ML20133F808
| ML20133F808 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 10/09/1985 |
| From: | Bordenick B NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP) |
| References | |
| CON-#485-742 OL-3, NUDOCS 8510110237 | |
| Download: ML20133F808 (7) | |
Text
._-
l Y42 l
October 9,1985 l
i i
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA r c c p' NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0P911SSION f
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD
'd5 CTil P3 :21 In the Matter of NkdqNfg U Mct LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY Docket No. 50-322-OL-3 l
)
(Emergency Planning)
(ShorehamNuclearPowerStation,
)
l Unit 1)
)
l NRC STAFF RESPONSE TO SUFFOLK COUNTY AND STATE OF NEW YORK MOTION FOR EXTENSTION OF TIME FOR FILING EMERGENCY PLANNING APPEAL BRIEFS l
I.
INTRODUCTION i
By motion dated October 7, 1985, Suffolk County and the State of New York seek an extension of the filing deadline to October 23, 1985, for the brief in support of their appeal of the Licensing Board's April 17, 1985 Partial Initial Decision on Emergency Planning (PID) 1/ and, to November 6,1985, for the filing of their brief in support of the appeal of the Licensing Board's August 26, 1985 Concluding Partial Initial Decision on Emergency Planning (CPID) 2/. Both briefs are presently due on October 15, 1985.
For the reasons set out below, the NRC Staff does not oppose the request for an extension of time to October 23, 1985, for the filing of a brief in support of the PID appeal. As to the brief in 1/
LBP-85-12,21NRC644(1985).
2/
LBP-85-31, 22 NRC l
1 8510110237g5 322 PDR ADOCK PDR 2 s 57
3 support of the CPID appeal, the Staff does not support the request for an extension of the filing time to November 6,1985, but would not object to an extension of time to October 23, 1985, as the filing date for such a brief.
II.
DISCUSSION The NRC Staff is aware of the extensive damage to the electric power system resulting from Hurricane Gloria which struck Long Island on September 27, 1985, as set out in the County and State's recent motion, and in the County's October 4th letter to the Appeal Board. While the Staff is sympathetic to the recent problems encountered by the County and State, their motion does not address such matters as why the State's word processing equipment in Albany, presumably unaffected by Hurricane Gloria, was not utilized subsequent to September 27th for purposes of timely ccmpleting the brief in cuestion. The Staff, however, does not believe that the additional eight day extension of time sought by the County and State will significantly delay resolution of the appeal in question. E Thus, the Staff does not oppose the requested extension of time as to the PID brief.
However, as to the requested extension of time relating to preparation of the brief in support of the CPID appeal, the Staff does not believe an extension beyond October 23rd is warranted. The CPID is a relatively brief decision which addresses only one area where the 3/
The filing deadline for this brief has been extended, without
~
objection of any party, on five separate occasions over an approximately four and one-half month period.
Licensing Board's findings were, in part, adverse to the County and State's position.
Presumably, preparation of the brief in support of the County and State Appeal of that one issue was well underway prior to September 27th.
The recent motion simply states, at page 3, that the difficulties and delays attendant to preparing the brief on the April PID have made it impossible to focus on this second brief. The Staff believes that the County and State can and should be able to complete their brief in support of the CPID Appeal by October 23, 1985, given the i
relatively narrow issue involved and the previous preparation time 4
I available prior to September 27th. Accordingly, the Staff opposes an extension of time to November 6, 1985, as requested, for the filing of the brief in support of the August CPID appeal. Powever, the Staff would not object to an eight day extension of time to October 23, 1985, for the filing of that brief. M III.
CONCLUSION The Staff does not object to an eight day extension of time within which the County and State may file a brief in support of their appeal of 4
i l
4/
The motion, at page 2, also reiterates the County and State's belief that appeal briefs on the Coliseum issue should be filed after completion of litigation pending in State court.
(See page 3 of a j
letter dated October 2,1985, from one of LILCO's counsel to the Appeal Board for a status report of the litigation in question).
The Staff notes that the Appeal Board has dealt with this suggestion in footnote 3 of its unpublished Order of October 7,1985, indicating its disinclination to defer the filing of the County's brief (or that of the State or Southampton) to await the outcome of pending State court litigation. As further noted by the Appeal Board, this is particularly so if there is no assurance of a rapid disposition of the State court litigation. The recent motion does not address tile question of whether there will be a rapid disposition of that litigation. The Staff continues to be of the opinion that filing of briefs should not be deferred pending completion of the State court litigation.
l i
the April PID. The Staff objects to the recuest for an extension of time to flovember 6,1985, for the filing of a brief in support of the County and State appeal of the August CPID. The Staff, however, would not object to an extension of time to October 23, 1985 for the filing of such a brief.
Respectfully submitted, WWr h/
Bernard M. Bordenick Counsel for NRC Staff Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 9th day of October,1985
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
~,
I NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD v ' O s su,
in the Matter of NQf g
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-322-OL-3 (Emergency Planning)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF RESPONSE TO SUFFOLK COUNTY AND STATE OF NEW YORK MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR FILING EMERGENCY PLANNING APPEAL BRIEFS" in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class or, as indicated by an asterisk, through deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system, or as indicated by a double asterisk, by hand delivery, this 9th day of October,1985.
Alan S. Rosenthal, Esq., Chairman **
Gary J. Edles, Esq.**
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Howard A. Wilber**
Gerald C. Crotty, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Ben Wiles, Esq.
Board Counsel to the Governor U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Executive Chamber Washington, D.C.
20555 State Capitol Albany, NY 12224 Morton B. Margulies, Chairman
- Fabian G. Palomino, Esq.
Administrative Judge Special Counsel to the Governor Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Executive Chamber 1
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission State Capitol Washington, D.C.
20555 Albany, NY 12224 Dr. Jerry R. Kline*
Jonathan D. Feinberg, Esq.
Administrative Judge New York State Department of Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Public Service U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Three Empire State Plaza Washington, D.C.
20555 Albany, NY 12223
_ _.-=
= ____ ___ _ _
W. Taylor Reveley III, Esq.
Mr. Frederick J. Shon*
Hunton & Williams Administrative Judge 707 East Main Street Atomic Safety and Licensing Board P.O. Box 1535 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Richmond, VA 23212 Washington, D.C.
20555 Herbert H. Brown, Esq.
Stephen B. Latham, Esq.
Lawrence Coe Lanpher, Esq John F. Shea, III, Esq.
Karla J. Letsche, Esq.
Twomey, Latham & Shea Kirkpatrick & Lockhart 1900 M Street, N.W.
Attorneys at Law.
8th Floor P.O. Box 398 33 West Second Street Washington, D. C.
20036 3
Riverhead, NY 11901 i
Donna Duer, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Attorney Board Panel
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Panel Washington, D.C.
20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 4
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel **
James B. Dougherty, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 3045 Porter Street, NW Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20008 Docketing and Service Section*
Stewart M. Glass, Esq.
Office cf the Secretary Regional Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Federal Emergency Management Washington, D.C.
20555 Agency 26 Federal Plaza Spence Perry, Esq.
Room 1349 Associate General Counsel New York, NY 10278 Federal Emergency Management Agency Room 840 Robert Abrams, Esq.
500 C Street, S.W.
Attorney General of the State Washington, D.C.
20472 of New York 4
Attn:
Peter Bienstock, Esq.
Edward M. Barrett, Esq.
Department of Law General Counsel State of New York j
Long Island Lighting Company Two World Trade Center 250 Old County Road Room 46-14 Mineola, NY 11501 New York, NY 10047 MHB Technical Associates Ms. Nora Bredes 1723 Hamilton Avenue Shoreham Opponents Coalition Suite K 195 East Main Street San Jose, CA 95175 Smithtown, NY 11787 e
i J
. _ = _ - _ - _ - -
l l,
Hon. Peter Cohalan Suffolk County Executive County Executive / Legislative Bldg.
Veteran.'s Memorial Highway Hauppauge, NY 11788 Martin Bradley Ashare, Esq.
l Suffolk County Attorney Mr. Jay Dunkleberger l
H. Lee Dennison Building New York State Energy Office Veteran's Memorial Highway Agency Building 2 Hauppauge, NY 11788 Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12223 Chris Nolin Mr. Robert Hoffman t
l New York State Assembly Ms. Susan Rosenfeld l
Energy Committee Ms. Sharlene Sherwin 626 Legislative Office Building P.O. Box 1355 Albany, NY 12248 Massapequa, NY 11758 M
k Eernard M. Bord 6 nick Counsel for NRC Staff I
i
--