ML20094G397
| ML20094G397 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 02/26/1992 |
| From: | Mcgranery J DOW, LOHNES & ALBERTSON, SCIENTISTS & ENGINEERS FOR SECURE ENERGY, SHOREHAM-WADING RIVER CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, NY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20094G344 | List: |
| References | |
| OLA-3, NUDOCS 9203020069 | |
| Download: ML20094G397 (35) | |
Text
. . . - . -- . - . .. .
'
- 31 2 .
N A.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ~
% ra -
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION lE IE S g g 1992 5
~.
BEFORE THE COMMISSION A Of In the Matter of Docket No. 50-322-Oba
)
LONG ISIAND LIGHTING COMPANY )
) (Application for (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, ) License Transfer)
Unit 1) )
)
NOTICE OF STATE TAXPAYER COMPLAINT AND CORRECTION Undersigned counsel for the Shoreham-Wading River Central School District (" School District") and Scientists and Engineers for Secure Energy, Inc. ("S E/' ) herewith furnishes the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") with a copy of the complaint served by New York State taxpayers for declaratory and injunctive relief pursuant to Article 7-A of the New York State Finance Law to have the Long Island Power Authority ("LIPA")
declared-to have been terminated by operation of law and to enjoin all continued appropriations to, and expenditures by, LIPA.
'In filing " Petitioners' Notice of LILCO/LIPA Exaggeration and a Commencement of State Court Action" in the above-captioned proceeding yesterday, undesigned counsel incorrectly assumed that the School District was a party to that action due to the commonality cf counsel. The School District is nqt a party to this taxpayers' action. However, that has no effect on the importance of the action or its pendency calling I
I 2
. u . _ _ _ _ _ . . __
Y t for this commission to stay its hand pending decision in the New York State Courts.
are also in receipt of yet The School District and SE2 to the another letter (an impermissible form of pleading)
Commission from counsel for the Long Island Lighting company
(" LI LCO")
and the Long Island Power Authority alleging that "whatever the size of the property tax liability for Shoreham at the beginning of the 10-year ramp-down, the ramp is still 10 years long . . . .
" LILCO/LIPA Letter at 1 (February 26, 1992);
This totally ignores a (served by telecopy at 12:09 p.m.).
principal point made in yesterday's filing by the School District and SE 2, namely that the assessed value of the Shoreham Plant "in a non-operative state" is 93.33% of its value in an operational state.
Comeare $146,134,908 ("non-operative state") with
$156,579,900 (assessed value after receipt of full power operating license).
Thus, the " assessed value" of the plant relevant to LIPA's obligations pursuant Public Authorities Law 5 1020-q subd.
I would not be able to be reduced by even 10% and there would be Section 1020-q makes nb further reductions after the first year.
no reference to a "10-year ramp-down."
Moreover, since the taxing jurisdictions are free to the School change their tax rates from year to year (for example, District increased its " tax rate" from 18.32% for 1990-91-to 20.55% for 1991-92, an increase of 12.17%), it would be highly i
r i l
speculative to assume that there would be any resulting decreases in the amount of payments due under the in lieu of tax payments.
Further, LILCo and LIPA assert that litigation to determine LIPA's demise by operation of lav should have been initiated earlier. However, the School District and SE 2sought to have the NRC require LIPA to pursue an action to reuove doubts as to its continued existence as a part of LIPA's burden as an applicant before the NRC. It was only the issuance by the NRC Staff of an Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact on Honday, February 24, 1992 which gave notice that the Commission was probably preparing to approve the fullness of the Staff recommendation in SECY-92-041 without requiring LIPA to remove doubt as to its existence. Undersigned counsel suggests that it was prudent for the plaintiff taxpayers (neither the_ School District D2I SE2 are plaintiffs in this
-action) to have expected the Commission to require LIPA to go forward and to have acted promptly when-issuance of the EA gave notice that the NRC was probably not going to require LIPA to initiate such an action. Those taxpayers commenced their action promptly within 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> after issuance of the EA gave notice that such an action would probably be necessary.
- .-. .. _ _ . - _ _ _ . _ _ ____ _. _ _ ._ .. . _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ . . - _ _ ~ . _ . . _ - . _
9 ,
I l
CONCLUSION WHEREFORE, the School District and SE 2 once again urge the commission to stay its hand in approving the application for license transfer as a matter of comity pending resolution of the question as to LIPA's continued existence in the New York State Courts.
Respectfully submitted, February 26, 1992 A % 4 fj mes P. McGranery,//,r.
UOW, LOHNES & ALBE M$ON Suite 500 1255 Twenty-Third Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20037 (202) 857-2929 Counsel for the Petitioners Shoreha_t-Wading River Central School District and Scientists and Engineers for Secure Energy, Inc.
i l
Y'
_ ___ . . _ . ~ _ . . - . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . ._ __
NED 12343 LENIS & GREER, P.C* P.02 TED 3 26-92 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
.......................................x COUNTY OF NASSAU KULKA CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT CORP.,
0MN1 BUZZ INC., and NASSAU.SUFFOLK CONTRACTORS' ASSOCIATION, INC.,
EUMMONS Plaintiffs,
- against -
Index No.
EDWAT.D V. REGAN, as Comptroller of the STATE OF NEW YORK,. PATRICK J.
BULGARO, as Director of the Budget of the STATE OF NEW YORK,_ RICHARD M. KESSEL, as Chairman of the LONG IS!.AND POWER _ AUTHORITY, IRVING LIKE, NORA BREDES,_DR. FRANK CIPRIANI, SHdLDON_SACKSTEIN, THOMAS TWOMEY, STEPHEN LISS, " JANE DOE", " RICHARD ROE",
the names of the defendants in the quotation marks being fictitious, the true names being unknown to the plaintiffs,_and LONG ISIAND POWER AUTHORITY, Defendants.
...................................----X To THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT (8)
YOU' ARE REREBY SUMMONED to answer _ the complaint in-this act ion and to serve- a copy of your answer, or if'the complaint is not served with this summons, to serve a notice- of appearance, on - the plaintiffs' attorneys (s) within twenty (20) days after the service of this summons, exclusive-of the day of service (or within thirty-(30) days after-the-service is: complete if this summons is not personally delivered to-you within the State of New York); and in case of your failure to appear or answer, judgment will be taken against -you by' default for the relief demanded-in the complaint.
, Dated: Poughkeepsie, New York February 26, 1992 LEWIS & GREER, P. C.
Attorneys for Plaintiffn 11 Raymond Avenue L
'- P. O. Box 2990 Poughkeepsie, NY 12603 L Telephone 914-454-1200
!~
o i
l .
I
P.C. p,g3 1E T' m 2 6 ,9 2 wen aae24 egyI3 Ca C5 R E E R ,
Plaintiffs designate Nassau County as the Place of Trial The basis of the venue is:
The county wherein the action took place.
Defendant's address:
Edward V. Regan, Comptroller Esq.
John Governor Black,ith Sm State Office Building ilth Floor, Le;al Department Albany, NY l'atrick J. Bulgaro, Director of the Budget stato capital Building nnon 113 Albany, NY Richard M. Kessel, Chairman of the Board of Trustees (and all Trustens of LIPA) long Is3snd Power Authority 200 Gardan City Plaza suite 201 Garden City, NY 11530 1.ong Island Power Authority 200 Garden City Plaza Suite 201 _
Garden City, NY 11530 Attorney General for the State of New York County of Nassau 190 Willis Avenue, Room 220 Mineola, NY 11501 2
. - , _ . _ _ _ . . . ~ . _ . _ _ . . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . - _ _ _ . _ . . - _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _
12: 14: - LEwIo s.- cnaen, - p.c. p.e4
",.E.Js q 2 o - o 2 ..WEo t
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
.......................................x COUNTY OF NASSAU-KULKA CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT CORP.,
1 OMNIBU22, INC., and NASSAU SUFFOLK CONTRACTORS' ASSOCIATION, INC.
VERIFIED COMPMINT Plaintiffs, Index No. _,
- against -
EDWARD V. REGAN,-as. Comptroller of the STATE OF NEW YORK, PATRICK J.
BUl>3AR04 as Director of the Budget of-the STATE OF NEW YORK, RICHARD M.
/,ISSEL,- as Chairman of the LONG ISLAND .
-POWER AUTHORITY, IRVING-LIKE, NORA BREDES,
--DR.:-FRANKiCIPRIANI,'SHELDON SACKSTEIN,
- THOMAS TWOMEY, STEPHEN LISS,-" JANE DOE",
" RICHARD ROE", the names of the defendants-in the quotation marks being fictitious,_
the true names being unknown to the plaintiffs,-and.LONG ISLAND-POWER AUTHORITY,-
Defendants.
.......................................x ,
Plaintif fs, Kulka construction Management Corp. , omnibuzr. Ine. , and Nassau Suf folk Contractors' Association,- Inc. , by their attorneyr, Lewis
&.crner, P.C. complain of the defendants and allege as follown:
PARTIES l '. Plaintiff Kulka Construction Management Corp. (KUI.KA) is'a corporation duly organized under the laws of the state of New York, with
-its' principal offices located in Hauppauge,.Suffolk County, New York,
.and a citizen taxpayer as defined in'. Article 7-A of the Stato Finance law.
is a corporatton duly
- 2. Plaihtiff Onnibuzz Inc. (OMNIBUZZ)
, , r. - , . , .,- ,, n- - , , . , . -- ... ,, , , , - ,
LENIs 8. GREER, P.C. p,c5
- ED 26-92 NED 12315 i
organized under the laws of the State of New York, with its principal l
offices located in South Hampton, Suf folk County, Now York, and a cit (zen taxpayer as defined in Article 7-A of the State Finance law.
Nassau Suffolk contractoru' Association. Inc.
- 1. Plaintiff (NASSMI SUFFOLK) is a not-for-profit membership corpormt inn duly organfred under the laws of the State of New York, with its principal offices located in Coranck, Nassau County, New York, and a ultizen taxpayer as defined in Article 7-A of the State Finance Law.
- 4. For simplicity and brevity, the plaintif fs will be referred to collectively as the CITIZEN TAXPAYERS. :
r.
e Defendant Edward V. Regan is an officer of the Stat e of New l York as defined in Pub. O. 2, and as specified in St. Fin.121'b(1),
to as set vit: The Comptroller of the State of New York (The COMPTROL1,F.R) forth in Exec. 40.
- 6. Defendant Patrick J. Bulgaro is an officer of the State of New to York as defined in Pub. O. 2, and as specified in St. Fin. 121-b(1),
wit: The Director of the Budget of the State of New York (The BUDGET DIRECTOR) ao set forth in Exec. 180.
- 7. Defendant Richard M. Kessel is an officer of the State of New to York as defined in Pub. O. 2, and as specified in St. Fin.123-b(1),
vit: The Chairman of the Board of Trustees of LIPA.
Dr. Frank cipriani,
- 8. Defendants Irving Like, Nora Bredes, Sheldon Sackstein, Thotts Tweney, Stephen Liss, " Jane Doe", and "Pichard D. ?, and Roo" are officers of the State of New York as defined in Pub 2
. _ _ _ -- _ -. __._ _ .- - . _ _ _ _ ._, _ m __ _ .
LEWIS C. GREER, P.C* P.06 Y E lt - ' 2 6 - 9 2 WED 123 1G members of the Board of as specified in St. Fin. 12 3-b (1) , to vitt Trustees of the Long Island PoWor Authority (LIPA).
Yassel, 9 For purposes of simplicity, defendants Richard M.
Irving Like, Nora Bredes, Dr. Frank cipriani, Sheldon Sackstein. 'rhomas Twomey, Stephen Liss, " Jane Doe" and " Richard Roe" will be referred to collectively as the Trustees of LIPA.
- 10. Defendant Long Island Power Authority (LIPA), is a corporate municipa) instrumentality of the State of New York, established Tanuary 10? 0-4 et.
15, 1487 pursuant to Chapter 517 of the Laws of 1986, Pub. A.
reg., the Long Island Power Authority Act (the LIPA Act) , hav inq its of f tres and principal place of business at 200 Garden City Plara Garden city. Hassau County, New York.
NATURE oF_ACTToN
- 11. This Complaint alleges causes of action for declaratory and L.a w , on injunctive relict pursuant to Article 7-A of the State Finance the grounds that Edward V. Regan, Patrick J. Bulgaro. Ea and the c
Trustees of LIPA have caused, are causing, and are about to cause wrongful expenditures, misappropriations, misapplications, or il legal or unconstitutional disbursements of state funds.
- 12. LIPA is joined as a defendant pursuant to St. Fin. 173-b(2),
to wit:
as the recipient and intended recipient of said state funds, appropriations from the State of New York.
to f>ub. A.
- 13. LIPA may sue and be sued in all courts pursuant 1020-f(a).
3
- -. . - . . - - . - . . - - . - . - - - _ - ~ - - . . . - . . . - - - -
LEWIS c. GREER, P.C. P.07 jEB- 26-92 . WED ~12816 um Nascau county,
- 14. This - action is commenced in Supreme Court, pursuant to CPLR 503 on the grounds that NASSAU SUFFOLX han its principal place of business in Nassau County.
- 15. This action is cor.nenced in Supreme Court, Nassau county, pursuant to St. Fin.123-c(1) on the grounds that wrongful expenditures, ,
or unconstitutional misappropriations, misapplications, or illegal disbursements of state funds occurred, are occurring, and are about to occur in Nassau County, in which LIPA and the Trustees of LT PA have their principal place of business.
- 16. This action is commenced in Suprene Court, Hassau county, pursuant to Pub. A. 102 0-y (1) , on the grounds that LIPA han its principal place of business in Nassau County.
PREFERENCE
- 17. This action is entitled to a preference over all other causes in alI courts. St.-. Fin. 123-c(4).
This action is entitled to-a preference over all civi: causes 18.
in all courts of the state, except elections matters, and shall~ be heard and determined in preference to all other. civil business pending therein, except election matters, irrespective of position on the enlendar. Pub. A. 1020-y(1).
BACEGR_OpMD FACTS
- 19. In 1986, the State Legislature enacted the LIPA-Act, chapter 517 of the Laws of 1986, Pub. A. 1020-a, et. seq.. That Act created 4
- - - - - ,- ,-r - . . - . .._-.
LEWIS G GRECR, P.C. P.OG FED-26-92 WED 12: 17 e .
LIPA as a public power authority on Long Island, and authorizrsd t.1PA to acquire LILCO and transform it from a private, investor-owned ut i t ity to a public power authority.
14R7.
20.
LIPA became a stato public authority on January 15,
- 21. On February 28, 1989, LIPA, LILCO, Governor Cuono and other ,
parties executed an agreement (the SETTLEMENT), pursuant to which wi11 remain the supplier of electricity on Long Island. '
22.
Ifnder the SETTLEMENT, LIPA Will acquire a single Llim asset, the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station (SHOREHAM), for purposes of closure and decommissioning.
has undertaken numerous M. Since LIPA's inception, LIPA aer lvities purportedly pursuant to the LIPA Act, including studying ways to decommission SHOREHAM, studying energy efficiency and conservation, and supervising the activitics and expenditures of LILCO.
24.
Since LIPA's inception, LIPA has not sold a single watt of entirely dependent upon state electricity. Instead, LIPA is appropriations for funding, has no revenue or prospective revenue to repay the appropriations, as required by law, and has failed to repay any appropriations.
AS REGAN.
AND FOR A FIRST CAUBE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANTS PATRICK J. BULGARO,__LTPA AND THE TRUSTEES OF_LIPA 2 E V.
'f]{JLp QIZEN TAIPAYERS ALLEGE AB FOLLOWS:
- 25. The CITIZEN TAXPAYERS repeat and reallege each a nri every i
allegation previously set forth, as though set forth fully at length herein, i
l -
12g17 t.gWIS GPEER, P.C. P,og WCDw26-92 WED EL
- 26. The COMPTROLLER is charged with suporvising the account.s of every public corporation, including LIPA, pursuant to Article X, section 5 of the State Constitution.
- 21. The COMPTROLLER is charged with, intar AliA, the 101 lowing 3
) statut.ory datics:
A. Superintending the fiscal concerns of the state.
R. Examining, auditing, and settling th* accounts of n1i public the stato, and officers and other persons indebted to cortifying t!'o amount or balance due thereon.
- c. Drawing n r. cants on the treasury for the payments m monies directed by law to be paid out of the treasury.
St. Fin. 8 (1) , 8 (3) , 8 (8) .
?R. The BUDGET DIRECTOR is charged with the responsit ii tty of evaluating and approving the expenditure or proposed expen<titure of st ate appropriations by LIPA and the Trustees of LIPA, prior to each fiscal year in which the expenditures are to be made.
- 29. The BUDGET DIRECTOR is charged with the responsibility of of approval of expenditures, or proposed issuing certificatos expenditures of state appropriations made or to be made by LTPA and the Trustees of LIPA.
- 30. The Trustees of LIFA cre charged with the responsibility of to their spaneli ng , appropriating, applying and disburcing state funds various purposes in accordance with LIPA's powers and duties under the L1PA Act.
- 11. Upon information and belief, from January 15, M97 to the present, the Trustees of LIPA authorized the expenditure of, and then 6
_ . . _ . _ _ _ . . _ . . _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ . . _ _ . _ _ . . _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . ~ _ _ , ._ _ _ _ .
LEWIS 0. GREER, P.C. p, 1o T.E D.r 2 6 - 9 2 WED 1281O spent, state appropriations at an annual rate of $2,673,219.0ft
- 12. On or about October 30, 1991, LIPA submitted to New York State in additional appropriations for the a buriget recuest for $1,540,000.00 ,
fincal period 4/1/92-3/31/93.
- 33. The Trustees of LIPA are planning to spend $3,1 M. 000. 00 during the fiscal period 4/1/92-3/31/93.
- 14. LIPA, a state public authority, was created for a prolircinary and provisional period of five (5) years Every authority or commission hereafter created by this chapter shall terminate at the end of five years from the date end of such period it has of its creation if at the outstanding no liabilities; provided, however, that any appropriation made to such authority or commissioned by t he state of New York or by any political subdivision thereof shall not be deemed a liabil:,ty for the purposes of thin section. ,
Pub. A. 2828.
- 15. - The LIPA- Act expressly states that LIPA shall centinue es a lawful state public authority only until terminated by law:
The Authority and its corporate existence shall continue unt ii
~ terminated by law, provided, however, that no such law sha)I ta):e effect so long as the Authority shall have bonds, notes, or other obligations outstanding, unless adequate provision has been made for the payment thereof.
Pub. A. 1020-z
- 16. On January 15, 1992, adequate provision was made for the pay:eent - of all- of LIPA's outstanding liabilities, bonds, notes, and other obligations, with the exception of state appropriations.
- 17. On January 15, 1992, LIPA was terminated by operat ion of law as a lawful entity.
7 i *
,, , - , - . - . , ,m,- - . _ _ . _ . , _ . - _ _ , . , , . . . _ _ _ _ _ . ~ . , . . _ _ . , . ._ ,.-- . . . _ , . . . . .
WED 1:7819 L. E W I S 8. GREER, P.C. P. 11
,r E D - 2 6 - 9 2
- 38. Every delle.r appropriated to and spent by LIPA .t od the Trustees of LIPA after January 15, 1992, constitutes a wtongful misappropriation, or 111egni or expenditure, nisapplication, unconstitutional disbursement of state funds.
- 19. Because LIPA terminated as a lawful entity on January 15, 199?, an injunction is necessary (1) to prohibit the COMPTRO1MP from drawing warrants on the treasury for the payment of any ntate appropriations to LIPA; (2) to prohibit the BUDGET DIREf'7 0)t from approving and/or issuing any certificate of approval of expendituten, or proposed expenditures, to be made by LIPA and the Trustees of 7.11 A, and to prohibit LIPA and the Trustees of LIPA from npending, (3) appropriating, applying or disbursing any state appropriatione;.
AS_AND FOR A_EECOND CAUSE OF ACTIoM AGATNRT DFFENDANTS EDEABp V. REGAN. PATRICK J. DULGARo. LTPA AND THE TRUSTEES OF LIJA, THE CITI2EN TAXPAYERS ALLEGE AS FOLLOW 81 40 The CITIZEN TAXPAYERS repeat and reallege cach and every allegation previously set forth, Jis though set forth fully at length herein.
- 41. Fron LIFA's inception on January 15, 1987 until the present, t
the State Legislature appropriated, and the COMPTROLLER drew warrants on the treasury for the payment of, at least $14,203,300.00 to LIPA in the following fashion:
l Dates App *ooriation 1/15/87 through 3/31/88 $ 4,699,978.00 4/01/88 through 3/31/89 6,300,005.00 4/01/89 through 3/31/90 2,800,000.00 4/01/90 through 3/31/91 403,317.00 8
l
S u n .' 2 6 - 9 2 WED 12819 t_EW3S C. GREER, P.C. P. 12 i
4/01/91 through 3/31/92 .00
$14,203,300.00 TOTAL
- 42. From LIPA's inccption on January 15, 1987 to the prer. cot, the Trustees of LIPA and the BUDGET DIRECTOR approved the expenditut.. of at least $14,203,300.00 in state appropriations by LIPA. .
- 43. Froa January 15, 1987 to the present, the BUDGET D1FECTOR issued certificates of approval of all expenditures of state appropriations made by LIPA and the Trustees of LIPA.
- 44. From LIPA's inception on January 15, 1987 to the present , 14 PA and the Trustees of LIPA spent at Icast $14,203,300.00 to ntate appropriations.
45 LIPA is a stato public authority, and as such f,r PA is obligated by statute to re' pay all state appropriations.
Notwithstanding any inconsistent provision of this chapter c.r any other chapter, special or local J ew, every annronrig.tj en from stato funds hereaf ter me.de as an advance to or on behal f of any agency, authority, fund or :orporation continued or created by the public Authorities Law or by any other act or law shall be identified as an advance, and shall provide that l In any event, and notwithstanding a repayment schedule, the unpaid balance of any monies appropriated as an advance pag]1 l
be renaid to the state out of the procesds of the first bonds issued by such agency, authority, Jund or corporation subsequent to the effective date of such appropriation.
St. Fin 4 0-a(1) . (Emphasis added).
l Repayment of amounts expended from appropriations as advances by the state shall be received by the state comptroller and Such recavrent shall . in tota L ,hp deposited in the treasury.
sufficinnt to fully reimburse the state for the advances.
St. Fin. 40-n(4) (Emphasis added).
9
\
pr g s . 2 6 - 9 2.' W E D 12820 LEWTS 8. _ .QREER, P.C. P. 1D
- 46. The LIPA Act (Pub. A. 1020-a et, seq.) specifically ntates that LIPA is not exempt from the repayment obligations of State i agencies, authorities, funds.or corporations.
All appropriations made by the state to the authority shalLJie '
treated as advances by the state __to the authority, and shg11 be repaid to it without interest either out of the proceeds of bonds issued by the authority pursuant to the provisions of-
~
this title, or by the delivery of non-interest bearing bonda of the authority to the state- for all or any part of such ,
advances, or out of excess revenues of the authority, at sut h times and on such conditions as the state and the authoriiy mutually may agree upon.
Pub. A. 1020-r. (Emphasis added).
- 47. LIPA has failed to repay any state appropriations made nince LIPA'm inception, leaving a total balance due and owing of at least
$14,701,300.00.
- 48. By appropriating state funds to an authority that har; failed to repay any such funds, and by spending those funds, defendants Edward V. Regan, Patrick J. Bulgaro, LIPA and the Trustees of LIPA caused, are causing, and are about to cause wrongful' expend i t ures,.
misappropriations, misapplications, or illegal or unconstitutional disbursements of state funds.
49 ~ LIPA's failure to repay any state appropriations, alI nf which must be repaid, makes a declaratory judgment necessary to state that LT PA - must- repay - all state appropriations, as required by tw. In addit ton, an injunction is necessary, until LIPA repays all outnt anding appropriations, (1)' to prohibit the COMPTROLLER from drawing warrants on the treasury for the payment of any stato appropriations to LIPA: (2) to 10
- p. - , - ,-n. -
1" E D 4 2 6 - 9 2 64 E D 12321 L fi 64 1 G C. G R E II R , P C. P. 14 i
prohibit the DUDGET DIRECTOR from approving and/or isnuirq at,y certificate of approval of expenditures, or proposed expenditures to be made by LIPA and the Trustees of LIPA; and (3) to prohibit LIPA and the Trustees of LIPA from spending, appropriating, applying or dl@ursing any state appropriations.
A8 Ah_'D FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION _ AGAINST DRENDANTS EDMBp
- v. RecAN, PATRICK J. BULGARo. LIPA AND THE TRUSTEE 8__OF LTPJu TR$_ CITIZEN TAXPAYERS __ ALLEGE..AR FOLLOWSt
- 50. The CITIZEN TAXPAYERS repeat and reallege each if the alleqstions previously set forth, as though set forth fully at length herein.
- 51. LIPA has not sold a single vatt of electricity, and t br refore has not generated any revenues from investment activity, from operations, or from any source since LIPA's incept: ton on January 15, 19117.
- 52. LIPA's only source of " income" is earnings on the investment of state appropriations.
- 51. Earnings on the investment of state appropriationr, lo not constitute revenue for LIPA because all such earnings must be returned to the State of New York.
- 94. LIPA does 7ot own any productive assets with which to qennrate revenue or investment income from the sales of goods or servicer,
- 55. LIPA has no prospective source of revenue to repay ntate appropriations.
S6 LIPA chairman Richard M. Kessel has written explicit 1y that a 11
C5 R E E R , P.C. P. 15 N E' 11 1 2G-92 WED 12821 L. E W I G O.
l conversion of SHOREHAM to a gas-fired facility will not generate any revenuo for LIPA.
LIPA's review of a Shoreham conversion has absolutely nothing to do with generating a revenue source for the authority, in f act, I have seen no proposals that would generate any revenue for LIPA. Any profits garnered from a Shoreham conversion would be passed on to LILCO ratepayers -- not LIPA.
litysday, June 28, 1991, editorial by Richard M. Kessel.
r> 7 . LIPA is entirely dependent upon state approprint inns for funding.
r> R . None of LIPA's activities have any potential to nencrate revenue with which LIPA might repay state appropriations. Itostdes spending approximately $500,000.00 to determine whether SHOREHAM nhould be converted to a gas-fired facility, LIPA has also commin:ti oned a
$300,000.00 study to examine the potential for cost effectivo energy savings on Long Island and to encourage LILCO to undertd.- more aggressive demand sido nanagement programs. Newsday, March 11. 1491.
Additionally, LIPA bas recommended a new construction program ti- of fer design assistanco, training and performance incentives to festar energy efficiency design and construction techniques for lovelopern and builders. In a related initiative for 1991, LIPA plans to implement a program to work with towns on Long Island to upgrade building codes and practices so that new construction and major renovations are more energy efficient. LIPA has also recently participated in a proceeding before the PSC by mildly opposing LILCO's request for three succensive 5%
inc.reases in electric rates. Egwsday, April 4, 1991, edit or i al by f
12 j
l l
-- ! E' B '- 2 6 - 9 2 WED 12322- LEWIS 8. GREER, P.C.- P .-1 6 Richard M. Kessel.
In short, LIPA is capable of spending taxpayer monov, but j incapable of generating revenue to repay state appropriations.
. 59. LIPA has an accumulated deficit of at least $11,890. > n.co.
- LIPA f'inancial report for 4/1/90-3/31/91.
- 60. By appropriating state funds to an authority that ham no ability to repay, and by spending those state funds, defendanta Edward V. Regan, Patrick J. Bulgaro, LIPA and the Trustees of LIPA causei, are i causing, and are about to cause wrongful expenditures,
' misappropriations,- misapplications, or illegal or unconstiturlonal :
disbursements of state funds.
63,- Because LIPA has no ability to repay state appropriat lens, any expenditures will cause irreparable injury to state-additional taxpayers. An injunction ~is therefore necessary: (1) to prohibit th(n COMPTROLLER from drawing warrants on the treasury for the payment of any state appropriations to LIPA; (2) to prohibit the BUDGET DIRECTOR from
' approving an6/or issuing any certificate of approval of expenditures, or proposed expenditures, to be made by LIPA and the Trustees of 1,1PA: and to prohibit . LIPA_ and the Trustees of LIPA from spending, (3) appropriating,-applying or disbursing any state appropriations, 13
, ,-r , - . . . - , , , 4_ , , _ , _ _ . ~ , . ~,,.m.,-..#,.,..~m,.,,.m..-_.,,-,,s ..m._,_.,,..._-,.-r -- -
_-...---,._.w-
12823 LENIS 8. GREER, P.C. P. 17
. j" II,D ; 2 5 - 9 2 NED AS AND FOR A FOURTH CAUDE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANTS EQQJ.Q V. REGAN, PATRICK J. BULGARO, LIPA AND THE TRUSTEE 8 OP LJfL TJ18 CITIZEN TAXPAYERP ALLEGB_l8 FOLLOW 8_t O. The CITIZEN TAXPAYERS repeat and reallege each a n't avery allegation previously set forth, as though fully set forth at langth herein.
M. Before any state appropriations are available for expenditure, L1.>A is obligated to execute a written repayment agreement with the BUDGET DIRECTOR:
No part of any appropriation made as an advance pursuant to this section shall be availabic for expenditure until a written repayment agreement fund or is entered into by the agency, authority, corporation to which the appropriation is mado (LIPA) and the Director of the Budget. Each and every such repayment agreement shall include a repayment schedule which states the date or dates on which the amount of each part or all of the appropriation made as an advance shall be repaid to the state and meets such other terms and conditions as determined by the director of the bydget.
St. rin. 40-a(2).
- e. 4 . The BUDGET DIRECTOR may not approve the expenditure > of any state appropriations by LIPA until the BUDGET DIRECTOR and I.TI' A have executed a written repayment agreement:
The Director of the Budget shall not issue any certificate of approval until the authority has entered into a written agrcement with the Director of the Budget providing for repayment by the authority to the state of an amount equal to the total amount expended by the state from such appropriation, on terms to be determined by the copy of such Director of the Budget, and a agreement shall be filed with the State comptroller, the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and the chairman of the Assembly Ways and 14
LEWIG 8. GREER, P.C. P. 1 0 b ED d 26-92 NED 12 2B Heano Committee.
1986 New York Laws ch. 517 9(e) .
- 65. By enacting St. Fin. 40-a(2) and 1986 New York Laws rh. 517 9(e), the Legislature intended that the BUDGET DIRECTCR and LIPA execute i
a repayment agreement to provide state taxpayers with adeqoce and meaningful assurances that all state appropriations to LIPA will be --
repa t et .
- f. 6 . On August 20, 1987, LIPA and the BUDGET DIRECTOR exocote' a Repayinent Agreement, purportedly pursuant to St. Fin. 40-a(2) mti 1986 Ilow York Laws Ch. 517 9 (e) .
67 The Repayment Agreement governs the first $11,000,000.00 appropriated to LIPA by the State of New York.
- 68. On or about October 28, 1987, the COMPTROLLER approvati and ratified the Repay:nent Agreement.
69 The Repayment Agreement f ails to include a repayment nrhedale _
showinq the date or dates vnen all state appropriations are to be repaid by LIPA, in violation of St. Fin. 40-a(2).
- 70. The Repayment Agreement provides that LIPA vill repay all state appropriations as follows:
A. First, from the proceeds of the first issuance of Bond:s (other than Repayment Bonds):
B. Second, from the authority's excess revenues;
- c. Third, if sufficient Bond proceeds or excess revenues are not available, then by the delivery of Repayment Bondn 1o the COMPTROLLER; 11 Fourth, if LIPA f ails to satisfy the Repayment Bonds wit hin 15
\ 15
~ -
WCD 1 2 8 2 a4 LCWIG C. G ia r, gr ia , P.C. P. 39 f C. D i 26-92
! days prior to their date of naturity (five years from t he date of issuanco), then by delivery of Replacenent Ropaymont: Lionds to the COMPTROLLER, which also nature five years f rom t he date of issuance.
- 71. LIPA'o lack of revenue and potential revenue makes pt nviejons "A" and "D" of the Ropayuent Agreement illusory and neanifiq1ess.
Potential invectors would not invest in LIPA, given LIPA's blM ory of financial lossoa, lack of productive assets, and outstandin<i a< bt of nore t han $14 million owed to New York Stato.
7?. Neither R0 payment Bonds nor Replaconent Ropayment notdn are "non-interest benring bonds" Within the meani ^ of Pub. A. 10?O r.
71 The delivery of Repaynent Bonds or Replacenent Repayment Bonds ir, nothing nero than a pledge or promise to ropay state approrertations when, or if, LIPA issues revenue bonds or generates excess evenues.
- 74. LIPA could not have delivered, purouant to the Prpayment Agreement, Ropayment Bonds or Replacement Repayncnt Bonds t hit would nat.ut e before LIPA becano cubject to termination by operation of law.
7 'i . The Ropayment Agreement fails to state how LIPA wi11 repay state appropriations after 10 years' time.
F ri . The Repaynant Agroonent provides tF .t Repa7nent Mn>Is and 9 Replacement Repayment Bonds are non-interest bearing, and are without rennurse to the assets of LIPA, except to the extent that 1.t rA has sourcen of funds available from the proceeds of the first issuance of L1rA bonds or from any excess revenues derived from LIPA's opt v at tons and/en investments.
- 77. The Repayment Agreement providos no assurances tn state 16
~ - - - - - ~ - - - _ - - - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _
. - . ~ ~ . _ . ~ . . -
LCW!G C. GRCCR, P.C. P. 20 t CI'D J 26-92 W E I) 12324 taxpayers that any appropriations will be repaid by LIPA, aret offers state taxpayers no recourse in the event that LIPA shall fail t o repay state appropriations. <
- 78. The Ropayment Agreement is an illusory promise to r*My, and offers state rLfers nothing beyond LIPA's pro-oxisting ntat utory obligationo to repay state appropriations.
- 79. By executing the Repaynant Agreement, the BUDGET DIPIT7nR and Lira reduced to a nullity LIPA's statutory obligatieno to repay state appropriations.
- 80. At the time that LIPA and the BUDGET DIRECTOR excrut 'd the state Repayment Agreement, both parties hogs that it did not provliin taxpayers with adequate or neaningful assurances of repayment .
A1. At the time that LIPA and the BUDGET DIRECTOR execut od the Repaynent Agreement, both parties httcy that there was a possibilit y that LIPA would terminato as a lawful entity before any Repayment Bonds natured.
A7. Upon infonwtion and belief, at the the that LIPA and the BUT)GET DIRECTOR executed the Repaynont Agreement, both partios experis.d and ints. oat.d LIPA to terminate as a lawful entity beiaro any Frpaynent Bondo rnatured.
R1. By CXecuting and approving a repayment agreement that is i
l illusory and moaningless, the BUDGET DIRECTOR, LIpA, the COMPTR01.1.ER, to cause and the trustoos of LIPA caused, are causing, and are about wrongful exponditures, nisappropriations, mioapplications, or illegal or l
1 17
(
t
( .
l..
l r c.u r a c. ~ 9 2 ta c u : 2 2e L tr ia s o c. a re c e re , r> . c . v 2i unconstitutional dioburcoments of otate funds. A declaratory lodgment in therefore necessary tn require the BUDGET DIRECTOR and f.I PA to execute a Ropaymont Agrooment which providos state taxpayer *4 with ,
adequate and noaningful assurances of repayment of all appropriit inns. j In addition, an injunction is necessary, until the BUDGET DIREFTnR and LIPA execute a repaymont agreenent which provides state taxpayatr with adequate and meaningful assurances of repayuents (1) To proh { bit the C014PTROLLER f rom drawing Warrants on the trecoury for the paynnnt of any state appropriations to LIpAt (2) to prohibit the BUDGET DIRrrTop rron approving and/or issuing any certificate of approval of expenditut en, or propoced expanditures, ao be made by LIFA and the Truntooo of 1. ira: and from (3) to prohibit LIPA and the Trustees of LIPA srnnding, appropriating, applying or disbursing any stato appropriations.
Afl AND FOR AN FIFTH CAUSE ACTIQN _ AG A_TNGT DEFE}iDANTS EDWARp_V a EcqAL_RATRicK J. BULcApo, LTPA AND THE TayLaTors or LIPA,,,Tye cLuzrN TAXPAYERS _ ALLEGE AS FOLLOWS t R4. The CITIZEN TAXPAYERS repeat and reallege cach and overy allegation previously set forth.
A ', . LIPA has failed to repay any state appropriations from the proceeds of the issuance of any bends.
- 86. LIFA has failed to issue any bonds. Transcript of 1,18'A Board Meeting held December 18, 1991, p. 111.
87 LIPA has not capitalized any costs attributabic tn the issuanca of bonds.
RP. Upon information and belief, LIPA has never attonpted to issue is
. - . , ., - - . . , , . , . , , - , . . - - - .- . . ~ . - . . . -- - , , . . , - . , - _ ,. .. ....-n,. . - , . - . - -
l 1232(. L E 64 3 o g, c pg g g pg , f" . C
- f* . 2 2
.' C, D ~ 2 ek - 9 2 64 C D bonds.
- 89. Upon information and belief, LIPA has no plano to lonue bonds.
- 90. Upon information and belief, LIPA has no intention of innuing l
bonds.
91 LIPA lacks the financial abili cy required by Pub A. In.'n-k to issue bonds.
fron the
- 92. LIPA has failed to repay any state appropriations proceeds of exooss rovenues.
- 93. LIPA has failed to repay any stato appropriationn by the delivery of Ropaymont Bonds or Roplacenant Repayment Bonds.
- 94. The Repayment Agreement requires LIPA to deliver Hepayment fiscal Bnndn to the COMPTROLLER on the first business day of the firnt year af ter LIPA acquires state appropriations but fails to repay them by issuing bondo os generating excess revenues.
- 45. LIPA f ailed to deliver any Repayment Bonds or Pep 1 teement Repayment Bonds to the COMPTROLLER on the first business day of the foiled to first fiscal year after LIPA acquired state appropriations but repay them.
- 96. LIPA failed to file, and could not have filed, cortification on of delivery of any Repayment Bonds, or Replacement Repayment Bonds, the first business day of the first fiscal year af ter LIPA acquired state appropriations but failed to repay them.
- 97. On December 18, 1991, more than 4 fiscal years af ter LIPA first acquired state appropriations but failed to repay Ihnm, the 19
v-,--m- ,- ,. - - , . - - - -
. - . . - . . . , ~ . _ - . . . - . -_ - - - -
LKW3e c. G re t: c st , f* . C . f* . 2 3,
#. D L 2 6 - 19 2 64 tt i) 12826 l
l l
Trustees of LIPA authorized the delivery of Repaymont Bondn tn the
(
COMPTROLLER, pursuant, to the Repaypent Agreement.
On December 20, 1991, LIPA drafted and executed a ttopayment {
98.
j pond, purportedly pursuant to the Repaymont Ag'.eement , t:nvering $
I 11,794.983.00 in state appropriations and $ 60",691 2'1 in invnstment jncome earned on state appropriations.
- 99. The Repayment Bond dated Decerber 20, 1991 will mature on December 20, 1996, more than 9 fiscal years af ter LIPA first acquired t j
st at o appropriations but f ailed to repay them.
10o. If LIPA delivers Replacenant Ropaynent Bonds @on the .
1991 natures, the Reptu:ement Repayment Bond dated Decorber 20, Repayment Bonds will nature on December 20, 2001, more than 14 fiscal years after the first year in which LIPA acquired state approptlations but failed to repay then. i 101. By- authorizing state appropriations to LIPA notwithst anding
- 1,1PA's failure to comply with the Repayment Agreement, and by spending such state appropriations, defendants Edward V. Regan, pat t'ick J.
Bulgaro, LIPA and the Trustees of LIPA caused, are now causing, and are about= to cause wrongful expenditures, nisappropriations, [
risapplications, or illegal or unconstitutional disbursenent n of state f u nd r. , 7 102 Because LIPA has no ability, present or-prospectivn, t o repay state appropriations, LIPA will be unable to comply with any Pepayment-Agroenent which LIPA might execute with the BUDGET DIRECTOP. For the !
20 e
--,,. -- ,_v._- ,,.,__r, ,4 , , . , . , . . . _ _ _ _ . ..wm-~._,_,.
. _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ __.m___m. _ . _
r II 2# y- 2 6 - 9 2 64 t! D 1 2 8 2 'T L II 44 1 B S. G FR E C ft , P.C. f* . 2 4 1.1PA vili rare reason, any additional expenditures by the Trustece of cause irroparable injury to state taxpayers. An injunction is t harefore netersary (1) to prohibit the COMPTROLLER from drawing Warrants on the trensury for the payment of any state appropriations to LIPA: (?) to approving and/or innoing any prohibit the BUDGET DIRECTOR from cortificate of approval of expenditures, or proposed expenditurer , t.o be snd the inado by LIpA and the Trustco of LIpA and (3) to prohibit LIPA Trusteen of LIpA from opending, appropriating, applying or disbursing any r. tate appropriations, hgED FOR__8_JJXLH CAUSE OPJ9 TION AGAINST DEFENDA_NTS E.QUEQ
- v. R M AN, PATnicK J. DULOAPO. LIPA _hND TH1; TRUSTED p2.. LIP %
Tig: CITTEEN TAXPAYER 6 ALLEGE As roLLoJ.G.1 101. The CITIZEN TAXPAYERS repeat and roa21ege cach ani overy alimtation previously set forth.
104. LIpA and the BUDGET DIRECTon have failed to execute any th* first repayment agrooment governing appropriations in excess of
$11,000,000 appropriated to LIPA.
105 NeV York State appropriated at least $3,700,000.00 to LIpA beyond the first $11,000,000.00 in appropriations to LIpA.
106. Upon information and belief, LIpA has spent substantin11y all of the foregoing $3,700,000.00.
107. The Repaynent Bond dated Decer.ber 20, 1991 is nulI and void first jnsof ar as it promises to repay any appropriations beyond the
$11,000,000.00.
108. Every dollar appropriated to, and spent by LIPA, beyond the 21
. - _ . - - , . - . . - ~ . . - . . ~ ~ . . - - . - _ .-
1282O L E 64 I G c. G gg c gI gg , g3 .C. p,2e
- !! *Is
- 2 6 - 9 2 64 C D first $11,000,000.00 in appropriations to LIPA, was and will be a wrongful expendituro, misappropriation, mionpplication or illegal or unconstitutional disbursoment of State funds.
109. By failing to execute any repayment agreement tn qnvern appropriations and exponditures in excess of the first $11,00n n00,00 appropriated to LIPA, the BUDGET DIRECTOR, LIPA, the COMPTROLITR snd the Trustees of LIPA caused, are causing, and are about to cause wrongful or illenal or expenditures,. misappropriations, misapplications, An injunctton in unconstitutional disbursements of state funds.
trawing therefore necessary (1) to prohibit the COMPTROLLER from warrants on the treasury for the payment of any state approprint long to LTPA: (2) to prohibit the BUDGET DIRECTOR from approving and/or i r. suing any certificate of approval of expenditures, or proposed expenr11turen, to bn made by LIpA and the Trustees of LIPA and (3) to prohibit LIPA and the Trusteos of LIPA from spending, appropriating, applying or disbursing any stato appropriations.
NO SIMILAR REL_IEF 110. No other action has been commenced that addressos the issues raised in this action, or that requests the same or similar relief.
WHEREFORE, the CITIZEN TAXPAYERS respectfully requoct t.h it this court grant the following doclaratory and injunctive roliof against defendants Edward V. Regan, as COMPTROLLER, Patrick J. Bulqaro, as l
22 i
e
- . , . . _ . , _ _ ~ _ . . _ _ . , ,._,..,m... - .-
- m. - . , . . , - ,m.-
p,e, p,yg k N' i 26-92 wcn 12: 20 t.nuto s. annen, i
BUDGET VlRECTOR, LIPA and the Trustees of LIPA A. On the first cause of action, pursuant to Article 7-A of the state Finance I,aw, against Edward V. Regan, Patrick J. Bulgaro, l.1PA and the Trustees of LIPA, an injunction prohibiting the COMPTR0!,tSR from ;
the paynont of any state drawing warrants on the treasury for appropriations to LIPA; prohibiting the BUDGET DIRECTOR from artroving and/or issuing any cortificate of approval of expenditures, or pr oposed and expenditures, to be made by LIPA and the Trustcos of f.11% ?
prohibiting LIPA and the Trustees of LIPA fror spending any state appropriations; B. On the second cause of action, pursuant to Article 7 A nr the State Finance Law, against Edward V. Regan, Patrick J. Bulgaro,1.'PA and the Trustees of LIPA, the following relief:
l state A declaratory judgment stating that LIPA must repay al
{
appropriations; and LIPA repays all out st.anding
- 2. An injunction, until from strawing appropriations, prohibiting the COMPTROLLER stato l warrants on the treast ry for the payment of any t
' appropriations to LIPA; prohibiting the BUDGET DIRECTOR from approving and/or issuing any cortificate of approval of expenditures, or proposed expenditures, to be nado by t,tPA and Richard H. Kessel and prohibiting LIPA and the Trustces of LIPA from spending any state appropriations;
- c. On the third cause of action, pursuant to Article 7-A of tho l
State Finance Law, against Edward V.- Regan, patrick J. Bulgaro,1.!PA and fron thn Trustees of LIPA, an -injunction prohibiting the COMPTRoi.11R on the treasury for the paynent of any state drawing warrants appropriations to LIPA, prohibiting the BUDGET DIRECTOR from npproving 23 l
e
, - , , , , , , - - - - . , , . , - . - - , . - . , _ . . . . _ . . . - - - . , - . - - - . . - - . . . , , .--,._.-,....,,--,..n~, - - - . . - . . . , , - -. ...,...-. - . , . - , . - - - - - - - . . ,
WED 12329 ttygg g, g.' I* C C IR e P.C. P . 2 'r fEl'-26-92 and/or issuing any cortificate of approval of expondituros, or proposed and expenditures, to be nado by LIPA and the Trusteos of Lira,
, of LIPA from spending any r, tate prohibiting LIPA and the Trustees appropriationst
- n. On the fourth cause of action, pursuant to Article 7-A of the state Pinance Law, against Edward V. Regan, Patrick J. Bulgaro, f,1 PA the Trustees of LIPA, the following roliof:
1.
A declaratory judgnent stating that the BUDGET DIREC70H and LIPA must execute a ropayment agreement which provides state of with adoquate and meaningful assurancen taxpayers repaynonti and 2.
An injunction, until the BUDGET DIRECTOR and LIPA execute said repaymont agrooment, prohibiting for thethe COMPTROLLER payment of any stato from drawi darrants on the treasury from appropriations to LIPAT prohibiting the BUDGET DIRECTORapproval of approving and/or issuing any cortificate of expenditures, or proposed expenditures, to be m LIPA from spending any additional stato appropriations:
E, on tho fifth cause of action, pursuant to Article 7-A or the State Finance Lav, against Edward V. Regan, Patrick J. Dulgaro, L1PA and from the Trustees of LIPA, an injunction prohibiting the COMPTROLt.ER any state on the treasury for the payment of drawing warrants appropriations to LIPAr. prohibiting the BUDGET DIRECTOR from app and/or issuing any cortificate of approval of expendituros, or pi nposed and expenditures, to be made by LIPA and the Trustocs of 1,1PA:
Trustees of LIPA from spending any stato prohibiting LIPA and the appropriationst of the T. On the sixth cause of action, pursuant to Artiela 7 A 24
_- . , , ., - _ . . _ - . . _ _ . , . _ . . . . . , _,,_ - , _ , ~ . _ , , . . _ . _ . _ . _ . . _ . _ _ . . . . . . , , _ , _ . _ , . .
L e ta r e c. c re n e n , p,e. %
64 c n 2329 In-26-92 d
st ate Financo Law, against Edvard V. Regan, Patrick from J. Bul an injunction prohibiting the COMP 7 Rot.LF.D the Trusteos of LIPA, for the payront of any state drawing warrants on the treasury ving appropriations to LIPAt prohibiting the BUDGET i DIRECTOR or rroposed and/or issuing any certificate of approval of expond tures, t.i t'A t and to be made by LIPA and the Trustees of expenditures, of LIPA from spending any stato prohibiting LIPA and the Trustees appropriations; of thin etion, All together with the costs and disbursements llef no may bo reastinable attorneys fees, and such other and further ro iust, proper, and equitable.
Dated:
February 26, 1992 Poughkeepsie, Now York LEWIS & GREER, P.C.
Attornoys for Plaintiffs OFFICE & P.O. ADDRESS 11 Raymond Avenue P.O. Box 2990 12603 Poughkeepsie, NY (914) 454-1200 25
, v.r,n. n -- -- ,,. . . . - . . . . , - . - , , -
. , , ,-, ,, , -, . - , ,-.,n.-,,,. , - - . . . - ,
m
)
LEN o e, p.c. P.29
- qn-2e-92 wen 12
- 30 cactn, ATTORNEY VERIFICATIp_)[
STATP OF NEW YORK )
)s; C00NTY or DUTCHESS )
I, the undereigned, an attorney duly admittod to pract ice law of the in the Courts of the State of New York state that I am a Lombor law f irm of LEWIS & GREER, P. C., the attorneys of record rv KULTA 01CIIBUEZ , INC. and NASSA11 stirr0LX c0HSTRtleTIN MANAGEMENT CORP.,
Cot 1 TRACTOR'S ASSOCIATION INC., the Plaintiffs in the Within .vtlon; I the have read the foregoing Complaint and know the contents thereof came la true to my own knowledge, except as to the nattern therein allened to be on information and bellof, and as to those treters I believe them to be true. L The groundo of my belief as to all matters not stated upor my own knowledge are based upon review of correspondence, records and reports in my possession.
The reason this verification is made by me and not by the KUI.KA O!OTIBUZ3, INC. OR NASSAtt SUFFOLK PANAGEMENT CORP.,
CottSTRUCTION CONTRACTORS' ASSOCIATION INC. is that the said Plaintiffs reside outs of Dutchess County.
I r.ifirm that the foregoing statomonts are true, under pena'tles of perjury.
Dated: Poughkcopsis, Now York -
February 26, 1992 q 'j, '
y _
LOU t IS, ESQ.
Atto - at Ic? .
9 4
o .. s
/,
8 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 4 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE COMMISSION ,- g ,7 3 $32 C 2 10
,g),%)
In the Matter of )
)
Docket No.
2d g h
/
IANG ISLMID LIGitTING COMPANY ) w-
) (Application for (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, ) License Transfer)
Unit 1) )
.)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the Petitioners' Notice of State Taxpayer Complaint and correction in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by hand, telecopy, or first-class mail, postage prepaid (as indicated below) on this 26th day of February, 1992:
Chairman Ivan Selin Commissioner Forrest J. Remick U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, Maryland 20852 Rockville, Maryland 208..
(Hand) (Hand)
Commissioner Kenneth C. Rogers Commissioner James R. Curtiss U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike 11555 Rockville Pike Rockvillo, Maryland 20852 Rockville, Maryland 20852 (Hand) (Hand)
Commissioner E. Gail de Planque Thomas S. Moore, Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Administrative Judge One White Flint North Atomic Safety & Licensing Board 11555 Rockville Pike U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Rockville, Maryland 20852 Washington, D.C. 20555
! (Hand) (Mail) l l Jerry R. Kline George A. Ferguson Administrative Judge Administrative Judge Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 5307 Al Jones Drive (Mail) Shady Side, Maryland 20764 (Mail) e r==p ~s - m y 'r -P 4 *t +-?- 4
o<>*s 9
Edwin J. Reis, Esq. W. Taylor Reveley, III, Esq.
Mitzi A. Young, Esq. Donald P. Irvin, Esq.
Office of the General Councol Hunton & Williams U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Riverfront Plaza, East Tower one White Flint North 951 East Byrd Street 11555 Rockville Pike Richmond, Virginia 23219-4074 Rockville, Maryland 20852 (Telecopy)
(Hand)
Samuel A. Cherniak, Esq. Carl R. Schenker, Jr. , Esq.
NYS Department of Law O'Melveny & Myers Bureau of Consumer Frauds 555 13th Street, N.W.
and Protection Washington, D.C. 20004 120 Broadway (Telecopy)
New York, New York 10271 (Telecopy)
Nicholas S. Reynolds, Esq. Stanley B. Klimberg, Esq.
David A. Repka, Esq. Executive Director &
Winston & Strawn General Counsel 1 1400 L Street, N.W. Long Island Power Authority Washington, D.C. 20005 200 Garden City Plaza, Suite 201 (Telecopy) Garden City, New York 11530 (Mail)
Charles E. Mullins, Esq.
Office of the General Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission one White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, Maryland 20852 (Hand)
I LT,lhfrrrs ,r 7pmes P. McGranerp',9Jr.
Counsel for the Petitioners Shoreham-Wading River Central School District and Scientists and Engineers for Secure Energy, Inc.
- . _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ . _ - . _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ . . _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ .