ML20032E426
| ML20032E426 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 10/27/1981 |
| From: | Milhollin G Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | AAMODTS |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8111200546 | |
| Download: ML20032E426 (3) | |
Text
,
m UNITED STATES OF AMERICA O
gg m
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t, y-1 p
610L.il
$ hT pg g, g[9 ISBN ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
? vaM*
B'U ce Administrative Judge Gary L. Milhollin
[ETf[G a jaty 8E k
' as Special Master Q
BRANCH In the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY )
Decket No. 50-289
)
(Restart)
(Three Mile Island Ncclear
)
(Reopened Proceeding)
Station, Unit 1)
)
October 27, 1981 l
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER FOLLOWING A CONFERENCE AMONG THE PARTIES A conference among the parties to this proceeding was held on October 16, 1981 in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. The conference was convened pursuant to a Memorandum and Order of October 8, 1931 vy the Special Master.
The following parties were repre-sented: GPU Nuclear Corporation, Licensee; the Office of Executive Legal Director, United States Nuclear Regulatory Conmission (the Staff); Three Mile Island Alert (TMIA); Mr. Norman and Mrs.
Marjorie Aamodt.
The Conn.onwealth of Pennsylvania also partici-pated as an interested state under 10 CFR 5 2.715(c).
The purpose of the conference was to enable the parties to report on prooress made in discovery.
The conference was re-cessed'ron9:30to11:00a.m.,11:15tonoon,12:12to2:05p j
2:10 to 2:55 p.m. and 5:25 to 5:30 p.m. to allow the parties to reach agreement on discovery matters.
The parties are to be sop Q
8 I commanded for their cooperation in facilitating discovery.
3 8111200546 811027 PDR ADOCK 05000289 G
F
- 3 I. Motions Filed And Rulinjs Of Special Master The Staff moved the Special Master to reconsider his previous decision specifying the " attitude of the liRC Staff" concerning its excminations as a subissue within the general issue of the reopened proceeding.
(Tr. 23,376).
The Special Master will dispose of this r;otion by written order.
(Tr. 23,444).
The Aamodts presented two motions for ccnsideration by the Special Master.
(Tr. 23,394).
The first motion requested that four additional issues be added for consideration in the reopened proceeding.
The motion was denied frcn the bench (Tr. 23,444).
The second motion requested that NRC operator licensing examina-tions be postponed during the pendency of the reopened proceeding.
After hearing arguments frcm the parties, the Special !! aster denied this motion (Tr. 43,432) on the ground that the aliequacy of the examinations will be a matter in controversy during the reopened proceeding and that the Staff should understand that it is proceeding at its own risk.
Objections were made by Licensee ar.d Staff to certain interrogatories presented by the Aamodts.
These objections ~were disposed of by rulings from the bench.
II. Schedulins A schedule for follow-en discovery was agreed to by the parties.
(Tr. 23,424 et. seq.). Responses to discovery requests received on October 16 are due on October 26.
Follou-on discovery requests may be submitted by October 22.
Responses to follow-on discovery are due on October 28.
Once a party has ascertained that follow-en discovery is needed, it will make every effort to promptly notify the party from which discovery is requested.
i i
Documents furnished in response to discovery requests need not be served on the Licensing Board.
III.
Presentation of.litnesses At Hearing Juring the Conference, the parties agreed upon the sequence in wh ch testiroony shall be presented at the evidentiary hearing beginning on November 10. The Licensee will present its direct case, followed by intervenors, the Staff, and then witnesses called by the Special Master.
(Tr. 23,447). This shall be the schedule unless it is altered by the Special Master.
The Licensee has agreed to serve as the initial contact for Mr. Frank Kelly, who is to be called as a Board uitness (Tr. 23,459).
Ms. Louise Bradford of TMIA has agreed to serve as the designated person for rapid com.unication to the intervenors, iri lieu of Mr. John Clo.:ett.
(Tr. 23,454).
Requests for sequestration of witnesses should be made before the commencement of the evidentiary hearing.
The parties should be prepared to address tiiis question when the hearing begins if they have r.ot reached an agreement upon it before that time.
t
.)
2 /. / S
, 4 /.
- v Gary L. Silhollin M;f ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE
}
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Bethesda, Maryland October 27, 1981
-_,-_..__ -,_. -. -. _ - _ - _ _