ML20137D637
| ML20137D637 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 11/21/1985 |
| From: | Silberg J CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO., SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE |
| To: | NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP) |
| References | |
| CON-#485-319 NUDOCS 8511270113 | |
| Download: ML20137D637 (5) | |
Text
r 4
.l, "e
C og hr November 21, 1985 g
y 5 hB'25 p3;;7 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION k((J/0: ec
~ w,. 3 - -,a Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board S
/
In the Matter of
)
)
THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC
)
Docket Nos. 50-440 ILLUMINATING' COMPANY, ET AL.
)
50-441
)
(Perry Nuclear Power Plant,
)
g gg.g6 96 Units 1-and 2)
)
,/
For the Appeal Board APPLICANTS' MOTION TO INCREASE PAGEy LIMIT FOR APPEAL BRIEF O_.
d
' ~ '
secretarytothe AppealBoard Applicants request that the Appeal Board incrMse tNe page limit for its responsive brief from 70 pages to 120 pages.
Section 2.762(e) of the Commission's Rules of Practice provides that a party's brief on an appeal from an initial decision may not exceed 70 pages (exclusive of the table of contents, table of citations and addenda).
The rule permits a party to request an increase in the page limit for good cause.
The rule appears to establish the 70 page limit regardless of the number of different briefs to which a response must be made.
In the instant case, Applicants must respond to two separate appeals, each involving different sets of contentions.
The brief filed by Ohio Citizens for Responsible Energy totaled 57 pages (in its smaller type); Sunflower Alliance's brief is 27 pages long.
Had there been separate appeals of 8511270113 851121 PDR ADOCK 05000440 0
C PDR
separate initial decisions, Applicants would have been entitled to file a 70 page brief on each appeal.
While Applicants may not need 140 pages to adequately brief the issues raised in the two appeals, Applicants estimate that substantially more than 70 pages will be required to deal with the numerous subissues R
raised in the two appellant briefs.
For example, Sunflower Alliance's brief separately addresses 20 particularized contentions dismissed by the licensing board and eight others which were the subject of evidentiary hearings.
Applicants therefore respectfully request that a page limit of 120 panes be established.
Applicants will, of course, make every effort to keep the number of pages in their brief as low as reasonably achievable.
Respectfully submitted, SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE qf%
V
(
Ja
- Silberg, P.
C.
Counsel for Applicants 1800 M Street, N.
W.
Washington, D.
C.
20036 (202) 822-1063 Dated:
November 21, 1985 - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _
n:.
,/
November 21, 1985 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board In the Matter of
)
)
THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC
)
Docket Nos. 50-440 ILLUMINATING COMPANY, ET AL.
)
50-441
)
(Perry Nuclear Power Plant,
)
Units 1 and 2)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that copies of the foregoing APPLICANTS' MOTION TO INCREASE PAGE LIMIT FOR APPEAL BRIEF were served by deposit in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, this 21st day of November 1985, to all those on the attached Service List.
O J%
Jay' S%1 berg
}
DATED:
November 21, 1985 J
.~
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC
)
Docket Nos. 50-440 ILLUMINATING COMPANY, _ET _AL.
)
50-441 (Perry Nuclear Power Plant,
)
Units 1 and 2)
)
SERVICE LIST James P.-Gleason, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing 513 Gilmoure Drive Appeal Board Panel Silver Spring, Maryland 20901-U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Jerry R. Kline Docketing and Service Section
-Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Office of the Secretary U.S.-Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washitgton, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Glenn O. Bright Colleen Woodhead, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Office of the Executive Legal U.S. Nuclear. Regulatory Commission Director y
Washington, D.C.
20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 i
i Alan S. Rosenthal, Chairman 2
Atomic Safety and Licensing
_ Terry Lodge, Esquire Appeal Board Suite 105 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 618 N. Michigan' Street
]
. ashington, D.C.
20555 Toledo, Ohio 43624 W
Dr. W. Reed Johnson Donald T.
Ezzone, Esquire
. Atomic Safety and Licensing Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Appeal Board Lake County Administration Center U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 105 Center Street Washington, D.C.
20555 Painesville, Ohio 44077 Mr. Howard A. Wilber Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic _ Safety and Licensing Board Panel Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissior U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Washington,'D.C.
20555
. John G. Cardinal, Esquire Ms. Sue Hiatt Prosecuting Attorney-8275 Munson Avenue Ashtabula County Courthouse Mentor, Ohio 44060 Jefferson, Ohio 44047
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING - APPEAL BOARD b?V 2$
'In the Matter of
)
)
OCC.':-
THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING
)
Docket Nos. 50 -N,'40;, OL '.'
)50-44I DL
)
(Perry ~ Nuclear Power Plant, Units
)
1 and 2)
)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that, on this 25th day of November, 1985, I mailed a copy (first page only) of the Appeal Board's denial by stamp endorsement of " Applicant's Motion to Increase Page Limit for Appeal Brief," dated November 21, 1985, to each of the following:
Terry Jonathan Lodge Colleen P. Woodhead, Esq.
618 N. Michigan St.,
Office of the Executive Suite 105 Legal Director Toledo, Ohio 43624 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Jay Silberg, Esq.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Shaw, Pittman, Potts &
Trowbridge Docketing and Service Branch 1800 M Street, N.W.
U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Washington, D.C.
20036 Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Susan L. Hiatt 8275 Munson Road Mentor, Ohio 44060 l
l
-z-Sec $tary to the Appeal BoNrd g>S@
k...
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _