ML20058J543

Order Granting Aamodt Request for 8-day Extension to File Exceptions to ASLB 820728 Partial Initial Decision. Exceptions Due by 820820.Time for Filing Brief to Be Calculated on Basis of last-filed Appellant Brief

ML20058J543
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	08/06/1982
From:	Shoemaker C Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:	AAMODTS
References
NUDOCS 8208110091
Download: ML20058J543 (3)

Text

_

e

• -} k h' DOCKETED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

[ '

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION .

g2 km -9 N.1 %0 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD Administrative Judges:

FFl{. ((h ~

BRANCH .

Gary J. Edles, Chairman '

't Dr. John H. Buck '

. M Christine N. Kohl SERVED Augkj982 In the Matter of )

) Docket No. 50-289 l METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY )

) (Restart - Management (Three Mile Island Nuclear ) Issues)

Station, Unit No. 1) )

)

ORDER August 6, 1982 The Licensing Board's Partial Initial Decision in the reopened phase of this proceeding was served on July 28, 1982. In accordance with our November 3, 1981 Order (unpublished), exceptions with respect to all management issues, including the issues involved in the reopened phase, are due to be filed 10 days after the Board's decision, i.e., no later than August 12, 1982. 1 Intervenors Marjorie and Norman Aamodt~have filed a motion requesting at least an eight-day extension of time in l which to file exceptions. They indicate, among other ,

t

~~1/ Parties are entitled to an additional five days because the Board's decision was served by mail. See 10 CFR 2.710.

Ohh0!$o$0gy eda

- - - - -ys

I

, 2 ,

~

J things, that they will be required to prepare exceptions at the same time as they are preparing comments on emergency planning issues before another appeal board in this proceeding. They represent that the licensee, the NRC staff and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania do not oppose the motion. Accordingly, we grant it and, as set forth below, establish the dates for the filing of exceptions and briefs for all parties.

We remind each party filing exceptions that it may file only a single consolidated brief in support of all of its exceptions in the management phase of the case (not only the cheating issue). Similarly, an appellee may file only a single reply brief, even if addressing issues raised in the briefs of more than one opposing party. Briefs are limited by rule to 70 pages. Requests to exceed this limit are discouraged and must be filed at least seven days in advance of the brief's due date. They must also state good cause for exceeding the page limit and specify the enlargement required. See 10 CFR 2.762 (e) (1982). We also expect the parties to comply with the other briefing requirements regarding format and content. See 10 CFR 2.762 (c) , (d) ;

2.708. -

The Aamodts' motion for extension of time is granted.

Exceptions to the Partial Initial Decision shall be filed by all parties no later than August 20, 1982. Briefs in support of all exceptions are due in accordance with the

7.. _ - .

, s \

4 '

s ,

t I

I ,

s *

. 3 n.

f 2 i 4.' .

v 3 t, 4-

..s-tprovisions of 10 CFR 2. 7.6,2 (a) and 2.710. Consolidated reply

• t { tg 4

briefs shall be filed p' rsuant u to 10 CFR 2.762 (b) and 2.710. "

' s  ?

i

,dhe time for filing; reply briefs shall be calculated on the l

basis of the date of the'1ast -filed appellant 's brief.

j It is so ORDERED. ,

r

/

'3 tg i

g

FOR THE APPEAL BCARD ,

e i' \

s t.- '

b -- 38 _ __

A ,, j ,.

C.( @ n STioemaker y j =.">3cretary to the t e

y Appeal Board-  :

) /

... , /

x x

, 4

{  !

\

t, 1 l '

?

/  ;)

4

• k i g

\

s

,f u

I, -

+

t

. - . , _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ - _ _ . . . . _ . . . . _ . . . _ . _ _ - . _ _ _ _ . . _ , . . - . _ , . . . , . . , ., , _ _ _ . , _ . . . _ _ . _ - _ _ . _ - . . .