ML20028C305

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Requests Ruling on Util 820928 Motion for Clarification of Portions of ASLB Memorandum & Order Ruling on Motions for Summary Disposition of Contentions.Scope of Contention 9(a) Must Be Delineated to Address Contention Effectively
ML20028C305
Person / Time
Site: Byron  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 01/03/1983
From: Mark Miller
COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO., ISHAM, LINCOLN & BEALE
To: Callihan A, Cole R, Smith I
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8301070314
Download: ML20028C305 (2)


Text

- _ _ _ _ . - .

ISHAM, LINCOLN & BEALE n COUNSELORS M LAW C '

THREE FIRST NATIONAL PLAZA CHICAGO, ILUNOIS =

.g3 jg -6 N120 EERTT u'NCoti E E "EEY[sE" wasa,NoToN omCE M0 CONNECT T VENUE N W uttaus sEitE. g5.tg b %dM& eRMICH

  • ^5"'"Ja"# "

January 3, 1983 In the Matter of )

)

COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-454 OL

) 50-455.0L (Byron Nuclear Power Station, )

Units 1-& 2) )

Hon. Ivan W. Smith Dr. A. Dixon Callihan Administrative Judge and Chairman Union Carbide Corporation Atomic Safety and Licensing P. O. Box Y Board Panel Oak Ridge, Tennesee 37830 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Dr. Richard F. Cole Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555

Dear Administrative Judges:

On September 28, 1982, Commonwealth Edison Company

(" Edison") filed its Motion For Clarification of portions of the Board's " Memorandum and Order Ruling on Motions For_ Summary

Disposition of DAARE/ SAFE Contentions". On October 8, 1982, t

DAARE/ SAFE filed its response to that motion. One of the matters as to which Edison sought clarification was the i scope of the Board's ruling with respect to DAARE/ SAFE Contention 9 (a) . That contention referred to the possibility of bubble collapse water hammer events in feed water lines.

The Board's September 10, 1982, Summary Disposition Order purported to deal with Contention 9 (a) but did so in such a way as to leave the scope of the evidentiary presentation for that contention unclear.

8301070314 830103 PDR ADOCK 05000454 1 g PDR

. . .- . ~ _ -

]}$Q3

9 Administrative' Judges January 3, 1983 Page 2 The Board Order dated August 30, 1982 stated that prefiled testimony for the evidentiary hearings shall be filed on or before February 15, 1983. In order to properly address Contention 9 (a) Edison (and presumably the other parties as well) must know the scope of the contention.

Edison therefore respectfully requests an early ruling by the Board on its September 28 Motion For Clarification.

Should the Board require further information regard-ing its Motion For Clarification, we would be happy to provide it. Thank you for your attention to this matter..

Yours truly,

'. 6 / I e f

Michael I. Miller One of the Attorneys for Commonwealth Edison Company MIM:es cc Service List l