ML20116M459

TU Electric Opposition to Motion for Rehearing by RM Dow.* RM Dow 921110 Motion for Rehearing Should Be Denied.W/ Certificate of Svc

ML20116M459
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	11/19/1992
From:	Schmutz T NEWMAN & HOLTZINGER, TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC)
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
CON-#492-13368 CPA, NUDOCS 9211200280
Download: ML20116M459 (7)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ -

/3B & 2' i i

1 I

DDle[1(.D i

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA lbHHC NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION  :

ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD '92 IN l9 $ll :27 Before Administrative Judges: cri+ ,

g g, , j ud- <

, i!.

,'J ar!

Morton B. Margulies, Chairman ]

Dr. James H. Carpenter Dr. Peter S. Lam ,

In the Matter of  : Docket No. 50-446-CPA Texas Utilities Electric  : ASLB No. 92-668-01-CPA Company  :

(Construction Permit

Amendment) 8 (Comanche Peak Steam Electric  :

Station, Or'* 2)  : November 19, 1992 TU ELECTRIC'S OPPOSITION TO NOTION _FOR REHEARING BY R. MICKY DCM Introduction On November 10, 1992, R. Micky Dow filed a Motion For Rehearing (" Motion"), requesting that this Board reconsider its October 19, 1992, Memorandum and Order denying a Motion For Extension Of Time To File Brief filed by Sandra Long Dow dba Disposable Workers of Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station and M. Micky Dow ("the Dows") on October 5, 1992, 1/ Because NRC

,l/ Memorandum and Order (Ruling on Dow Motion For Extension Of Time and Setting A Further Schedule) (October 19, 1992),

(hereinafter " Order").

" Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief by Sandra Long Dow dba Disposable Workers of Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station and R. Micky Dow" ' October S, 1992), (hereinafter

" Mot. for Exten-ion of Time").

9211200280 921119 g>3 PDR ADOCK 05000446 1; }

0 PDR a .__ ,

a .

2-regulations do not provide f or rehearing of ASLB procedural orders, and Mr. Dow fails to provide any new information which would alter this Board's finding that good cause for the extension did not exiat, To..as Utilities Electric Company hereby requests that this Board dts Mr. Dow's Motion for Rehearing.

Background

On July 28, 1992, the Dows filed a motion to intervene end r$ quest for a hearing claiming that the Comanche Peak' Steam Electric Station construction permit extension sought by TU Electric should not be granted. Because the Dows' motion was patently defective, this Boar  ; sued an order according the Dows the opportunity tu cure the motion's defects by filing an amendment on or before October 5, 1992 2/

On October 5, 1992, the Dows filed a motion requesting-that this Board grant them an extension of time to file-the required amendment on the oasis that "R. Micky Dow was, in some manner precluded from timely filing through circumstances of which he had no control." (Mot, for Extension of Time'at 2.) As nupport, the Dows alleged that Mr. Dow was arrested and jailed in Colorado on September 3, 1992 and that various materials in his posse,sion which were needed to prepare the amendment, were 2,/ See Memorandum and Order (Setting-pleading Schedule)

(September 11, 1992).

- 5

• seized, illegally, ... and removed to the State of Kansas-...

and secreted there .... (Mot, for Extensior. -: Time at 2.) 1/

On October 19, 1992, this Board issued a Memorandum and Order denying the Dows' Motion for Extension of Time. In its Order, this Board found that the information contained in the Motion lacked credibility, was not supported by probative evidence, and failed to establish good cause for granting the extension. The Board, therefore, concluded the Dows failed to meet their burden pursuant to 10 C.F.R. S 2.711(a). (Crder ..

at 4.)

Discussion As a threshold matter,'NRC regulations do not provide f or rehearing of Licensing Board procedural orders, and hence,Jan this basis alone, Mr. Dow's Motion for Rehearing should be denied. Mr. Dow's Motion for Rehearing should also be denied:

because it provides no new inf ormatior which =would etter this Board's prior ruling that good cause-for granting an extension had not been demonstrated. Information provided in.nn effort to demonstrate good'cause pursuant to 10 C.F.R. S 2.711(a) must-overcome the NRC's long-standing policy of favoring the-

.1/ _The Dows further' alleged that those responsible for depriving Mr. Dow of his materials'were "the utility and-agencies of the United Stateu. Government." Id,

7 1

l observance of established time limits. A/ Here, Mr. Dow's most {:

recent motion merely repeats and ..xpands upon information  ;

contained in the Dows' prior Motion for Extension of Time -- {

information which this Board previously held insufficient to f

establish good cause. In its Order denying the Dows' Motion for i

- Extension .)f Time, this Bohrd concl'Med that allegations addressing Mr. Dow's arrest and incarceration, " lack [ed).

i credibility ... [were] not supported by probative evidence, . . .  ;

&nd [did] not establish good cause." (Order at 5.)

Notwithstanding the Board's statements, Mr. Dow's Motion for Rehearing merely provides additional unsubstantiated details related to precisely the same events discussed in the initial-motion. 1/ Becausa th3se events failed to demonstrate good 1 1/ In Iono Island Lichtino Co. (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,-

Unit 1) ALAB-743, 18 NRC 387, 396 n.36 (1983), the Appeal .

Board stated:

[T]hs exclusion from a proceeding _of persons or organizations who have slept on their rights does not offend any public policy favoring broad citizen involvement in nuclear licensing adjudications. [Such a policy)_..._must._be viewed in conjunction with the-equally important policy.

favoring the observance of established _ time limics.

5/ Mr. Dow's present_ motion continues his pattern of_ making

. patently, absurd and, for ebvious reasons,1 unsubstantiated

- assertions. Thua, this Board is. asked to believe that during his- thirty days in prison; law : enforcement of ficials-in Colorado 1 engaged;in_a bizarre conspiracy to deny Mr.,Dow. ,

communication with anyone, including his wife', Perhaps the .

- best example:of the-kind of~ incredible assertions for'which Mt. Dow is by now well-known, is.the fcllowing:

(continued...) .

_i-t

> ,w.,--, w ,-,-yu- -,Nn+i,-.y-- ,,m3- .,w- my- , -,-h .,w ..w, .-e, p - ,I-.--.- e w- r,

c causo for the Dows' initial Motion for Extension of Time, further unsubstantiated explanations of these same events can have r effect upon this Board's prior holding, and therefore, do not support Mr. Dow's Motion for Rehearing. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, Mr. Dow's Motion for Reheari.ig should be denied.

Respectfull, submitted, g D' Robert A. Wooldridge, Esq. George L. Edgar gj Worsham, Forsythe, Sampels Thomas.A. Schmut

& Wooldridge Steven P. Frant:

2001 Bryan Tower Paul J. Zaffuts Suite 3200 Newman & Holtzinger, P.C.

Dallas, TX 75201 Suite 1000 (214) 979-3000 1615 L Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 955-6600 Attorneys for TU Electric November 19, 1992 fj ( . . . continued)

I have only tot 'ed the high-r os of this matter.

It goes much de ser, and is fa .aore complicated, even to includt my being a witness to using the former Secrete of state as a tool for revenge.

't at i on , attach., "Sta.ement of Richard E. Dow, Jr. aka

. Micky Dow", p. 9, (October 19, 1992).

g7 q LvLni ith UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -MhnC-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

-BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD ' 92 NDV 19 A11:27 In the Matter of *

)

)

t i I; Eh A NM j h

)

TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC ) Docket No. 50-446-CPA COMPANY ) ASLBP No. 92-668-01-CPA

)

(Comanche Peak Steam Electric ) (Construction Perm.it Station, Unit 2) ) Amendment)

)

CEh"~FICATE OF SERVICP I hereby certify that copies of TU ELECTRIC'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR REHEARING BY R. MICKY DOW were served upon the following persons by deposit in the United States Mail-(except as indicated below), postage prepaid and properly addressed, on the date shown below:

U.S. Muclear Regulatory Commission Atcmic Safety and Licensing Board Adjudicatory File 1"ihington, D.C. 20555 (rwo Copies)

Office of the Secretary

• U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-Attention: Chief, Docketing i and Service'Section (Original Plus Two Copies)

Administrative Judge

• Morton B. Margulies, Chairman

~ Atomic' Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Perulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555; Administrative Judge

• James H; Carpenter . i Atomic-Safety and Licensing Board i U.S. Nuclear' Regulatory Commission i Washington, D.C. 20555  ;

• Served by Hand

e

. . u.,

(

f

.2-Administrative Judge

• Peter-S. Lam Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.C.-Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 ,'

7anice E. Moore '

Office of General Counsel-U.S. Nuclear Regulatory' Commission Washingtor., D.C . 20555 Marian L. Zobler Office of the Genera,' Counsel U.S. Nuclear-Regulatory Commission Washington,- D.C. 20555 Michael H. Finkelstein Office of the General' Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 3

Sandra Long Dow R. Micky Dow 322 Mall Blvd., #147-Monroeville, PA 15147 Michael D. Kohn Stephen M. Kohn Kohn, Kohn and Cc'.apinto, P.C. ,

517 Florida Ave., N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20001-Dated this 19th day of November, 1992.

ff',

$4 'j a PaulJ 4 ffd'ts

-&g"lHoltzinger, P.C.

Newma <

Suite 1000-1615 LLStreet, N.W.

Washington, D.C. ;20036'

'(202) 955'6600

..