ML20106D421

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Confirms Westinghouse & ITT-Grinnell Acceptance of Proposed Mods to Protective Agreements in .Proprietary Matls Available.Case Should Not Be Given Addl Time to Respond to Applicant Motion.Related Correspondence
ML20106D421
Person / Time
Site: Comanche Peak  Luminant icon.png
Issue date: 10/22/1984
From: Horin W
BISHOP, COOK, PURCELL & REYNOLDS, TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC)
To: Ellis J
Citizens Association for Sound Energy
References
CON-#484-705 OL, NUDOCS 8410250139
Download: ML20106D421 (2)


Text

--

EWED ~ .u.u q--

y OCT.XEIED LAW OFFICES OF USMC BISHOP, LIBERMAN, COOK, PURCELL & REYNOLDS s2 OO SEVE NTE ENTH STR E ET, N.W. IN NEW YORK WASHINGTON D.C.2OO36 BIS HOP, LIB ERM A N & COOK (202> es7-se "55'*"" "'^"*"S UFFICE OF SEUt iAi 00CKEi!NG & SEEV i " ' * ' " ' " ' * ' ""' '*

TELEX 440574 INTLAW UI g g,N(W (212i 704-o to o TELEX 222767 W RITER'S DIRECT DI AL 12 0 2)

October 22, 1984 Mrs. Juanita Ellis President, CASE 1426 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 50-446 O L_-

Dear Juanita This is to confirm Westinghouse and ITT-Grinnell's accep-tance of your proposed modifications to the protective agreements set forth in your October 16, 1984, letter. As we discussed on October 18, 1984, the proprietary materials are available to be picked up at Texas Utilities' Dallas office. You are to bring the. signed original agreements with you to the offices. When formally executed by Westinghouse and ITT-Grinnell, a copy of the fully executed agreements will be forwarded to you.

I should add that your interpretation in your October.16 letter of our conversation on October 4 regarding these agree-ments is not at all accurate. As I indicated in my October 4 letter, if you had executed the agreements by October 9, as you stated you could, the documents would have been immediately transmitted. They would, therefore, have been available to you the following day (October 10) . Further, your claim that you could not have agreed to this because you had not yet even seen the agreements is untrue. You did have the agreements at the time of our October 4 discussion. I had transmitted them to you by overnight delivery on September 29, 1984. Finally, you will recall that our point of disagreement was whether CASE should have additional time to respond to our motion if there was any delay in execution'of the protective agreements. I continue to 8410250139 e41022 PDR ADOCK 05000 G

Ds'as

. 3 -

believe CASE'should not be given additional time and, therefore, ido-not consider it proper for CASE to submit any portion of its answer to Applicants' motion beyond October 30, 1984.

Sinc rely, wLa.

William A. IIorin Counsel for-Applichnts cc: Service List - First Class Mail R '. . A. Wiesemann (Westinghouse)

D. D. McKenney (ITT-Grinnell) 8 1

] '.

.~- .,-,,,..,-.,,,,n - - , , , , . . . . - - , , . , - - - . , - , , , , - . - , , , - , . ~~..,-,-,,_,-.-,,-.,.,y,_ . , , . , . , - , . , - - ~ ~ , - - - - .