ML18227D538
| ML18227D538 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie, Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 08/05/1977 |
| From: | Bouknight J, Mathews J Florida Power & Light Co, Lowenstein, Newman, Reis & Axelrad, Mathews, Osborne, Ehrlich, McNatt, Gobelman & Cobb |
| To: | Case E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| Download: ML18227D538 (4) | |
Text
ROSCRT LOWENSTCIN JACK R. NEWMAN HAROLO I; RCIS MAVRICC AXCLRAO KATHLCCH H. SHCA J A, SOVKNIOHTiJR, HORC M, BABCOCK MICHAEL A. BAVSCR ROSERT H CVLR FRCOERIC S, GRAY LINOA L, HOOOC JOEL S. WIOHTIAOM,CAVII!I I.AW OF'F'ICCS LOW'I7'HNSTEIN, lTHW'iiiAN,REIS 8C AXELRAD IO25 CONNECTICUT AVCNUC, N. W.
WASHINGTON, O. C. 20036 2CI2 833-837I Au ust 5
1977 Mr. Edson G.
Case Acting Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Re: Florida Power G Light Company St. Lucie Plant, Unit No.
1 Turkey Point, Plant, Units No.
3 6
4 Docket Nos.
50-335A, 50-250A, 50-251A
Dear Mr. Case:
This regards a letter addressed to you from Robert A. Jablon, attorney for "Florida Cities", dated August 1, 1977.
Mr. Jablon's letter requires response in two respects.
The Cities suggest that Florida Power G Light Company (FPL) should not be afforded the opportunity to respond to a notice of violation, as provided in 10 CFR 52.201, prior to issuance of any order to show cause in these dockets.
This suggestion is contrary to law.
The notice procedure provided in 52.201 is based directly upon the requirement of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.
558.
In addition, the Cities'osition appears to be grounded upon the view that a "record" exists in these dockets.
No evidentiary record of any kind exists.
The Cities appear to have confused their own claims and charges with an evidentiary record; in fact, the Cities'leadings are nothing but that the advocacy of one party.
Simply because these baseless.
and exaggerated charges have been repeated countless times in pleadings sub-mitted by the Cities (and apparently the Cities would have all of their previous pleadings incorporated by reference into each new pleading) does not. lend credence to them or raise them to the dignity of a "record".
The Cities also suggest that FPL's reference to its rights to notice and an opportunity to respond thereto represents a dilatory tactic on the part of FPL.
- However, review of the papers filed with the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, beginning with Mr. Jablon's own confusing letter
LOWENSTEIN, NEWMAN> REIS &
ELRAD Mr. Edson G.
Case August 3, 1977 Page 2
of October 29, 1976, will reveal that any delay which has taken place in resolving this matter is not the responsibility of FPL.
Cities and their counsel have adopted the tactic of filing papers containing extensive charges against FPL in almost every conceivable governmental forum.
Some of the charges which appear in the papers filed with you have been the subject of a civil antitrust case between FPL and one of the Cities, a case which was determined at the trial court level upon a jury verdict and judgment for FPL; other charges have been the subject of previous proceedings before the Federal Power Commission; many are now pending in an active proceeding being conducted by the Federal Power Commission; letters have been directed to the Antitrust Division of the U.S.
Department of Justice and to members of Congress.
None of the charges made by the Cities has ever been found to be true or meritorous by any court or governmental agency.
Nonetheless, the Cities respond to each judicial or administrative rejection of their charges by strengthening the rhetoric of their next pleading
("egregiously
...misuse").
It would appear that if any party to this matter should be heard to complain of "exhaust[ive]" and vexatious litigation it would not be the Cities. It is not too much to expect that parties which choose to institute litigation on every possible front should be required to endure the exercise of the accused party's established procedural rights..
Accordingly, it is requested that, for the reasons stated in FPL's letter of July 5, 1977, no proceedings be initiated on the basis of the Cities request.
In the event, however, that the Director determines to initiate proceedings, FPL requests that it be afforded the notice of violation and opportunity to respond thereto provided in the Administrative Procedure Act and in 10 CFR 52.201.
Respectfully Submitted, Attorneys for Florida Power 6 Light Company
.A. Bouknig
, Jr owenstein, ewma
, Reis 6 Axelrad 1025 Connecticut
- Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 Ak~
r 8p @~-
John E. Mathews, Jr.
- Mathews, Osborne, Ehrlich, McNatt Gobelman
& Cobb 1500 American Heritage Life Building ll East Forsyth Street Jacksonville, Florida 32202
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
)
Florida Power
& Light Company
)
(St. Lucie Plant, Unit No.
1)
)
)
Florida Power
& Light Company
)
(Turkey Point Plant., Unit Nos.
)
3 and 4)
)
Docket No. 50-335A Docket, No. 50-250A 50-251A CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that copies of the following:
Letter to the Director, Nuclear Reactor Regulation dated 8/5/77 have been served on the persons shown on the attached list by hand delivery or deposit in the United States Mail, properly stamped and addressed on August 5
1977 By:
J.
A. Bouknig
, Jr.
owenstein,
- ewman, Reis
& Axelrad 1025 Connecticut
- Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 Counsel for Florida Power
& Light Company
Alan S. Rosenthal, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear.Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Jerome E. Sharfman, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Richard S.
- Salzman, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Lee Scott Dewey, Esquire Counsel for the Staff, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 C.R. Stephens, Supervisor (20)
Docketing and Service Station Office of the Secretary of the Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Secretary
. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 William C. Wise, Esquire Suite 200 1019 19th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 Robert M. Lazo, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 John M. Frysiak, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. '0555 William H.. Chandler, Esquire
- Chandler, O'Neal, Avera,
- Gray, Lang
& Stripling P.O.
Drawer 0
Gainesville, Florida 32602 Jerome Saltzman Chief, Antitrust and indemnity Group U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Reactor Regulation Washington, D.C.
20555 Ivan W. Smith, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.- 20555 Robert A. Jablon, Esquire 2600 Virginia Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20037 David A. Leckie, Esquire Antitrust Division
, Department of Justice P.O.
Box 7513 Washington, D.C.
20530