ML20084S386

Motion for Prompt Response to Summary Disposition Motions on Phases I & II of Low Power Testing Proposal.Related Correspondence

ML20084S386
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	05/22/1984
From:	Earley A HUNTON & WILLIAMS, LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML20084S387	List: ML20084S386 ML20084S389 ML20084S393 ML20084S427 ML20084S432
References
OL-4, NUDOCS 8405240434
Download: ML20084S386 (1)

Text

r t

"",'Sg@GM:$

- r, s _ g

e. LILCO, May 22, 1984 5

f0 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 4 4/O :

~

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION  :;r~e , ,

~ '

LY 3}cpo,

'd".?t i s Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )

)

LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322-OL-4

) (Low Power)

(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, )

Unit 1) )

MOTION FOR PROMPT RESPONSES TO LILCO'S

SUMMARY

DISPOSITION MOTIONS Today, LILCO renews its request for summary disposition on Phases I and II of its low power testing proposal. As to these phases, there has yet been no dispute by the County or State to LILCO's evidence that no AC power -- and hence no onsite power source -- is necessary to-protect the public even in a LOCA. No dissent has arisen despite numerous objections by the County and State to other portions of LILCO's Supplemen-tal Motion and despite the following opportunitites for raising contrary facts: (1) two filings by the County between the March 20 filing of LILCO's Supplemental Motion and the April 6 Memorandum Order of this Board; (2) extensive oral argument on April 4 on the issues in the Supplemental Motion; (3)~ Joint Ob-jections to the April 6 Order; (4) affidavits filed by the County with the Board and with the federal court; (5)

B405240434 840522- 6 PDR ADOCK 05000322

x. O _

PDR _

4 opportunity for opening statement and cross-examination of LILCO's witnesses on April 24 and 25; (6) opportunity to file direct testimony on April 20; (7) comments filed on May 4 in response to the Commission's April 30 Order; (8) oral argument before the Commission on May 7 at which time LILCO's motions for summary disposition on Phases I and II were pending; and (9) May 10 comments by the County to the Commission in which the County reargued its substantive opposition to LILCO's Sup-plemental Motion.

LILCO's Supplemental Motion was filed more than 2 months ago accompanied by extensive affidavits. On April 13, LILCO produced thousands of documents in response to the Coun-ty's extensive document requests. Thus, the County and State have had ample opportunity to review the facts. If they dis-pute the material facts set forth in LILCO's motions for summa-ry disposition, they should be in a position to enumerate the disputed facts promptly. Accordingly, this Board should exer-cise its discretion pursuant to 10 CFR S 2.711 and order that responses, if any, to LILCO's motions for summary dispositions be filed by May 30, 1984. By the 30th, the County.will have had LILCO's May 4 motions 26 days, more than the usual time

_ permitted for response. 10 CFR $ 2.749(a).

4

t g Respectfully submitted, LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY Robert M.F.foT W ~Earley,-Jr./

Anthony Jessine A. Monaghan Hunton & Williams P. O. Box 3535 Richmond, Virginia 23212 DATED: May 22, 1984

_ .