ML20106D483

Response Opposing Case Motion for Interrogatories & Production of Documents W/Respect to 841003 Testimony of TC Brandt.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence

ML20106D483
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	10/23/1984
From:	Downey B BISHOP, COOK, PURCELL & REYNOLDS, TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC)
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
CON-#484-688 OL-2, NUDOCS 8410250175
Download: ML20106D483 (6)

Text

-- , ,.

^

- * ~ " '

N

. ' RELMED CCRnESPONDUd gf ,

,y

.J gi

.L j

OCT9>pg43 ocegm;gg  :

(M, SI:RVICEER.UICH

\M m:cr.nac

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA '

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )

)

TEXAS UTILITIES. GENERATING ) Docke t Nos . 50-445-2 COM PANY, et al. ) 50-446-2

)

(Comanche Peak Steam Electric )-

Station, Units-l'and 2) )

4 APPLICANTS' RESPONSE TO " CASE'S MOTION FOR INTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS WITH' RESPECT TO OCTOBER 3, 1984. TESTIMONY OF THOMAS C. BRANDT"

~

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT Below applicants respond and object, as appropriate, to the interrogatories and requests for production of. documents set forth i

in " CASE's Motion For Interrogatories And Production Of Documents With Respect To October 3, 1984 Testimony Of Thomas C. Brandt."

As a preliminary matter, however, applicants are constrained to point out that CASE's " Motion" is not a motion at all; rather, it is nothing more than a list of discovery requests. As such, the requests are clearly untimely and should not be permitted, "except upon leave of the presiding officer for good cause shown." 10 C.F.R. $ 2.740(b)(1). Nevertheless, to expedite this proceeding, applicants hereby waive their timeliness objection as to CASE's interrogatories. Applicants do object, on timeliness grounds, to the production of the matrix and, draft prefiled testimony that are otherwise responsive to CASE's discovery requests 3 and 4.

8410250175 841023 PDR AbOCK 05000445 O

PDR

-\ g' _C3 , , -

_.=..:_.; - - - - . l =:- ~. .:. - - - - -

1. List'all materials examined by lir. Brandt in preparation for.and presentation of his October 3, 1984-testimcny.

ANSWER:

r In preparation for, and during his testimony, Mr. Brandt-examined-(a).all travelers.that CASE has alleged are deficient,

, (b) the construction and quality control procedures applicable to, the construction and inspection of the stainless steel liner-3 plate, (c) the NCRs attached to, and referenced in, CASE's plead-

!- ing dated September 27, 1984,'(d) the text-of CASE's pleading '

dated September 27, 1984, (e) the transcript of the hearing in this proceeding for September 18, 1984, (f) the handwritten list j of allegations served on applicants by intervenor during the week ,

of Septeraber sixteenth, and (g) a matrix prepared by applicants' 4

counsel identifying each traveler that intervenor alleges is deficient, and the specific allegations made for each such traveler.

2. List all materials relied upon by Mr. Brandt in prepara-tion for and presentation of his October,3, 1984 testimony.

i ANSWER:

In giving his testimony, Mr. Brandt relied upon the travel-

ers, procedures and NCRs identified in his testimony.

3. Produce all documents identified in 1 and 2, except

) those documents already produced in this proceeding.

l

.~. _ _ . _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ . _ _ _ . _ __ __ __ . . _ . -

RES PONSE:

All documents-identified in interrogatories 1 and 2 above, except for the hearing transcript and the matrix prepared by coun-

-sel were either (1) prepared by intervenor, or (2) served on the intervenor by the applicants. The applicants object to the production of the hearing transcript on the grounds that the tran-script is equally available to intervenors and applicants. Appli-cants object to the production of the matrix prepared by counsel on the grounds that the matrix represents attorney work product, and, thus, it is not discoverable under 10 C.F.R. $ 2.740(b)(2).

4. Produce a copy of the transcript of the tastimony given by Mr. Brandt on October 3, 1984 exactly as trcnscribed by the court reporter. -

RES PONSE:

Applicants object to the production of Mr. Brandt's draft, prefiled testimony. Such drafts are clearly attorn.y work product, and, thus, exempt from production under 10 C.F.R.

$ 2.740(b)(2). Moreover, such drafts are subject to the attorney-client privilege, and, thus, are not subject to discovery under 10 C.F.R. $ 2.740(b)(1). Finally, no copy of Mr. Brandt's draft testimony exists " exactly as transcribed by the court reporter." Applicants' counsel has two copies of the draft testi-many, both of which contain counsel's notes, comments, etc., which  ;

l 1

4-notations and comments reflect counsel's work product and are thus not discoverable.

Respectfully submitted Bruc~e L. 'D6iiney '

/b>}

BISHOP, LIBERMAN, O , PURCELL &

'REYNOLDS 1200 Seventeenth reet, N.W.

, Washingtoni D.C. 20036 (202) 857-9800 Counsel for Applicants October 23, 1984 d

i I

e

, , , a-- . . - . , . ... . - . . - - - . -n. - . ,--, .-m , - - . , , , , . ,-,----,-.,--..,n-... ~ . - - , . , - - - , . , - , - - - - . - . - .

~ < - -

A ,e ,.e.

- '- .[ _ ., V e. k .1 y e- -.s % -

}-

} ~*

l l

.i s

UNITED STATESLOF AMERICA

. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4

BEFORE THE ATOMIC -SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD U

' i' 4

-

• InLthe Matter of )-

)

l TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC ~ ) Docket:Nos. 50-445-2 and 2

COMPANY, _et _al . - ) 50-446-2

)

L (Comanche Peak Steam Electric ) (Application for

_ Station, Units 1 and 2) ) Operating Licenses) t l- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I

I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing " Applicants' '

Response to ' CASE's Motion For Interrogatories And Production Of Documents With Respect To October 3, 1984 Testimony of.C. Thomas Brandt'" in the above-captioned matter were served upon the-following persons by hand-delivery on October. 24 1986, or by i . overnight delivery,

• or deposit in the United Stater, mail,**

{ first class, postage prepaid, this 23th day of Octcber, 1984:

1 Peter B. Bloch, bsq. ** Chairman, Atomic Safety.and 1 Chairman, Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel' l Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory i j Commission  !

commission Washington, D.C. 20555 j Washington, D.C. 20555 i

Mr. William L. Clements

} *Dr. Walter H. Jordan Docketing & Services Branch '

j' 881 West Outer Drive U. S. Nuclear Regulatory l Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Commission .

Washington, D.C. 20555 i Herbert Grossman, Esq.

}. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Stuart A. Treby, Esq.

i Commission Office of the Executive i l Washington, D.C. 20555 Legal Director

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory i

• • Mr. Robert D. Martin Commission Regional Administrator Washington, D. C. 20555

! Region IV

- 0.S. Nuclear Regulatory ** Chairman, Atomic safety and l Commission Tiicensing Board Panel 611' Ryan Plaza Drive U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

! Suite 1000 Commission Arlington,-Texas 76011 ,

Washington, D.C. 20555 l

4 f

- -re. --.,e. , _ , , , -.%--y r-,-e-+wi.,-wwy -,r.,-,,e-m, -cw,---ge.t=+r-mae7,,,.---e,+=e-ew++=eww**m-e,-'d,t v- r- w- v w + w.r - e w-wem---. w----

.)

. __ _ wa_1

• • Renea Hicks, Esq. Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.

Assistant Attorney ' General Executive Director Environmental Protection Trial Lawyers for Public Justice Division 2000 P. Street, N.W.

P.O. Box 12548 Suite 600 Capitol Station Washington, D. C. 20036 Austin, Texas 78711 Ellen Ginsberg, Esq.

• • Mrs. Juanita Ellis Atomic Safety and Licensing President, CASE Board Panel 1426 South Polk Street U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Dallas, Texas 75224 Commission Washington, D. C. 20555

" Bruce L.' Downey a

cc: John W. Beck-Robert Wooldridge, Esq.

i O

e e - - - , -- . , . - . , . - , , . .,, , . - - - , . - - .-