ML20238E559

Confirms That Brazos Understanding of Phrase,As Set Forth in Objections & Responses of 870814,essentially Correct. Related Correspondence

ML20238E559
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	09/03/1987
From:	Roisman A ROISMAN, A.Z.
To:	Jablon R SPIEGEL & MCDIARMID
References
CON-#387-4340 CPA, NUDOCS 8709150068
Download: ML20238E559 (2)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

g3 Y8 erEDTED CORRESP9FM9h Law Offic:s Anthony Z. Roisman, P.C. 3 Suite 600  %!t 1401 New York Avenue, NW.

Washington, D.C. 20005

'87 SEP -8 P2 :49 Of Counsel To: Telephone:

Cohen.Milstein & Hausfeld (202) 628-3500 Washir.gton, D.C [.. ;gQ . 7 Moza r' G. Ratner, P.C iA ' I t #

Washington D.C September 3, 1987 Robert Jablon Spiegel & McDiarmid 1350 New York Ave., NW Washington, DC 20005 RE: Texas Utilities Electric Co. (Comanche Peak)

Docket No. 50-445-CPA

Dear Bob:

I have just returned from vacation and have been reviewing the responses and other documents filed by Brazos relevant to the June 19, 1987, discovery request of Consolidated Interveners. I noted in particular a controversy regarding the meaning of the phrase " delay in construction" as contained in Consolidated Interveners' Amended Contention 2. The purpose of this letter is to confirm that Brazos's understanding of the phrase, as set forth in its Objections and Responses of August 14, 1987, at p.

2, is essentially correct.

TUEC's assertion that construction was completed on August 1, 1985, refers, at most, to the completion of what TUEC believed was the legally and techicaly required construction. In fact, as Brazos correctly recognizes, the only relevant construction of the plant is construction in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations that meets final approval by the NRC. Thus, in responding to the subject discovery, attention should be focussed both on why as of August 1, 1985, the plant was not properly constructed nor approved by the NRC and on why the corrective actions needed (i.e., required by law and regulations) were not taken more promptly in order to obtain approval more quickly.

Consolidated Interveners appreciate the efforts of Brazos to provide a rational and common sense interpretation to our i discovery requests. Such an approach by TUEC would have itself greatly expedited the decisionmaking process in this case.

8709150068 G70903 PDR

• ADOCK 05000445 35)

A PDR 6

Sincerely,-

"7 Anthony Zl Roisman AZR/bp cc: service list I

l l

I

, _ . _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _A