ML19271B001
| ML19271B001 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 08/05/1980 |
| From: | Latham S LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO., NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD), SHOREHAM OPPONENTS COALITION, TWOMEY, LATHAM & SHEA |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8008110537 | |
| Download: ML19271B001 (3) | |
Text
.
o t r%
4 4
- ih
\\\\
AUS 7t980 F UNITED STATES OF AMERICA C
gfg 3 C7 Lt.! g,,,,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 9
g,.g[{g7 em=3 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD v
ch i l t t0 In the Matter of
)
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-322
)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, )
Unit 1)
)
JOINT MOTION OF SHOREHAM OPPONENTS COALITION, NRC STAFF AND LILCO TO EXTEND SOC'S TIME TO PARTICULARIZE CERTAIN CONTENTIONS In its Order dated June 26, 1980, the Licensing Board in the above captioned action granted the request of SOC and Staff to extend until August 6, 1980 the time to particu-larize certain $OC contentions.
While SOC, NRC Staff and LILCO have made substantial progress regarding the particular-ization of the remaining SOC contentions, additional tiac is needed to complete the particularization process.
Accordir. gly,
SOC, NRC Staff and LILCO request an additional 60 days for further particularization.*
As of this date, two of SOC's original contentions require further particularization before submission to the Board.
The two remaining contentions are identified as Contentions 6 and 19 in SOC's Petition to Intervene dated January 24, 1980.
On July 17, 1980, a meeting involving representatives of SOC, NRC Staff and LlaCO was held in Riverhead, New York to discuss the particularization of the W
800812,0 7 3 )
9 :s o i
remaining two SOC contentions.
The meeting was attended by LILCO's outside counsel, Taylor Reveley, and Anthony Earley, Jr.; John Moran of LILCO; George Dawe, Jr. of Stone and Webster; Bernard Bordenick and Jerry Wilson of the NRC Staff; Steve Latham, attorney for SOC and Richard Hubbard of MHB Technical Associates.
Prior to the July 17th meeting, SOC and NRC Staff had had informal discussions regarding contentions 6 and 19 and SOC had submitted a second draft of contention 6 to both Staff and LILCO for their review.
The morning session of the July 17th conference involved a detailed review of the status of Reg. Guides 1.97 through 1.145, inclusive, as they pertained to the Shoreham nuclear plant.
As a result of these discussions, the parties identified a number of issues requiring further review and in some cases, documents were to be produced to fac-ilitate that review.
The parties are currently in the midst of examining the material identified at the July 17th meeting and hope to schedule another meeting on contention 19 during the month of August.
With regard to contention 6, discussions were held on the afternoon of July 17th between NRC Staff and SOC (LILCO was unable to attend this session due to other commitments) and a new contention 6 was drafted.
That contention has been submitted to Staff and LILCO and it is SOC's understanding that agreement to this latest draft of contend on 6 (with 2-perhaps some final modifications) can be reached in the near future.
Accordingly, the parties hereby request an additional sixty days to continue, and hopefully conclude the particular-ization process.
It is anticipated that a completed contention 6 will be ready for submission to the Board in the next two to three weeks.
The parties would be happy to submit a completed contention 6 to the Board as soon as it is ready unless the Board prefers a single submission of both contentions when the particularization process is complete.
- Although this Motion is signed by SCC alone, it has been reviewed with attorneys for Staff and LILCO and is being jointly submitted by all three parties.
/h. Af Dated: August 5, 1980 by:
7M-Riverhead 6/
Twomey, Latham & Schmitt 33 West Second Street P.O. Box 398 Riverhead, NY 11901 Attorneys for SOC