ML19224C799: 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 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:x-~NRC PUBLIC DOCmfENT ROOM
{{#Wiki_filter:x-~
-*'.#/ ","',-, [, f ,,'C ' M^*UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
NRC PUBLIC DOCmfENT ROOM                         #
'NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION M d'f fN<M ,s\4-m\'BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING BOARD
                                                                  / ","
: s. s v& i,k
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA            , [,
&cm e+In the Matter of
                                                                  *      ^
))TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING
f ,,     'C ' M NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION         M d'f
)Docket Nos. 50-445 COMPANY, ET AL.
                                                                <M             fN
)50-446)(Comanche Peak Steam Electric
                                                                              ,s\ 4     -m
)Station, Units 1 and 2)
                                                                            \               '
)APPLICANTS' ANSWER TO CFUR MOTION TO A5END SUPPLEMENT TO PETITION TO INTERVENE On May 29, 1979, Citizens for Fair Utility Regulation
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING BOARD cm e+        s.& s v& i,k In the Matter of                     )
(" CFUR" ) filed a second Motion for Leave to Amend the supplement to its petition to intervene.
                                            )
This motion apparently is a follow-up by CFUR to the confusion which arose at the prehearing conference on May 22, 1979, with respect to what in fact CFUR proposes as contentions in this proceeding.
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING           )   Docket Nos. 50-445 COMPANY, ET AL.                   )               50-446
At first, CFUR filed a supplement to its petition to intervene dated May 7, 1979, setting forth its proposed contentions.
                                            )
Thereafter, on May 22, 1979, CFUR filed the motion to amend that supplement in which it recast several of its proposed contentions.
(Comanche Peak Steam Electric         )
Thereafter, by motion dated May 29, 1979, CFUR again sought to amend its supple-ment to the petition and to recast all of its proposed contentions.
Station, Units 1 and 2)            )
This disorderly prccess by which CFUR seeks to amend and reamend its petition to intervene relating to contenrions is totally inconsistent with the procedure contemplated by 2 0.[,' ' j(79070604813  
APPLICANTS' ANSWER TO CFUR MOTION TO A5END SUPPLEMENT TO PETITION TO INTERVENE On May 29, 1979, Citizens for Fair Utility Regulation
.-2-10 CFR 52. 714 (b) .
(" CFUR" ) filed a second Motion for Leave to Amend the supplement to its petition to intervene.         This motion apparently is a follow-up by CFUR to the confusion which arose at the prehearing conference on May 22, 1979, with respect to what in fact CFUR proposes as contentions in this proceeding.       At first, CFUR filed a supplement to its petition to intervene dated May 7, 1979, setting forth its proposed contentions.       Thereafter, on May 22, 1979, CFUR filed the motion to amend that supplement in which it recast several of its proposed contentions.       Thereafter, by motion dated May 29, 1979, CFUR again sought to amend its supple-ment to the petition and to recast all of its proposed contentions.
Such amendments as these are required to be filed 15 days prior to the prehearing conference.
This disorderly prccess by which CFUR seeks to amend and reamend its petition to intervene relating to contenrions is totally inconsistent with the procedure contemplated by 2 0.[   ,' ' j(
While we recognize that the Licensing Board permitted CFUR to modify its position with respect to the Staff's proposed quality assurance / quality control contention within a few days after the prehearing conference (Tr. 116), the Board in our judgmeat did not contemplate that CFUR would take three weeks to clarify its position or to attempt to recast entirely each of its proposed contentions.
79070604813
Thus, we submit that the attempt by CFUR to do so should not be permitted, and that CFUR's instant motion should be denied.
 
In any event, we have attempted to review the proposed contentions set forth in CFUR's instant motion, and have compared those contentions with the material set forth in CFUR's supplement and first motion to amend.
10 CFR 52. 714 (b) . Such amendments as these are required to be filed 15 days prior to the prehearing conference.
We have con-cluded on the basis of this review that our position as to whether or not CFUR has raised a valid contention remains unchanged, viz., that CFUR has raised no contention which meets the requirements of 10 CFR S2.714 (b) as to specificity and supporting basis.
While we recognize that the Licensing Board permitted CFUR to modify its position with respect to the Staff's proposed quality assurance / quality control contention within a few days after the prehearing conference (Tr. 116), the Board in our judgmeat did not contemplate that CFUR would take three weeks to clarify its position or to attempt to recast entirely each of its proposed contentions.       Thus, we submit that the attempt by CFUR to do so should not be permitted, and that CFUR's instant motion should be denied.
The proposed contentions are vague, unsupported, irrelevant, or based upon hearsay, or are proscribed challenges to NRC Regulations.
In any event, we have attempted to review the proposed contentions set forth in CFUR's instant motion, and have compared those contentions with the material set forth in CFUR's supplement and first motion to amend.       We have con-cluded on the basis of this review that our position as to whether or not CFUR has raised a valid contention remains unchanged, viz., that CFUR has raised no contention which meets the requirements of 10 CFR S2.714 (b) as to specificity and supporting basis. The proposed contentions are vague, unsupported, irrelevant, or based upon hearsay, or are proscribed challenges to NRC Regulations.
Respectfully submitted,lllV fcbol S.Reynolds DEBEVOISE & LIBER"AN Counsel for the Applica::ts June 13, 1979
Respectfully submitted, V
?' (! ll}  
ll l fcbol       S. Reynolds DEBEVOISE & LIBER"AN Counsel for the Applica::ts June 13, 1979
.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
                                    ?' (! l l}
*NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
 
))TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of                 )
)COMPANY, ET AL.
                                      )
)Docket Nos. 50-445
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING       )
)50-446 (Comanche Peak Steam Electric )
COMPANY, ET AL.               )       Docket Nos. 50-445
Station, Units 1 and 2)
                                      )                   50-446 (Comanche Peak Steam Electric )
)_.CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " Applicants' Answer To CFUR Motion To Amend Supplement To Petition To Intervene," dated June 13, 1979, in the captioned matter have been served upon the following by deposit in the United States mail this 13th day of June 1979:
Station, Units 1 and 2)        )
Elizabeth S.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " Applicants' Answer To CFUR Motion To Amend Supplement To Petition To Intervene,"
Scwers, Esq.
dated June 13, 1979, in the captioned matter have been served upon the following by deposit in the United States mail this 13th day of June 1979:
Lawrence J.
Elizabeth S. Scwers, Esq.           Lawrence J. Chandler, Esq.
Chandler, Esq.
Chair =an, Atcmic Safety and       Office of the Executive Licensing Board                     Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory             U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission                         Ccmmission Washington, D.C.     20555         Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Richard F. Cole               Richard W. Lowerre, Esq.
Chair =an, Atcmic Safety and Office of the Executive Licensing Board Legal Director U.S.Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ccmmission Washington, D.C.
Atcmic Safety and Licensing       Assistant Attorney General Ecard Panel                     Environmental Protection Age:
20555 Washington, D.C.20555 Dr. Richard F.
II. S . Nuclear Regulatory         P.O. Box 12548 Ccmmissica                     Capitol Station Washington, D.C. 20555         Austin, Texas 78711 Mr. Lester Kornblith, Jr.         Mrs. Juanita Ellis Atemic Safety and Licensing       President Scard Panel                     CASE U.S. Nuclear Regulatory           1426 S. Polk Cc= mission                     Dallas, Texas   75224 Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Richard L. Fouke Chairman, Atcmic Safety and       CFUR Licensing Board                 16683 Carter Drive U.S. Nuclear Regulatory           Ar lington , Texas   76010 Commission Washington, D.C.     20553                                 .
Cole Richard W.
29J   24
Lowerre, Esq.
 
Atcmic Safety and Licensing Assistant Attorney General Ecard Panel Environmental Protection Age:
  .                                         Geoffrey M. Gay, Esq.           Mr. Chase R. Stephens West Texas Legal Services       Docketing & Service Section 406 W.T. Waggoner Building       U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 810 Houston Street                 Commission Fort Worth, Texas   76102       Washington, D.C. 20555
II. S . Nuclear Regulatory P.O.Box 12548 Ccmmissica Capitol Station Washington, D.C.
                                          /
20555 Austin, Texas 78711 Mr. Lester Kornblith, Jr.
                                            /
Mrs. Juanita Ellis Atemic Safety and Licensing President Scard Panel CASE U.S.Nuclear Regulatory 1426 S.Polk Cc= mission Dallas, Texas 75224 Washington, D.C.20555 Mr. Richard L.
                                              / i   bl/
Fouke Chairman, Atcmic Safety and CFUR Licensing Board 16683 Carter Drive U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Ar lington , Texas 76010 Commission Washington, D.C.20553.29J 2 4
Nicholas S. Reynolds cc:   Homer C. Schmidt Spencer C. Relyea, Esq.
-...-2-Geoffrey M.
                                  !'   l$}}
Gay, Esq.Mr. Chase R.
Stephens West Texas Legal Services Docketing & Service Section 406 W.T.Waggoner Building U.S.Nuclear Regulatory 810 Houston Street Commission Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Washington, D.C.20555///i bl/Nicholas S.
Reynolds cc: Homer C.Schmidt Spencer C.
Relyea, Esq.
!'l$}}

Latest revision as of 03:06, 2 February 2020

Util Answer to Citizens for Fair Util Regulation 790529 Second Motion to Amend Petition to Intervene.No Contention Has Been Raised Which Meets Requirements of 10CFR2.714(b). Certificate of Svc Encl
ML19224C799
Person / Time
Site: Comanche Peak  Luminant icon.png
Issue date: 06/13/1979
From: Reynolds N
DEBEVOISE & LIBERMAN
To:
References
NUDOCS 7907060483
Download: ML19224C799 (4)
v • d • e


Text

x-~

NRC PUBLIC DOCmfENT ROOM #

/ ","

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , [,

  • ^

f ,, 'C ' M NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION M d'f

<M fN

,s\ 4 -m

\ '

BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING BOARD cm e+ s.& s v& i,k In the Matter of )

)

TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING ) Docket Nos. 50-445 COMPANY, ET AL. ) 50-446

)

(Comanche Peak Steam Electric )

Station, Units 1 and 2) )

APPLICANTS' ANSWER TO CFUR MOTION TO A5END SUPPLEMENT TO PETITION TO INTERVENE On May 29, 1979, Citizens for Fair Utility Regulation

(" CFUR" ) filed a second Motion for Leave to Amend the supplement to its petition to intervene. This motion apparently is a follow-up by CFUR to the confusion which arose at the prehearing conference on May 22, 1979, with respect to what in fact CFUR proposes as contentions in this proceeding. At first, CFUR filed a supplement to its petition to intervene dated May 7, 1979, setting forth its proposed contentions. Thereafter, on May 22, 1979, CFUR filed the motion to amend that supplement in which it recast several of its proposed contentions. Thereafter, by motion dated May 29, 1979, CFUR again sought to amend its supple-ment to the petition and to recast all of its proposed contentions.

This disorderly prccess by which CFUR seeks to amend and reamend its petition to intervene relating to contenrions is totally inconsistent with the procedure contemplated by 2 0.[ ,' ' j(

79070604813

10 CFR 52. 714 (b) . Such amendments as these are required to be filed 15 days prior to the prehearing conference.

While we recognize that the Licensing Board permitted CFUR to modify its position with respect to the Staff's proposed quality assurance / quality control contention within a few days after the prehearing conference (Tr. 116), the Board in our judgmeat did not contemplate that CFUR would take three weeks to clarify its position or to attempt to recast entirely each of its proposed contentions. Thus, we submit that the attempt by CFUR to do so should not be permitted, and that CFUR's instant motion should be denied.

In any event, we have attempted to review the proposed contentions set forth in CFUR's instant motion, and have compared those contentions with the material set forth in CFUR's supplement and first motion to amend. We have con-cluded on the basis of this review that our position as to whether or not CFUR has raised a valid contention remains unchanged, viz., that CFUR has raised no contention which meets the requirements of 10 CFR S2.714 (b) as to specificity and supporting basis. The proposed contentions are vague, unsupported, irrelevant, or based upon hearsay, or are proscribed challenges to NRC Regulations.

Respectfully submitted, V

ll l fcbol S. Reynolds DEBEVOISE & LIBER"AN Counsel for the Applica::ts June 13, 1979

?' (! l l}

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )

)

TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING )

COMPANY, ET AL. ) Docket Nos. 50-445

) 50-446 (Comanche Peak Steam Electric )

Station, Units 1 and 2) )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " Applicants' Answer To CFUR Motion To Amend Supplement To Petition To Intervene,"

dated June 13, 1979, in the captioned matter have been served upon the following by deposit in the United States mail this 13th day of June 1979:

Elizabeth S. Scwers, Esq. Lawrence J. Chandler, Esq.

Chair =an, Atcmic Safety and Office of the Executive Licensing Board Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ccmmission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Richard F. Cole Richard W. Lowerre, Esq.

Atcmic Safety and Licensing Assistant Attorney General Ecard Panel Environmental Protection Age:

II. S . Nuclear Regulatory P.O. Box 12548 Ccmmissica Capitol Station Washington, D.C. 20555 Austin, Texas 78711 Mr. Lester Kornblith, Jr. Mrs. Juanita Ellis Atemic Safety and Licensing President Scard Panel CASE U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 1426 S. Polk Cc= mission Dallas, Texas 75224 Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Richard L. Fouke Chairman, Atcmic Safety and CFUR Licensing Board 16683 Carter Drive U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ar lington , Texas 76010 Commission Washington, D.C. 20553 .

29J 24

. Geoffrey M. Gay, Esq. Mr. Chase R. Stephens West Texas Legal Services Docketing & Service Section 406 W.T. Waggoner Building U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 810 Houston Street Commission Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Washington, D.C. 20555

/

/

/ i bl/

Nicholas S. Reynolds cc: Homer C. Schmidt Spencer C. Relyea, Esq.

!' l$

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML19224C799&oldid=2389174"