ML17209B113
| ML17209B113 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 05/22/1981 |
| From: | Bowers E Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | PARSONS & WHITTEMORE |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8105280217 | |
| Download: ML17209B113 (3) | |
Text
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
$f$ tIIQ
'A OMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD efore Administrative Judges:
3
~~~88)~
lizabeth S.
- Bowers, Chairman
+eau aevi~~~
Dr. Oscar H. Paris
~'s 8
Dr. Peter A. Morris 8
~ocKeao usNRo MAY26
)S8t
~
Offing Of Qe pe~
~ting tt, AN,~
La g smvE> ge 26 1S8 In the Matter of:
)
FLORIDA POWER
& LIGHT COMPANY
)
(St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant,
)
Unit 2)
)
).
Docket No. 50-389-OL May 22, 1981 Order Relative to Parsons
& Whittemore, Inc.
and Resources Recovery (Dade County), Inc.
Motion for Permission to Reply to Answers to Their Intervention Petition On April 7, 1981, Parsons 8 Whittemore, Inc.
(P&W) and its subsidiary, Resources Recovery (Dade County), Inc.
(RRD), jointly petitioned. for leave to intervene and requested the Commission to hold a limited antitrust hearing on the Florida Power
& Light Company (FPL) application for an operating license.
The petition discussed the interest of P&W and RRD.
On April 22, 1981, the NRC Staff responded to the petition.
On May 6, 1981, following the Board's grant of additional time, FPL responded to the petition.
By motion of May 13, 1981, petitioners seek leave to answer the responses of the. NRC Staff and FPL to the petition.
It was suggested if
( 4
(
4 li
'l d
I Ii lf b
d
the motion was granted, the filing would be made on or before June 1, 1981.
P8W and RRD state that FPL has made erroneous factual statements and fallacious legal positions concerning certain contractual disputes.
On May 15, 1981, FPL opposed the motion on the basis that it is a
delaying action and the matters in dispute are antitrust issues.
FPL also r
stated that if the motion is granted, it would move to issue subpoenas similar to those requested by FPL's motion to the Licensing Board presiding over the construction permit 'antitrust proceeding.
On May 22, 1981, the Staff stated it does not oppose the motion as it relates to the NRC,answer.
The Board has determined it has suffic'ient information to consider the petition and that an additional round (or rounds) of filings is not necessary for its determination and would only delay the issuance of its ruling.
The motion of PSW and RRD to respond to the answers to their interven-tion petition is denied.
IT SO ORDERED FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD et S.
- Bowers, C airman Administrative Judge Dated at bethesda',
- Maryland, this 22nd day of May, -1981.