ML20070D514
| ML20070D514 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 06/29/1994 |
| From: | Kohn M AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED, KOHN, KOHN & COLAPINTO, P.C. (FORMERLY KOHN & ASSOCIA |
| To: | Bloch P, Carpenter J, Murphy T Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#394-15301 93-671-01-OLA-3, 93-671-1-OLA-3, OLA-3, NUDOCS 9407080143 | |
| Download: ML20070D514 (2) | |
Text
Ih 4, f5301 KOHN, KOHN, S COLAPINTO, PC.00g (
ATTORNEYS AT law S17 FLORIDA AVENUE, NW WASHINGTON. DC 20001-1850 (202) 234-4663 FAX (202) 462-4145
'94 JUN 30 P4 :05 fuCCHA{L Q KO4N **.
EAE"c"JE#o*..
OFFICE OF SECRE TARY : ES ""!A 00CKEIWG & S,LRViCE : ggg=
a,couN a e coonn enowN,
BRidiCh ANNETTE R KRONSTACT *
~ ~""
June 29, 1994
)
l Hon. Peter B. Bloch, Chair Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Hon. James H.
Carpenter.
933 Green Point Drive Oyster Point Sunset Beach, NC 28468 Hon. Thomas D. Murphy Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Re:
In the Matter of Georgia Power Company, et.al.
(Vogtle Electric Generating
- Plant, Units 1 and 2) Dockets Nos. 50-424-OLA-3 & 50-425-OLA-3, ASLBP No. 93-671-01-OLA-3
Dear Honorable Judges:
I write you concerning the joint stipulation concerning discovery reached by the parties during the May 26, 1994 status conference.
Today Mr. David Lewis, Esq.,
counsel to Licensee, informed me that Licensee was not going to comply with discovery deadlines set forth in the joint stipulation and requested that Intervenor agree to allow Licensee to avoid the deadlines contained in the stipulation with respect to Licensee's filing responses to Intervenor's request for admissions.
We advised Licensee that we would agree to such a request on condition that Intervenor receive a continuance of the time allotted to conduct discovery by seven days (the length of time Licensee indicated they were seeking to extend its filing).
Licensee has rejected this request, forcing Intervenor to object to Licensee's request to set aside its obligations set forth in the joint stipulation.
Intervenor believes that Licensee does not have good cause to seek a
continuance of the deadlines imposed in the joint stipulation because it places Licensee in an unfair bargaining
)
advantage.
The discovery cut-off date was arrived at by the j
parties based on the date the parties would be filing responses to
(
9407080143 940629-O' PDR ADOCK 05000424 0
PDR O
l
Page 2 June 29, 1994 Letter from M.
Kohn Intervenor's pending request for admissions. Licensee now seeks to obtain the benefit of the bargain without regard to the consideration agreed upon by the parties.
Intervenor does not believe that Licensee has good cause to seek an abridgment of the stipulated agreement.
Intervenor is prepared to file his admissions on time (the stipulation calls for the joint filing of admissions by the parties; because Licensee has advised Intervenor's counsel that they do not plan to comply with this stipulation requirement, Intervenor will file his response to Licensee's request for admissions under seal with the Board and will refrain from serving this document on any party until this matter is resolved.
Intervenor wishes to note that the response to admissions is an integral part of Intervenor's discovery and his ability to conduct depositions was based on Licensee's filing its Admissions as contemplated under the joint stipulation.
Intervenor awaits receipt of Licensee's formal motion.
Respectfully submitted, Michael D.
Kohn Attorney for Intervenor cc:
Licensing Service List
\\301\\ASLB1.let
..,