ML20080R815

Response to Eddleman 840208 Request for Expedited Ruling on Timeliness of Applicants 840207 Motion for Summary Disposition of Eddleman 83/84B.Nature of Eddleman Request Objected To.W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence

ML20080R815
Person / Time
Site:	Harris
Issue date:	02/22/1984
From:	Carrow H CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8402280420
Download: ML20080R815 (5)

Text

'

g7f K ,,

RELATED CO GESPONDENCE I b' Februaffjgt984 l: . >

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA $

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION '84 g 24 A;;;;5 h

BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BEERD C

~ ~ ~; ilHG BRANC.,fk.h".

'~

-In the Matter of )

' ~

)

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ).

AND NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN ) ~',

MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY -/) - -

) Docket Nos. 50-400 OL (Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, -' "~

) 52:401 OL Units 1 & 2) ) "j

APPLICANTS' RESPONSE TO'.W LLS EDDLEMAN'S EQUEST FOR EXPEDITED

. RULING ON TIMELINC&S OF APPLICANTS' 2-7-84 " MOTION FOR

SUMMARY

DISPOSITION OF EDDLEMAN 83/84B" Applicants filed their Motien for Summary Disposition of Eddleman Contention 83/84B on February 7,' 1984. The following day, Mr. Eddleman served his " Request for Expedited Ruling on 4.

Timeliness" of that Motion. Mr. Eddleman has until Ma ch 5 to file his response to Applicants'

' Motion.

Mr. Eddlehan begins his pleadi g by complaining that Applicants did not consult with him prior'to filing their summary disposition motion. However, there is no provision in the J , / ,.

y' Commission regulations (s6e 10 C.F.R. S 2.149) regarding Motions for Summary Disposition, nor

!i; i 3. '

4 regarding motions in general, which requires such consultation prior to filing a motion.

O Applicants object to the implication of Mr.' Eddleman's pleading tha' Applicants are

,r' ,

~

_ required to_ consult with. Mr. Eddleman prior to filing any motion. Mr. Eddleman has never

, s' N consulted with Applicants prior to making any of his numerous motions filed in this action and j q J' -

__fipplicants find if

somewhat remarkable that h would place such an unfair burden on the f ' Applicants.- # '

_,M -

7y '

p"m( The substance of Mr. Eddleman's filing is/his request that a separate and expedited ruling on the timeliness of Applicants motion be made by.the Board. # Applicants have demonstrated ya -

,. ~

the -timeliress of their motionjn arguments stated therein.# As Applicants have shown, this

-i-WW ** "

420

• 840222*

O

• • g' e

3 c,D3

m tion signific;,ntly precedts the environmental proceedings currently sat for June 5 in this cetion. In a conference call of February 16, 1984, regarding Security Plan contentions, the Board stated that it was unsure that even the June 5 date would stand. Thus, Applicants' motion j ..

is substantially in advance of any hearing and, as is the purpose of Motions for Summary Disposition, will make for an expeditious and efficient resolution of the issue.

Applicants object to the nature of Mr. Eddleman's request to the Board. All parties in this L

proceeding are required by the Commission rules to respond (if a response is intended) to various filings by opposing parties within a limited amount of time. Mr. Eddleman's request would put a halt to the orderly process of these proceedings and, in effect, would ask the Board to rule on cbjections of Mr. Eddleman prior to his having to make the effort required to prepare a response. It is not unrealistic to expect that if adjudication of the issue were allowed to proceed in this manner and if the first objection did not succeed, then a second would be tried, and a third, and so on, thus postponing indefinitely Mr. Eddleman's responsibility to prepare a response and completely disrupting the orderly and efficient nature of the entire adjudicatory process. Such a process would effectively shift a great deal of Mr. Eddleman's burden and would, in fact, be an imposition upon the Licensing Board in having to rule seriatim on Mr.

Eddleman's objections.

The proper recourse for Mr. Eddleman is to include all his objections to Applicants' motion within his reponse thereto. The Board can then review the entire documentation related to the motion and can rule on all issues raised in an expeditious manner, thereby avoiding a piecem'eal ruling on each separate point as Mr. Eddleman would request.

Therefore, Applicants respectfully request that the Board fully consider the Applicants' Motion for Sumthey Disposition of 83/84B and require the response of Mr. Eddleman as provided for in the rules no later than March 5,1984.

This the&Ddcy of February,1984.

191 Ccw Hill Carrow Attorney Carolina Power & Light Company Post Office Box 1551 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 (919) 836-6839

Attorneys for Applicants:

Thomas A. Baxter John H. O'Neili, Jr.

Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 822-1000 Richard E. Jones Samantha Francis Flynn Carolina Power & Light Company

- Post Office Box 1551 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 (919) 836-6517 4

8 e

'l

- , , , ------n-- + e- -.,-- ,,--e,--r ,- -

q

I:

d UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ogg(([EL u

~

BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 24 All:15 In the Matter of )

0Frm- _ 3

) 00C$l70fg}CRm;.,

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ) Shaic EAVK r.

AND NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN MUNICIPAL )

POWER AGENCY )

) Docket Nos. 50-400 OL (Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, ) 50-401 OL Units 1 & 2) )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " Applicants' Response to Wells Eddleman's Request for Expedited Ruling on Timeliness of Applicants' 2-7-84 ' Motion for Summary Disposition of Eddleman 83/84B'" were served this 22nd day of February,1984 by d;, posit in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid, to the parties on the attached Service List.

Hill Carrow Attorney Carolina Power & Light Company '-

Post Office Box 1551 Raleigh, North Caroline 27602 (919) 836-6839 Dated: February 22,1984

SERVICE LIST James L. Kelley, Esquire John D. Runkle, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Conservation Council of North Carolina U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 307 Granville Road Weshington, D. C. 20555 Chapel Hill, North Carollra 27514 Mr. Glenn O. Bright M. Travis Payne, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Edelstein and Payne

' U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Post Office Box 12643 Washington, D. C. 20555 Raleigh, North Carolina 27605 Dr. James H. Carpenter Dr. Richard D. Wilson Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 729 Hunter Street U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Apex, North Carolina 27502 Washington, D. C. 20555 Mr. Wells Eddleman Charles A. Barth, Esquire 718-A Iredell Street Mymn Karman, Esquire Durham, North Carolina 27705 Office of Executive Legal Director U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Thomas A. Baxter, Esquire Wcshington, D. C. 20555 John H. O'Neill, Jr., Esquire Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge Docketing and Service Section 1800 M Street, N.W.

Office of the Escretary Washington, D. C. 20036 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Wcshington, D. C. 20555 Dr. Phyllis Lotchin 108 Bridle Run

-Mr. Daniel F. Read, President Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514 Chapel Hill Anti-Nuclear -

Gmup Effort Bradley W. Jones, Esquire 5707 Waycross Street U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Raleigh, North Carolina 27606 Region II 101 Marietta Street Atlanta, Georgia 30303 i Dr. Linda Little Gr.vernor's Waste Management Board 513 Albemarle Building Robert P. Gruber 325 Salisbury Street Executive Director Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 Public Staff North Carolina Utilities Commission Ruthanne G. Miller, Esquire Post Office Box 991 Atomic Safety and Licensing Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Board Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

' Washington, D. C. 20555

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ .