ML19210C725

Status Rept of Remanded Proceeding.No Further Hearings Held. Briefs Filed on 790716 & Replies on 790816.LILCO Et Al Supported Station as Proposed.Believes Proposal Will Be Approved by Weight of Evidence.W/Certificate of Svc

ML19210C725
Person / Time
Site:	05000516, 05000517
Issue date:	10/10/1979
From:	Reveley W LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
To:	NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP)
References
NUDOCS 7911200006
Download: ML19210C725 (4)

Text

.

A7

- s

.

2 s

' ~

1S. '-

NRC PUBLIC DCCUMENT 199M 10/10/79 (g$7 [f _, ~ u g,,

• ~

6 - -i v.-, 4.,W'pu -

,e s a

~

\s.\ .

~.

$.' ' sg , . > -5 ' /.,

UNITED STATES OF AMEAICA i.e:- J s NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Acceal Board In the Matter of )

)

LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY )

and )

NEW YORK STA"'? 77 TCTRIC & ) Docket Nos. 50-516 GAS CORPORATION ) 50-517

)

(Jamesport Nuclear Power Station, )

Units 1 and 2) )

Siting Board Proceeding Status Recort In a letter dated October 3,1979, C. Jean Bishop, Secre-tary to the Appeal 3 card, requested an update on the Jamesport Siting Board proceeding:

The Appeal Board asks you to please inform it of the status of that remanded proceed-ing, including the positions of the various participants, when an en h ers' decision is anticipa:ed, and the likelihood, exten:

and effect of further croceedings before the State Siting Board'i:self.

1. No further hearings have been held in the New York Sta:e Ja=esport case, despite the Siting Board's December 1973 remand of the proceeding. Last May, after adopting means for supplementing the record tha: did not involve furrher hearings or further decision by the Examiners, :he Siting 3 card directed

hat exceptions :o the Ex' e ers' June 1973 decisions be 4

77' 353 791120000 6

briefed. Parties interested in filing briefs and/or other materials did so initially on July 16 and in reply on August 16, 1979. The following table su==arices these filings.-

Julv 16 Au ws: 16 Applicants x x Consumer Protection Board x x Dep': of Environmental Conservation (DEC) x x Dep': of Health -

x Dep't of Public Service CDPS) x x Ecology Action of Tompkins County x -

Join: Intervenors (six parties) x x League of 'Jonen Voters of Tomokins County I x Suffolk County x x Town of Riverhead x Town of Southold x x

2. In the filings just noted, the Applicants supported the station as proposed. The Town of Riverhead urged the sit-ing of at least one 800 MWe unit at Jamesport to be owned by LILCO and NYSE&G, but called for further hearings to determine whether the station should be nuclear or coal-fired. The DEC recoc= ended "that LILCO alone chould be per=icted to add to its system a maxi =um of 1200 54e or its equivalent in central-iced or decentralized energy sources on Long Island," '.hese energy sources to be used to displace oil-fired generation. The DPS opposed :he Jamesporr application, felt that there might be a need for new coal-fired generation at Shoreham 'Jes: at some point, but recoc= ended doing nothing absent the filing of a new application. The Depart =ent of Health filed testi=ony on August 16 rebutting the suggestion in.:estimony filed by Suffolk County

.7/,

?G^

.) J ' r

3 .

on July 16 that nuclear e=ergency planning would be infeasible a: Ja=esporr. All of the other parties listed above st= ply argued that the Jamesport application should be rej ected.

3. The Siting 3o. d is co=pelled by state statute either to decide the Jamesporr case by February 4, 1980 or to find good cause for delay. The Board has not'=et publicly since the case was briefed.

4. We do not know whether the Board will meet the Febru-ary 4 deadline or extend its time for decision. If the Board were to ra-'nd the proceeding to develop further evidence, or to suspend its deliberations pending further nuclear develop-ments in Washington, an extension of the deadline would seem likely.

5. It is the Applicants' strong view that, if the case is decided La accord with the weight of the evidence in the record, pertinent state law and sound public policy, the James-port Nuclear Pcwer Station will be approved as proposed. The Applicanes urged the Siting Board in their briefs of July 16 and August 16 to root its decision in these considerations and, thus, Oc grant Ja=esport a certificate of environmental ec=-

patability and public need.

Respectfully submitted, LONG ISTED LIGh"IING COMPA.Tf W. Taylor Reveley, III 4 77'}

     ,w                              -

Hunton & Williams D

• go rR D' 707 Eas Main Street P. O. Box 1535 1

Mdil $ gg@f1 $ 4 Rich =cnd, Virginia 23212 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of Sicing 3 card Proceeding Status Report were served upon :he following by first-class mail, postage prepaid, on October 10, 1979: Richard S. Salr=an, Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Atomic Safety and Licensing Cocmission Appeal Board Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Con:=ission Washington, D. C. 20555 Washington, D. C. 20555 Bernard M. Bordenick, Esquire Dr. W. Reed Johnson U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Atomic Safety and Licensing Commission Appeal Board Washington, D. C. 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Con: mission Washington, D. C. 20555 Irving Like, Esquire Reilly and Like Sheldon J. Wolfe, Esquire 200 West Main Street Acomic Safety and Licensing Babylon, New York 11702 Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Joseph C. Gramer, Esquire Washington, D. C. 20555 425 3roadhollow Road Melville, New York 11746 Mr. Ralph S. Decker Route 1, Box 190D Mrs. Jean H. Tiedke Cambridge, Maryland 21613 Mrs. Shirle.y 3achrach Box 1103 Dr. E. Leonard Cheatt=1 Southold, New York 11971 Route :J3, Box 350A Watkinsville, Georgia 30677 W. Taylor Reveley, III Zunton & Williams 707 East Main Stree: P. O. Box 1535 ., g (Js Rich =ond, Virginia 23212 7 7^ lJ OA'ED: October 10, 1979

                               -}}