ML20040G307
| ML20040G307 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 02/09/1982 |
| From: | Milhollin G Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | AAMODTS |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8202120147 | |
| Download: ML20040G307 (2) | |
Text
c..
m yf '
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'82 FEB 10 PI :36 9 9. g...g ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD oc m Before Administrative Judge Gary L. Milhollin as Special Master SERVED FEB 1 0 1982 Docket No. 50-28 Og ' \\
In the Matter of
)
(Restart)
METROPOLITAN EDIS0N COMPANY
)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear
)
(Reopened Proc fig)
\\
Station, Unit 1)
)
Ogg s
' ~ ~ '
FQ i :
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
"$J
^[
DENYING MOTION TO STAY THE HEARING Mnr,i a
t, g
s Norman and Marjorie Aamodt, who are intervenors in this proceedin, &, n. m (
moved on December 10, 1981, to stay the evidentiary hearing. They wished to have the hearing stayed pending an investigation of allegedly inappropriate communications between Licensee's counsel and certain witnesses. The motion was made on the record while the hearing was in progress. The Licensee, the NRC Staff, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania opposed the motion and stated their reasons on the record. The motion was then denied from the bench.
(Tr. 26,788 to 25,799).
l l
The Aamodts now request, by a written motion dated January 8, 1982, that the denial be reconsidered. Also, in the event that the motion is not granted after reconsideration, they request that the motion be certified to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.
l The motion was denied on December 10 because the relief requested,-which DSO) was a stay of the hearing pending a collateral proceeding on the conduct of~
Licensee's counsel, was entirely disproportionate to the facts upon which the
/g relief was sought.
The facts consist of one communication, which occurred l
l when' Licensee's counsel informed two sequestered witnesses of the testimony l
C202120147 820209
(
PDR ADOCK 05000289 0
e,.
s -,
[
of a third witness who had been presented by the NRC Staff. This third witness was not sequestered.
The Licensee's counsel based his action upon his desire to obtain information useful in cross examination and upon his interpretation of the order sequestering witnesses (Special Master's Seques-tration Order of November 12,1981).
I am still of the opinion that Licensee's counsel acted in good faith, and according to an interpretation of the Se-i t
~
questration Order which does not violate its literal terms.
Nothing in the Aamodts' motion for reconside, ration causes me to change my mind.
With respect to the Aamodts' additional motion to certify this question to the Licensing Board, it is obvious that the Aamodts have not met the require-ments for interlocutory appeal set out in 10 CFR 52.730(f).
Those requirements were adopted by the Licensing Board for this proceeding (Licensing Board's-Memorandum and Order of September 14, 1981).
For the reasons stated previously on the record, and those stated above, both of the Aamodts' motions are hereby denied.
IT IS 50 ORDERED.
QAH Gary L. Silhollin g
ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 9th. day of February, 1982
..