ML20127L665

Order Summarily Denying Suffolk County 850618 Appeal of ASLB 850614 Partial Initial Decision.Appeal Does Little More than Rehearse Suffolk County/State of Ny 850619 Joint Stay Motion Denied in ALAB-810.Served on 850624

ML20127L665
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	06/24/1985
From:	Shoemaker C NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP)
To:	SUFFOLK COUNTY, NY
References
CON-#285-561 ALAB-810, OL, NUDOCS 8506280090
Download: ML20127L665 (2)

Text

? D0

• ' Uh O UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -

M 24 '

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 21 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL B TI /

Administratiw Judges:

Alan S. Rosenthal, Chairman June 24, 1985 Gary J. Edles Howard A. Wilber SERVED JUH4 Bb

)

In the Matter of- )

)

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

)

(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, )

Unit 1) )

)

ORDER On June 19, 1985, in ALAB-810, we denied the joint motion of intervenors Suffolk County and the State of New York for a stay pendente~ lite of the effectiveness of the Licensing Board's June 14, 1985 partial initial decision in this operating license proceeding involving the Shoreham nuclear facility. That motion had been filed on behalf of the County by attorneys in the Washington, D.C. office of the law firm of Kirkpatrick & Lockhart.

Now before us is a document entitled "Suffolk County's Notice of Appeal and Request for Stay," filed on the 1

21 NRC .

t 2

See LBP-85-18, 21 NRC . ALAB-810 did, however, extend for a brief period an emergency ex parte stay entered on June 17, 1985. This was done to enaLTe the movants to seek relief from the Commission.

8506280090 850624 n)

PDR ADOCK 05000322 7 g PDR

r-0 u

2 County's behalf by its County Attorney. Although the certificate of service indicates that it was placed in the mail on June 18, 1985, our copies were not received until late in the afternoon on June 21.

It appears that this motion does little more than rehearse much of the content of the joint stay motion denied in ALAB-810. Accordingly, on the authority of ALAB-810, it is summarily denied.3 It is so ORDERED.

FOR THE APPEAL BOARD O_. b G b,,_b C. J(gn Shbemaker Secretary to the Appeal Board Mr. Edles did not participate in this order.

3 This was the second stay request filed by the County Attorney. The previous one, submitted on June 17, 1985, was summarily denied in an unpublished order entered on June 18.

But the notice of appeal filed with that request remains in effect. Thus, it was not necessary for the County Attorney to file another notice of appeal with his most recent stay request.

The June 18 order also took note of the dispute between the Suffolk County Attorney and the Kirkpatrick & Lockhart firm respecting whether the latter still represents the County in this proceeding or, instead, that representation is now in the hands of the County Attorney exclusively. The order indicated that, pending the resolution of that controversy, we will accept papers filed on behalf of the County from either Kirkpatrick & Lockhart or the County Attorney (or both) .