ML19312C742

Approves Applicant'S Motion to Amend Prehearing Order 6 & Moves to Further Amend Order 6,extending Deadline for Requesting Addl Discovery to 730730.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML19312C742
Person / Time
Site:	Oconee, Mcguire, McGuire
Issue date:	06/06/1973
From:	Bannan C, Brand W, Leckie D JUSTICE, DEPT. OF
To:	US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
References
NUDOCS 7912190953
Download: ML19312C742 (5)

Text

'

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

. BEFORE THE ATOMIC ENERGY ComfISSION In ,the Matter of )

DUKE POWER COMPANY Docket Nos.. , 50-270A, (Oconee Units 1, 2 and 3 ) 50-287A, 50-369A, McGuire Units 1 and 2) ) 50-370A ANSWER OF THE DEPARTMElfr OF JUSTICE TO APPLICANT 'S MOTION TO AMEND PARAGRAPH G OF PREHEARING ORDER NUMEER SIX AND SEPARATE MOTION OF THE DEPARTMENT TO AMEND PARAGRAPH G OF PREHEARING ORDER NUMBER SIX Pursuant to Section 2.740(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice ,10 C.F.R. , Part 2, and Paragraph H of Prehearing Order Number Six, the Department of Justice answers that it does not object to Applicant's motion, dated May 30, 1973, to amend Paragraph G of that Prehearing Order and moves that Paragraph G be further. amended to extend the deadline for requesting additional discovery to July 30,1973, with a proviso that this deadline will not apply to further discovery requests shown to be specifically related or responsive to any post-June 15 document production made by Applicant under the First Joint Request.

Paragraph G of Prehearing Order Number Six calls for compliance with outstanding discovery requests , including the First Joint Request for Documents , by June 1,1973, and the making;of all requests for interrogatories , further production of- documents , and depositions by July 2,1973--

only 31 days later.

}

Thirty-one days for the Department to copy and i examine Applicant's documentary production and then formulate additional discovery requests specifying in detail the infor-mation desired and the source material to be examined (as i the Board has directed) would have been a tight schedule ,

even if Applicant had produced the great bulk of its documents well be fore June 1. This has not been the case, however.

From the September 6,1972, date of service upon Applicant of the First Joint Request until April 30, 1973, Applicant 1 available noticed 14,520 documents /for inspection.*/ Subsequently, it  !

has noticed the availability of 29,653 additional pages and has informed us that yet another 16,000 pages will be mad

.available on or before June 15. In other words, approximate _y 76% of Applicant's document production has been or will be accomplished in the final month and a half of this discovery period. Further, not only has there been an accelerating rate of production, the estimated 60,000 total pages to be produced by Applicant substantially exceeds any amount previously foreseen. .

Given this course of production, it would be patently unfair if the Department were not allowed sufficient time to 1

. formulate intelligently, after a review of all the documents produced , our desired interrogatories , further document

• / Notices of availability are invariably mailed to us and thus not actually received until one to three days after their given dates.

e 2

~

requests , and notices of depositions. We are most concerned, however, that. this preceeding be speedily carried forward and are limiting this requested extension to the minimum time we believe necessary to consider and prepare further discovery requests. We ask only that the Board extend its original discovery-request deadline by 28 days--14 days to compensate for Applicant's requested 14-day extension to substantially complete its document production and only 14 additional days to permit our reasonable review of the great mass of docu-ments just produced and yet to be produced--with a reasonable exemption from the deadline to accommodate any discovery requests that may be generated as a direct result of the "possible loose ends" Applicant intimates may not be made available until sometime after June 15, 1973.

< For the reasons stated above, good cause exists for the extension sought. Counsel for Applicant and the Intervenors have advised us that they have no objection thereto.

Respectfully submitted ,

iG7

, f: MQ ' ? :, , , ,

C. FORREST BANNAN DAVID A. LECKIE WALLACE E. BRAND' i httorneys I Department of Justice ,

1 Washington, D. C.

June 6,1973 ,

l 1 1

f E

UNITED STATES OF A> ERICA BEFORE THE ATOMIC ENERGY C0FDIISSION 1 '

In the Matter of )

)

DUKE POWER COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-269A. 50-270A, (Oconee Units 1, 2 and 3 ) 50-287A, 50-369A, McGuire Units 1 and 2) ) 50-370A -

i CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of ANSWER OF THE DEPARTLENT OF JUSTICE TO APPLICANT 'S MOTION TO ALEND PARAGRAPH G OF PREHEARIEG OPJ)ER NUMBER SIX AND SEPARATE MOTION OF THE DEPARTIENT TO ABEMD PARAGRAPH G OF PP2 HEARING ORDER NUMBER SIX, dated June 6,1973, in the above captioned matter have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class or air mail, this 6th day of June , 19 73 :

Honorable Walter W. K. Bennett William Warfield Ross , Esquire Chairman, Atomic Safety and George-A. Avery, Esquire Licensing Board Keith Watson, Esquire Post Office Bo:: 185 Toni K. Golden, Esquire Pinehurst, North Carolina 28374 Wald, Harkrader & Ross 1320 Nineteenth Street, N.W.

Honorable Joseph F. Tubridy Washington, D. C. 20036 4100 Cathedral Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D. C. 20016 J. O. Tally, Jr., Esquire J . A . Bouknigh t , Jr., Esquire Honorable John B. Farmakides Tally, Tally & Bouknight Atomic Safety and Licensing . Post Office Drawer 1660 Board Fayetteville, North Carolina 28302 U. S. Atomic Energy Comission Troy B. Conner,. Esquire Washington , D. C. 20545 Reid & Priest Carl Horn, Esquire 1701 K Street, N.W.

President, Duke Power Company Washington, D. C. 20006 422 South Church Street-Charlotte, North Carolina 28201 Joseph Rutberg, Esquire Benjamin H. Vogler, Jsquire William H. Grigg, Esquire Antitrust Counsel for AEC Vice President and General-Counsel Regulatory Staff Duke Power Ccmpany U. S. Atomic Energy Commission 1 Washington, D. C. 20545 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28201  !

Mr. Abraham Braitmati, Chief j W. L. Porter, Esquire- . Office of Antitrust and '

Duke Power Ceccany Indemnity 422 South Churca street 9. S. Acccic Energy C:-mission Charlotte, North Carolina.'28201 ' Washington , D. C. 20545

\

i L_

m David Stover, Esquire th[. Frank W. Karas , Chief Tally, Tally & Bouknight Public Proceedings Branch 429 N Street, S.W.' Office of the Secretary of Washington, D. C. 20024 the Commission U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Washington, D. C. 20545 Board Panel U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Chairman, Atomic Safety and Washington, D. C. 20545 Licensing Appeals Board ..-

U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C. 20545 C. Forrest Bannan Attorney, Antitrust Division Department of Justice Washington, D. C. 20530 e

c 4

6 99

*=wHm y

b

\  %

L