ML20080F651
| ML20080F651 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 09/09/1983 |
| From: | Shotwell J MASSACHUSETTS, COMMONWEALTH OF |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20080F639 | List: |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8309190354 | |
| Download: ML20080F651 (2) | |
Text
-
r 4
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA fsfqfD NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
'83 SEP 16 All :53 Before. Administrative Judges:
0FFICE OF SECf(t.fAr -
Helen F. Hoyt, Chairperson 00CKE-TING & SERVif.E Emmeth-A. Luebke BRANCH Jerry Harbour
~
)
In the Matter of
)
)
DUELIC SERVICE COMPANY OF
)
Docket Nos. 50-443-OL t.Si EAMPSHIRE, et al.
)
50-444-OL
)
(Seabrook Station, Units 1
)
and 2)
)
.)
September 9, 1983
)
MOTION OF ATTORNEY GENERAL FRANCIS X.
BELLOTTI FOR CLARIFICATION OF BOARD ORDER DATED AUGUST 30, 1983 In its Memorandum and Order dated August 30, 1983, I
containing the Board's rulings on parties ' contentions relative to the New Hampshire Radiological Emergency Response Plan, the Board has, we believe, inadvertently omitted a critical phrase and two critical regulatory references in in.its recitation of Massachusetts Contention IV.
As we dis tssed in our Answer to the Staff's Response to Attorney C-eneral Bellotti's Contentions, the Staff had inadvertently critted nhese sare items when it offered a suggested redrafted fern of -Jie contention.
See Answer of Attorney General Francis 7.
Bellotti to the Staff's Response to His Contentions on the New Eanpshire Radiological Emergency Response Plan, 8309190354 830909 PDR ADDCK 05000443 C
Y d
filed July 21, 1983, at 5.
With the Staf f 's authorization, we indicated in our pleading of July 21, 1983, that the initial sentence of Contention IV as redraf ted to accommodate the Staff's concerns should read as follows:
The New Hampshire Radiological Emergency Response Plan does not satisfy the require-ments of 10 C.F.R.
E50.47 (a) (1), (b) (10),
or (b) (11) in that protective actions for emergency workers and the public have not been sufficiently developed.
The critical phrase "and the public" and the critical references to 10 C.F.R. 550.47 (a) (1) and (b) (11) have, without explanation, been dropped from the initial sentence of Mass. Contention IV as stated in the Board's August 30 order.
We ask that the Board clarify that these omissions were inadvertent and that the initial sentence of the contention should read as set forth above.
Respectfully submitted, FRANCIS X.
BELLOTTI ATTORNEY GENERAL I
Mr?
By:
J inn Shotwell
\\
istant Attorney General Environmental Protection Division 1