ML20080G737

Forwards Memorandum on Committee to Bridge the Gap Witness Panel Composition.If Party Intends to Rebut New Matl in Gap Direct Case,Rebuttal Outlines Should Be Filed by 830926

ML20080G737
Person / Time
Site:	05000142
Issue date:	09/14/1983
From:	Hirsch D COMMITTEE TO BRIDGE THE GAP
To:	Bright G, Frye J, Luebke E Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML20080G740	List: ML20080G737 ML20080G751
References
NUDOCS 8309200339
Download: ML20080G737 (1)

Text

. .

COMMITTEE TO BRIDGE THE GAP 1637 BUTLER AVENUE =203 LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90025 00LMETED 1213) 478 0829 USNRC Septemrg,g19Mt49 John H. Frye, III, Chairman Dr. Glenn C. Bright Administrative Judge Administrative Jud@FFICE OF SECRETAs '

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and IE56fMff MICI U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 6: m. ' sion Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Emmeth A Luebke Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 In the Fatter of The Regents of the University of California (UCLA Research Reactor)

Docket No. 50-142 (Proposed Reneual of Facility License)

Dear Adninistrative Jt 3ges In your Memorandum and Order of September 2,1983, you asked CBG to file an outline of our proposed rebuttal testinony by September 26.

During the conference call mer dalized in that Kemorandum and Order, there was some discussion whether other partes 'ight be contemplating some rebuttal. It was made clear that any such rebuttal, in keeping with your Crder of April 7 (p. 3), would be limited to new raterial not included in C3G's declarations submitted in January, as those declarations amounted to C3G prefiling six months early its direct case and any rebuttal to that material was to have been included in the direct testimony already filed.

While we understand that no party can anticipate what new matters might occur in the upcoming cross-examination and retuttal, CBC is concerned that parties ray attempt to go beyond the restrictions the Board has set on the scope of rebuttal with regards C3G's direct case. As CBC's direct testimony is almost verlatin taken from the declarations which the parties have had since January and were supposed to have put forth any response in their June pre-filed testimony, and as the October schedule is quite tight, C3G requests that, should a party feel that there is new raterial in C3G's direct case which it intends to present rebuttal regarding, that the parties also file pebuttal outlines by September 26, identifying the particular paragraphs of the testimony it asserts are new and that it wishes to rebut.

Re ectful su itted,

/,

w aniel Hirs .

s 0309200339 830914 PDR O ADOCK 05000142 PDR

.- _