (see NIPSCO's Response to Illinois' First Set of Interrogatories,
- p. 6 (July 8, 1981)) unless it contends that dewatering will be terminated at another time.
should be ordered to respond to this and related Interrogatory 20 (b) .
- 6. Additional objections to Interrogatory 19 are taken because "[n]either the rate, the period of time nor the depth of the ' dewatering' referred to are identified or described";
because details regarding ground water levels, flow, and chemical characteristics at distances of 700 feet, 1/2 mile, and 1 mile from the excavation wh ch occurred as a result of dewatering prior to September 1, 1979, are not specified; and because "the point in the excavation from which those distances are measured" are not identified. Clearly, these objections have been put forth only for the purpose of avoidance. The inter-rogatories seek information regarding intervenors' own con-tentions; they ask intervenors to provide some specifics regarding the effects of dewatering which they have repeatedly alleged will occur. If they have none, they may of course state that in response to the interrogatories but they cannot be allowed to evade their responsibility to answer interrogatories through use of contrived, artificial objections. Intervenors should be ordered to answer fully Interrogatory 19.
- 7. Intervenors object to Interrogatory 27 on the ground that That is, it "is too vague and ambiguous to be answerable."
the Interrogatory, "does not specify what is meant by ' relies' nor does it specify the purpose for which PCCI rely on particular documents." " Rely" is cLviously used in a usual dictionary
meaning: "to find support: depend" (Webster's Third New International Dictionary at 1919 (1966).) The interrogatory requests identification of documents relating to admitted contentions upon which an intervenor relies for any purpose in this proceeding. This objection also contrived and calculated to delay discovery. Intervenors should be orderd to answer fully Interrogatory 27.
II. Other Deficient Answers
- 1. The answer to Interrogatory 21(a) refers inter alia to "the species identified during the AEC construction permit proceedings with respect to the proposed Bailly plant."
Given the length of those " proceedings" and the extensive record compiled in the course thereof, the answer is in--
sufficient. Intervenors should be ordered to list the species and icentify the transcript page, exhibit number and page,
- etc. where the information can be found.
- 2. The answer to Interrogatory 21(c) similarly refers to
"[t]he evidence in AEC construction permit [ proceeding?] with respect to the proposed Bailly plant . . . " in response to the request to " provide the bases" for a quoted contention.
Intervenors must be required to identify which " evidence" they are referring to since they clearly do not refer to all.
The same answer refers to " studies of the impact of construc-tion dewatering at Bailly upon the Indiana Dune National .
Lakeshore done by the U.S. Department of the Interior, the National Park Service and the United States Geological
,, , -- - , .w..-, - - ,
- _g.
. Survey . . . .
" Intervenors must be required to identify by title, author, date, etc., the reports, memoranda, etc. which document those " studies."
- 3. No answer has been given to Interrogatory 22(h). Inter-venors should be ordered to respond fully.
III. Execution of Answers and Objections The Answers and Objections were executed by " Edward W.
Osann, Jr., agent of each" of the listed parties and " Robert J.
Vollen and Jane M. Whicher Attorneys for" the listed parties.
(Answers and Objections, p. 13.) Mr. Osann has also signed an " Affirmation" which recites that he is "an attorney for" the named organization and persons; that he has "the authority as agent for each of those parties to submit their respective answers" to NIPSCO's interrogatories and does so "as agent."
The Affirmation records that Mr. Osann has read the answers and objections and " conferred with other attorneys for these parties concerning them and that they are true and correct to the best of [his] knowledge and belief." (Answers and Objections, pp. 14-15.)
Therefore, as in the case of the Answers to NIPSCO's First Set of Interrogatories, it appears that there has been 1
no consultation with the organizations and persons admitted to Furthermore, this proceeding in preparation of the responses.
t the individual parties have failed to execute their answers, We as required by NRC regulations. (10 C.F.R. 5 !. 740b (a) . )
l shall not repeat the arguments made in NIPSCO's Motion to Compel l
l l
10 -
. Responses to the First Set of Interrogatories (May 26, 1981) but refer the Board to that document.
IV. Observation In large part, the Answers and Objections filed by
" Porter County Chapter," " Concerned Citizens," " Businessmen,"
Mr. Newman, and Ms. Warner are apparently patterned upon the l
l
" Answers of the People of the State of Illinois to NIPSCO's
{ Second Set of Interrogatories" (June 9, 19 81) . Thus the Answers and Objections would also fall substantially below the standard which is required of parties in NRC proceedings, particularly those represented by counsel.
The Second Sets of Interrogatories seek clarification, i
l elaboration, definition of the contentions which these parties proposed as issues in this proceeding. They probe subjects l
with which these intervenors must be presumed to be familiar.
Yet the answers provide little of substance. The objections appear to have been contrived for the purpose of evasion; in any event they are without merit.
l
! The Commission recently reminded its Licensing Boards and l
the parties in its proceedings that:
i The purpose of discovery is to expedite hearings by the disclosure of information in the possession of the parties which is rele-l vant to the subject invol'od in the proceeding l
l so that issues may be narnawed, stipulated, or eliminated and so that evidence to be presented at hearing can be stipulated or otherwise l limited to that which is relevant.
(Statement of Policy of Conduct of Licensing Proceed.ings, 46 Fed. Reg. 28,533, 28,535 (May 27, 1981).) However, these
intervenors appear determined to thwart accomplishment of that purpose and to use discovery for the purpose of delay.
We regret that it has been necessary to request frequently that the Board intervene in the discovery process. However, there is no alternative when parties obviously -- or purpose-fully -- seek to avoid their responsibilities with respect tu discovery.
It would therefore appear appropriate for the Board to remind these intervenors of the obligation which each assumed by seekinc party s tatus and of the fact that sanctions may be imposed upon those who fail to meet their obligations. (See, e.g., Pennsylvania Power & Light Co. (Susquehanna Steam Electric Station), Memorandum and Order on Pending Motions, pp. 23-28 (May 20, 1981).)
V. Conclusion NIPSCO requests the Licensing Board to issue an order compelling each of the three organizations and two indivi,Iuals to file full, complete, and properly executet answers," complying
- with the requirements of NRC Regulations, to NIPSCO's Second Sets of Interrogatories.
Respectfully submitted, I
t
{.
Kadhleen H. Shea LOWENSTEIN, NEWMAN, REIS &
EICHHORN, EICHHORN & LINK AXELRAD 5243 Hohman Avenue 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Hammond, Indiana 46320 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 862-8400 Joint answers are unobjectionable if they otherwise meet NRC requirements.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA L
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 4
In the Matter of ) Docket No. 50-367
)
NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC SERVICE ) (Construction Permit COMPANY ) Extension)
)
(Bailly Generating Station, ) July 21, 1981 Nuclear-1) )
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of Northern Indiana Public Service Company's Motion to Compel Answers to Its Second Sets of Interrogatories to (1) Porter County Chapter of the Izaak Walton League of America, Inc. (2) Concerned Citizens Against Bailly Nuclear Site (3) Businessmen for the Public Interest, Inc. (4) James E. Newman (5) Mildred darner in the above-captioned proceeding were served o.- the following by deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, or by hand delivery, this 21st day of July, 1981:
Herbert Grossman, Esquire, Chairman Administrative Judge U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Robert L. Holton
{ Administrative Judge l School of Oceanography l Oregon State University j C rvallis, Oregon 97331 Dr. J. Venn Leeds Administrative Judge 10807 Atwell Houston, Texas 77096 '
Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 I
I i
i Howard K. Shapar, Esquire Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Stephen H. Lewis, Esquire Office of the Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20.c55 Susan Sekuler, Esquire Environmental Control Div;sion 188 West Randolph Street Suite 2315 Chicago, Illinois 60601 Robert J. Vollen, Esquire c/o BPI 109 North Dearborn Street Suite 1300 Chicago, Illinois 60602 Edward W. Osann, Jr., Esquire One IBM Plaza Suite 4600 Chicago, Illinois 60611 Robert L. Graham, Esquire One IBM Plaza 44th Floor Chicago, Illinois 60611 Mr. 2.11.e Olszanski Mr. Clifford Mezo United Steelworkers of America 3703 Euclid Avenue East Chicago, Indiana 46312 Mr. George Grabowski Ms. Anna Grabowski 7413 W. 136th Lane Cedar Lake, Indiana 46303 f
ROA L Mathleen H.~Shea LOWENSTEIN, NEWMAN, REIS
& AXELRAD 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
-+w .- -- rv. . p-.m.. ,.m-. e w -c-e e -.
9y.-e -- - ,. .