ML19282B188
| ML19282B188 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 01/31/1979 |
| From: | Hoefling R NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Shapiro R Cammer & Shapiro |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19282B190 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7903090343 | |
| Download: ML19282B188 (2) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. y@ MCs% d UNITED ST ATES ,l'.,.4 /$ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMisslON -{M)g j W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 \\ui r 5 nm o January 31, 1979 [. c. 4 x .'Jac - 7._.,C DCQ y.,.T RCC
- f f;, @p, N Ralph Shapiro, Esq.
Cammer and Shapiro Er ff ~ ).r N </ G ~ 9 East 40th Street New York, New York 10016 f3 8/ M C'-f* xif In the Matter of 4 '~ <i' LONG ISLAND L73HTING COMPANY 's (Shoreham Nuclear Puer Station, Unit 1) "M Dockee No. 50-322
Dear Mr. Shapiro:
At our meeting in your offices on December 22, 1978, I indicated that I would provide you with some materials relative to the disposition of the judicial appeal from the Shoreham construction permit proceeding. l_/ In the Court's Order of November 9,1976, a copy of which is enclosed, the Court dismissed the first ground of the appeal, namely, that the Comission had failed to give adequate consideration to the environmental impact of Class 9 accidents. With regard to the second ground stated in the appeal, namely, that the Commission had failed to give adequate consideration to the incremental effect of the environmental impacts associated with the nuclear fuel cycle, the Court ordered the issue remanded to the Comission for further consideration in light of the decisions in Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Comission, 547 F.2nd 633 (D.C. Cir.,1976) and Aeschliman v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Comission, 547 F.2nd 622 (D.C. Cir.,1976). These latter decisions were subsequently reversed and remanded by the Supreme Court. 2_/ The Supreme Court also vacated the November 9,1976 Order of the Court of Appeals relative to Shoreham._3/ Subsequently, the Court of Appeals, in its Order of November 29,1978, a copy of which is enclosed, held the Shoreham appeal in abeyance pending the issuance of a final fuel cycle rule by this agency. That rulemaking proceeding has not yet been completed. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ck( .: { Ri hard K. Hoefiing 7 Counsel for NRC Sta f Enclosure as Stated _lj The Lloyd Harbor Study Grouo, Inc. v. United States Nuclear Reculatory Comission, No. 73-2266, United States Court of Appeals for tne vistrict of Columbia Circuit. 2/ Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., et al. 435 U.S. 519 (1978). J/ 46 U.S.L.W. 3642. 7 9 0 3 0 9 03 f.3
,e'* 2 cc (w/encls.): Elizabeth S. Bowers, Esq. Dr. Oscar H. Paris Mr. Frederick J. Shon Edward M. Barrett, Esq. Edward J. Walsh, Esq. Howard L. Blau, Esq. W. Taylor Reveley, III, Esq. Jeffrey Cohen, Esq. Irving Like, Esq. Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Docketing and Service Section Mr. J. P. Novarro Energy Research Group, Inc.}}