ML20095G500
| ML20095G500 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 08/22/1984 |
| From: | Horin W BISHOP, COOK, PURCELL & REYNOLDS, TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| To: | Ellis J Citizens Association for Sound Energy |
| References | |
| OL, NUDOCS 8408280083 | |
| Download: ML20095G500 (2) | |
Text
m A %S.
3 LAW OFFICES OF '
BISHOP, Ll3ERMAN. COOK, PURCELL & REYNOLDS i200 S EVENTEENTH STR E ET, N. W.
iN NEW YORM WASHINGTON, D. C. 20036 asswop, LimERMAN & COOM (aO2) e57-s800 as aROAnway NEW YORM NEW YORM i0004 isl a.e-seOO TELEX.40s74 iNitaw vi
'84 E 24 A9 5f'vE,E ame>
August 22, 19842 _
.z Mrs. Juanita Ellis Prpsident, CASE 14'26 South Polk Street Dallas, Texas 75224 Subj:
Texas Utilities Electric Company (Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2);
Docket Nos. 50-445*and 50-44604-
Dear Mrs. Ellis:
Enclosed is material requested by CASE in the August 6, 1984, conference call between Applicants and CASE regarding Applicants' mctions for summary disposition.
This material was: identified as item 3 in my letter to you of August 20, 1984.
'3.
Drawing and calculations for the_. support with the largest difference in loads between analyses with and without consideration of the effects of rotational constraint..This support is FW-1-18-703-C52R.
CASE should_ note that the loads used to check the baseplate are those which result from the analysis that assumed 18 supports on this stress problem were not present (see page 2 of 2 of calculation).
(Axial restraints)
I am also enclosing another copy of the Gibbs & Hill Specification SS-30 referenced in item 5 of my August 20 letter.
This dccument may have been inadvertently left out of the original package.
With this material my records reflect no outstanding requests from the August 6, 1984, conference call.
Please notify me promptly if you believe o,therwise.
.With-respect to other discovery requests discussed in your August 13, 1984, letter to me, I have been. informed that all. references from the motion for summary disposition con-cerning safety factors had been picked up from Applicants' Dallas offices by August 6, 1984.
Your letter reflected that there were still some items not yet provided as of August 13,
'1984.
Accordingly, consistent with the Board's directive in the conference call today, your response to this motion should be due August 29,-1984.
8408280083 840822 PDR ADOCK 05000445-
~p@[
Q PDR
3 e In addition, you may consider this letter written con-firmation of the four items (three regarding A500 steel and one concerning section properties) you listed as having been orally ccmmunicated to CASE.
Finally, the letter from Applicants to the Staff (Schmidt to Youngblood) referenced in item 10 of your letter relating to the AWS/ASME motion was dated July 16, 1984.
You should have received a copy of the letter.
1 If not, h.aase contact me and I will send you a copy.
I believe that with
'33 production of material regarding the A500 steel motion, which was discussed during the conference call this morning, Applicants will have provided all information we hat agreed to provide.
Accordingly, the 20-day time period for providing responses to Applicants motions (except A500 steel) should commence with your receipt of this letter.
Please let me know promptly if your records de not reflect this.
Sincerely, O
I
'Jn J W William A. Horin Ccunsel for' Applicants Enclosure Overnight Delivery cc:
w/ enc 1. Stuart Treby w/o encl. Remainder of Service List 9
a
-