ML20084K499

Comments on Cormier Re Contention Xx Discovery. Cormier Seeks Only ASLB Ruling on Matter of Appropriateness of Compensating Committee to Bridge the Gap Expert Witnesses.Related Correspondence

ML20084K499
Person / Time
Site:	05000142
Issue date:	05/04/1984
From:	Bay J BAY, J.H., COMMITTEE TO BRIDGE THE GAP
To:	Bright G, Frye J, Luebke E Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
OL, NUDOCS 8405140052
Download: ML20084K499 (2)

Text

- -

Yllf '

RELATED CORRESPONDENCE May 4, 1984 John H. Frye, III, Chairman Administrative Judge .%*TED Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ,N Washington, D.C. 20555 #A)' 10 g0:50 Glenn O. Bright 9c. ,

Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board

[dk.{N" I SRANC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 In the Matter of THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA (UCLA Research Reactor)

Docket No. 50-14 2 O L (Proposed Renewal of Facility License)

Dear Administrative Judges:

- I am today in receipt of Mr. Cormier's May 3, 1984 letter to you concerning various matters related to Contention XX discovery. Although Mr. Cormier comments on his withdrawal of certain expurgations and on CBG's document discovery re-quest, he seeks only a Board ruling on the matter of the appropriateness of compensating CBG's expert witnesses for the time spent by said witnesses in deposition. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 (b) 4 (C) specifically provides that the court shall require such compensation. The experts involved have l

been secured by Intervenor because of their expertise and their l

opinions will no doubt be explored at the' depositions. They

.will be acting in their professional capacity and. they .

are entitled to their usual and customary fees for such time j as is required on their part to have their deposition taken. i The fees sought are the usual and customary chargec of thess l experts, See, Public Services Company of Oklahoma, 5 NRC 657,673. i l

As to Mr. Cormier's comment on the proceedings at the pre- l hearing conference, he-did indeed indicate that his preference {

was to proceed by way of interrogatory. I take this opportunity j to point out, however, that deposition by interrogatory also i comes within the scope of FRCP 26 (b) 4 (C) and would likewise be conditioned on payment to the experts of their customary and usual fees for their time spent answering such interrogatories.

8405140052 840504 i gDRADOCK05000

The depositions of CBG's experts are currently scheduled for Thursday May 10, 1984. We. join with the University in seeking a resolution of this dispute prior to then and preferably by the afternoon of Tuesday May 8, 1984.

Veryp uly You s, I

r Joh H. Bay l Counsel for Intervenor  ;

i a

L i

i l

}

4 I

- ._, _ , _ . . . _ . .._ _ _ - . . _ _ . _ _ . _ _ . - _ . . - . , _ . , .______.'