ML20062A532

Expresses Disbelief That Interviews W/Aslbp Members Re Proceeding Would Violate Ex Parte Rule.Interviews Are Necessary to Carry Out Commission Directive

ML20062A532
Person / Time
Site:	Harris
Issue date:	10/02/1978
From:	Kelley J NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
To:	Abston O NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTOR & AUDITOR (OIA)
Shared Package
ML20062A503	List: ML20062A496 ML20062A506 ML20062A532
References
NUDOCS 7810140125
Download: ML20062A532 (1)

Text

_

~

1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMisslON

[gyh..'. ,.t j j t wassincron. o. c. 20sss

• k-ttg#E

%,; e,4 ,/ a g

October 2,1978 9 g g 9'

&g $e,'y/.

PIMORANDUM FOR: 0. Gene Abston, Acting Director g &,. f D l

Office of Inspector and Auditor

.,i  % o  ;

FROM: Cffgfames L. Kelley, Acting General Counsel '

SUBJECT:

INQUIRY INTO STAFF TESTIMONY AT THE SHEARON HARRIS CONSTRUCTION PERMIT HEARING This is in response to your memorandum to me of September 28, 1978, on the above subject. I do not believe that the interviews with the O late the ex parte rule. Licensing For oneBoard thing,members, as adescribed you are not " party" to in theyour memorandum, proceeding within the meaning of the rule, since you are an office reporting directly to the Commission. Secondly, although it may be imoossible to totally separate the. subject of your inquiry from the merits issue remanded to the Board, I believe that the two subjects are sufficiently distinct that you can. proceed without seriously compromising this aspect of the rule. Finally, the results of your interviews will ultimately be placed in the public record of the proceeding and the parties will have an opportunity to comment.

That proposed procedure is fully inconsistent with the spirit of the ex parte ' rule. In view of the foregoing considerations, I believe thatlour proposed interviews of Board members will be consistent with the Comnission rules, including the ex parte rules, and that, indeed, such interviews are necessary in order for you to carry out the Commission's directive.

O ,

h I

W e

y

,, LIC DOCUAgyI' R00X

,-**~.

SH Aw, PITTM AN, PoTTs & TROWB RIDG E 18 0 0 M STREET,N.W.

WAS H I N GTO N ,0..C. 2 0 0 3 6

' ' '.' L ; ! - j. .,

na mar o. ports sames vuowas 6c waar .. . g. (zoas sai-aioo eT2uant 6. ai?TMaN STEVEN 6. M E67ZCa a j

ozonos r. vnoweaioor o cam o. avuca 6.g* f < C. Of - , -

I".5"c01a*3N SE.6up o. costwica 3"*h 2."=$:*6[$*v'ow  %.V "'EC "' 8 "

==

sown s=oes s ~

'l h taoas ase-osea s ase-s7eo l2 sowno"!'. "=J.

e = enc 6am "a'"#a's . s wwtwaoa

"?"!"s.*e'""'On

a. n. maown

<" cih'$y.4 7 - -

eauc e w. cauacw.osa u. sa= es o. wa-um "'E"

' a - = = = ' = " a* u~ - = " >

h"ti#.i it. s".1..".fe..'u." "Pc".*No nic w m . no..a.

'd"t!"

""- e. no.ei.. 9 gp 26 \a73y' '"$ i cAe6. .s w.w w.

tz::::*.'":.s..o,,i escaos v.a66sa s a.

C" = ::~:::' .

warias a. taavieso-oiaz *m 2 C*d'esAy;$ #

sown w.swamon p F

==. maao rono arvmo60s vicvoa a s. asami=s o

'#3 tat,.'.'a $!"" To;0,'." ""- 4 * "*" " * " "

• marwanic6 p. onero.sa, raamauw o.cwo a counsc6 MAKn AuotNeuen otomot O. Caowstv. sa.  %

ann ant 6. eua c. sa. micwas6 o. ..ars 4l g E$a"$ E."r'a"jso"."'**

N"o'**f".

saurs m ouaosa .*.'/SU* sveven u. LucAs

. . - . . . . . . . September 21, 1978 s

C1vect w. Smith, sea. , Chairmen ,

1. ar. G1en o. Brisht Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel V Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissio:

( Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C.- 20555 1

Dr. J. V. Leeds, Jr.

10807 Atwell Drive Houston, Texas 77096 In the Matter of Carolin 23fer & Light Company (Shearon arris klant, Units 1, 2, 3, 4)

Docket Nos. 0-400) 50-401, 50-402 and 50-403 1

Gentlemen:

V O By letter dated September 14, 1978, Staff counsel advises the Board that the Staff expected to be able to file written tastimony by November 1, 1978, for the remanded hearing on the management capabilities of Carolina Power & Light Company to construct and operate the Shearon Harris facility. Staff cour.sel further suggested l that the hearing could take place by the middle of November, barring i

unexpected scheduling problems.

Carolina Power & Light Company will also be prepared to m et a mid-November hearing date and suggests that when a definite hearing date has been established, the filing date for prepared i l

t 1

I l

731590125 l

. s ::'

>SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE Ivan W. Smith, Esq.

Page Two September 21, 1978 testimony should be set two weeks in advance of the hearing. We also respectfully request that the hearing date be established after j c conference call with counsel for tl.e parties to avoid schedule conflicts.

Res tfull su itted, f

9e F. Trowbridg GFT Occ :/ pan Charles A. Barth, Esq.

Thomas S. Erwin, Esq.

Jesse C. Brake, Esq.

Docketing and Service Section _

l l

>