ML19270H192: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
| number = ML19270H192
| number = ML19270H192
| issue date = 10/30/1978
| issue date = 10/30/1978
| title = Motion by GE to Quash Aslb 781018 Subpoena to Produce Reed Rept.Ge Willing to Submit Rept for Insp by Aslb to Determine Lack of Relevance to Proceeding.Requests Appearance to Present Oral Argument in Support of Motion
| title = Motion by GE to Quash ASLB 781018 Subpoena to Produce Reed Rept.Ge Willing to Submit Rept for Insp by ASLB to Determine Lack of Relevance to Proceeding.Requests Appearance to Present Oral Argument in Support of Motion
| author name = Edgar G, Gallen K
| author name = Edgar G, Gallen K
| author affiliation = GENERAL ELECTRIC CO., MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS
| author affiliation = GENERAL ELECTRIC CO., MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS
Line 18: Line 18:
=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:l{}    ' 5'
{{#Wiki_filter:l{}    ' 5'
   .*    l .k  1 *2 Attachment 1
   .*    l .k  1 *2 Attachment 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA            c      e NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION nc3
                                                  ..
                                                                         %,,...        g g 31 1973      b i      m..w:#
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA            c      e
                                                                  #                %
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
                  -
nc3
                                                                         %,,...        g g 31 1973      b
                                                                                      ''
i      m..w:#
IN THE MATTER OF                        )            y              &
IN THE MATTER OF                        )            y              &
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF              )
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF              )
Line 35: Line 27:
(Black Fox Stations,                  )
(Black Fox Stations,                  )
Units 1 and 2)                        )
Units 1 and 2)                        )
                            ,
GENERAL ELECTRIC MOTION TO QUASH INTERVENOR'S SUBPOENA DATED OCTOBER 18, 1978 1/
                                        . -
GENERAL ELECTRIC MOTION TO QUASH
,
INTERVENOR'S SUBPOENA DATED OCTOBER 18, 1978 1/
              ,
General Electric (GE) hereby appears specially ~
General Electric (GE) hereby appears specially ~
and moves, pursuant to 10 CFR S 2.720(f), to quash the sub-poena issued in response to the Intervenors' motion by the Licensing Board (the Board) in the above-captioned proceedings on October 18, 1978.      The subj ect subpoena, which bears a re-turn date of October 30, 1978, seeks the production of GE's
and moves, pursuant to 10 CFR S 2.720(f), to quash the sub-poena issued in response to the Intervenors' motion by the Licensing Board (the Board) in the above-captioned proceedings on October 18, 1978.      The subj ect subpoena, which bears a re-turn date of October 30, 1978, seeks the production of GE's
               " Reed Report," and inspection of that report, pursuant to a protective agreement and order, by Intervenors' Counsel and
               " Reed Report," and inspection of that report, pursuant to a protective agreement and order, by Intervenors' Counsel and
      '
     .        technical consultants.
     .        technical consultants.
                              -
2238 009
2238 009
                                  -
               -1/  Kansas Gas and Electric Ceccany (Wolf Creek 1), ALAB-311, 3 NRC 85 (1976).
               -1/  Kansas Gas and Electric Ceccany (Wolf Creek 1), ALAB-311, 3 NRC 85 (1976).
b I h D [" i (
b I h D [" i (
7906250$i'                        _
7906250$i'                        _


                                                      ..
     ~                                          *                            *
     ~                                          *                            *
..                                                                                ,    .
                                                   ,                        -2 With respect to the Board, GE remains willing to make the Reed Report available for inspection by the Board in camera, and will do so immediately upon request.        To the extent that the instant controversy may have resulted from the Board's unexpressed view that it has an independent duty to inquire concerning the Reed Report, GE submits that the record is barren of any evidence which would trigger that inquiry in the instant proceedings (see Memorandum in Support of General Electric's Motion to Quash, dated October 30, 1978, Section III. B.).      Notwithstanding this, if the Board is of the view that some form of inquiry is appropriate, and if its in camera review of the Reed Report should yield matters warranting further inquiry related to these proceedings, it may then notify the parties and take appropriate steps to          ,
                                                                            *
                                                                                    .
*
                                                   ,                        -2
                                                    .
With respect to the Board, GE remains willing to make the Reed Report available for inspection by the Board in camera, and will do so immediately upon request.        To the extent that the instant controversy may have resulted
                                                                                      .
from the Board's unexpressed view that it has an independent duty to inquire concerning the Reed Report, GE submits that the record is barren of any evidence which would trigger that inquiry in the instant proceedings (see Memorandum in Support of General Electric's Motion to Quash, dated October 30, 1978, Section III. B.).      Notwithstanding this, if the Board is of the view that some form of inquiry is appropriate, and if its in camera review of the Reed Report should yield matters warranting further inquiry related to these proceedings, it may then notify the parties and take appropriate steps to          ,
consider those matters in these proceedings.
consider those matters in these proceedings.
As against the Intervenors, GE submits that, for the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum in Support of General Electric's Motion to Quash, dated October 30, 1978, the subpoena is unreasonable and requires the submission of information and data not relevant to any matter in issue.
As against the Intervenors, GE submits that, for the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum in Support of General Electric's Motion to Quash, dated October 30, 1978, the subpoena is unreasonable and requires the submission of information and data not relevant to any matter in issue.
See 10 CFR S 2. 720(f) (1) . Accordingly, as against the Inter-venors, the subpoena must be quashed.
See 10 CFR S 2. 720(f) (1) . Accordingly, as against the Inter-venors, the subpoena must be quashed.
           ? .''    '
           ? .''    '
                        .
GE, requests that the Board afford it the opportunity to appear specially and present oral argument in support of 2238 010
GE, requests that the Board afford it the opportunity to appear specially and present oral argument in support of 2238 010
  -  _. -          --    -      -        -          .-
_
                                      -..- - . - _            . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
        . .                                        .
: s.  ..
: s.  ..
  .
                                                       ',                                          -3 this motion at the earliest possible time and at a location convenient to the Board and the parties.                GE believes that, in light of the apparent factual misconceptions in the record to date, and the commercial sensitivity of the Reed Report,                              ,
                                                       ',                                          -3 this motion at the earliest possible time and at a location convenient to the Board and the parties.                GE believes that, in light of the apparent factual misconceptions in the record to date, and the commercial sensitivity of the Reed Report,                              ,
oral argument would be of particular benefit to the Board's consideration of the instant controversy, and in the interest of all parties.
oral argument would be of particular benefit to the Board's consideration of the instant controversy, and in the interest of all parties.
                '
Respectfully submitted, George    Edgar Specia  Counsel f r General Electric Company 0F COUNSEL Kevin P. Gallen Morgan, Lewis & Bockius 1800 M Street, N.W.                                .
Respectfully submitted,
                                                                                                '
                                                                                            ,. -
George    Edgar Specia  Counsel f r General Electric Company 0F COUNSEL Kevin P. Gallen Morgan, Lewis & Bockius 1800 M Street, N.W.                                .
Suite 700 Washington, D.C. 20036 Dated:  October 30, 1978                                223@ Q}j
Suite 700 Washington, D.C. 20036 Dated:  October 30, 1978                                223@ Q}j
                                                                                  .
_. _.      __}}
_. _.      __}}

Latest revision as of 18:17, 1 February 2020

Motion by GE to Quash ASLB 781018 Subpoena to Produce Reed Rept.Ge Willing to Submit Rept for Insp by ASLB to Determine Lack of Relevance to Proceeding.Requests Appearance to Present Oral Argument in Support of Motion
ML19270H192
Person / Time
Site: Black Fox
Issue date: 10/30/1978
From: Edgar G, Gallen K
GENERAL ELECTRIC CO., MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS
To:
Shared Package
ML19270H188 List:
References
NUDOCS 7906250184
Download: ML19270H192 (3)
v • d • e


Text

l{} ' 5'

.* l .k 1 *2 Attachment 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA c e NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION nc3

%,,... g g 31 1973 b i m..w:#

IN THE MATTER OF ) y &

PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF )

OKLAHOMA, ASSOCIATED ELECTRIC ) Docket Nos.

COOPERATIVE, INC., and ) STN 50-556 WESTERN FARMERS ELECTRIC ) STN 50-557 COOPERATIVE, INC. )

)

(Black Fox Stations, )

Units 1 and 2) )

GENERAL ELECTRIC MOTION TO QUASH INTERVENOR'S SUBPOENA DATED OCTOBER 18, 1978 1/

General Electric (GE) hereby appears specially ~

and moves, pursuant to 10 CFR S 2.720(f), to quash the sub-poena issued in response to the Intervenors' motion by the Licensing Board (the Board) in the above-captioned proceedings on October 18, 1978. The subj ect subpoena, which bears a re-turn date of October 30, 1978, seeks the production of GE's

" Reed Report," and inspection of that report, pursuant to a protective agreement and order, by Intervenors' Counsel and

. technical consultants.

2238 009

-1/ Kansas Gas and Electric Ceccany (Wolf Creek 1), ALAB-311, 3 NRC 85 (1976).

b I h D [" i (

7906250$i' _

~ * *

, -2 With respect to the Board, GE remains willing to make the Reed Report available for inspection by the Board in camera, and will do so immediately upon request. To the extent that the instant controversy may have resulted from the Board's unexpressed view that it has an independent duty to inquire concerning the Reed Report, GE submits that the record is barren of any evidence which would trigger that inquiry in the instant proceedings (see Memorandum in Support of General Electric's Motion to Quash, dated October 30, 1978,Section III. B.). Notwithstanding this, if the Board is of the view that some form of inquiry is appropriate, and if its in camera review of the Reed Report should yield matters warranting further inquiry related to these proceedings, it may then notify the parties and take appropriate steps to ,

consider those matters in these proceedings.

As against the Intervenors, GE submits that, for the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum in Support of General Electric's Motion to Quash, dated October 30, 1978, the subpoena is unreasonable and requires the submission of information and data not relevant to any matter in issue.

See 10 CFR S 2. 720(f) (1) . Accordingly, as against the Inter-venors, the subpoena must be quashed.

? . '

GE, requests that the Board afford it the opportunity to appear specially and present oral argument in support of 2238 010

s. ..

', -3 this motion at the earliest possible time and at a location convenient to the Board and the parties. GE believes that, in light of the apparent factual misconceptions in the record to date, and the commercial sensitivity of the Reed Report, ,

oral argument would be of particular benefit to the Board's consideration of the instant controversy, and in the interest of all parties.

Respectfully submitted, George Edgar Specia Counsel f r General Electric Company 0F COUNSEL Kevin P. Gallen Morgan, Lewis & Bockius 1800 M Street, N.W. .

Suite 700 Washington, D.C. 20036 Dated: October 30, 1978 223@ Q}j

_. _. __

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML19270H192&oldid=2379439"