ML20032D058

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Order Re 811102 Prehearing Conference.Nrc & Applicant Stated That Certain Documents Would Be Offered as Exhibits & That Supplementary Testimony Would Be Presented at Future Hearing.Aslb to Be Reconstituted
ML20032D058
Person / Time
Site: Atlantic Nuclear Power Plant 
Issue date: 11/05/1981
From: Wolfe J
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:
References
ISSUANCES-MP, NUDOCS 8111130344
Download: ML20032D058 (2)


Text

- --

~=

^

g-

.,m UNITED. STATES OF AMERICA "

uk;Y:

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION-ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 11 lef -6 N0 6 Before Administrative Judges:

0FFICE OF SECRETAiir Sheldon J. Wolfe, Chairman DOCKETING & SERV!CE -

Dr. David R. Schink BRANCH Glenn 0. Bright

)

In the Matter of-

)

.)

0FFSH0RE POWER SYSTEMS

)

Docket No. STN 50-437 MP

)

(Manufacturing License for

)

November 5, 1981 Floating Nuclear Power Plants)

)

\\

^c.'

//,

9.

t No d

(Section2.752MemorializationofPrehearingConferenceI@

ORDER u

87

/t Pursuant to the Order of October 2,1981, a prehearirig/ f' I conference was held on November 2, 1981.

In attendance were Barton Cowen, Esq. and Ann Strickland, Esq.,. representing Applicant, and Steven Schinki, Esq., representing the NRC Staff. None of the Intervenors attended.

After the possible supplementation of Applicant's and the Staff's proposed partial findings of fact was discussed (Tr. 7478-80),

and after Mr. Sohinki advised that the Staff had no present intention of issuing further supplements to the Final Environmental Statement or to the Safety Evaluation Report (Tr. 7480), counsel for Applicant and Staff stated that certain documents would be offered as exhibits and

~

D%2 s

! D 8111130344 811105 PDR ADOCK 05000437 o

PDR

g,-

L Cf n

y

,A l9 j'..

.]

that certain supplementary testimony would be presented at a future

  1. Y hearing (Tr. 7482-88). Open items listed in an attachment to the

- t' "7

Staff's letter,to the Board dated October 11,.1979 were discussed

'/

(Tr. 7488-97).

f Because Judge Bright had a scheduling conflict, after con-r rferring with the Chief Administrative Judge, the Chairman announced

,p that the Board would have to be reconstituted and another Adminis-i trative Judge would be appointed. Applicant and Staff agreed in suggesting that their written direct testimonies should be submitted

,c by~ November 27 and that the hearing should proceed on December 4,.1981.

~

Further, Applicant and Staff were in agreement regarding a proposed sghedule f$r the submission of proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law by all parties.

The Chairman stated that an Order-woul.d be issued scheduling the hearing and subsequent submissions (Tr. 7497-7515).

4IT IS 50 ORDERED FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD

\\

k Sheldon J.Ulolfe ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE

___