ML20059M674

Corrected Memorandum & Order (Dispensing W/Prefiled Testimony).* Hearing Dates Will Remain as Specified in Order of 900829 & Requirement for Prefiled Testimony Will Be Dispensed.Served on 901001

ML20059M674
Person / Time
Site:	Perry
Issue date:	09/27/1990
From:	Frye J, Kline J, Shon F Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:	CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO., NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
References
CON-#490-10863 90-605-02-OLA, 90-605-2-OLA, OLA-2, NUDOCS 9010050181
Download: ML20059M674 (3)

Text

t- 1

}O$b CORRECTED COPY ppg '

U$NRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA I NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION '90 (CT -1 P2 :11 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD t yH ru ci stcat tuv i

Before Administrative Judges John H Frye, III, Chairman

$$h['M l Dr. Jerry R. Kline Frederick J. Shon NFWED OCT - 11990  ;

i In the Matter of Docket No. 50-440-OLA-2 The Cleveland Electric i Illuminating Company, et al ASLBP No. 90-605-02-OLA (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, l Unit No. 1) i September 27, 1990 l MEMORANDUM AND ORDER +

(Dispensing with Profiled Testimony)  ;

On September 26, 1990, counsel for CEI telephoned the Board to request an indefinite delay in the hearing now set to begin October 30. Counsel represented that the other parties were in agreement to the delay, that the parties had _

t been in contact and had arrived at a possible stipulation that might establish the facts of the case and hence make a hearing unnecessary, and that substantial effort would be saved if preparations for the hearing could be avoided.

Counsel further stated that OCRE had propounded a series of questions to CEI, questions which could probably be answered in a week, and that upon receipt of the answers

the parties would in all likelihood be able to arrive at a 9010050181 900927 E ,

PDR ADOCK 05000440 )

O PDR  ;

) 60

r ,

]

I

. i l

i stipulation within another week. Thus a settlement might well be attainable at about the time the filing of testimony  !

is now due.  !

l The Board is reluctant to delay the hearing 1 indefinitely. We have decidad to allow the parties to dispense with the preparation of prefiled testimony, but retain the hearing dates presently scheduled. Thus if a settlement is reached, no resources need be expanded in preparing prefiled testimony, and if no settlement is reached direct testimony on any remaining differences ,

concerning the facts can be presented at the hearing. If the parties still wish a delay at some time after the middle of October (when prefiled testimony would have been due) they may so move at that time.

The hearing dates will remain as specified in our order i

I

F .

9 '.

i f

I of August 29; the requirement for profiled testimony will be l

dispensed with. .

IT IS SO ORDERED 1 Atomic fety and Licensing Board m /

defl W 1.b u /

Frederick J. hon '

ADMINISTRATI E JUDGE J h A /1 ll s D'f. Jerry 1. Kli'ne ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE i

/

J 8 Me, III, Chairman M NISTRATIVE JUDGE I

Bethesda, Maryland September 27, 1990 t

I Counsel for CEI was informed of this decision by telephone on September 26.

! i l  !

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