ML20090J778
| ML20090J778 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 05/21/1984 |
| From: | Brown H KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NY |
| To: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| OL-4, NUDOCS 8405230230 | |
| Download: ML20090J778 (5) | |
Text
DOCKETED USHRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA i
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMgIgg 7j p4:36 Before the Commission
)
In the Matter of
)
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
)
),
Docket No. 50-322-OL-4 (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,
)
(Low Power)
Unit 1)
)
)
)
REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION OF COMMISSION'S ORDER OF MAY 16, 1984 By Order issued May 16, 1984 (CLI-84-8), the Commission, inter alia, provided to the Licensing Board "as guidance" a schedule for the Board's consideration of any exemption request that LILCO might file under Section 50.12 (a).
Suffolk County hereby requests the following clarifications of the Commission's Order.
1.
At page 3, the Order states, "The following schedule is provided to the Licensing Board as guidance in resuming the hearing."
(Emphasis added.)
Suffolk County requests the Commission to make clear that any hearing that might take place if LILCO files for an exemption will not be resumed, but will be new in all ways.
The new hearing would necessarily be in response to LILCO's request for exemption from GDC 17.
The previous one-day hearing addressed an entirely different legal framework and, in any event, was rendered void ab initio by the 8405230230 940521 PDR ADOCK 05000322 1
0 pop o-
. Commission's Order of April 30 which vacated the schedule adopted for that hearing by the Licensing Board.
l 2.
The scheduling of any hearing on a LILCO exemption request should remain flexible pending a determination of the issues which would actually be put into controversy.
The reason this is important is that the Commission does not now have the slightest idea of what LILCO might file and how the County and other parties might respond.
The complexity of LILCO's filing would be one ingredient to be considered by the Board in setting a schedule.
However, of equal importance would be the extent to which the County and other parties would present affirmative cases of their own under the criteria of Section 50.12 and other pertinent regulations.
Obviously, major presentations of affirmative cases by other parties would increase pre-trial discovery needs and burdens of each of the parties.
Therefore, the Commission should instruct the Board, in setting a schedule, to be flexible and sensitive to the actual situation which develops.
3.
The Commission should make clear that a pre-hearing schedule should not begin to run until the Board makes a finding that any LILCO exemption request is sufficiently complete with requisite information and factual support to permit the pro-ceeding to go forward.
The County i.e. concerned that a LILCO filing may be skeletal and may not contain sufficient informa-tion to permit the County to proceed promptly with meaningful discovery.
If this were to occur, valuable and limited time
D
- would be lost while the pre-hearing clock would nevertheless be running.
4.
The Commission should make clear that any pre-hearing schedule should provide time for the County and other parties to file motions for disposition as a matter of law of any LILCO exemption request under Section 50.12 (a).
This Section specifically requires that an exemption be " authorized by law."
In the event LILCO requests action not so authorized, the parties should be permitted to move for immediate disposition of LILCO's request, rather than being required to go through the process of compiling a factual hearing record which would not be germane to resolution of the legal issue.
5.
The Commission should make clear that if LILCO requests an exemption, the " common defense and security" standard of f
Section. 50.12 (a) and the separate "high assurance" security standard of Part 73, which is applicable under Section 50.57 (c),
are to be appropriately treated as safeguards matters in accordance with the Commission's regulations.
Moreover, such
~
treatment would necessarily have a direct impact on the scheduling of both pre-hearing and hearing activities.
Respectfully submitted, Martin Bradley Ashare Suffolk County Department of Law Veterans Memorial Highway l
l Hauppauge, New York 11788
.f}'; '
,=
f
/
,.s Herbert H.
Brown Lawrence Coe Lanpher KIRKPATRICK, LOCKHART, HILL, CHRISTOPHER & PHILLIPS l
1900 M Street, N.W.,
Suite 800 l
Washington, D.C.
20036 l
May 21, 1984 Attorneys for Suffo.'
County l
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY CCMMISSION Before the Commission
)
In the Matter of
)
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-322-OL-4
)
(Low Power)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,
)
Unit 1)
)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION OF COMMISSION'S ORDER OF MAY 16, 1984, dated May 21, 1984, have been served to the following this 21st day of May 1984 by U.S.
mail, first class, by hand when indicated by two asterisks, and by telecopier when indicated by one asterisk.
Judge Marshall E. Miller, Chairman *
- Edwin Reis, Esq. *
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Counsel for NRC Staff U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the Executive Legal Washington, D.C.
20555 Director U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Judge Glenn O.
Bright **
Washington, D.C.
20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Edward M.
Barrett, Esq.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Long Island Lighting Company 250 Old Country Road
' Judge Elizabeth B.
Johnson ##
Mineola, New York 11501 Oak Ridge National Laboratory P.O.
Box X, Building 3500 Honorable Peter F.
Cohalan Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Suffolk County Executive H.
Lee Dennison Building Eleanor L.
Frucci, Esq.
Veterans Memorial Highway Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Hauppauge, New York 11788 U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 BY TELECOPY
- BY HAND BY FEDERAL EXPRESS ##
J
Fabian Palomino, Esq.*
James B.
Dougherty, Esq.
Special Counsel to the Governor 3045 Porter Street, N.W.
Executive Chamber Washington, D.C.
20008 Room 229 State Capitol Mr. Brian McCaffrey Albany, New York 12224 Long Island Lighting Company Shoreham Nuclear Power Station W.
Taylor Reveley, III, Esq.*
P.O.
Box 618 Anthony F.
- Earley, Jr.,
Esq.
Nor:h Country Road Robert M.
Rolfe, Esq.
Wading River, New York 11792 Hanton & Williams P.O. Box 1535 Jay Dunkleberger, Esq.
707 East Main Street New York State Energy Office Richmond, Virginia 23212 Agency Building 2 Empire State Plaza Mr. Martin Suubert Albany, New York 12223 c/o Congressman William Carney 1113 Longworth House Office Bldg.
Stephen B.
Latham, Esq.
Washington, D.C.
20515 John F.
Shea, Esq.
Twomey, Latham and Shea Martin Bradley Ashare, Esq.
33 West Second Street Suffolk County Attorney Riverhead, New York 11901 H.
Lee Dennison Building Veterans Memorial Highway Docketing and Service Branch Hauppauge, New York 11788 Office of the Secretary U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Nunzio J.
Palladino, Chairman **
Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Room 1114 1717 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20555
/
Commissioner Victor Gilinsky Herbert H.
Brown, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission KIRKPATRICK, LOCKHART, HILL, Room 1103 CHRISTOPHER & PHILLIPS 1717 H Street, N.W.
1900 M Street, N.W.,
Suite 800 Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20036 Commissioner James K. Asselstine **
DATE:
May 21, 1984 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Room 1136 1717 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Commissioner Frederick M. Bernthal **
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Room 1156 1717 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Commissioner Thomas M.
Roberts **
U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Room 1113 1717 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20555 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -