ML20211D096
| ML20211D096 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 10/17/1986 |
| From: | Cotter B Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | Damato A SENATE |
| References | |
| CON-#486-1189 OL-3, OL-5, NUDOCS 8610220102 | |
| Download: ML20211D096 (2) | |
Text
/f9 63KfCu g3M UNITED STATES p
M E
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD PANEL g
g..... j#
W ASHIN GTON, D.C. 20555
' g,{
October 17, 1986
- M DCT 20 P3 :43 GFFli. -
'J 00CKUr;.
The Honorable Alfonse M. D'Amato United States Senator Washington, C.C.
20510 g
Dear Senator D'Amato:
This is in response to your letter of October 14, 1986 concerning the reconstitution of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board presiding in the emergency planning exercise segment of the Shoreham proceeding.
First, let me say that there seems to have been some confusion as to the scope of the proceedings affected by the reconstitution. This is understandable given the number of issues pending in the Shoreham case.
Consequently, I have submitted a clarification of the Notice of Reconstitution for publication in the Federal Register. A copy is enclosed.
As you will note, Judges Margulies, Kline and Shon will continue to preside over the bulk of the emergency planning issues in Shoreham, including all matters that have been the subject of extensive prior litigation. The reconstituted Board of Judges Frye, Paris and Shon will preside only in the proceedings related to the emergency ' planning exercise. Hearings on this issue were instituted pursuant to a June 6, 1986 Connission order and do not involve " tens of thousands of pages
... compiled in the nearly five-year history of the Shoreham case."
Last week, Judge Margulies advised me that it was his Board's opinion upon completing the admission of issues in the exercise case, that all pending proceedings in Shoreham could not be heard in anything like a reasonably timely fashion by a single Board.
For that reason, I established the reconstituted Board to handle the newer, less developed emergency planning exercise hearing.
In complex NRC proceedings, segregation of specific hearing issues for consideration by separate licensing boards has been a nomal case management procedure for many years.
In Shoreham itself, emergency 31anning was assigned to a separate board long before the original board 1ad completed consideration of other safety and environmental issues.
Similarly, the Seabrook proceeding in New Hampshire is being handled by two licensing boards, i
i D
hb G
h bD h
Honorable Alfonse M. D'Amato 2
October 17, 1986 My sole concern in respondng to the excessive workload created by the expanding Shoreham emergency planning proceeding was to assure that all issues are heard fully without unnecessary delay.
I believe it is that commitsent to which the residents of Long Island are entitled.
Sincere Y
B. Paul Cotter, r.
Chief Administrative Judge Enclosure
/cc: Service List - Shoreham/ Emergency Planning, Docket No. 50-322-OL-3 Shoreham/EP Exercise, Docket No. 50-322-OL-5 l
i 6
e
- _ -.