ML20215C987
| ML20215C987 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 10/09/1986 |
| From: | Shoemaker C NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-#486-1035 CPA, NUDOCS 8610100555 | |
| Download: ML20215C987 (2) | |
Text
>
00CHETED 4
(
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
'86 (ET -9 P2 :27 S)
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD f0CK I G
$=ff SRANCi Administrative Judges:
Alan S. Rosenthal, Chairman October 9, 1986 Dr. W. Reed Johnson Thomas S. Moore SERVED OCT -91986 3
In the Matter of
)
)
TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC
)
Docket No. 50-445-CPA COMPANY, ET AL.
)
)
(Comanche Peak Steam Electric )
Station, Unit 1)
)
)
MEMORANDUM In our September 22, 1986 order (unpublished), we invited the parties to comment on the Commission's response in CLI-86-15, 24 NRC (September 19, 1986), to the question certified to it by us in our July 2, 1986 memorandum and order (unpublished).
All of the parties accepted the invitation.
In addition, intervenors Citizens Association for Sound Energy and Meddie Gregory filed a motion with the Licensing Board seeking the admission of amended contentions or, in the alternative, the reconsideration of,certain contentions that had been previously denied by that Board.I Entitlement to the 1 The caption to the motion erroneously represented that the motion was being filed with us.
The intervenors have now submitted a corrected caption.
8610100555 861009 PDR ADOCK 05000445 b
4 2
requested relief is said to be justified by the discussion contained in CLI-86-15.
On the basis of our examination of the papers now before us, we are persuaded that the appropriate course is to withhold further consideration of the pending appeal of the applicants and the NRC staff from the Licensing Board's May 2, 1986 order to await that Board's action on the motion now before it.
Were the Board either to admit the intervenors' amended contentions or to grant the alternative relief sought by the motion, that appeal might well become academic.
In the totality of circumstances, we see no reason why decision on the appeal cannot abide the event of further developments below.
FOR THE APPEAL BOARD O.
C. JQn Sh6emaker Secretary to the Appeal Panel