ML20216D449
| ML20216D449 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 06/25/1987 |
| From: | Hoyt H Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-#287-3889 82-471-02-OL, 82-471-2-OL, OL, NUDOCS 8706300527 | |
| Download: ML20216D449 (3) | |
Text
5
- l (, b S $ $
3 00thEIP UNITED STATES OF-AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges:
FF 4 Helen F. Hoyt, Chairperson vo m g~ j; y' a
Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr.
Dr. Jerry Harbour SERVED JUN 2 61987 In the Matter of
)
Docket Nos. 50-443-0L 50-444-0L PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY (ASLBPNo. 82-471-02-OL) 0F NEW HAMPSHIRE, et al.
(Offsite Emergency Planning)
(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
June 25, 1987 MEM0RANDUM AND ORDER (Pennitting Responsei-~to Motions for Reconsideration of Board's May 1E, 1987 Memorandum and Order)
I On May 18, 1987 this Board issued a Memorandum and Order 2
explaining the bases for, and revising, our February 18, 1987 Order ruling on the admissibility of contentions on Revision 2 of the New Hampshire Radiological Emergency Response Plan (NHRERP). Corrections to the May 18,- 1987 Order were issued on May 27, 1987.
Subsequently, motions for reconsideration or clarification of our l
Order of May 18, 1987 were received from the Town of Amesbury, dated i
1 Memorandum and Order Providing Basis for and Revision to Board's-Rulings on Contentions on Revision 2 of NHRERP, dated May 18, 1987.
2 -
Memorandum and Order Ruling on Contentions -- Revision 2 New Hampshire Radiological Emergency Response Plan, dated February 18, I
1987.
B706300527 870625
{DR ADOCK 050 g 3:
}3%
- 1 j
t b]
, May 26, 1987; the Town of Hampton, dated May 27, 1987; and the Seacoast Anti-Pollution League, dated May 27, 1987.
The Staff responded, on June 15, 1987, with "NRC Staff's Response to Motions for Reconsideration Filed by the Town of Amesbury and the l
Town of Hampton," and on June 16, 1987, with "NRC Staff's Response to SAPL's Motion for Partial Reconsideration." Applicants moved to strike (onJune 18,1987) the Staff's responses to the Amesbury and Hampton motions for reconsideration on the grounds that our Orders of February 18 and May 18, 1987 were in the nature of a prehearing conference order admitting and denying contentions, and hence are governed by 10 C.F.R. 9 2.752. Section 2.752(c) provides,that parties j
may not file replies to objections to such orders unless the Board so directs. Alternatively, Applicants move that if the Board wishes to give the Staff leave to file a response, the Board should enter an order directing replies, and give the Applicants an appropriate amount of time to file a full response. Applicants further stated that they have not responded to the motions for reconsideration, in reliance on the Rules of Procedure.
While Section 2.752 procedures might be construed to apply in this instance, the Board had not previously so directed. Accordingly, Applicants' alternative motion is granted and parties who wish to do so are permitted to respond to the motions for reconsideration filed by the Town of Amesbury, the Town of Hampton, and Seacoast Anti-Pollution
y
_j League. Such responses are due in hand to the Board and affected parties by July 8, 1987.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
/
/
7 y' HelenF.Hoyt,Chairpersop ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Issued at Bethesda, Maryland this 25th day of June, 1987.