ML19289E847

Opposes D Fankhauser Response to 790306 Proposed Timetable of Events.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML19289E847
Person / Time
Site:	Zimmer
Issue date:	03/08/1979
From:	Conner T, Wetterhahn M CONNER, MOORE & CORBER
To:
Shared Package
ML19289E848	List: ML19289E847 ML19289E851 ML19289E854
References
NUDOCS 7905290171
Download: ML19289E847 (3)

Text

.

m WC PUBLIC DCCOIENT ROOM

/

7.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA '~ ,j ,

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ' '

, y'

~ " ~:.' , -,/

In the Matter of )

)

The Cincinnati Gas & Electric ) Docket No. 50-358 Company, et al. )

)

(William H. Zimmer Nuclear )

Power Station) )

APPLICANTS' OPPOSITION TO " DAVID FANKHAUSER'S RESPONSE TO PROPOSED TIME TABLE OF EVENTS" On March 6, 1979, Intervenor, David Fankhauser, sub-mitted his " Response to the Board's Schedule of Events."

Therein he requested that the prehearing conference be scheduled after April 1, 1979, and that the period for discovery be extended until that date in order to permit him to serve additional interrogatories. As discussed below, Applicants, The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company, et al., oppose the Intervenor's requests.

Initially, Dr. Fankhauser misconstrues the import of the Board's Order of February 23, 1979. In that order, the Board established a definite schedule for close of discovery of March 5, 1979 and for the prehearing conference of March 22-23, 1979. --1/ It was only with regard to the schedule of events to be held on March 22 and 23 that the Board invited comment by the parties. The Board's schedule for close of discovery and for the prehearing conference was not subject to comment by the parties.

4-

_1/ Order at 1.

7Q05290/7'/ ()-

As already discussed in "AFpiicant's Upposition to Miami Valley Power Project's Motice to Continue Prehe. iring Conference,"datedhfarch7, 1979, this proceeding has been pending sinet September}5, 1975. Dr. Fankhauser has been a party since March 16, 1976. He has been represented by counsel during the course of this proceeding and has had almost three years in which to pursue discovery against the Applicants and other parties. Dr. Fankhauser has suggested no reason why any further discovery could not have been promulgated by the March 5, 1979 date set by the Licensing Board.

1 Ina.smuch as Dr. Fankhauser is represented by counsel, there is no need for his attendance at one or more sessions of the prehearing conference. While Dr. Fankhauser alludes to certain difficulties in his " teaching responsibilities" which make his attendance questionable, this is obviously his regular occupation and was at the time he elected to seek party status. All participants must meet their responsibili-ties as parties to move the proceeding in accordance with 8 't the Rules'of Practice.

2/ See , Consumers Power Compang (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2), AI TB-2 7 0, . I NRC 4 7 3, 476 (19 7 5', .

1 e

2047 ?52 6

?

For the foregoing reasons, no extension for discovery should be granted and the prehearing conference should be held as scheduled.

Respectfully submitted, CONNER, MOORE &'CORBER M yg$ D* O l.

Troy B_. Co r, Jr. ,

L/ !.f

/ &

Mark J J etterhahn Counsel for the Applicants March 8, 1979 2047 ?S3