ML20151U488

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Requests for Opportunity to Respond to Comments Filed Re Antitrust Issues Raised by Ohio Edison Co in Application for Amend to License & to Address Procedural Status of Application.Author Also Requests 45-day Response Period
ML20151U488
Person / Time
Site: Perry 
Issue date: 04/19/1988
From: Bauser D
OHIO EDISON CO., SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE
To: Thomas C
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8805020073
Download: ML20151U488 (1)


Text

._

SHAW, PITTMAN, PoTTs & TROWBRIDGE A *Anth.mSMS* t.eCWomeo *noFESECNA4 CoshaonAtpO8e9 2300 N STREET. N. W,

..-,.'."T. Tai'..,

J',"1"J;;%,

C

,o.;o

""'W'"n".m"**

cacei..>.n.

e..

woen'E*o'fe"av..

DEGORAM 8. SAUSER (202)7 33.

April 19, 1988 Cecil O. Thomas, Chief Policy Development and Technical Support Branch Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555 t

I Ret Docket No. 50-440A, Amendment Application by Ohio Edison Company to Suspend the l

Perry Operating License Antitrust Conditions

[

Dear Mr. Thomas:

Pursuant to the notice in the Federal Register of March 22, 1988, 53 Fed. Reg. 9386, the com, mar en-tod in which to express views on the antitrust issues rat =

cy Sur client, Ohio Edison Company, in its amendment applice 1-now expired.

At this juncture, we would like to requen oortunity to respond to l

the comments that have been filed address the procedural status of the Application.

We req':

a 45-day response period.

We have received comments from American Municf. pal Power-Ohio, Inc., the City of Cleveland and the City of Clyde.

If there are any other comments that will be considered by the NRC Staff, we would appreciate your forwarding a copy of these com-ments to us.

Thank you very much for your attention to this natter.

Sincerely, l

W. 6 W Deborah A. Bauser Counsel for Ohio Edison Company DBB:jah cc Counsel of Record M

,