ML17209B260: 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)
Line 17: Line 17:
=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:FPL:6/12/81JUN181981~yzgz~~gtaMTORXUNITEDSTATESOFAMERICANUCLEARREGULATORYCOMMISSION6'FQRETHEATOMICSAFETYANDLICENSINGBOARDIntheMatterof))FLORIDAPOWER6LIGHTCOMPANY)DocketNo-.~50-389A(St.LuciePlant,UnitNo.2))June12,TF81MOTIONOFFLORIDAPOWER6LIGHTCOMPANYFORDEFERRALOFCONSIDERATIONOFMOTIONFORSUMMARYDISPOSITION/PL+<<>o~0(go4OnMay27,1981,theCitiesfileda"MotiontoEstablishProcedures,foraDeclarationthat-aSituationInconsistent,withtheAntitrustLawsPresentlyExistsandforRelatedRelief.",DuringthecourseofaconferencecallonJune11,1981,theCitiesadvisedtheBoardthattheyintendtheirplead-ingasamotionforsummarydispositionfiledpursuantto10CFR52.749.Inthesecircumstancesandforthereasonsgivenbelow,FPLrespectfullyrequeststhattheBoarddeferconsiderationoftheCities'otionandnotrequireFPLtoansweritonthemeritsuntilfurtherorderoftheBoard.Therequesteddeferralcouldtaketheformeither.ofdenialofthemotionaspremature,withoutprejudicetoitsrefilingafterdiscoveryhasprogressedfurther,orofanorderpermittingFPLtodeferfilingofitsresponseuntilorderedtodosobytheBoard.FPLrequeststhisrelieffortwobasicreasons.First,discoveryhasnotyetprogressedtothepoint1e whereFPLshouldberequiredtorespondtoamotionwhich,onitsface,seeksdispositionofallissuesinthecaseotherthanrelief.Citieshavenotyetrespondedtotheinterrogatoriesdirectedtotheminthiscase.InthelitigationpendingintheU.S.DistrictCourtinMiami,FPLhashaddocumentdiscoveryofmostoftheCities,butnotoftheCityofLakeHelenortheFloridaMunicipalUtilitiesAssociation(FMUA),whicharepartiestothisproceedingbutnottotheMiamicase.SomedepositionshavebeentakenintheMiamicase,butdepositionsoftheCitiesarefarfrombeingcompleted;ofcourse,nodepositionshavebeentakenofLakeHelen,FMUAoranyexpertwitnesswhotheCitiesmaydesignatewhentheyfileresponsestointerrogatoriesinthiscase.Second,itisunlikelythatanythingusefulcanbeaccomplishedbyconsiderationofthemotioninitspresentform,particularlyatatimewhenissueshavenotbeenmoreclearlydefined.Theremaybeinstancesinwhichconsiderationofamotionforsummarydisposition'atanearlystageofdiscoverycanbeappropriateandhelpful,particularlywherethemotionisaddressedtooneormoresharplydefinedissueswhichinvolvetheapplicationoflawtofactswhicharegenuinelynotsubjecttodispute.TheCitiesmotionisnotsuchapleading.Itisvagueanddiscursiveandreliesonalistof"MaterialFactsNotGenuinelyinDispute"whichconsistsofsweeping,highlyargumentativegeneralizations.Thesegeneralizations,inturn,aregroundedonassumptions--whichFPLbelievesareunfounded-thattheCitieswillsucceed inpersuadingtheBoardoftheirtheoriesofmarkets,market*/powerandcompetition.-TheCities'otionismoreinthenatureofaprematurelyfiledtrialbriefthanamotionforsummarydisposition,althoughitlacksthespecificitywhichwouldbeexpectedinatrialbrief.NothingwouldbeaccomplishedatthistimebyFPL'stakingtheconsiderabletimeandeffort"necessarytorespondto.thislengthymotionortheBoard'sdevotingitstimeto,wadingthroughtheevid-=**/entiarymaterials"placedbeforeitbytheCities.-Item1inthelistofundisputed"facts"proferredbytheCitiesisillustrative.Itincludesthefollowing:"FPLhasaneffectivemonopolycontrolover[nuclearfacilitiesinPeninsularFlorida],whichithasusedtoadvantageit-.selfincompetition."Thatstatementappearstorestontheassumptionsthat(1)nucleargenerationistherelevantproductmarket,(2)"PeninsularFlorida"istherelevantgeographicmarket,(3)FPLhasmonopolypowerintheallegedmarket,and(4)FPLisengagedinsomekindofundefinedcompetitionwithCitiesinsomeunspecifiedmarket.FPLcontestseachofthesepropositions.Moreover,thechargethatFPL"hasused[suchmonopolycontrol]toadvantageit-selfincompetition"obviouslyhasnoplaceinthe"shortandconcisestatementofmaterialfacts"requiredby10CFR52.749;TheCitieshaveplacedessentiallythesamefactualpre-sentationthatappearsintheirMotionbeforetheU.S.DistrictCourtinMiamiinpapersfiledinresponsetoamotionbyFPLforsummaryjudgmentofTallahassee'sclaimthatitisen-titledundertheantitrustlawstoaccesstoFPL'snuclearplants.FloridaCities'nswertoMotionofFPLforSummaryJudgmentofTallahassee'sNuclearAccessClaim(No.79-5101-Civ-JLK,May15,1981).ThepurposeoftheCities're-sentationtotheCourtistoconvincetheCourtthatgenuineissuesofmaterialfactmustbetriedandthat,therefore,FPL'smotionforsummaryjudgmentshouldbedenied;theCitiesapparentlydidnotconsidertheirpresentationsufficientlystrongtojustifytheirfilingofacrossmotionforsummaryjudgmentintheMiamicase.Thus,wehavethepeculiarsituationoftheCities'avingfiledessentiallythesamepresentationintwoforums,claiminginoneforumthatitdemonstratestheabsenceofanymaterialfactualissuesandintheotherthatitdemonstratesjusttheopposite.ThedecisionoftheDistrictCourtonthemotioncouldbeofconsiderableassistancetothisBoard,andtheCourt'sfindingsastowhatfactualpropositionsareandarenotgenuinelyinissuecouldbeveryhelpful.Thatisanotherreasonfordeferring'considerationoftheCities'otionhere.
{{#Wiki_filter:FPL:6/12/81JUN181981~yzgz~~gtaMTORXUNITEDSTATESOFAMERICANUCLEARREGULATORYCOMMISSION6'FQRETHEATOMICSAFETYANDLICENSINGBOARDIntheMatterof))FLORIDAPOWER6LIGHTCOMPANY)DocketNo-.~50-389A(St.LuciePlant,UnitNo.2))June12,TF81MOTIONOFFLORIDAPOWER6LIGHTCOMPANYFORDEFERRALOFCONSIDERATIONOFMOTIONFORSUMMARYDISPOSITION/PL+<<>o~0(go4OnMay27,1981,theCitiesfileda"MotiontoEstablishProcedures,foraDeclarationthat-aSituationInconsistent,withtheAntitrustLawsPresentlyExistsandforRelatedRelief.",DuringthecourseofaconferencecallonJune11,1981,theCitiesadvisedtheBoardthattheyintendtheirplead-ingasamotionforsummarydispositionfiledpursuantto10CFR52.749.Inthesecircumstancesandforthereasonsgivenbelow,FPLrespectfullyrequeststhattheBoarddeferconsiderationoftheCities'otionandnotrequireFPLtoansweritonthemeritsuntilfurtherorderoftheBoard.Therequesteddeferralcouldtaketheformeither.ofdenialofthemotionaspremature,withoutprejudicetoitsrefilingafterdiscoveryhasprogressedfurther,orofanorderpermittingFPLtodeferfilingofitsresponseuntilorderedtodosobytheBoard.FPLrequeststhisrelieffortwobasicreasons.First,discoveryhasnotyetprogressedtothepoint1e whereFPLshouldberequiredtorespondtoamotionwhich,onitsface,seeksdispositionofallissuesinthecaseotherthanrelief.Citieshavenotyetrespondedtotheinterrogatoriesdirectedtotheminthiscase.InthelitigationpendingintheU.S.DistrictCourtinMiami,FPLhashaddocumentdiscoveryofmostoftheCities,butnotoftheCityofLakeHelenortheFloridaMunicipalUtilitiesAssociation(FMUA),whicharepartiestothisproceedingbutnottotheMiamicase.SomedepositionshavebeentakenintheMiamicase,butdepositionsoftheCitiesarefarfrombeingcompleted;ofcourse,nodepositionshavebeentakenofLakeHelen,FMUAoranyexpertwitnesswhotheCitiesmaydesignatewhentheyfileresponsestointerrogatoriesinthiscase.Second,itisunlikelythatanythingusefulcanbeaccomplishedbyconsiderationofthemotioninitspresentform,particularlyatatimewhenissueshavenotbeenmoreclearlydefined.Theremaybeinstancesinwhichconsiderationofamotionforsummarydisposition'atanearlystageofdiscoverycanbeappropriateandhelpful,particularlywherethemotionisaddressedtooneormoresharplydefinedissueswhichinvolvetheapplicationoflawtofactswhicharegenuinelynotsubjecttodispute.TheCitiesmotionisnotsuchapleading.Itisvagueanddiscursiveandreliesonalistof"MaterialFactsNotGenuinelyinDispute"whichconsistsofsweeping,highlyargumentativegeneralizations.Thesegeneralizations,inturn,aregroundedonassumptions--whichFPLbelievesareunfounded-thattheCitieswillsucceed inpersuadingtheBoardoftheirtheoriesofmarkets,market*/powerandcompetition.-TheCities'otionismoreinthenatureofaprematurelyfiledtrialbriefthanamotionforsummarydisposition,althoughitlacksthespecificitywhichwouldbeexpectedinatrialbrief.NothingwouldbeaccomplishedatthistimebyFPL'stakingtheconsiderabletimeandeffort"necessarytorespondto.thislengthymotionortheBoard'sdevotingitstimeto,wadingthroughtheevid-=**/entiarymaterials"placedbeforeitbytheCities.-Item1inthelistofundisputed"facts"proferredbytheCitiesisillustrative.Itincludesthefollowing:"FPLhasaneffectivemonopolycontrolover[nuclearfacilitiesinPeninsularFlorida],whichithasusedtoadvantageit-.selfincompetition."Thatstatementappearstorestontheassumptionsthat(1)nucleargenerationistherelevantproductmarket,(2)"PeninsularFlorida"istherelevantgeographicmarket,(3)FPLhasmonopolypowerintheallegedmarket,and(4)FPLisengagedinsomekindofundefinedcompetitionwithCitiesinsomeunspecifiedmarket.FPLcontestseachofthesepropositions.Moreover,thechargethatFPL"hasused[suchmonopolycontrol]toadvantageit-selfincompetition"obviouslyhasnoplaceinthe"shortandconcisestatementofmaterialfacts"requiredby10CFR52.749;TheCitieshaveplacedessentiallythesamefactualpre-sentationthatappearsintheirMotionbeforetheU.S.DistrictCourtinMiamiinpapersfiledinresponsetoamotionbyFPLforsummaryjudgmentofTallahassee'sclaimthatitisen-titledundertheantitrustlawstoaccesstoFPL'snuclearplants.FloridaCities'nswertoMotionofFPLforSummaryJudgmentofTallahassee'sNuclearAccessClaim(No.79-5101-Civ-JLK,May15,1981).ThepurposeoftheCities're-sentationtotheCourtistoconvincetheCourtthatgenuineissuesofmaterialfactmustbetriedandthat,therefore,FPL'smotionforsummaryjudgmentshouldbedenied;theCitiesapparentlydidnotconsidertheirpresentationsufficientlystrongtojustifytheirfilingofacrossmotionforsummaryjudgmentintheMiamicase.Thus,wehavethepeculiarsituationoftheCities'avingfiledessentiallythesamepresentationintwoforums,claiminginoneforumthatitdemonstratestheabsenceofanymaterialfactualissuesandintheotherthatitdemonstratesjusttheopposite.ThedecisionoftheDistrictCourtonthemotioncouldbeofconsiderableassistancetothisBoard,andtheCourt'sfindingsastowhatfactualpropositionsareandarenotgenuinelyinissuecouldbeveryhelpful.Thatisanotherreasonfordeferring'considerationoftheCities'otionhere.
FPLsubmitsthatitisnotusefulforthepartiesatthisstagetoarguethemeritsoftheircasesinanunfocusedmanner.Afarbetteruseoftheparties'imeandresourceswouldbeanefforttodefinewithsomespecificitythemattersthatremaininissueinthewakeofthesettlementlicenseconditionswhichwereattachedtotheconstructionpermitpursuanttotheBoard'sOrderofApril24,1981.Thefirststepinthisprocessisforthe'Cities,asdirectedbytheBoardintheJunell,1981,conferencecall,tosubmitaclearandunambiguousstatementoftheissuesastheyperceivethemtogetherwithaspecificstate-mentoftheadditionalreliefwhichtheyseek.Atthesametimediscoverycanmoveforward,sothatitwillbepossibletoresolveexpeditiouslytheissuessodefinedeitheruponmotionsforsummarydispositionorafterafocusedhearing.WHEREFORE,FPLrespectfullymovesthattheCitiesmotionforsummarydispositionbedeniedaspremature,withoutprejudicetorefilingatafuturedate,orthatFPLbepermittedtodeferfilingofitsresponsetotheCities'otionuntiltheBoardissuesafurtherordercallingforaresponse.Rspectfulysubmitted,A.Bouknight,Jr.Lwenstein,Newman,Reis6Axelrad1025ConnecticutAvenue,N.W.Washington,D.C.20006HerbertDymCovington&Burling88816thStreet,N.W.Washington,D;C.20006DATED:June12,1981AttorneysforFloridaPower6LightCompany UNITEDSTATESOFAMERICANUCLEARREGULATORYCOMMISSIONBEFORETHEATOMICSAFETYANDLICENSINGBOARDIntheMatterof))FLORIDAPOWER&LIGHTCOMPANY)(St.LuciePlant,UnitNo.2))DocketNo.50-389ACERTIFICATEOFSERVICEIherebycertifythatcopiesof"MOTIONOFFLORIDAPOWER&LIGHTCOMPANYFORDEFERRALOFCONSIDERATIONOFMOTIONFORSUN~DRYDISPOSITION"wasservedbyhanddelivery*orbydeposit,intheU.S.Nail,firstclass,postageprepaidthis12thdayofJune,1981.*IvanW.Smith,EsquireChairmanAtomicSafetyandLicensingBoardU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555*RobertM.Lazo,EsquireAtomicSafetyandLicensingBoardU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555MichaelA.Duggan,EsquireCollegeofBusinessAdministrationUniversityofTexasAustin;Texas78712DocketingandServiceStationOfficeoftheSecretaryU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555JeromeSaltzman,ChiefAntitrust&IndemnityGroupU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555ThomasGurney,Sr.,Esquire203NorthMagnoliaAvenueOrlando,Florida32802AtomicSafetyandLicensingBoardU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555RobertE.BathenFredSafferR.W.Beck&AssociatesP.O.Box6817Orlando,Florida32803*RobertA.Jablon,EsquireAlanJ.Roth,Esquire2600VirginiaAvenue,N.W.Washington,D.C.20037WilliamC.Wise,EsquireSuite500120018thStreet,N.W.Washington,D.C.20036WilliamH.Chandler,EsquireChandler,O'Neal,Avera,Gray&StriplingPostOfficeDrawer0Gainesville,Florida32602 h0~*JanetUrban,EsquireP.O.Box14141Washington,D.C.20044DonaldA.Kaplan,EsquireRobertFabrikant,EsquireAntitrustDivisionU.S.DepartmentofJusticeWashington,D.C.20530JosephRutberg,EsquireLeeScottDewey,EsquireFredricD.Chanania,EsquireCounselforNRCStaffU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555CharlesR.P.Brown,EsquireBrown,PaxtonandWilliams301South6thStreetP.O.Box1418FortPierce,Florida33450*BenjaminH.VoglerU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555AnnP.Hodgdon,EsquireOfficeoftheExecutiveLegalDirectorU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555*GeorgeR.Kucik,EsquireNarcGary,EsquireEllenE.Sward,EsquireArent,Fox,Kintner,Plotkin6Kahn1815HStreet,N.W.Washington,D.C.20006RichardS.Salzman,EsquireAtomicSafetyandLicensingAppealBoardPanelU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555J.A.Bonagt,Jr.Xjowenstein,Newman,Reis6Axelrad025ConnecticutAvenue,N.W.Washington,D.C.20036(202)862-8400DATED:June12,1981  
FPLsubmitsthatitisnotusefulforthepartiesatthisstagetoarguethemeritsoftheircasesinanunfocusedmanner.Afarbetteruseoftheparties'imeandresourceswouldbeanefforttodefinewithsomespecificitythemattersthatremaininissueinthewakeofthesettlementlicenseconditionswhichwereattachedtotheconstructionpermitpursuanttotheBoard'sOrderofApril24,1981.Thefirststepinthisprocessisforthe'Cities,asdirectedbytheBoardintheJunell,1981,conferencecall,tosubmitaclearandunambiguousstatementoftheissuesastheyperceivethemtogetherwithaspecificstate-mentoftheadditionalreliefwhichtheyseek.Atthesametimediscoverycanmoveforward,sothatitwillbepossibletoresolveexpeditiouslytheissuessodefinedeitheruponmotionsforsummarydispositionorafterafocusedhearing.WHEREFORE,FPLrespectfullymovesthattheCitiesmotionforsummarydispositionbedeniedaspremature,withoutprejudicetorefilingatafuturedate,orthatFPLbepermittedtodeferfilingofitsresponsetotheCities'otionuntiltheBoardissuesafurtherordercallingforaresponse.Rspectfulysubmitted,A.Bouknight,Jr.Lwenstein,Newman,Reis6Axelrad1025ConnecticutAvenue,N.W.Washington,D.C.20006HerbertDymCovington&Burling88816thStreet,N.W.Washington,D;C.20006DATED:June12,1981AttorneysforFloridaPower6LightCompany UNITEDSTATESOFAMERICANUCLEARREGULATORYCOMMISSIONBEFORETHEATOMICSAFETYANDLICENSINGBOARDIntheMatterof))FLORIDAPOWER&LIGHTCOMPANY)(St.LuciePlant,UnitNo.2))DocketNo.50-389ACERTIFICATEOFSERVICEIherebycertifythatcopiesof"MOTIONOFFLORIDAPOWER&LIGHTCOMPANYFORDEFERRALOFCONSIDERATIONOFMOTIONFORSUN~DRYDISPOSITION"wasservedbyhanddelivery*orbydeposit,intheU.S.Nail,firstclass,postageprepaidthis12thdayofJune,1981.*IvanW.Smith,EsquireChairmanAtomicSafetyandLicensingBoardU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555*RobertM.Lazo,EsquireAtomicSafetyandLicensingBoardU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555MichaelA.Duggan,EsquireCollegeofBusinessAdministrationUniversityofTexasAustin;Texas78712DocketingandServiceStationOfficeoftheSecretaryU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555JeromeSaltzman,ChiefAntitrust&IndemnityGroupU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555ThomasGurney,Sr.,Esquire203NorthMagnoliaAvenueOrlando,Florida32802AtomicSafetyandLicensingBoardU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555RobertE.BathenFredSafferR.W.Beck&AssociatesP.O.Box6817Orlando,Florida32803*RobertA.Jablon,EsquireAlanJ.Roth,Esquire2600VirginiaAvenue,N.W.Washington,D.C.20037WilliamC.Wise,EsquireSuite500120018thStreet,N.W.Washington,D.C.20036WilliamH.Chandler,EsquireChandler,O'Neal,Avera,Gray&StriplingPostOfficeDrawer0Gainesville,Florida32602 h0~*JanetUrban,EsquireP.O.Box14141Washington,D.C.20044DonaldA.Kaplan,EsquireRobertFabrikant,EsquireAntitrustDivisionU.S.DepartmentofJusticeWashington,D.C.20530JosephRutberg,EsquireLeeScottDewey,EsquireFredricD.Chanania,EsquireCounselforNRCStaffU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555CharlesR.P.Brown,EsquireBrown,PaxtonandWilliams301South6thStreetP.O.Box1418FortPierce,Florida33450*BenjaminH.VoglerU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555AnnP.Hodgdon,EsquireOfficeoftheExecutiveLegalDirectorU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555*GeorgeR.Kucik,EsquireNarcGary,EsquireEllenE.Sward,EsquireArent,Fox,Kintner,Plotkin6Kahn1815HStreet,N.W.Washington,D.C.20006RichardS.Salzman,EsquireAtomicSafetyandLicensingAppealBoardPanelU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555J.A.Bonagt,Jr.Xjowenstein,Newman,Reis6Axelrad025ConnecticutAvenue,N.W.Washington,D.C.20036(202)862-8400DATED:June12,1981}}
}}

Revision as of 17:41, 18 May 2018

Motion Requesting Aslb Defer Consideration of Fl Cities 810527 Motion to Establish Procedures & Not Require Util to Answer on Motion Merits Until Further Aslb Order.Nothing Useful Can Be Accomplished by Motion.W/Certificate of Svc
ML17209B260
Person / Time
Site: Saint Lucie NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 06/12/1981
From: BOUKNIGHT J A
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO., LOWENSTEIN, NEWMAN, REIS, AXELRAD & TOLL
To:
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
ISSUANCES-A, NUDOCS 8106190262
Download: ML17209B260 (6)
v • d • e


Text

FPL:6/12/81JUN181981~yzgz~~gtaMTORXUNITEDSTATESOFAMERICANUCLEARREGULATORYCOMMISSION6'FQRETHEATOMICSAFETYANDLICENSINGBOARDIntheMatterof))FLORIDAPOWER6LIGHTCOMPANY)DocketNo-.~50-389A(St.LuciePlant,UnitNo.2))June12,TF81MOTIONOFFLORIDAPOWER6LIGHTCOMPANYFORDEFERRALOFCONSIDERATIONOFMOTIONFORSUMMARYDISPOSITION/PL+<<>o~0(go4OnMay27,1981,theCitiesfileda"MotiontoEstablishProcedures,foraDeclarationthat-aSituationInconsistent,withtheAntitrustLawsPresentlyExistsandforRelatedRelief.",DuringthecourseofaconferencecallonJune11,1981,theCitiesadvisedtheBoardthattheyintendtheirplead-ingasamotionforsummarydispositionfiledpursuantto10CFR52.749.Inthesecircumstancesandforthereasonsgivenbelow,FPLrespectfullyrequeststhattheBoarddeferconsiderationoftheCities'otionandnotrequireFPLtoansweritonthemeritsuntilfurtherorderoftheBoard.Therequesteddeferralcouldtaketheformeither.ofdenialofthemotionaspremature,withoutprejudicetoitsrefilingafterdiscoveryhasprogressedfurther,orofanorderpermittingFPLtodeferfilingofitsresponseuntilorderedtodosobytheBoard.FPLrequeststhisrelieffortwobasicreasons.First,discoveryhasnotyetprogressedtothepoint1e whereFPLshouldberequiredtorespondtoamotionwhich,onitsface,seeksdispositionofallissuesinthecaseotherthanrelief.Citieshavenotyetrespondedtotheinterrogatoriesdirectedtotheminthiscase.InthelitigationpendingintheU.S.DistrictCourtinMiami,FPLhashaddocumentdiscoveryofmostoftheCities,butnotoftheCityofLakeHelenortheFloridaMunicipalUtilitiesAssociation(FMUA),whicharepartiestothisproceedingbutnottotheMiamicase.SomedepositionshavebeentakenintheMiamicase,butdepositionsoftheCitiesarefarfrombeingcompleted;ofcourse,nodepositionshavebeentakenofLakeHelen,FMUAoranyexpertwitnesswhotheCitiesmaydesignatewhentheyfileresponsestointerrogatoriesinthiscase.Second,itisunlikelythatanythingusefulcanbeaccomplishedbyconsiderationofthemotioninitspresentform,particularlyatatimewhenissueshavenotbeenmoreclearlydefined.Theremaybeinstancesinwhichconsiderationofamotionforsummarydisposition'atanearlystageofdiscoverycanbeappropriateandhelpful,particularlywherethemotionisaddressedtooneormoresharplydefinedissueswhichinvolvetheapplicationoflawtofactswhicharegenuinelynotsubjecttodispute.TheCitiesmotionisnotsuchapleading.Itisvagueanddiscursiveandreliesonalistof"MaterialFactsNotGenuinelyinDispute"whichconsistsofsweeping,highlyargumentativegeneralizations.Thesegeneralizations,inturn,aregroundedonassumptions--whichFPLbelievesareunfounded-thattheCitieswillsucceed inpersuadingtheBoardoftheirtheoriesofmarkets,market*/powerandcompetition.-TheCities'otionismoreinthenatureofaprematurelyfiledtrialbriefthanamotionforsummarydisposition,althoughitlacksthespecificitywhichwouldbeexpectedinatrialbrief.NothingwouldbeaccomplishedatthistimebyFPL'stakingtheconsiderabletimeandeffort"necessarytorespondto.thislengthymotionortheBoard'sdevotingitstimeto,wadingthroughtheevid-=**/entiarymaterials"placedbeforeitbytheCities.-Item1inthelistofundisputed"facts"proferredbytheCitiesisillustrative.Itincludesthefollowing:"FPLhasaneffectivemonopolycontrolover[nuclearfacilitiesinPeninsularFlorida],whichithasusedtoadvantageit-.selfincompetition."Thatstatementappearstorestontheassumptionsthat(1)nucleargenerationistherelevantproductmarket,(2)"PeninsularFlorida"istherelevantgeographicmarket,(3)FPLhasmonopolypowerintheallegedmarket,and(4)FPLisengagedinsomekindofundefinedcompetitionwithCitiesinsomeunspecifiedmarket.FPLcontestseachofthesepropositions.Moreover,thechargethatFPL"hasused[suchmonopolycontrol]toadvantageit-selfincompetition"obviouslyhasnoplaceinthe"shortandconcisestatementofmaterialfacts"requiredby10CFR52.749;TheCitieshaveplacedessentiallythesamefactualpre-sentationthatappearsintheirMotionbeforetheU.S.DistrictCourtinMiamiinpapersfiledinresponsetoamotionbyFPLforsummaryjudgmentofTallahassee'sclaimthatitisen-titledundertheantitrustlawstoaccesstoFPL'snuclearplants.FloridaCities'nswertoMotionofFPLforSummaryJudgmentofTallahassee'sNuclearAccessClaim(No.79-5101-Civ-JLK,May15,1981).ThepurposeoftheCities're-sentationtotheCourtistoconvincetheCourtthatgenuineissuesofmaterialfactmustbetriedandthat,therefore,FPL'smotionforsummaryjudgmentshouldbedenied;theCitiesapparentlydidnotconsidertheirpresentationsufficientlystrongtojustifytheirfilingofacrossmotionforsummaryjudgmentintheMiamicase.Thus,wehavethepeculiarsituationoftheCities'avingfiledessentiallythesamepresentationintwoforums,claiminginoneforumthatitdemonstratestheabsenceofanymaterialfactualissuesandintheotherthatitdemonstratesjusttheopposite.ThedecisionoftheDistrictCourtonthemotioncouldbeofconsiderableassistancetothisBoard,andtheCourt'sfindingsastowhatfactualpropositionsareandarenotgenuinelyinissuecouldbeveryhelpful.Thatisanotherreasonfordeferring'considerationoftheCities'otionhere.

FPLsubmitsthatitisnotusefulforthepartiesatthisstagetoarguethemeritsoftheircasesinanunfocusedmanner.Afarbetteruseoftheparties'imeandresourceswouldbeanefforttodefinewithsomespecificitythemattersthatremaininissueinthewakeofthesettlementlicenseconditionswhichwereattachedtotheconstructionpermitpursuanttotheBoard'sOrderofApril24,1981.Thefirststepinthisprocessisforthe'Cities,asdirectedbytheBoardintheJunell,1981,conferencecall,tosubmitaclearandunambiguousstatementoftheissuesastheyperceivethemtogetherwithaspecificstate-mentoftheadditionalreliefwhichtheyseek.Atthesametimediscoverycanmoveforward,sothatitwillbepossibletoresolveexpeditiouslytheissuessodefinedeitheruponmotionsforsummarydispositionorafterafocusedhearing.WHEREFORE,FPLrespectfullymovesthattheCitiesmotionforsummarydispositionbedeniedaspremature,withoutprejudicetorefilingatafuturedate,orthatFPLbepermittedtodeferfilingofitsresponsetotheCities'otionuntiltheBoardissuesafurtherordercallingforaresponse.Rspectfulysubmitted,A.Bouknight,Jr.Lwenstein,Newman,Reis6Axelrad1025ConnecticutAvenue,N.W.Washington,D.C.20006HerbertDymCovington&Burling88816thStreet,N.W.Washington,D;C.20006DATED:June12,1981AttorneysforFloridaPower6LightCompany UNITEDSTATESOFAMERICANUCLEARREGULATORYCOMMISSIONBEFORETHEATOMICSAFETYANDLICENSINGBOARDIntheMatterof))FLORIDAPOWER&LIGHTCOMPANY)(St.LuciePlant,UnitNo.2))DocketNo.50-389ACERTIFICATEOFSERVICEIherebycertifythatcopiesof"MOTIONOFFLORIDAPOWER&LIGHTCOMPANYFORDEFERRALOFCONSIDERATIONOFMOTIONFORSUN~DRYDISPOSITION"wasservedbyhanddelivery*orbydeposit,intheU.S.Nail,firstclass,postageprepaidthis12thdayofJune,1981.*IvanW.Smith,EsquireChairmanAtomicSafetyandLicensingBoardU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555*RobertM.Lazo,EsquireAtomicSafetyandLicensingBoardU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555MichaelA.Duggan,EsquireCollegeofBusinessAdministrationUniversityofTexasAustin;Texas78712DocketingandServiceStationOfficeoftheSecretaryU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555JeromeSaltzman,ChiefAntitrust&IndemnityGroupU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555ThomasGurney,Sr.,Esquire203NorthMagnoliaAvenueOrlando,Florida32802AtomicSafetyandLicensingBoardU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555RobertE.BathenFredSafferR.W.Beck&AssociatesP.O.Box6817Orlando,Florida32803*RobertA.Jablon,EsquireAlanJ.Roth,Esquire2600VirginiaAvenue,N.W.Washington,D.C.20037WilliamC.Wise,EsquireSuite500120018thStreet,N.W.Washington,D.C.20036WilliamH.Chandler,EsquireChandler,O'Neal,Avera,Gray&StriplingPostOfficeDrawer0Gainesville,Florida32602 h0~*JanetUrban,EsquireP.O.Box14141Washington,D.C.20044DonaldA.Kaplan,EsquireRobertFabrikant,EsquireAntitrustDivisionU.S.DepartmentofJusticeWashington,D.C.20530JosephRutberg,EsquireLeeScottDewey,EsquireFredricD.Chanania,EsquireCounselforNRCStaffU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555CharlesR.P.Brown,EsquireBrown,PaxtonandWilliams301South6thStreetP.O.Box1418FortPierce,Florida33450*BenjaminH.VoglerU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555AnnP.Hodgdon,EsquireOfficeoftheExecutiveLegalDirectorU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555*GeorgeR.Kucik,EsquireNarcGary,EsquireEllenE.Sward,EsquireArent,Fox,Kintner,Plotkin6Kahn1815HStreet,N.W.Washington,D.C.20006RichardS.Salzman,EsquireAtomicSafetyandLicensingAppealBoardPanelU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555J.A.Bonagt,Jr.Xjowenstein,Newman,Reis6Axelrad025ConnecticutAvenue,N.W.Washington,D.C.20036(202)862-8400DATED:June12,1981

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML17209B260&oldid=658304"