ML20196F757
| ML20196F757 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 12/01/1988 |
| From: | Letsche K KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART, LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO. |
| To: | Johnson W, Kohl C, Rosenthal A NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP) |
| References | |
| CON-#488-7601 ALAB-905, LBP-88-13, LBP-88-24, OL-6, NUDOCS 8812140113 | |
| Download: ML20196F757 (2) | |
Text
--
i 760 l l[
KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART
!KXM ' mY fni Floor Excawas rucs IKC M st1CET,N.T.
N[
TASHLNGTCN, D C. 2Me 5MI m zu m 14:e BarKru AsTMA
?t9JWAP GC2) T' Sex 0 if a mn m tc o TIllCAYk (2@ 776eiJ0 nWRCH, PA gegn }t?e ammj.!gw a u x.trTse m mne December 1, 1988
' ;.1 va IL,13 e
BLTELECOPIER g
h; Christine N. Kohl, Chairman tocxrnmu 8 /
Alan S.
Rosenthal EMC NW Dr. W. Reed Johnson
% (~ rpyN Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Ret Docket No. 50-322-OL-6 (25% Power)
Dear Madam Chairman and Gentleman:
The Governments bring to the Board's attentif.n that ALAB-905, which vacated and remanded in part the OL-3
.'41 censing Board's decision on the adequacy of LILCO's reception centers (LBP-88-13, 2r NRC 509 (1988)), supports the Goven ments' pending Motion for Stay of the November 21, 1988 Lisensing Board Order.
Sig Lena Island Lichtino Co_ (Shoreham Nuclea.' Power Station, Unit 1), ALAB-905, 28 NRC (November 29,. 19?6).
One primary premise of the November 21 Order van the Licensing Board's assertion that "there are no contentions relevant to (LILCO's 25% power) request before this Board."
November 21 Order at 8. See also isb. at 3 ("LBP-88-24 resulted in Board)").putionofallcontentionspendingbefore(theOL-3 res That Licensing Board premise was, in turn, the apparent basis for the Board's conclusion that it was "required by (Section 50.57(c)] to issue an order authorizing the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation to make appropriate findings on LILCO's application and to issue the license requested." Ish, at 7.
In light of ALAB-9C's, the November 21 Order is clearly erroneous.
ALAB-905 not only vacated a Licensing Board finding that a material portion of LILCO's proposed emergency plan is
.1/
As noted in the a.
rnments' Stay Motion, in authorizing issuance of a 25% po. w License, the OL-6 Board erroneously ignored the pendency <..i the Governments' contentions in the OL-5 proceeding.
kk
[
1>4 h O
KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART Christine N. Kohl, Chairman Alan S. Rosenthal Dr. W. Reed Johnson Decamber 1, 1988 Page 2 adequate, but it established the need for additional Licensing Board proceedings before the required adequacy finding can be made in the future.
Sea ALAB-905, slip op. at 4, 6,
12-13, 41, 42, n.75.
Accordingly, the Novemb' r 21 order should be stayed pending full appellate review of its merits, in ligP of ALAB-905 and for the other reasons set forth in the Governm( ws' Stay Motion.U Indeed, ALAB-905 would support summary reversal of the November 21 Order.
The State of New York and the Town e7 Southampton join in the views expressed herein.
Sincerely, l
/C Karla J.
Letsche cc:
Bv Teleceoier:
Donald P.
Irwin, Esq.
Edwin J. Reis, Esq.
William R. Cumming, Esq.
Docketing and Service Section Fabian G. Palomino, Esq.
i By Federal Excress:
Dr. W. Reed Johnson Stephen B.
Latham, Esq.
l 2/
In their stay Motion, the Governments cited the recent New York Supreme Court decision enjoining the use of LILCO's proposed Bellmore rece.ption center, and the pendency of the reception center appeal, as facts supporting the need for a stay of the November 21 Order authorizing issuance of a 25% power
]
license, because they evidence the inadequacy of LILCO's proposed emergency plan.
Een the Governments' Stay Motion, at page 11-12.
The rulings in ALAB-905 confirm the C:overnments' position.