ML20206H046
| ML20206H046 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 04/13/1987 |
| From: | Selleck K ROPES & GRAY, TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#287-3077 CPA, NUDOCS 8704150236 | |
| Download: ML20206H046 (5) | |
Text
-.
3077
\\.
Filed:
Apri106(,KEIE97 USNHC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA p art 13 P4 20
~
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE U '.E C. ' 2 " #
00CKEinh' M b M.
before the BRI. NCH, ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
)
In the Matter of
)
)
TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC
)
Docket No. 50-445-CPA COMPANY, et al.
)
)
(Comanche Peak Steam
)
Electric Station, Unit 1)
)
)
)
PERMITTEES' RESPONSE TO JOINT INTERVENORS' REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY The " Joint Intervenors"1 have filed a request, presumably responses to 10 CFR S 2.730(c), seeking leave to file a reply to the Permittees' Opposition to the Joint Intervenors' motion to compel production of documents sought by Meddie Gregory discovery, Sets 5 and 6.
l 1
In a recent phone conversation with the undersigned counsel, Meddie Gregory's attorney, Anthony Z. Roisman, Esquire, asserted that the Intervenors in this docket had not yet been consolidated -- a proposition with which Permittees do not disagree.
B704150236 B70413 i
PDR ADOCK 05000445 D
$0$
i While wa have coma difficulty believing that any further debate regarding the essentially simple propositions raised by the Joint Intervenors' Motion to Compel will be fruitful, we do not normally seek to preclude the filing of arguments alleged to be informative of the proper disposition of' issues before the ASLB.
The policies embodied in the Rules of Practice which prohibit the continual exchanging of memoranda seem to us primarily designed to promote efficiency and expediency, and may benefit the Commission and its Licensing Boards as much or more than they do the parties.
For that reason, we are hesitant to oppose the Intervenors' request.
(We presume, of course, that if such a reply is permitted and raises new arguments or matters, Permittees would be afforded similar leave in order to insure that the balance of fairness struck by the Rules is not shifted.)
We must note our extraordinary surprise at one assertion advanced in the Joint Intervenors' filing, however.
It is the statement that Permittees' response to the Motion to Compel was
" essentially a ' surprise' pleading filed at a strategic time when the opportunity to reply was not guaranteed."
't Joint Intervenors' Request to File a Reply at 1.
What this was intended to communicate is unclear.
The fact is that the Rules of Practice give Permittees an absolute right to file a response to a motion to compel.
10 CFR 5 2.730(h)
. 1 7-
,- i-erm, - - -
m =
ew w
+
imm-v
Tha Rules further spacify tho timo in which such a response g
should be served.
10 CFR $ 2.730(c)
Permittees filed their response exactly according to these rules.
It is thus impossible to perceive how Joint Intervenors can claim to have been " surprised" by that filing.
It is moreover' difficult to understand how such timely filing could be
" strategic [ ally]" manipulated, nor how strict adherence to the Rules of Practice prohibiting further filings should be construed as something extraordinary or unfair.
The Intervenors' arguments are thus obviously misplaced.
TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY For the Owners of CPSES g
Thomds G.
D i g n'a n, Jr.
R.
K.
Gad III William S.
Eggeling Kathryn A.
Selleck Ropes & Gray 225 Franklin Street Boston, MA 02110 (617) 423-6100 Attorneys for Texas Utilities Electric Company
t DOC KE T EI' CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE UsNRt I, Kathryn A. Selleck, one of the attorneys for'ELxAE 13 P4 :20 Utilities Electric Company, hereby certify that on April 6, 1987, I made service of the within document by plac fqythe.
same in the hands of Federal Express, charges prepa gCMETiki dNidf'
~
(except that, where ndicated by an asterisk, ordinary fispt4 class mail used), to Peter B. Bloch, Esquire Geary S.
Mizuno, Esquire Chairman Office of the Executive Administrative Judge Legal Director Atomic Safety and Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Board Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Maryland National Bank Bldg.
Commission 7735 Old Georgetown Road East West Towers Building Bethesda, MD 20814 4350 East West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 Dr. Walter H.. Jordan Anthony Roisman, Esquire Administrative Judge Suite 600 881 W. Outer Drive 1401 New York Avenue, N.W.
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Washington, D.C.
20005
- Chairman
- Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Lawrence J. Chandler, Esquire Mrs. Juanita Ellis Office of the Executive President, CASE Legal Director 1426 S.
Polk Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Dallas, Texas 75224 Commission 7735 Old Georgetown Road Bethesda, MD 20814 s
I
- Renea Hicks, Esquire Ellen Ginsberg, Esquire Assistant Attorney, General Atomic Safety and Licensing Environmental Protection Division Board Panel P.O. Box 12548, Capitol Station U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Austin, Texas 78711 Commission East West Towers Building 4350 East West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 -
Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom Mr. Lanny A.
Sinkin
~
Administrative Judge Christic Institute 1107 West Knapp 1324 North Capitol Street Stillwater, Oklahoma 74075 Washington, D.C.
20002 Ms. Billie Pirner Garde Mr. Robert D. Martin Midwest Office Regional Administrator, 3424 N. Marcos Lane Region IV Appleton, WI 54911 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Suite 1000 611 Ryan Plaza Drive Arlington, Texas 76011
- Slizabeth B.
Johnson
- Mr. James E. Cummins Administrative Judge Resident Inspector Oak Ridge National Laboratory Comanche Peak S.E.S.
P.O. Box X, Building 3500 c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Commission P.O. Box 38 Glen Rose, Texas 76043 Nancy Williams Cygna Energy Services, Inc.
101 California Street Suite 1000 San Francisco, California 94111
~~
Kathryn A.
Selleck
- First Class Mail t
9