ML20072A206
| ML20072A206 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 12/29/1982 |
| From: | Levin J, Sohinki S CONSOLIDATED EDISON CO. OF NEW YORK, INC., MORGAN ASSOCIATES, POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK |
| To: | Gleason J, Paris O, Shon F Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-SP, NUDOCS 8301030230 | |
| Download: ML20072A206 (3) | |
Text
w 00thMjD POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK' 10 COLUMBUS CIRCLE, NEW YORK, N.Y.
10019 CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW'M R h k.
4 IRVING PLACd, NEW YORK, N.Y.
10003
. : E h 6:. W.
ff;3.iiins & SEBV!C:t BRANCH December 29, 1982 The Honorable James P.
Gleason Administrative Law Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 513 Gilmoure Drive Silver Spring, Maryland 20901 The Honorable Frederick J.
Shon The Honorable Oscar H. Paris Administrative Law Judges Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Re:
In re Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. &
Power Au thority of the State of New York (Indian Point, Units 2 and 3), Nos. 50-247 SP, -286 SP l
Dear Judges Gleason,
Shon, and Paris:
l At approximately 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, December 28, 1982, l
Jeffrey M.
Blum contacted Stephen M. Schinki and Joseph J.
- Levin, l
Jr., counsel for Con Edison and the Power Authority, respec-tively, and proposed that Steven C. Sholly and Gordon R.
Thompson l
be made available for deposition at 9:00 a.m.
the following morning at the opfices of Con Edison in New York City.
Despite the short notice and despite the necessity that Mr. Levin break personal commitments made subsequent to the conference call of December 28, licensees agreed to be present to continue the 1.
The problem of securing a court reporter at that late hour for the following morning was called to Mr. Blum's attention.
l 8301030230 821229 9
O PDR ADOCK 05000247
=
Q PDR
Hon. James P. Gleason Hon. Frederick J.
Shon Hon. Oscar H. Paris December 29, 1982 Page 2 deposition of Mr. Sholly and Dr. Thompson.
Because Mr. Levin would be traveling from Washington to New York, the licensees requested that the deposition begin at 9:30 a.m.
Mr. Blum rejected this request and insisted that the deposition begin at 9:00 a.m.
Mr. Levin agreed to make every effort to be present at 9:00 a.m.
Only then did it become clear to licensees' counsel that Mr.
Blum's offer was contingent upon the licensees committing to terminate the deposition at exactly 12:30 p.m., whether or not the deposition had been concluded.
Mr. Blum stated that the exact 3-1/2 hour time limit and exact 12:30 p.m. deadline were essential to any agreement and that without a commitment from the licensees to that effect, Dr. Thompson would not agree to a continuation of the deposition.
Both Mr. Sohinki and Mr. Levin made personal and professional commitments to Mr. Blum that each
~
would make every effort to complete the deposition in advance of the time that Dr. Thompson had insisted upon as a " deadline" and further gave their joint opinion that there was little chance this could not be accomplished.
However, the licensees stated to Mr. Blum that they could not commit in advance to a deadline which might well leave some important questions unasked and unansweriJ.
The licensees reminded Mr. Blum that if he believed at any point in the deposition that his witness was being
" harassed" or that irrelevant questions were being directed to the witness he would certainly be free to terminate the deposition.
Despite the licensees' assurances, Mr. Blum stated that he did not believe Dr. Thompson would accept the proposal.
The licensees asked Mr. Blum if they should make arrange-ments for a court reporter to be present just in case Dr.
Thompson agreed to appear.
Mr. Blum responded negatively and l
l stated that if Dr. Thompson changed his mind Mr. Blum would telephone Mr. Schinki by 6:10 p.m.
Mr. Sohinki did not hear further from Mr. Blum.
Licensees' counsel have pursued this matter in good faith and with as much accommodation as was reasonably possible while still diligently representing the interests of their clients.
l UCS/NYPIRG have created a situation guaranteed from the outset to result in the noncontinuance of the Sholly/ Thompson deposition.
Efforts by the licensees to contact Mr. Blum as of this writing, at both home and office, have been unsuccessful.
I Therefore, despite the issuance this morning of the Board's order e+
Ho6. Jame s P. Gleason Hon. Frederick J.
Shon Hon. Oscar H. Paris December 29, 1982 Page 3 it appears certain that licensees will not have a reasonable opportunity to continue the deposition of Dr. Thompson and Mr.
Sholly.
Sincerely, E
~
q ogcIp J.
ev n Ste en M.
Schinki togc'an Associat
, Chartered Att rney for p
Attorney for the Power Authority Consolidated Edison Company of the State of New York of New York, Inc.
cc:
Official Service List (By hand delivery to Judges Gleason, Shon, and Paris, Ruthanne Miller, Esq.,
NRC staf f, UCS/NYPIRG counsel in Washington, D.C.
and New York, and Steven C. Sholly)
JJ L,J r. /pa t t
e e
es 4