ML19332D581: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 15: Line 15:
| document type = LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS, PLEADINGS
| document type = LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS, PLEADINGS
| page count = 2
| page count = 2
| project =
| stage = Request
}}
}}


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:. . . _ . . . . . . . . . _ . . . .         . _ . . . . _
{{#Wiki_filter:... _......... _....
h}4)O                                                                                                                               >
h}4)O f
i f                                                                                                                                    I November 20, 1989               1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA                     W g           g before the                  g(>                 4 DOCTITED NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION       _
i November 20, 1989 1
t,     NOV 2019895"S
W UNITED STATES OF AMERICA g
                                                                                                        - E,
g g(>
* DOOKETtNG &
DOCTITED before the 4
0   SLTnCL AP/,Ncu
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t,
                                                                                                                                /
NOV 2019895"S
In the Matter of                                                             4> [ LONC                 ,
- E, DOOKETtNG &
y, n PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY                                   Docket Nos. 5 0-4 4 3'd '                     ,
0 SLTnCL AP/,Ncu
OF NEW HAMPSHIRE,'gi al.                                     50-444-0                       ,
/
(Seabrook Station, Units 1                             (Offsite Emergency and 2)                                         Planning and Safety Issues)
In the Matter of 4> [ LONC y, n PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY Docket Nos. 5 0-4 4 3'd '
APPLICANTS' REQUEST FOR COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF APPLICANTS' ANSWER TO INTERVENORS' NOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR A STAY OF LBP-89-28                                       .
OF NEW HAMPSHIRE,'gi al.
TO THE COMMISSION:
50-444-0 (Seabrook Station, Units 1 (Offsite Emergency and 2)
Planning and Safety Issues)
APPLICANTS' REQUEST FOR COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF APPLICANTS' ANSWER TO INTERVENORS' NOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR A STAY OF LBP-89-28 TO THE COMMISSION:
Applicants respectfully represent as follows:
Applicants respectfully represent as follows:
: 1.       Under date of November 17, 1989, The Attorney General of The Commonwealth of Massachusetts (MAG) on behalf of himself and New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution (NECNP) and Seacoast Anti-Pollution League (SAPL) , filed and se'ved                     r by telefax a " Motion for Extension of Time to File an Application for Stay of LBP-89-28" ("the Motion").
1.
: 2.         Later on that same day in the afternoon, Applicants filed and served by Federal Express an answer to the Motion, a copy of which answer is attached hereto and marked                           "A."
Under date of November 17, 1989, The Attorney General of The Commonwealth of Massachusetts (MAG) on behalf of himself and New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution (NECNP) and Seacoast Anti-Pollution League (SAPL), filed and se'ved by r
EX28 CORE.SB 9912040172 891120 PDR   ADOCK 05000443 o                         eDR                                                           yo3
telefax a " Motion for Extension of Time to File an Application for Stay of LBP-89-28" ("the Motion").
2.
Later on that same day in the afternoon, Applicants filed and served by Federal Express an answer to the Motion, a copy of which answer is attached hereto and marked "A."
EX28 CORE.SB 9912040172 891120 PDR ADOCK 05000443 yo3 o
eDR


P 3,
P 3,
S
S 3.
: 3. After 5:00pm on that same day, Applicants' received an order from the Appeal Board referring the Motion to the Commission. This Order obviously was issued prior to the time the Appeal Board had received Applicants' Answer.
After 5:00pm on that same day, Applicants' received an order from the Appeal Board referring the Motion to the Commission.
: 4. Applicants' Answer demonstrates that the Motion should be denied as a matter of law because it is filed well out of time.
This Order obviously was issued prior to the time the Appeal Board had received Applicants' Answer.
WHEREFORE, Applicants respectfully request that the Commission consider the Answer attached hereto and marked   "A" in its consideration of the Motion referred by the Appeal Board.
4.
Applicants' Answer demonstrates that the Motion should be denied as a matter of law because it is filed well out of time.
WHEREFORE, Applicants respectfully request that the Commission consider the Answer attached hereto and marked "A"
in its consideration of the Motion referred by the Appeal Board.
Respectfully submitted, n
Respectfully submitted, n
Thomas G. Dignan', ~J r.
Thomas G.
George H. Lewald Jeffrey P. Trout Jay Bradford Smith Geoffrey C. Cook William L. Parker Ropes & Gray One International Place Boston, MA 02110-2624 (617) 951-7000 counsel for Applicants i}}
Dignan', ~J r.
George H. Lewald Jeffrey P. Trout Jay Bradford Smith Geoffrey C.
Cook William L.
Parker Ropes & Gray One International Place Boston, MA 02110-2624 (617) 951-7000 counsel for Applicants i}}

Latest revision as of 02:29, 31 December 2024

Applicant Request for Commission Consideration of Applicant Answer to Intervenors Motion for Extension of Time to File Application for Stay of LBP-89-28.* Intervenors Motion Should Be Denied Due to Untimeliness.W/Certificate of Svc
ML19332D581
Person / Time
Site: Seabrook  NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 11/20/1989
From: Dignan T
PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, ROPES & GRAY
To:
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML19332D582 List:
References
CON-#489-9473 LBP-89-28, OL, NUDOCS 8912040172
Download: ML19332D581 (2)


Text

... _......... _....

h}4)O f

i November 20, 1989 1

W UNITED STATES OF AMERICA g

g g(>

DOCTITED before the 4

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t,

NOV 2019895"S

- E, DOOKETtNG &

0 SLTnCL AP/,Ncu

/

In the Matter of 4> [ LONC y, n PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY Docket Nos. 5 0-4 4 3'd '

OF NEW HAMPSHIRE,'gi al.

50-444-0 (Seabrook Station, Units 1 (Offsite Emergency and 2)

Planning and Safety Issues)

APPLICANTS' REQUEST FOR COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF APPLICANTS' ANSWER TO INTERVENORS' NOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR A STAY OF LBP-89-28 TO THE COMMISSION:

Applicants respectfully represent as follows:

1.

Under date of November 17, 1989, The Attorney General of The Commonwealth of Massachusetts (MAG) on behalf of himself and New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution (NECNP) and Seacoast Anti-Pollution League (SAPL), filed and se'ved by r

telefax a " Motion for Extension of Time to File an Application for Stay of LBP-89-28" ("the Motion").

2.

Later on that same day in the afternoon, Applicants filed and served by Federal Express an answer to the Motion, a copy of which answer is attached hereto and marked "A."

EX28 CORE.SB 9912040172 891120 PDR ADOCK 05000443 yo3 o

eDR

P 3,

S 3.

After 5:00pm on that same day, Applicants' received an order from the Appeal Board referring the Motion to the Commission.

This Order obviously was issued prior to the time the Appeal Board had received Applicants' Answer.

4.

Applicants' Answer demonstrates that the Motion should be denied as a matter of law because it is filed well out of time.

WHEREFORE, Applicants respectfully request that the Commission consider the Answer attached hereto and marked "A"

in its consideration of the Motion referred by the Appeal Board.

Respectfully submitted, n

Thomas G.

Dignan', ~J r.

George H. Lewald Jeffrey P. Trout Jay Bradford Smith Geoffrey C.

Cook William L.

Parker Ropes & Gray One International Place Boston, MA 02110-2624 (617) 951-7000 counsel for Applicants i