ML19319C532
| ML19319C532 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse, Perry  |
| Issue date: | 08/05/1974 |
| From: | Reynolds W CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO., SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE, TOLEDO EDISON CO. |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8002190967 | |
| Download: ML19319C532 (6) | |
Text
,
' August 5, 1974
)
UNITEb STATES OF AMERICA ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of
)
)
THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY and )
THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC
)
ILLUMINATING COMPANY
)
(Davis-Besse Nuclear Power
)
ge Station, Unit 1)
)
Docket Nos. 50-346A
)
50-440A THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC
)
50-441A ILLUMINATING COMPANY, et al.)
(Perry Nuclear Power Plant,
)
Units 1 and 2)
)
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE TO THE CITY OF CLEVELAND'S OBJECTIONS TO PREHEARING CONFERENCE ORDER NO. 2 1.
On July 31, 1974, the City of Cleveland
(" City")
filed with the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
(" Licensing Board") its " Objections" to Prehearing Conference Order No. 2, pursuant to Section 2.751(d) of the Commission's Restructured Rules of Practice.
One of the City's objections is directed to the failure of the Licensing Board to provide in the hearing shcedule "for an end to the period for production of documents prior to the commencement of the period of dis-covery by deposition" (City's Objections, p. 1).
2.
Applicants agree with the City that it would be helpful to all the parties to include in the hearing 3002190 96 7
[
schedule a specific date prior to completion of discovery on December 15, 1974, op which responses to interrogatories should be submitted and all documents requested should be produced.
We recommer.d that October 31, 1974, be set as the final date for responding to interrogatories and producing documents.
3.
Such an amendment to the hearing schedule would allow 45 days for completion of discovery by deposition (November 1 to December 15, 1974).
Applicants submit that this is more than enough time needed for the taking of 1/
depositions.-
Indeed both the Department of Justice and the AEC Regulatory Staff, who have had considerable experience in this area as participants in a number of antitrust hear-i ings under Section 105c of the Atomic Energy Act, recommended in their Proposed Hearing Schedules that discovery by depo-sition not exceed 45 days after the submission of answers to interrogatories and the production of documents.-2/
1/
This 45-day period is, of course, in addition to the 62 days of discovery that precede the suggested October 31 date (August 1 to October 31, 1974), during which the parties may well be able to take depositions of witnesses who were not served with interrogatories or asked to produce documents.
2/
Applicants recommended in their Proposed Hearing Schedule that the period for taking depositions not exceed 30 days.
We continue to believe that any longer period than 30 days (such as the 63-day period recommended by the City in its Proposed Hearing Schedule) is unnecessary and serves only to prolong the hearing process for no purpose other than to delay completion of the present proceeding.
2
w 4.
Applicants see no reason for the Licensing Board to extend the disgovery period beyond the December 15, 1974, date designated in the Board's hearing schedule.
Nor do we understand the City to be urging any such change in its " Objections."
Respectfully submitted, SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE By b s.
3 d b_ !
. C f.
Wm. Bradford Reynolds Gerald Charnoff Counsel for Applicants Dated:
August 5, 1974
~
\\
3
s UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of
)
)
THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY and )
THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC
)
ILLUMINATING COMPANY
)
(Davis-Besse Nuclear Power
)
Station, Unit 1)
)
Docket Nos. 50-346A
)
50-440A THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC
)
50-441A ILLUMINATING COMPANY, et al.)
(Perry Nuclear Power Plant,
)
Units 1 and 2)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing
" Applicants' Response to the City of Cleveland's Objections to Prehearing Conference Order No. 2 were served upon each of the persons listed on the attached Service List by U. S.
Mail, postage prepaid, on this 5th day of August, 1974.
SHAW, PITT M, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE N
a By l_) u. Du.0 h sA lb C
Wm. Bradford Reynolds Counsel for Applicants Dated:
August 5, 1974
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION In the Matter of.
)
)
THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY and )
THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC
)
ILLUMINATING COMPANY
)
)
(Davis-Besse Nuclear Power
)
Docket Nos. 50-346A Station, Unit 1)
)
50-440A
)
50-441A THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC
)
ILLUMINATING COMPANY
)
)
(Perry Nuclear Power Plant,
)
Units 1 and 2)
)
SERVICE LIST John B. Farmakides, Esq.
Mr. Frank W. Karas, Chief Chairman Public Proceedings Staff Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Office of the Secretary U. S. Atomic Energy Commission U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C.
20545 Washington, D. C.
20545 John H. Brebbia, Esq.
Benjamin H. Vogler, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Office of General Counsel Alston, Miller & Gaines Regulation 1776 K Street, N.W.
U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C.
20006 Washington, D. C.
20545 Robert J. Verdisco, Esq.
Dr. George R. Hall Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Office of General Counsel U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Regulation Washington, D. C.
20545 U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C.
20545 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Andrew F. Popper, Esq.
U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Office of General Counsel i
Washington, D. C.
20545 Regulation U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C.
20545 l
^\\
Joseph J. Saunders, Esq.
John R. White, Esq.
Steven Charno, Esq.
Executive Vice President Antitrust Division Ohio Edison Company Department of Justice 4 *e North Main Street Washington, D. C.
20530 Akron, Ohio 44308 Reuben Goldberg, Esq.
Thomas J. Munsch, Esq.
David C..Hjelmfelt, Esq.
General Attorney 1700 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W.
Duquesne Light Company Washington, D. C.
20006 435 Sixth Avenue Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219 Frank R. Clokey, Esq.
Special Assistant John Lansdale, Esq.
Attorney General Cox, Langford & Brown Room 219 21 Dupont Circle, N. W.
Towne House Apartments Washington, D. C.
20036 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105 Wallace L. Duncan, Esq.
Mr. Raymond Kudukis Jon T. Brown, Esq.
Director of Utilities Duncan, Brown & Palmer City of Cleveland 1700 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W.
1201 Lakeside Avenue Washington, D.
C.
20006 Cleveland, Ohio 44114 C. Raymond Marvin, Esq.
Herbert R. Whiting, Director Assistant Attorney General Robert D. Hart, Esq.
Chief, Antitrust Section Department of Law 8 East Long Street 4
1201 Lakeside Avenue Columbus, Ohio 43215 Cleveland, Ohio 44114 Deborah M. Powell, Esq.
John C. Engle, President Assistant Attorney General AMP-O, Inc.
Antitrust Section Municipal Building 8 East Long Street 20 High Street Suite 510
~
Hamilton, Ohio 45012 Columbus, Ohio 43215 Donald H. Hauser, Esq.
Christopher R. Schraff, Esq.
Managing Attorney Assistant Attorney General The Cleveland' Electric Environmental Law Section i
Illuminating Company' Eighth Floor l
.55 Public Square 361 East Broad Street Cleveland, Ohio 44101 Columbus, Ohio 43215
' aslie Henry, Esq.
1uller, Henry, Hedge.& Snyder 300 Madison Avenue Toledo, Ohio 43604 e
I