ML20128G456

Advises That NRC 850319 Response to State of Ny & Suffolk County 850304 Renewal of Request for NRC Supplementation of Fes Will Not Be Supplemented,Based on Commission Declining to Reconsider CLI-84-9

ML20128G456
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	05/28/1985
From:	Perlis R NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD)
To:	Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
References
CON-#285-169 CLI-84-09, CLI-84-9, OL-4, NUDOCS 8505300165
Download: ML20128G456 (1)

Text

I69 p arro,

','o g UNITED STATES y g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION r,  : WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 l

j May 28, 1985 CO U EIL:

. UshiRC Mr. Samuel J. Chilk Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission '85 MAY 28 P4:23 Washington, D.C. 20555 If0CkdikGYSENia In the Matter of BRANCH LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1)

Docket No. 50-322-OL-4(Low Power -- Remand)

Dear Mr. Chilk:

In the NRC Staff Response to Suffolk County and State of New York Petition for Reconsideration of CLI-85-1 filed on May 13, 1985, the Staff indicated its intention to file a supplement to its March 19, 1985 Response to the State and County's March 4,1985 Renewal of Requent for NRC Supplementation of the Shoreham FEIS. (May 13th Response at 18, fn. 11).

At the time the Staff filed its May 13th Response; the Staff was unaware that the Commission had already declined to reconsider its decision (CLI-84-9) holding that supplementation of the Shoreham FEIS was not required by NEPA. (See Letter of April 18, 1985 from Chilk to Brown and Lanpher). In light of the fact that there is no inotion pending before the Comission related to CLI-84-9, the Staff wishes to inform the Commission that it will not be supplementing its March 19th Response. We apologize for any confusion our May 13th filing may have caused.

Sincerely, Wfh Robert G. Perlis Counsel for NRC Staff cc: Service List 8505300165 850528 PDR ADOCK 05000322 0 PDR S&