ML20062L966

Further Suppl to Recent NRC & Suffolk County Status Repts. Suffolk County Legislature Rejection of Sixth Stipulation & Settlement Necessitate Schedule Be Set for Remainder of Hearing.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence

ML20062L966
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	12/09/1981
From:	Reveley W LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
NUDOCS 8112170014
Download: ML20062L966 (5)

Text

.'

s u\ f. ~%. /r '. l 7,. ,- ~. . m ,, / Q, Dec Ar 9,~i98'l'], \

9 DEC15198182 9 nr 4 . ggg, M M u.s. g ie .

^

h

/ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA C 4'

.b ( NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION \

M fs[,>

Q[ TO -

Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )

)

LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322

)

(Shoreham Nuclear Fower Station, )

Unit 1) )

FURTHER LILCO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECENT STATUS REPORTS OF THE COUNTY AND STAFF The Suffolk County Legislature rejected yesterday the Sixth Stipulation and Settlement that had been negotiated in great detail, and at great length, by representatives of the County, LILCO and the NRC Staff.

It has become even more crucial than before, accordingly, that the Board set a schedule for the rest of this proceeding, beginning with a deadline for particularizing contentions.. Their particularization has been underway literally for years.

At the risk of becoming grimly monotonous on the subject, LILCO feels cc.ipelled to stress, once again, the protracted nature of nuclear proceedings on Long Island. It took 31 months to move from the first day of Shoreham's CP hearings to the day on which the ASLB decision was issued. Similarly, it took 21 months to go from the first day of Jamesport's CP hearings to the issuance of a partial initial decision. The rest of the ASLB decision followed 8112170014 81120% a68 I PDR ADOCK 05000322 yf G PDR 'y p 7

4 seven months later, that is, 28 months after the first day of hearings. We have yet to reach the first day of hearings in this case. We continue to lack even a schedule for reaching the.first day. Twenty-eight to 31 months from that day (assuming it is reached next spring) comes in the fall of 1984 -- roughly two years after Shoreham is scheduled to be physically complete.

In light of yesterday's action by the Suffolk County Legislature, the history of nuclear proceedings on Long Island, and the advanced state of Shoreham's construction, LILCO believes it imperative that the Board " expedite the hearing process by, using those managements methods . . . contained in Part 2 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations." Statement of Policy on Conduct of Licensing Proceedings, CLI-8-8, 13 NRC 452, 453

)

(1981). To quote the Commission's Statement of Policy more fully:

Although staff review of pending license applications was delayed during this [TMI] period, utilities which had received construction permits continued to build the authorized plants. The staff is now expediting its review of the appli-cations and an unprecedented number of hearings are scheduled in the next 24 months. Many of these pro-ceedings concern applications for operating licenses.

If these proceedings are not concluded prior to the completion of construction, the cost of such delay could reach billions of dollars. The Commission will seek to avoid or reduce such delays whenever measures are available that do not compromise the Commission's fundamental commitment to a fair and thorough hearing

. process.

The~refore, the Commission is issuing this policy statement on the need for the balanced and efficient conduct of all phases of the hearing process. The Commission appreciates the many difficulties faced by its boards in conducting these contentious and-complex proceedings. By and large, the boards have performed very well. This document is intended to

, , , , . . . . . . - - g -

, , , y w. --..,n. , , - , _ _ . - --._.~-,-.,,,.--,-,.,..-w,- , , - - - ,

deal with problems not primarily of the boards'~

own making. However, the boards will play an important role in resolving such difficulties.

Individual adjudicatory boards are encouraged to expedite the hearing process by using those management methods already contained in Part 2 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. The Com-mission wishes to emphasize tho'.'h that, in ex-pediting the hearings, the board should ensure that the hearings are fair, and produce a record which leads to high quality decisions that adequately protect the public health and safety and the environment.

Virtually all of the procedural decisions dis-cussed in this Statement are currently being employed by sitting boards to varying degrees. The Commission's reemphasis of the use of such tools is intended to reduce the time for completing licensing proceedings.

Id.

Respectfully cubmitted, LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY W. Ta r Reveley, III Hunto & Williams P. O. ex 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212 DATED: December 9, 1981 O

e

I In the Matter of LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1)

Docket No. 50-322 (OL)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of FURTHER LILCO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECENT STATUS REPORTS OF THE COUNTY AND STAFF were served upon the following by first-class mail, postage prepaid, on December 9, 1981:

Louis J. Carter, Esq. Jeffrey C. Cohen, Esq.

Administrative Judge New York State Energy Office 23 Wiltshire Road Swan Street Building, Core 1 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19153 Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12223 Dr. Oscar H. Paris '

Administrative Judge Mr. Jay Dunkleberger Atomic Safety and Licensing New York State Energy Office B0ard Panel Agency Building 2 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Empire State Plaza Washington, D.C. 20555 Albany, New York 11801 Mr. Frederick J. Shon Howard L. Blau, Esq.

Administrative Judge 217 Newbridge Road Atomic Safety and Licensing Hicksville, New York 11801 Board Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ralph Shapiro, Esq.

Washington, D.C. 20555 Cammer and Shapiro, P.C.

9 East 40th Street Secretary of the Commission New York, New. York 10016 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 David J. Gilmartin, Esq.

Attn: Patricia A. Dempsey, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing County Attorney Appeal Board Panel Suffolk County Department U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission of Law Washington, D.C. 20555 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11787 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Mr. Marc W. Goldsmith U. S.- Nuclear Regulatory Commission Energy Research Group, Inc.

Washington, D.C. 20555 400-1 Totten Pond Road Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 Bernard M. Bordenick, Esq.

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 e

V

~

Stephen B. Latham, Esq. MHB Technical Associates Twomey, Latham & Schmitt 1723 Hamilton Avenue 33 West Second Street Suite K P. O. Box 398 San Jose, California 95125 Riverhead, New York 11901 f

W. Ta r R6veley, II7 Hunt & Williams /

707 st Main Street P. O. Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212

(

Dated: December 9, 1981 l

f I

l

-'*y 9 > - - - , , , - , , , ,