ML20028E310
| ML20028E310 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zimmer |
| Issue date: | 12/06/1982 |
| From: | Borgmann E CINCINNATI GAS & ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20028E309 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8301210205 | |
| Download: ML20028E310 (2) | |
Text
.
9 THE CINCINNATI GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY dK ~~ ~
.cI,o^.;S, c $7c^.E",
December 6, 1982
.._. PRINCIPAL STAFF b uh--
/Y/a/ of
. D/E; gpp 14P573 7
^/F Mr. James G.
Keppler 1 0EO'?
PA0 Regional Administrator, Region III j oEQDS SLO I
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
- 0((h Commission I M 799 Roosevelt Road
( $
FILE
/p?/y Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 In the Matter of The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company, et al.
(Wm. H. Zimmer Nuclear Power Station)
Docket No. 50-358
Dear Mr. Keppler:
On September 24, 1982, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued to The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company
("CG&E" or " Company") a " Demand for Information" relating to a " Petition To Suspend Construction Of The Zimmer Station" dated August 20, 1982 filed by the Miami Valley Power Project ("MVPP").
The Demand for Information required that by December 31, 1982, the Company specifically address Paragraphs 19 through 273 of MVPP's Petition, and admit or deny each of the allegations and explain the basis therefor.
The Company has been diligently proceeding with the preparation of its response to the NRC's Demand for Information.
However, because of the volume of the material and the complexity of the investioscion necessary, an extension of time is required to complete the response and provide the information required by the NRC for each of the alle-gations.
Many of the allegations consist of a number of sep-arate assertions, which may or may not be related.
Therefore each allegation must be broken down into its component parts for analysis, assignment of responsibility, and response.
The attachments to the MVPP Petition are approximately eight inches thick.
The attachments referenced in the text of the allegation must also be examined.
Some of the allegations refer to more than a single attachment.
Each of these allegations must then be pursued to determine its validity, its context and any neces-sary corrective action.
This process involves not only the Company, but its principal contractors and subcontractors who 8301210205 830117 ENEC 101962 PDR ADOCK 05000358 PDR A
j.
.A James G. Keppler December 6, 1982 Page 2 may have possession of documents or other information which must be examined or pursued.
The task involved in reviewing and compiling the information gathered is also extremely large.
While a high priority has been placed upon the response to the Demand for Information by the Company, many of the key people involved in responding to the individual matters within each allegation have competing requirements for their time.
This is particularly true now that the NRC has issued its " Order To Show Cause And Order Immediately Suspending Construction" dated November 12, 1982.
These circumstances constitute good cause for an extension of time to submit the required response to the Demand for Information.
Based upon its best estimate to date, the Company therefore requests that it be given until March 1, 1983 to complete its response.
If you require additional information in support of this request or have any questions regarding it, please let me know.
Sincerely,
/
V=
Earl A.
Borgmann
.