ML20126G888
| ML20126G888 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 06/13/1985 |
| From: | Christman J HUNTON & WILLIAMS |
| To: | Edles G, Rosenthal A, Wilber H NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP) |
| References | |
| CON-#285-473 OL-3, NUDOCS 8506180177 | |
| Download: ML20126G888 (3) | |
Text
'
HUNTON & WILLIAMS 707 EAST MAIN sincer P.O. Box iS3 5 20o0 pt==svLva=ia avg =ws. = w RrenwoND. Vinto1NI A 20212 aos..... c=Le a o ooxseaso wrw vena. =cw vo== ioivi wa smenovon. o. c. aoose retse=oses aia eso-eaoo TELepwows aoa ess isoo TcLepwoNE 804 788 8200 troen7s470s rimsr v.moimia sann towan TWX - 710 - 9 5 6 - 0 0 61 e e a y ev Loino e o mox ice e o non sees mattion. =onta camotina a7eoa moeroom, vinoimia assie vattemont s'e-eam-mati Tetspwows so4 eas-ssos trLex7ssere "est ve==t ssar sa== evito ese e o som oss aose cua = enioor noao
==onv LLE. vs=*et sste 37 sos DOLMETED raiaran, vino =ia amoso
,cupmon eis.o....i.
June 'l:3~,
1985 veup=o=,os.3sa aaoo
,,m,,.
osarcv ovat no ao4 7ee-
'85 JUN 17 All:06 Alan S. Rosenthal, Chairgan.7,:
- e.,Howard A.
- Wilber, Atomic Safety and LicenshN6nfG5 3 hinistrative Law Judge Appeal Board BRANCH Atomic Safety and Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Appeal Board Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Fifth Floor (North Tower)
Commission East West Towers Fifth Floor (North Tower) 4350 East-West Highway East-West Towers Bethesda, MD 20814 4350 East-West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 Gary J.
- Edles, Administrative Law Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Fifth Floor (North Tower)
East West Towers 4350 East-West Highway Bethesda, MD 20814 In the Matter of LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1)
Docket No. 50-322-OL-3 (Emergency Planning)
Dear Administrative Law Judges:
By letter of May 31, 1985, Don Irwin of this office ad-vised you that Suffolk County Executive Peter Cohalan had is-sued Executive Order 1985-1, directing a review of the offsite l
8506180177 850613
]@O PDR ADOCK 05000322 C
r s
HUNTON & WILLIAxs emergency plan prepared by LILCO for the Shoreham plant and the County's participation in an exercise of that plan.
A more re-cent development now needs to be reported to you as well.
On June 6 eight Suffolk County legislators and officials of four towns in the County filed suit in the New York Supreme Court to enjoin the Executive Order and declare it null and void.
On June 7 a temporary restraining order was denied by Justice Jack J. Cannavo in Hauppauge.
On June 10 Justice Robert W.
Doyle held, on a motion for a preliminary injunction and without awaiting a responsive pleading by the County Execu-t f.v e, that Executive Order 1985-1 was null and void.
He also denied LILCO's motion to intervene in the case.
The County Ex-ecutive filed a notice of appeal from this judgment the same evening.
Since the judgment is against an officer of a munici-pal corporation, filing of the notice of appeal automatically stays the judgment pending appeal under New York law.
As part of his decision, Mr. Justice Doyle ruled that, under New York State law, the County Legislature has the power to prepare disaster preparedness plans, while the County Execu-tive has the power to take action in a real emergency:
Section 24 provides in substantial part that it is only in the event of a disaster, rioting, catastrophe or similar public emergency that the Chief Executive of.the governmental units identified in the sections may proclaim a local state of emergency and take action authorized under Subparagraph A through F of Subdi-vision 1.
Where the disorder is in the order of a radiological accident, the Chief Execu-tive may not even exercise the t
==
l
n HUNTON & WILLIAMS aforementioned powers until the Governor of the State of New York has issued a proclamation of disaster emergency in re-sponse to the Chief Executive's request.
Transcript of decision rendered by Mr. Justice Doyle at 6-7, Prospect v.
Cohalan, Index No. 85-10520 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. June 10, 1985).
Thus, even if this decision survives appeal, it sup-ports LILCO's " realism" argument that in a real emergency there would be no gap in " legal authority" because governmental units would respond.
The County Executive, who has the authority to respond in an actual emergency, is willing to do so.
It is therefore apparent (as it always has been) that the " legal au-thority" contentions present a purely fictional issue, unless the NRC believes that the Governor of New York would willfully obstruct the response to a radiological emergency.
Yours very truly, de James N. Christman 126/586 cc:
Service List
,