ML20204K086
| ML20204K086 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 08/05/1986 |
| From: | Irwin D HUNTON & WILLIAMS, LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO. |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#386-248 OL-5, NUDOCS 8608110276 | |
| Download: ML20204K086 (6) | |
Text
,
LILCO, August 5,1986 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Sfg[ED
? NE ~7 P1 46 Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
((7[hc WhTAR y BR IFVIT in the Matter of
)
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
) Docket No. 50-322-OL-5
) (EP Exercise)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,
)
Unit 1)
)
LILCO'S MOTION FOR THREE-DAY EXTENSION TO RESPOND TO INTERVENORS' EXERCISE CONTENTIONS Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO) moves for a three-day extension of time, until the close of business on Thursday, August 14,1986, to respond to Intervenors' con-tentions on the February 13, 1986 emergency planning exercise for the Shoreham Nuclear Powee Station, and for corresponding adjustments in the Intervenors' reply date and, if necessary, the date for the prehearing conference scheduled for August 26. In support, LILCO states as follows:
1.
At the July 8 prehearing conference, the Board granted Intervenors 23 ad-1 ditional days to complete their contentions, establishing August 1 as the service and fil-ing dato. At the same time, LILCO indicated that it thought it would be able to respond to contentions within an approximately 10-day time period; the NRC Staff indicated that it would exert its best efforts to comply with such a schedule. Intervenors wished a week to reply to LILCO's and the Staff's responses. The Board ultimately established Friday, August 1 as the deadline for filing and serving contentions, Monday, August 11 as the deadline for LILCO's and the Staff's responses to them, and Monday, August 18 as the deadline for Intervenors' replies. The Board also set Tuesday, August 26 for a prehearing conference on the contentions. Memorandum and Order, July 11,1986, at 7.
06081kU D
P PDR
i 2.
Intervenors' contentions were timely filed, arriving at the offices of LILCO counsel at approximately 4:25 p.m. on August 1.
They are also served on the SI m that af tornoon.
3.
The Intervenors' filing is 162 pages long and consists of 50 separately num-bered contentions containing approximately 175 subparts. In addition, there are cross-references among numerous of the contentions and prefatory language to others, which make the relationships among the contentions more complex yet.
4.
LILCO has every interest in expediting this proceeding. However, LILCO's initial estimate that it would be able to respond to Intervenors' contentions by August 10 - five normal working days plus surrounding weekends presupposed responding to a document of normal length, whose sheer bulk and complexity did not materially influ-ence the amount of time necessary to analyze and answer it. As even a cursory exami-nation of Intervenors' papers reveals, that initial expectation has been confounded.
While it would be physically possible for LILCO to complete some form of response by Monday, August 11, LILCO believes that its response will be materially more useful to i
the Board if an additional three days are permitted for its preparation.
5.
LILCO would not oppose corresponding postponements of either Interve-nors' reply date (or even giving them an additional day's extension - i.e., until Friday,
~
August 22), or the prehearing conference (i.e., deferring it from its current date of Tuesday, August 26 until as late as Friday, August 29).M The current schedule has enough flexibility in it to permit these adjustments and thus avoid prejudice to any party. However, LILCO does not wish to create a risk that the prehearing conference 1/
Intervenors, however, have stated that they wish an extension of their reply deadline until Monday morning, August 25 if LILCO receives a three-day extension (see paragraph 7 telow).
l
3-4 would be delayed into the following week, i.e., beyond Friday August 29. Thus, if the price of an extension is to push the prehearing conference date to beyond Labor Day, LILCO would prefer to proceed on the present schedule.
Accordingly, LILCO proposes the following adjustments to the schedule set out in this Board's July 11 Prehearing Conference Order:
LILCO, NRC Staff file responses to contentions: August 14 Intervenors reply to contention responses:
August 22 (or a.m. August 25 - see paragraph 7 below)
Prehearing Conference:
Anywhere between August 26 f
and 29, at Board's discretion.
6.
LILCO is authorized to state that the NRC Staff cor. curs with the request i
for relief stated in this motion.
I i
7.
LILCO has contacted counsel for Suffolk County, as lead counsel for Inter-venors, with respect to the relief requested by this motion. LILCO is authorized to state that Intervenors do not oppose the relief requested by LILCO for itself and the Staff as long as Intervenors obtain an equal extension; and thus that if LILCO obtains three additional days, they wish an extension until the morning of Monday, August 25.
Intervenors state also that in the event that the Board is inclined to grant LILCO's re-quested three-day extension without also granting the extension to the morning of August 25 upon which their agreement to LILCO's proposal is premised, they wish to reply in writing to LILCO's motion and will do so on an expedited basis. LILCO does not oppose the Intervenors' receiving a reply filing 9xtension until Monday morning, August 25, if it will not imperil the Board's ability to hold a prehearing conference during the f
week of August 25-29; but that if the prehearing conference would have to slip beyond that week given these extensions, LILCO will accept whatever lesser extensions the Board is willing to grant consistent with holding a prehearing conference during the week of August 25-29.
_.,l___.___
-4 s
8.
LILCO will presume, pending receipt of the Board's decision on this motion, that the relief requested by it has not been granted. LILCO respectfully requests that the Board expedite disposition of this motion and that it notify the parties, by tele-phone if possible, of its ruling.
Respectfully submitt n
Dohltid P. Irwin James N. Christman Hunton & Williams 707 East Main Street P.O. Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212 804/788-8357 DATED: Augtist 5,1986 l
s CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE In the Matter of LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1)
Docket No. 50-322-OL-5 I hereby certify that copies of LILCO'S MOTION FOR THREE-DAY EXTENSION TO RESPOND TO INTERVENORS' EXERCISE CONTENTIONS were served this date upon the following by telecopy as indicated by an asterisk, by Federal Express as indi-cated by two asterisks, or by first-class mall, postage prepaid.
Morton B. Margulies
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Chairman Appeal Board Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Board Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Washington, D.C. 20555 Commission East-West Towers, Rm. 407 Atomic Safety and Licensing 4350 East-West Hwy.
Board Panel Bethesda, MD 20814 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory l
Commission Dr. Jerry R. Kline
- Washington, D.C. 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Bernard M. Bordenick, Eso.
- U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Oreste Russ Pirfo, Esq.
Commission Edwin J. Reis, Esq.
East-West Towers, Rm. 427 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 4350 East-West Hwy.
Commission Bethesda, MD 20814 7735 Old Georgetown Road (to mailroom)
Mr. Frederick J. Shon
- Bethesda, MD 20814 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Herbert H. Brown, Esq.
- U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Lawrence Coe Lanpher, Esq.
Commission Karla J. Letsche, Esq.
East-West Towers, Rm. 430 Kirkpatrick & Lockhart 4350 East-West Hwy.
Eighth Floor Bethesda, MD 20814 1900 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036 Secretary of the Commission Attention Docketing and Service Fabian G. Palomino, Esq.
- Section Special Counsel to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Governor Commission Executive Chamber 1717 H Street N.W.
Room 229 Washington, D.C. 20555 State Capitol Albany, New York 12224
..L
)
i Mary Gundrum, Esq.
William E. Cumming, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General Associate General Counsel 2 World Trade Center Federal Emergency Management Room 4614 Agency New York, New York 10047 500 C Street, S.W.
Room 840 1
Spence W. Perry, Esq. **
Washington, D.C. 20472 General Counsel Federal Emergency Ms. Nora Bredes Management Agency Executive Coordinator 501 C Street, S.W., Room 840 Shoreham Opponents' Coalition Washington, D.C. 20472 195 East Main Street Smithtown, New York 11787 Mr. Jay Dunkleberger New York State Energy Office Gerald C. Crotty, Esq.
Agency Building 2 Counsel to the Governor Empire State Plaza Executive Chamber Albany, New York 12223 State Capitol Albany, New York 12224 Stewart M. Glass, Esq. **
Regional Counsel Martin Bradley Ashare, Esq. **
Federal Emergency Management Eugene R. Kelly, Esq.
Agency Suffolk County Attorney 26 Federal Plaza, Room 1349 H. Lee Dennison Building _
New York, New York 10278 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11787 Stephen B. Latham, Esq. **
Twomey, Latham & Shea Dr. Monroe Schneider 33 West Second Street North Shore Committee P.O. Box 298 P.O. Box 231 Riverhead, New York 11901 Wading River, NY 11792 Jonathan D. Feinberg, Esq.
New York State Department of Public Service, Staff Counsel Three Rockefeller Plaza Albany, New York 12223 Doitald P. Irwin Hunton & Williams 707 East Main Street P.O. Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212 DATED: August 5,1986 o
_