ML19270G128: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:3 - | {{#Wiki_filter:3 - | ||
REttTED conn | REttTED conn | ||
;A - | ;A - | ||
[ U. S. NUCLEAR REGULA O h M lISSION # | [ U. S. NUCLEAR REGULA O h M lISSION # | ||
4 $. | 4 $. | ||
Line 27: | Line 25: | ||
$ \o7 2 | $ \o7 2 | ||
2 o'uaton Lighting & Power Co. I h ,, g''f! | 2 o'uaton Lighting & Power Co. I h ,, g''f! | ||
diens Ureek tiuclear Generating ) | diens Ureek tiuclear Generating ) | ||
Docket #50-46e T4b I e.. | Docket #50-46e T4b I e.. | ||
Line 43: | Line 40: | ||
' . ' .,,and ful.ly in writing, making them no lator than 14 days af ter ser-- | ' . ' .,,and ful.ly in writing, making them no lator than 14 days af ter ser-- | ||
vice of these interrogatories. | vice of these interrogatories. | ||
',-" r.ach Interro6atory is to be answered as follows: | ',-" r.ach Interro6atory is to be answered as follows: | ||
[*B'.ga.a.Frovideadirectanswertothequestion. | [*B'.ga.a.Frovideadirectanswertothequestion. | ||
jf.. [..b'. identif / all documents and studies, and th particular parts - | jf.. [..b'. identif / all documents and studies, and th particular parts - | ||
.g%., 7 | .g%., 7 | ||
Line 53: | Line 47: | ||
..the answer. Provide copies of any st'ch document in 30 day,s 4 | ..the answer. Provide copies of any st'ch document in 30 day,s 4 | ||
.W g under 10 CFR 2.741. | .W g under 10 CFR 2.741. | ||
.1,}$.Identifybyname, title, and affiliation each Staff or Conmission | .1,}$.Identifybyname, title, and affiliation each Staff or Conmission | ||
.:/y/ - employee, consultant, contractor or subcontractor that has the | .:/y/ - employee, consultant, contractor or subcontractor that has the arg .i ; | ||
arg .i ; | |||
' . expert knowledge required to support- the answer to the question. | ' . expert knowledge required to support- the answer to the question. | ||
y,4 | y,4 | ||
. Identify in the same manner who6 answers each InterroCatory. ._, | . Identify in the same manner who6 answers each InterroCatory. ._, | ||
9?J.d. Explain wheter the Staff or Commission is engaged or intends to | 9?J.d. Explain wheter the Staff or Commission is engaged or intends to engage in further research which may affect the answer, and - | ||
engage in further research which may affect the answer, and - | |||
''A" | ''A" | ||
<. identify such work. M.,- | <. identify such work. M.,- | ||
Line 74: | Line 60: | ||
"e" .f,) | "e" .f,) | ||
q$.p;f. Provide a summary of the testimony that each, witness in part | q$.p;f. Provide a summary of the testimony that each, witness in part | ||
;m 23 g. | ;m 23 g. | ||
*/ l (above) is exuecged to offar and state the factual basis for each | */ l (above) is exuecged to offar and state the factual basis for each | ||
.$7 - | .$7 - | ||
~2 conclusion or opinion each witness epects to present. $,ps . | ~2 conclusion or opinion each witness epects to present. $,ps . | ||
Line 84: | Line 68: | ||
7/r.) formin opinions and conclusions for testimony. ''@ | 7/r.) formin opinions and conclusions for testimony. ''@ | ||
. p' -y . . . 3: | . p' -y . . . 3: | ||
v.+ | v.+ | ||
..7'.,i . 79060500* .%, | ..7'.,i . 79060500* .%, | ||
Y ?' .. *Oh? | Y ?' .. *Oh? | ||
S. 1 N.',tr- | S. 1 N.',tr- | ||
. t INTERROGATORIES | |||
. t | |||
INTERROGATORIES | |||
: 1. What is the progrens of'the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safe- . | : 1. What is the progrens of'the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safe- . | ||
guards on ATWS? q- | guards on ATWS? q- | ||
: 2. Provile a copy of the sub-committec report as made available to be committee on January 4, 1979 | : 2. Provile a copy of the sub-committec report as made available to be committee on January 4, 1979 | ||
: 3. What is the Staff's estimate of the p'robability of an ATWS , | : 3. What is the Staff's estimate of the p'robability of an ATWS , | ||
in a BWR plant? ' | |||
: 4. How does. the Ctaff justify moving ahead with hearings on , | : 4. How does. the Ctaff justify moving ahead with hearings on , | ||
I., | I., | ||
; Apolicants ATWS system when the June, 1976 review by the | ; Apolicants ATWS system when the June, 1976 review by the | ||
: s. sl. | : s. sl. | ||
Environmental e | Environmental e | ||
Protection A 5encyjsays, , | Protection A 5encyjsays, , | ||
e As incidents occur in the nuclear power industry, 'M - | e As incidents occur in the nuclear power industry, 'M - | ||
their significance relative to reacbor safety should be evaluated and placed into m,eaningful perspective. (?) _' | their significance relative to reacbor safety should be evaluated and placed into m,eaningful perspective. (?) _' | ||
a- Specifically the incident at Three Mile Island, Unit 2, beginning March' 28, 1979 b- Reserved | |||
a- Specifically the incident at Three Mile Island, Unit 2, beginning March' 28, 1979 | |||
b- Reserved | |||
: 5. How much credit 'is assigned the Doppleer effect in reactivity . | : 5. How much credit 'is assigned the Doppleer effect in reactivity . | ||
d increase in an ATWS where the: | d increase in an ATWS where the: | ||
Line 134: | Line 94: | ||
: 6. Has the Staff taken the position (and is it the current posi-tion) that the recirculation pump trip feature combined with the ability to manually shutdown the reactor (by inserting ** | : 6. Has the Staff taken the position (and is it the current posi-tion) that the recirculation pump trip feature combined with the ability to manually shutdown the reactor (by inserting ** | ||
control rods or by initiating the Standby Liquid Control System | control rods or by initiating the Standby Liquid Control System | ||
_t (SLCS) provide sufficient protection in view of the very low | _t (SLCS) provide sufficient protection in view of the very low probability of complete failure to 'ucram? (This is a paraphrase of 15.1.28 of bhe PSAR') | ||
: 7. Does the NRC take the position that all SCRAMS are reported to it because licensee recording devices cannot be fud6ed, charts | : 7. Does the NRC take the position that all SCRAMS are reported to it because licensee recording devices cannot be fud6ed, charts | ||
* Reactor Safety StuM.y (WASH-14CO): A Review of the Final Report. | * Reactor Safety StuM.y (WASH-14CO): A Review of the Final Report. | ||
U. S. Enviranrental Protection Acency, Office of Radiation ' | U. S. Enviranrental Protection Acency, Office of Radiation ' | ||
Programs, ~.!as hington I . C. 20460, June 1976, Pa6e 1-8. | Programs, ~.!as hington I . C. 20460, June 1976, Pa6e 1-8. | ||
manually s.j%h | |||
manually | |||
s.j%h | |||
' )l,,1v :.', | ' )l,,1v :.', | ||
.; d:(. .. | .; d:(. .. | ||
' ]g Y | ' ]g Y | ||
.. , - - - ~3- y,i-p h qh | .. , - - - ~3- y,i-p h qh | ||
:.~ . a M. | :.~ . a M. | ||
hidden or other subterfuges won't evade NRC surveillance? .TO I | hidden or other subterfuges won't evade NRC surveillance? .TO I | ||
< .v..r : | < .v..r : | ||
G. NUREG-0460, V. III, Pg. 4, states: ,p 3 | G. NUREG-0460, V. III, Pg. 4, states: ,p 3 | ||
The principal criterion for choosing among the alter-S$$y | The principal criterion for choosing among the alter-S$$y | ||
Line 174: | Line 115: | ||
' T4r'' | ' T4r'' | ||
v , | v , | ||
: a. Isn'b it against policy to consider costs in safecy gg'ah u systems? (This intervenor recognizes that cost-benefit )y[, | : a. Isn'b it against policy to consider costs in safecy gg'ah u systems? (This intervenor recognizes that cost-benefit )y[, | ||
analysis are a part of the commission rules in regard ;:.f. s. . | analysis are a part of the commission rules in regard ;:.f. s. . | ||
to environmental, safety, such as with 10 CFR 20 guide- .55 | to environmental, safety, such as with 10 CFR 20 guide- .55 | ||
'wg* | 'wg* | ||
lines onradwaste systems.) 'qw | lines onradwaste systems.) 'qw | ||
: b. Will costs be a determining factor in the ATWS solution 4C, | : b. Will costs be a determining factor in the ATWS solution 4C, | ||
, for Allens Creek ( ACNGS-)? ;;hh | , for Allens Creek ( ACNGS-)? ;;hh | ||
:. If answer to "b" is "yes", please explain how costs will 'M.!5, | :. If answer to "b" is "yes", please explain how costs will 'M.!5, 1 | ||
be fi5ured in. For example, how wil'1 the Applicant be permitted to not use the full solution, assuming it is '') . | |||
Alternative #4, of NUREG-0460, v. III, Page. 18, 19? | Alternative #4, of NUREG-0460, v. III, Page. 18, 19? | ||
: 9. Wilt the NRC be able to present data from the Three Mile Island occurence on the adquacy of Regulatory Guide 1.77, | : 9. Wilt the NRC be able to present data from the Three Mile Island occurence on the adquacy of Regulatory Guide 1.77, with regard to adecuate conservation in assumptions rel-ative to peak fuel enthalpy? . | ||
with regard to adecuate conservation in assumptions rel- | |||
ative to peak fuel enthalpy? . | |||
: a. Will the results of the' December 9, 1978, LOFT tests be analyzed by that time, and available? | : a. Will the results of the' December 9, 1978, LOFT tests be analyzed by that time, and available? | ||
: 10. What is the Staff's current progress in the analyris of . '? | : 10. What is the Staff's current progress in the analyris of . '? | ||
General Electric Document, NED)-10802, " Analytic Methods ', | General Electric Document, NED)-10802, " Analytic Methods ', | ||
. of Plant Evaluacions of Gene'r al Electric BUR's"? | . of Plant Evaluacions of Gene'r al Electric BUR's"? | ||
11 Referring again to NUREG-0460, v.III, Pg 4, how many dollars per chance of ATWS accident was the limit on modifying . | 11 Referring again to NUREG-0460, v.III, Pg 4, how many dollars per chance of ATWS accident was the limit on modifying . | ||
standard design Mark-III, BWR-6 plants?(Of answer in another ,, | standard design Mark-III, BWR-6 plants?(Of answer in another ,, | ||
way if convenient this cost-benefit type question) , | way if convenient this cost-benefit type question) , | ||
; | ; | ||
: 12. How.will the risk of an ATUS stay acceptably small in view of the fact that the limited number of aperating reactors ; | : 12. How.will the risk of an ATUS stay acceptably small in view of the fact that the limited number of aperating reactors ; | ||
will increase ? (See NUREG-0460 v.III, P. 43). . | will increase ? (See NUREG-0460 v.III, P. 43). . | ||
Line 217: | Line 141: | ||
...s., , | ...s., , | ||
n;.;,'.t.;: . | n;.;,'.t.;: . | ||
4 ' l+, | 4 ' l+, | ||
~&'l!s :. " - . | ~&'l!s :. " - . | ||
Line 226: | Line 147: | ||
~ | ~ | ||
.7;'f.f T,.,' 13. How much more 13.4% sodium rentaborate solution in g Lions | .7;'f.f T,.,' 13. How much more 13.4% sodium rentaborate solution in g Lions | ||
.e f' ,,_. will be required of licensees to meet the"high capacity g;'g liquid poison injection" requirement of Alternate y4, . | |||
.e | |||
f' ,,_. will be required of licensees to meet the"high capacity g;'g liquid poison injection" requirement of Alternate y4, . | |||
-PJe.d in Table 1 on Page 18 of UUREG-0460, v. III.? | -PJe.d in Table 1 on Page 18 of UUREG-0460, v. III.? | ||
a '. | a '. | ||
Line 236: | Line 153: | ||
' g ,f 14. Has Apolicant committed to a rapid fuel failure (less than | ' g ,f 14. Has Apolicant committed to a rapid fuel failure (less than | ||
?[k[ | ?[k[ | ||
one minute) detection system? | one minute) detection system? | ||
.]7 '. 4,, d .L, a. Is there such a system for applicant to commit to? | .]7 '. 4,, d .L, a. Is there such a system for applicant to commit to? | ||
.t,.., s1 h... | |||
.t,.., s1 | |||
h... | |||
u .w .v . .M 15.r. State what consequence of ATWS events' alternative #4 (See 4 ,'' i UUREG-0460, v.III, Pg.18) would not mitigate and indicate | u .w .v . .M 15.r. State what consequence of ATWS events' alternative #4 (See 4 ,'' i UUREG-0460, v.III, Pg.18) would not mitigate and indicate | ||
, what you propse t'do about the consequences? | , what you propse t'do about the consequences? | ||
. l) ).Y | . l) ).Y | ||
:%0b eb: 6,, . | :%0b eb: 6,, . | ||
SERVICE OF PROCESS | SERVICE OF PROCESS y.3@.1.< | ||
y.3@.1.< | |||
-P I have served'c5pibs.oftFIRST SET OF INTERRO.GATORIES & FIRST n, , | -P I have served'c5pibs.oftFIRST SET OF INTERRO.GATORIES & FIRST n, , | ||
'*' REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS FROM .THE NUCLEAR REGULATORI COMMISSION BY | '*' REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS FROM .THE NUCLEAR REGULATORI COMMISSION BY | ||
' ,.'.. .., # JOEN F. DOHERTY on this day, April 7 , 1979 via U. S. Postal | ' ,.'.. .., # JOEN F. DOHERTY on this day, April 7 , 1979 via U. S. Postal | ||
. Service., nespbetfully submitted, | . Service., nespbetfully submitted, | ||
. . y. ' | . . y. ' | ||
f@n d. Doherty ' | f@n d. Doherty ' | ||
R 33% Leeland I.? y;e.' . | R 33% Leeland I.? y;e.' . | ||
douston, Te::n.s 77023 | douston, Te::n.s 77023 | ||
_.j- 9' PARTIES SERVED . | _.j- 9' PARTIES SERVED . | ||
'l l ' Sheldon J . Wolfe , Esq. (HRC) | 'l l ' Sheldon J . Wolfe , Esq. (HRC) | ||
/,. .'. ,', Dr. E. Leonard Cheatum (NRC) | /,. .'. ,', Dr. E. Leonard Cheatum (NRC) | ||
-c?'- Gustave Linenberger (NRC) | -c?'- Gustave Linenberger (NRC) | ||
Tl'.t. Docketing & Service Section (HRC) 5;-.' Steve Schinki (NRC Staff) | Tl'.t. Docketing & Service Section (HRC) 5;-.' Steve Schinki (NRC Staff) | ||
, '.F.i. chard A. Lawerre, Esq. (TEXAS)' | , '.F.i. chard A. Lawerre, Esq. (TEXAS)' | ||
P- 4 J. Gregory Copeland, Esq. (Applicant) | P- 4 J. Gregory Copeland, Esq. (Applicant) | ||
Line 289: | Line 181: | ||
-r ' Carro ninderstein, Esq. | -r ' Carro ninderstein, Esq. | ||
," $ # Brenda McCorkle, Esq. | ," $ # Brenda McCorkle, Esq. | ||
.g,,s; dames Scott, Esq. (Texpirg) vu,, | .g,,s; dames Scott, Esq. (Texpirg) vu,, | ||
,.,r. ' | ,.,r. ' | ||
Line 298: | Line 189: | ||
, -'.^ 'f k'* | , -'.^ 'f k'* | ||
'ir .&: | 'ir .&: | ||
,'[, , | ,'[, , | ||
; . g .- | ; . g .- | ||
. y .' .t ' | . y .' .t ' | ||
.g g s,;r..; l | .g g s,;r..; l | ||
(< .' | (< .' | ||
}}} | }}} |
Revision as of 19:28, 1 February 2020
ML19270G128 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Allens Creek File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png |
Issue date: | 04/09/1979 |
From: | Doherty J AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
To: | |
References | |
NUDOCS 7906050016 | |
Download: ML19270G128 (4) | |
Text
3 -
REttTED conn
- A -
[ U. S. NUCLEAR REGULA O h M lISSION #
4 $.
>[ BEFORE THE ATOr!IC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOA 9' b%9" d
1 ,bematterof: ' )' ' ' CM a
$ \o7 2
2 o'uaton Lighting & Power Co. I h ,, gf!
diens Ureek tiuclear Generating )
Docket #50-46e T4b I e..
g Station, Unit 1 #
EIRST
- ,2 SET OF INTERROGATORIES & FIRST REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS FROM
(, THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION .BY JOHN F. DOHERTY
- .;
s John r. Doherty, of 4438S Leeland, Houston, has been admitted r .-
l* ;iis a party .LNterVneor in the above proceedings on March 15, 1979, No raise a single contention with regard to the Anticipated Transi-
- n
] 'ent Without Scram Accident (ATWS-). . Pursuanc to 10 UFR 2.740 (b) 1 7'
s ,
2.741 the Staff is to answr eqch question below separately .
' . ' .,,and ful.ly in writing, making them no lator than 14 days af ter ser--
vice of these interrogatories.
',-" r.ach Interro6atory is to be answered as follows:
[*B'.ga.a.Frovideadirectanswertothequestion.
jf.. [..b'. identif / all documents and studies, and th particular parts -
.g%., 7
- f. . thereof, relied uoon by the staff, which serve as the basis for
..the answer. Provide copies of any st'ch document in 30 day,s 4
.W g under 10 CFR 2.741.
.1,}$.Identifybyname, title, and affiliation each Staff or Conmission
.:/y/ - employee, consultant, contractor or subcontractor that has the arg .i ;
' . expert knowledge required to support- the answer to the question.
y,4
. Identify in the same manner who6 answers each InterroCatory. ._,
9?J.d. Explain wheter the Staff or Commission is engaged or intends to engage in further research which may affect the answer, and -
A"
<. identify such work. M.,-
e r. p.
e'.-Identify the witnesses whom the Staff or Commission intends to 'g 1
- J.v.i. ,, have testify on the subject questioned. t ,
"e" .f,)
q$.p;f. Provide a summary of the testimony that each, witness in part
- m 23 g.
- / l (above) is exuecged to offar and state the factual basis for each
.$7 -
~2 conclusion or opinion each witness epects to present. $,ps .
m
. , g. Provide ooies of any document such witness will rely upon in ..
7/r.) formin opinions and conclusions for testimony. @
. p' -y . . . 3:
v.+
..7'.,i . 79060500* .%,
Y ?' .. *Oh?
S. 1 N.',tr-
. t INTERROGATORIES
- 1. What is the progrens of'the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safe- .
guards on ATWS? q-
- 2. Provile a copy of the sub-committec report as made available to be committee on January 4, 1979
- 3. What is the Staff's estimate of the p'robability of an ATWS ,
in a BWR plant? '
- 4. How does. the Ctaff justify moving ahead with hearings on ,
I.,
- Apolicants ATWS system when the June, 1976 review by the
- s. sl.
Environmental e
Protection A 5encyjsays, ,
e As incidents occur in the nuclear power industry, 'M -
their significance relative to reacbor safety should be evaluated and placed into m,eaningful perspective. (?) _'
a- Specifically the incident at Three Mile Island, Unit 2, beginning March' 28, 1979 b- Reserved
- 5. How much credit 'is assigned the Doppleer effect in reactivity .
d increase in an ATWS where the:
- a. Main Steam Isolation Valve Trips
- b. Turbine trips. ,
- 6. Has the Staff taken the position (and is it the current posi-tion) that the recirculation pump trip feature combined with the ability to manually shutdown the reactor (by inserting **
control rods or by initiating the Standby Liquid Control System
_t (SLCS) provide sufficient protection in view of the very low probability of complete failure to 'ucram? (This is a paraphrase of 15.1.28 of bhe PSAR')
- 7. Does the NRC take the position that all SCRAMS are reported to it because licensee recording devices cannot be fud6ed, charts
- Reactor Safety StuM.y (WASH-14CO): A Review of the Final Report.
U. S. Enviranrental Protection Acency, Office of Radiation '
Programs, ~.!as hington I . C. 20460, June 1976, Pa6e 1-8.
manually s.j%h
' )l,,1v :.',
.; d:(. ..
' ]g Y
.. , - - - ~3- y,i-p h qh
- .~ . a M.
hidden or other subterfuges won't evade NRC surveillance? .TO I
< .v..r :
G. NUREG-0460, V. III, Pg. 4, states: ,p 3
The principal criterion for choosing among the alter-S$$y
., native olant modifications is'the level of safety jud- l{f],.
ged by the NRC to be necessary. Another impor tant c eu.
.~ consideration is the cost of the modifications.
' T4r
v ,
- a. Isn'b it against policy to consider costs in safecy gg'ah u systems? (This intervenor recognizes that cost-benefit )y[,
analysis are a part of the commission rules in regard ;:.f. s. .
to environmental, safety, such as with 10 CFR 20 guide- .55
'wg*
lines onradwaste systems.) 'qw
- b. Will costs be a determining factor in the ATWS solution 4C,
, for Allens Creek ( ACNGS-)? ;;hh
- . If answer to "b" is "yes", please explain how costs will 'M.!5, 1
be fi5ured in. For example, how wil'1 the Applicant be permitted to not use the full solution, assuming it is ) .
Alternative #4, of NUREG-0460, v. III, Page. 18, 19?
- 9. Wilt the NRC be able to present data from the Three Mile Island occurence on the adquacy of Regulatory Guide 1.77, with regard to adecuate conservation in assumptions rel-ative to peak fuel enthalpy? .
- a. Will the results of the' December 9, 1978, LOFT tests be analyzed by that time, and available?
- 10. What is the Staff's current progress in the analyris of . '?
General Electric Document, NED)-10802, " Analytic Methods ',
. of Plant Evaluacions of Gene'r al Electric BUR's"?
11 Referring again to NUREG-0460, v.III, Pg 4, how many dollars per chance of ATWS accident was the limit on modifying .
standard design Mark-III, BWR-6 plants?(Of answer in another ,,
way if convenient this cost-benefit type question) ,
- 12. How.will the risk of an ATUS stay acceptably small in view of the fact that the limited number of aperating reactors ;
will increase ? (See NUREG-0460 v.III, P. 43). .
9 9
i
...s., ,
n;.;,'.t.;: .
4 ' l+,
~&'l!s :. " - .
- 4. . ,
3.b..'L nym .?!.t; n-
~
.7;'f.f T,.,' 13. How much more 13.4% sodium rentaborate solution in g Lions
.e f' ,,_. will be required of licensees to meet the"high capacity g;'g liquid poison injection" requirement of Alternate y4, .
-PJe.d in Table 1 on Page 18 of UUREG-0460, v. III.?
a '.
Tihr
' g ,f 14. Has Apolicant committed to a rapid fuel failure (less than
?[k[
one minute) detection system?
.]7 '. 4,, d .L, a. Is there such a system for applicant to commit to?
.t,.., s1 h...
u .w .v . .M 15.r. State what consequence of ATWS events' alternative #4 (See 4 , i UUREG-0460, v.III, Pg.18) would not mitigate and indicate
, what you propse t'do about the consequences?
. l) ).Y
- %0b eb: 6,, .
SERVICE OF PROCESS y.3@.1.<
-P I have served'c5pibs.oftFIRST SET OF INTERRO.GATORIES & FIRST n, ,
'*' REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS FROM .THE NUCLEAR REGULATORI COMMISSION BY
' ,.'.. .., # JOEN F. DOHERTY on this day, April 7 , 1979 via U. S. Postal
. Service., nespbetfully submitted,
. . y. '
f@n d. Doherty '
R 33% Leeland I.? y;e.' .
douston, Te::n.s 77023
_.j- 9' PARTIES SERVED .
'l l ' Sheldon J . Wolfe , Esq. (HRC)
/,. .'. ,', Dr. E. Leonard Cheatum (NRC)
-c?'- Gustave Linenberger (NRC)
Tl'.t. Docketing & Service Section (HRC) 5;-.' Steve Schinki (NRC Staff)
, '.F.i. chard A. Lawerre, Esq. (TEXAS)'
P- 4 J. Gregory Copeland, Esq. (Applicant)
-:fp;;*d l
e
, R. Gordoa Gooch, Esq. (Applicant.T
-r ' Carro ninderstein, Esq.
," $ # Brenda McCorkle, Esq.
.g,,s; dames Scott, Esq. (Texpirg) vu,,
,.,r. '
JL
~
- l'l . to
.i : '- .
, -'.^ 'f k'*
'ir .&:
,'[, ,
- . g .-
. y .' .t '
.g g s,;r..; l
(< .'}