ML20024D024
| ML20024D024 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 07/20/1983 |
| From: | Cutchin J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8307210305 | |
| Download: ML20024D024 (5) | |
Text
-
.;5 9 a g 5;.q:,: --
.y July 20, 1983 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY CONtISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLLHINATING Docket No. 50-440 OL COMPANY, ET AL.
50-441 OL (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1and2)
NRC STAFF'S ANSWER OPPOSING OCRE'S MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF APPLICANTS' ANSWER IN SUPPORT OF NRC STAFF'S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY
DISPOSITION OF ISSUE #13 1.
INTRODUCTION On June 30, 1983 Intervenor Ohio Citizens for Responsible Energy (OCRE) filed a motion M seeking to have stricken from the record certain portions of Applicants' answer _/ supporting the NRC Staff's motion for 2
sumary disposition of Issue #13.E As grounds for the relief requested, OCRE asserts that those portions of the Applicants' answer which OCRE seeks to have stricken constitute an impennissible reply brief. For the reasons discussed below the Staff opposes DCRE's motion to strike and urges that it be denied.
y
" Motion to Strike Portions of Applicants' Answer in Support of NRC Staff Motion for Sumary Disposition of Issue #13" ~(June 30,1983).
y
" Applicants' Answer in Support of NRC Staff Motion for Sumary DispositionofIssue.#13"(June 27,1983),
y "NRC Staff's Motion for Sumary Disposition of Issue #13 (May 31, t
1983).
a 8307210305 B30720 k
gDRADOCK 05000 4 g.
. _. s w=, -
.m___._
_ m.m.s
.e,.,
II. DISCUSSION OCRE seeks to have stricken from the Applicants' answer supporting the Staff's motion for sumary disposition of Issue #13 those portions of the Applicants' answer which address the answers of OCRE and Sunflower on the ground that they constitute responses that are prohibited by 10 CFR 2.749 of the Comission's regulations. The Staff does not agree that the Applicants are prohibited by 10 CFR 2.749 from addressing in their answer supporting the Staff's motion any facts that in their view warrant addressing sc long as they file their answer within the time allowed, as they did. That OCRE and Sunflower, as opponents of the Staff's motion for sumary disposition, have an opportunity to respond to the merits of Applicants' supporting answer within 10 days of its service prevents their being prejudiced. 10CFR2.749(a). Intervenors' actions in filing their initial opposing responses before they were due (thereby giving Applicants the opportunity to address Intervenors' opposing responses in Applicants' own response to the Staff's motion) and in failing to avail themselves of their opportunity to l
reply to the merits of the Applicants' supporting answer are problems of their own making. OCRE's present challenge to Applicants' actions on procedural grounds alone is without merit.4/ Moreover, since OCRE cites 4/
OCRE itself has failed to file an affidavit showingJ1_oo_d reasons for its inability to make a timely response to the Sucff's motion on the merits or an affidavit-showing that the one person whom OCRE alleges to have located is competent in the area of turbine missiles.
l See10CFR2.749(b)&(c);ClevelandElectricIlluminatintCompany TFerry Ruclear Power Plant, Units I and 2), ALAB-443, 6 NEC 741, 755 (1977); and "0CRE's Amended Response to NRC Staff's Motion for Sumary Disposition of Issue #13" with attached affidavit (June 29,1983).
I
-~..
P,
ALAB-443, it should be aware that where a Board believes that the existing
~
record is not sufficient to allow surmary disposition and that a party could submit the necessary evidence given the opportunity to do so, it is s
not improper for the Board to give a party supporting summary disposition an opportunity to submit that evidence and for the Board to consider such evidence in reaching a decision on summary disposition. ALAB-443, 6 NRC at 751-2.
In summary, Applicants were not prohibited by 10 CFR 2.749 from addressing the answers of OCRE and Sunflower opposing the Staff's motion for summary disposition of Issue #13, and the intervenors were not prejudiced by Applicants' doing so.
III. CONCLUSION For the reasons discussed above OCRE's motion to strike should be denied.
Respec ully submitted, y -.
James M. Cutchin IV Counsel for NRC Staff Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 20th day of July, 1983
_,. ~
^
.; 2,_. _ -
u^
o
~ JUtilTED STATES OF AMERICA
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING Docket No. 50-440 OL COMPANY, ET AL.
50-441 OL (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1and2)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE t
I hereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF'S ANSWER OPPOSING OCRE'S MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF APPLICANTS' ANSWER IN SUPPORT OF NRC STAFF'S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY
DISPOSITION OF ISSUE #13" in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class, or, as indicated by an asterisk, by deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Comission's internal mail system, this 20th day of July, 1983:
- Peter B. Bloch, Esq., Chainnan Donald T. Ezzone, Esq.
Administrative Judge Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 105 Main Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Lake County Administr= tion Center Washington, DC 20555 Painesville, Ohio 44077
- Dr. Jerry R.- Kline Susan Hiatt Administrative Judge 8275 Munson Road Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Mentor, Ohio 44060 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, DC 20555 Terry J. Lodge, Esq.
McComick, Pour 9ranz & Lodge
- Mr. Glenn 0. Bright 824 National Bank Building Administrative Judge Toledo, Ohio 43604 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission John G. Cardinal, Esq.
l' Washington, DC 20555-Prosecuting Attorney Ashtabula County Courthouse Jay Silberg, Esq.
Jefferson, Ohio 44047 Shaw, Pittman, Potts and.Trowbridge 1800 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 L
.. - ~.
r
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
- Docketing & Service Section Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
%~t James M. Cutchin IV Counsel for NRC Staff f
l l
e I
-,.