ML19309D342
| ML19309D342 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 03/06/1980 |
| From: | Biddle C BAKER & BOTTS, HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO. |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8004100274 | |
| Download: ML19309D342 (5) | |
Text
,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION-BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of S
S HOUSTON LIGHTING &
S POWER COMPANY, et al.
S Docket Nos. 50-498 OL Qti@pfr a S
50-499 OL (South Texas Nuclear S
DOCKEED Project Units 1 and 2)
S Ustmo IMR 10 GEO> 3
~
Of.t3cf ths Sc:rtr/
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE TO CCANP'S Ddfjr20EdC1 p'
MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER 9
Cmd j
SECOND INTERROGATORIES OF APPLICANTS 3f 4
Houston Lighting & Power Company, Project Manager of the South Texas Project, acting on behalf of itself and the other Applicants, the City of San Antonio, Texas, acting by and through the City Public Service Board of the City of San Antonio, Central Power and Light Company and the City of Austin, Texas, (hereinafter " Applicants") files I
this response to " Citizens Concerned About Nuclear Power, Inc. Motion for Extension of Time to Answer Second Inter-rogatories of Applicants" served by Certificate of Service dated March 2, 1980.
Applicants regret having to burden the Board with this response; for we do not oppose the extension of time sought by CCANP.
The subject pleading, however, requires a i
l 8004100 2_7 L
7 response for two reasons:
1.
The pleading mischaracterizes Mr. Biddle's response to Mr. Sinkin's question regarding the position of the Applicants on CCANP's request for an extension of time to respond to Applicants' second set of interrogatories.
Mr. Biddle did not unconditionally acquiesce in CCANP's request for a 30-day extension as suggested in CCANP's Motion but, rather, indicated that Applicants would have to await CCANP's pleading before making a final judgment on whether an extension as long as 30 days was warranted.
2.
The Motion is erroneously based on the premise that extensions of discovery requests should be routinely granted (a) for the convenience of the parties ("
Intervenors have literally thousands of pages of construction records to analyze."); and, (b) because certain NRC Staff documents (FES and SER) will not be available until the fall of 1982.
As to (a), it need only be said that the convenience of litigants cannot be dispositive on scheduling matters.
There is, of course, a public interest in the timely conduct of the Commission's business.
(See, e.g.,
Potomac Electric Power Company (Douglas Point Units 1 and 2) ALAB-277, 1 NRC 539, 552 (1975).
r 1
As to (b), the timing of the release of Staff documents and their relationship to the discovery process, the Commission's regulations contemplate that discovary may precede, by a very substantial time, the publication of the Staff's SER and FES.
10 C.F.R. 2.752 (especially footnote 1).
It is clear that the Motion is without merit.
However, Applicants believe that in complex litigation of this type, reasonable accommodations should, where possible, be made on a case-by-case basis.
In that context, Applicants pose no objection to the subject motion.
Respectfully submitted, 0fEV
)
OF COUNSEL:
Melbert D.
Schwarz C. Thomas Biddle, Jr.
Baker & Botts Charles G. Thrash, Jr.
3000 One Shell Plaza 3000 One Shell Plaza Houston, Texas 77002 Houston, Texas 77002 Lowenstein, Newman, Reis, Jack R. Newman Axelrad & Toll Robert H. Culp 1025 Connecticut Ave., N.W.
1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 Washington, D.C.
20036
~
Attorneys for HOUSTON LIGHTING &
POWER COMPANY, Project Manager of the South Texas Project, acting herein on behalf of it-self and the other Applicants, THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS, acting by and through the City Public Service Board of the City of San Antonio, CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY and THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS.
r UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of S
S HOUSTON LIGHTING &
S POWER COMPANY, et al.
S Docket Nos. 50-498 OL S
50-499 OL (South Texas Nuclear S
Project Units 1 and 2)
S CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing Applicants' Response to CCANP's Motion for Extension of Time to Answer Second Interrogatories of Applicants in the above-captioned procaeding were served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, or by hand-delivery this 64h day March, 1980.
Charles Bechhoefer, Esq., Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Dr. James C.
Lamb, III 313 Woodhaven Road Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514 Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Henry J. McGurren, Esq.
Hearing Attorney Office of the Executive Legal Director U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Richard W. Lowerre, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General for the 3 tate of Texas P. O. Box 12548, Capitol Station Austin, Texas 78711
Honorable Burt O'Ponnell County Judge, Mat-4 3rda County Matagorda County Court House Bay City, Texas 77414 Mrs. Peggy Buchorn, Executive Director Citizens for Equitable Utilities Route 1, Box 432 Brazoria, Texas 77422 Steven A. Sinkin, Esq.
116 Villita San Antonio, Texas 78205 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U. S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Mr. Chase R. Stephens Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary of the Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 c flwnu (%k #
C.
Thomas Biddle, Jr.
/.
--wn+
4
,,..., ~
,. _.