ML20205J004

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Memorandum Re Intervenors,Suffolk County,State of Ny & Town of Southampton 860122 Notice & Motion Requesting That Aslab Grant Certain Relief on Emergency Planning.Request for Intercession Must Be Addressed to Aslab.Served on 860129
ML20205J004
Person / Time
Site: Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date: 01/28/1986
From: Shoemaker C
NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP)
To:
References
CON-#186-880 OL-3, NUDOCS 8601300071
Download: ML20205J004 (2)


Text

$b.

~

y-<44 f

$\\

~

J

&~

f Y)

' NITED STATES OF AMERICA Y

o WUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 9-

\\h.3.oPg ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BO g Administrative Judges:

co

{\\ '

i Alan S.

Rosenthal, Chairman January 28, 1986 Gary J. Edles Howard A. Wilber SERVD. JAIL 2 0198b

)

In the Matter of

)

)

LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY

)

Docket No. 50-322-OL-3

)

(Emergency Planning)

(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,

)

Unit 1)

)

)

MEMORANDUM On January 22, 1986, intervenors Suffolk County, State of New York and Town of Southampton filed a " Notice and

' Motion Concerning Proposed Emergency Planning Exercises."

Although its caption stated that it was "Before the Commission," the document concluded (at page 4) with the request that this Board grant certain relief sought therein "if the Commission fails to do so."

The intervenors are correct that, in common with the commission, we currently have " jurisdiction (over] matters pertinent to the Shoreham emergency planning litigation."

Ibid.

But it scarcely follows that we might appropriately override a Commission determination to withhold the action i

0601300071 0

$22 PDR ADOCK O PDR G

O 2

asked of it.1 This consideration to one side, we are under no obligation to examine, let alone to act.upon, any filing which, according to its caption, is addressed solely to the Commission.

Whether conditional or not, any request for our intercession in a particular matter must be contained in a paper addressed specifically to us.

FOR THE APPEAL BOARD

.y b.

Q j

C. JQ n Shfemaker l

Secretary to the Appeal Board Mr. Edles did not participate in this memorandum.

i 1 To the contrary, we can disregard the Commission's treatment of a matter before it for consideration only if, unlike here, the Commission has explicitly authorized us to i

do so.

See, e.g.,

in this proceeding ALAB-800, 21 NRC 386 (1985), discussing the inclusion of such an authorization in the immediate effectiveness rule (10 CFR 2.764(g)).

_ _