ML20023A849
| ML20023A849 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinch River |
| Issue date: | 10/15/1982 |
| From: | Swanson D NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Finamore B National Resources Defense Council |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8210200080 | |
| Download: ML20023A849 (3) | |
Text
_ _ _
October 15, 1982 Barbara A. Finamore Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
1725 Eye Street, N.W.
Suite 600 l
Washinton, DC 20006 In the Matter of United States Department of Energy I
Project Management Corporation Tennessee Valley Authority (Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant) l Docket No. 50-537
Dear Ms. Finamore:
f The purpose of this letter is to confirm one topic of our conversations I
which were conducted over the phone cn October 5 and 6, 1982. During our conversations I noted that NRDC, Inc. and the Sierra Club (NRDC, et al) had not updated responses to certain discovery requests by both DOE and the Staff regarding witnesses to be used by NRDC, et al during the LWA-1 hearing.
Previously NRDC, et al indicated that the only witness to be used in the LWA-1 hearing was Dr. Cochran. " Responses of Intervenors NRDC, Inc. and the Sierra Club to NRC Staff ist Round of Discovery to NRDC,-
et al.", dated May 6, 1982.
(Three additional witnesses were subsequently Tdelitified for the site suitability hearing.)
I informed you that the Staff would want to depose any witnesses of NRDC, et al. Other than Dr. Cochran, but that the Staff was not interested in further deposing Dr. Cochran.
During our conversation, you were not able to state with certainty whether Dr. Cochran would be your only witness at the balance of the LWA-1 hearings, but that you would talk over the matter with your asso-ciates.
I indicated to you that if I did not hear further from you by October 8,1982 regarding additional NRDC, et al. witnesses, I would assume that there would be no NRDC, et al. witnesses appearing at the remaining LWA-1 hearings for CRBR other than Dr. Cochran, and that I would acknowledge by letter the Staff's reliance on the identification of a single NRDC, et al. witness. Since I have not heard from you regarding L J E:ATED 02IGII!;.L
% tifica B7 8210200090 G
DSo9
3 b
I this matter since our phone conversations, this letter constitutes written acknwoledgement of that fact.
Accordingly, the Staff considers that NRDC, et al.'s failure to update discovery regarding the use of witnesses at the LWA-1 he. rings for CRBR to be an affirmative statement by NRDC, et al. that their i
previous discovery responses were still correct; i.e., that Dr. Cochran would be the only NRDC witness at the CRBR LWA-1 hearings.
In reliance on NRDC, et al.'s position, the Staff will conduct no further depositions of Intervenors' witnesses, despite the fact that depositions could have been taken until October 18, 1982, pursuant to the Board's August 31, 1982 Order.
In my conversation with you on October 6,1982 and in the October 7, 4
1982 conversation between Bradley Jones and you, the Staff witnesses were identified who are contemplated to testify at the environment al/LWA-1 hearings for CRBR. The list of Staff witnesses likely to testify at the upcoming environmental hearings which was provided to you by phone includes the following:
Contentions 1, 2 and 3: William Morris, Edmund Rumble, j
Mohan Thadani, John Long and Jerry Swift; Contention 4: Robert Dube, Davis Hurt, Charles Gaskin, John Hockert, Brant Jones, Patrick Reardon, and Kenneth Byers; Contention Sa) and 7c):
Paul Leech, Irwin Spickler, Leonard Soffer, Charles Ferrell, and Homer Lowenberg; Contention 5b): Homer Lowenberg, Leonard Soffer, and Mohan Thadani-Contention 6: Homer Lowenberg, Edward Branagan, Justin Long, and Regis Boyle; Contention 7:
Paul Leech and John Long; j
Contention 8:
Peter Erickson, Richard Smith, and Seymour Block; and Contention 11: Michael Bender and Edward Branagan.
I indicated that there may be some movement of witnesses among the issues, but that the above list constituted the expected Staff witnesses. The Staff considers this submittal of witness names to constitute an update of its previous responses to discovery by NRDC, et al.
Finally, I note that the above names were provided to you in suffi-cient time to be included in your recent deposition. Those witnesses named above who were in the area, in addition to the four other Staff e
+
1 J
./...
L',
members requested by you who contributed to discovery responses but who i
are not currently proposed as Staff witnesses, were deposed by you on October 12 and 13, 1982.
Sincerely, i
Daniel T. Swanson Counsel for NRC Staff cc: Service List i
DISTRIBUTION:
DTSwanson GSMizuno BWJones SETurk.
MFSweeney SATreby MKarman JLieberman ELDFF(2)
Christenbury/Scinto Murray DMB-PDR/LPDR RStark Pleech Chron i
h i
N l~
0FC :
0E:.D. 5(i i
_____:_OELD p_p :
i NAME :DTSwanson:as: SATreby DATE : 10/15/82
- 10/15/82
..