ML16341B871
| ML16341B871 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 11/18/1982 |
| From: | Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16341B872 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8211300128 | |
| Download: ML16341B871 (2) | |
Text
/
V gp R'~ASCII~
~4 ~
PO
~c
." g
+a*++
OFFICE OF THE SEC R ETARY IIII 0 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORYCOMMISSlON WASHINGTON,O.C. 20555 October 27, 1981 MEMORANDUM FOR:
FROM:
SUBJECT'illiam J. Dircks Executive Director for Ope ions Samuel J. Chilk Secretary of the Commiss STAFF REFERRAL OF HEARING R
UESTS TO THE COMMISSION In January 1981 the Shoreham Opponents Coalition (SOC) submitted to the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation a petition that sought a hearing on the application of Long Is1and Lighting Company for an extension of the construction permit for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station.
In June 1981 that hearing request was transmitted to the Comission (SECY-81-395).
At that time, several members of the Commission requested an explanation of why there was a delay of six months before the ComIission was made aware of the hearing request.
Subsequently, staff prepared a chronology of the events concerning the petition and the timing of its referral to the Commission, which was provided to the Commissioners in:early August..-CQ<
I avao From the chronology, jt appears the main reason given for the delay in referral was a desire to have sufficient time to conduct negotiations concerning the substantive issues raised by the SOC petition prior to the convening of any adjudicatory proceeding.
In light of the ongoing operating license proceeding, these attempts to reach a settlement were undoubtedly a useful endeavor given the limited technical and legal resources available.
Nonetheless, it is ultimately the responsibility and prerogative of the COIImissioa, or any adjudicatory officials to whom it has,delegated the task, to consider and rule promptly upon hearing requests filed in accordance with section 189a of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
If thd CoMfssion is not aware of the pendency of such requests, it cannot fulfillits duty in this regard.
Accordin'gly, in the future, any Section 189a hearing request submitted to the staff that concerns a licensing action in which no notice of opportunity for hearing is outstanding shall be promptly transmitted to the COImission.
If settlement attempts are in progress and a delay in ruling on the petition would further the possibility of settlement, the'ommission should be so advised.
cc:
Chairman Palladino Commissioner Gilinsky Commissioner Bradford Commissioner Ahearne Commissioner Roberts OPE
,0 v
'IQ I