ML19329E864

Motion for Extension of Time Until 731119 to Respond to Intervenors' 731105 Motion to Produce Nonprivileged Documents.Motion Should Be Granted.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML19329E864
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	11/19/1973
From:	Ross W CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.), WALD, HARKRADER & ROSS
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
NUDOCS 8006180679
Download: ML19329E864 (4)

Text

_

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION In the Matter of )

Consumers Power Company ) Docket Nos. 50-329A

) 50-330A (Midland Plant Units 1 and 2) )

)

MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO PRODUCE NON-PRIVILEGED DOCUMENTS FILED BY INTERVENORS IN THIS PROCEEDING Applicant moves for an extension of time to respond to Intervenors' Motion to Produce Non-Privileged Documents (served by hand on Applicant's counsel.on Monday, November 5, 1973) to and including Monday, November 19, 1973. In support hereof Applicant states as follows:

1. Under the Commission's rules unless extended, time for responding to the Intervenors' Motion wculd expire Monday, Novem-ber 12, 1973.

2. . Applicant's Motion seeks production of 121 of what it describes as "non-privileged" and " relevant" documents. These i

appear to be about 8% of those documents made available for in-spection to the Intervenors' counsel through the sampling process ordered by_the Board. Applicant also seeks inspection of all other non-privileged documents presently held by Applicant's Washington. counsel.

3. An adequate response to Intervenors' Motion will require study of each of'the documents specifically sought to-be produced i

8006180 N 7 4

~

by the Motion. It will be necessary for Applicant's counsel to examine each document to determine (a) its relevancy and (b) whether or not it should have been produced pursuant to the joint document demand. Counsel will then have to prepare an adequate responsive pleading discussing each of the 121 documents which the Motion seeks, as well as addressing Intervenors' demand for virtually complete access to counsel's files.

4. A7plicant's Washington counsel are fully engaged in preparing Applicant's pre-trial brief in this proceeding which is due to be filed November 19, 1973. In addition, the lawyer in this office post immediately concerned with the sampling process, Keith S. Watson, has been out of town Monday through Wednesday of this week on a longstanding commitment. Accordingly, he has not been available to respond to Intervenors' Motion. Because of Mr. Watson's unique familiarity with this matter, as well as its complexity, it. would be physically impossible for this firm to pre-pare an adequate response to the Intervenors' Motion in the approxi-  ;

mately four working days available.

5. The delay here sought, to November 19, 1973, should not prejudice the Intervenors or other parties. Hearings are presently ;

1 scheduled to commence on November 26, 1973 in which the Department of Justice's direct case will firs,t be reached by cross examination.

We anticipate that-the earliest the Intervenors'. prepared direct evidence could be reached for cross examinacion would be the last two weeks in December 1973. The Hearing Board at this time has not pro-vided for introduction of additional documentary or other evidence in

~

'the initial hearing phase of this case. However,.should the Board

' decide to permit Intervenors to introduce any documents which it

- .m may order produced pursuant to Intervenors' Motion here under consideration, Intervenors should have adequate time to analyze and select such documents, under the schedule proposed by Appli-i cant in this Motion. Furthermore, the Board has directed that rebuttal evidence will be filed and heard at an interval following cross examination of the direct case, which would provide a further opportunity.

WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, it is requested that time for respcnding to the aforesaid Motion be extended to the close of business, November 19, 1973.

Ab 1

=_-

Wm. Warflehd Ross Wald, Harkrader & Ross 1320 Nineteenth Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C. 20036 Counsel for Applicant i

9

' November 7_,'1973 ,

3 m -

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION In.the Matter of )

) Docket Nos. 50-329A CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY ) 50-330A (Midland Units 1 and 2) )

4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO PRODUCE NON-PRIVILEGED DOCUMENTS FILED BY INTERVENORS IN THIS PROCEEDING, dated November 7, 1973, in the above-captioned matter have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class or air mail, this 7th day of November, 1973:

Jerome Garfinkel, Esq., Chairman Dr. J. V. Leeds, Jr.

. Atomic Safety and Licensing Board P. O. Box 941 Atomic Energy Commission Houston, Texas 77001 Washington, D. C. 20545 Atomic Safety and Licensing Hugh K. Clark, Esq. Board P. lD. Box 127A Atomic Energy Commission Kennedyville, Maryland 21645 Washington, D. C. 20545 Ja'es m Carl Pollock, Esquire William T. Clabault, Esq.

2600 Virginia Avenue, N. W. Joseph J. Saunders, Esq.

Washington, D. C. 20037 David A. Leckie, Esq.

Public-Counse'l Section Joseph Rutberg, Jr., Esq. Antitrust Division l -Antitrust Counsel for Department of Justice i AEC Regulatory Staff Washington, D. C. 20530 Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C. 20545 -

-Wallace E. Brand, Esq.

Antitrust Public Counsel Section P. O. Box 7513 Washington, D. C. 20044-Y Wm. Warfield Ross

. , - . . .-- e v-