ML20076K701
| ML20076K701 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/12/1983 |
| From: | Christman J HUNTON & WILLIAMS, LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO. |
| To: | Laurenson J Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL-3, NUDOCS 8309150238 | |
| Download: ML20076K701 (2) | |
Text
-. _ -
00LKETED IIU NTON & WILLI AM S WC 707 East MAIN STREET P. O. Box 6535
'83 SEP 14. 9 2o.i4bo.
- l.... o
...,..to. o menuon >, vimosura nasia R...oa so.
p, o.
no.aac u6..ow, on, ca.ou e,.o.
7,,,,,,,,,,
,o,,,,,,,,oo wo.=ovo=, o. c. noo n 0FFICE OF SU.$i'f5"'*"
September 12, 1983 00CMETING & SEP.vlu ris,vv.......
,o.
B R A NC6f't ao '
ao..on2...
NSKFoka,vs.oimi.,3.se CO4*. 4. a.. ol Ot.E CT Ds.L No..o* 7...
James A.
Laurenson, Chairman Dr. Jerry R. Kline Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Board U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission East-West Tower, Rm. 402A East-West Tower, Rm. 427 4350 East-West Highway 4350 East-West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 Bethesda, MD 20814 Mr. Frederick J. Shon Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 4
1 Commission East-West Tower, Rm. 430 4350 East-West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 Long Island Lighting Company Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Docket No. 50-322-OL-3_(Emergency Planning Proceeding)
Dear Administrative Law Judges:
Suffolk County has filed a "Suffolk County Objection to Special Prehearing Conference Order" dated September 1, 1983, in which the County takes issue with the Board's rulings on several of the County's proposed emergency planning conten-tions.
LILCO has some strong views on the arguments put for-ward by the County in that pleading, but we deem ourselves barred from making them by 10 C.F.R.
S 2.751a(d), which says that "[p]arties may not file replies to the objections (to a 8309150238 830912 PDR ADOCK 05000322 O
PDR 9
r' a
H UNTON & WILLI AMS special prehearing conference order) unless the Board so directs."
The Board did lift the prohibition against replies to objections to the prehearing conference order in its August 23
" Order Permitting Parties to Reply to Suffolk County Objection to Special Prehearing Conference Order."
However, the prohibi-tion was lifted in light of new developments that had to do only with scheduling and not with the admissibility of the con-tentions.
Also, the Board set a date certain for replies.
These features make it apparent that the prohibition was lifted only with respect to the County's first objection to the spe-cial prehearing conference order, dated August 23, 1983, which went only to scheduling.
Accordingly, LILCO feels constrained by S 2.751a(d) not to reply to the County's September 1 objection absent some in-dication otherwise by this Board.
If our understanding of the August 23 Board order is wrong and the Board would like to hear replies to the second as well as the first County objection, we will be happy to present our views upon a word from the Board.
Hearing no such word, we will stand on our earlier pleadings.
Yours very truly, fN James N. Christman 126/586 cc:
Service List
.