ML20235X588

Informs of Error in NRC 870924 Proposed Findings on Reception Ctr Issues.Proposed Finding on Traffic Control Contrary to Cuomo Vs Lilco,Util Plan & Testimony.Error Should Be Corrected.Related Correspondence

ML20235X588
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	10/08/1987
From:	Mcmurray C KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NY
To:	Bachmann R NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
References
CON-#487-4606 OL-3, NUDOCS 8710200050
Download: ML20235X588 (2)

Text

. <//, d4 gagg KIRIOKr qqpMMmmm3p LOCKHARTMN#mitmea.r _ g +g,3,-

SotJn1 LOBBY 9TH Floor EXCH/.NGE PLACE 1800 M STREET. N.W. ,

WASHINOToN, D.C. 200%5891 win 2274000 1428 BluCKE11 AVENUE MIAMI, FL 33131 TELEPHONE (202) 7769000 0 05) 374 4112 TELEX 440209 KL DC Ut 1500 OUVER BUILIXNO TELECOPtER Q02) 7749100 FITTSBUROH, PA 15222 $.179 "lD 3554500 CHRISTOPHER M. McMURRAY .

(202) M&9054 .

i Qi October 8, 1987 g. 3

\\

+ - \ .

-1 9, 11 $ jgg y .$ '

Richard G. Bachmann, Esquire Office of the General Counsel

( 8 United States Nuclear Regulatory oy Commission * ,

7735 Old Georgetown Road Room Number 8704 Bethesda, Maryland 20814

Dear Dick:

This letter is written on behalf of Suffolk County to bring to your attention -- and via copies to the attention of the Board and other parties -- an error in the Staff's September 24 pro-posed findings on the reception center issues. I am authorized to state that New York State and the Town of Southampton join in bringing this matter to your attention.1/

On page 53 of the Staff's brief, in the " Conclusions" paragraph, it is stated that traf fic control may be performed by LERO traffic guides. This statement is directly contrary to the holding in Cuomo v. LILCO, consol. Index No. 84-4 615 ( N.Y. Sup.

Ct. Feb. 20, 1985), aff'd, 511 N.Y.S. 2d 867 (1987), appeal pending. It is also directly contrary to LILCO's Plan for the reception centers and is unsupported by any evidence introduced at the reception center hearing. Indeed, LILCO's testimony on  !

the reception centers at page'37 specifically states that LERO traf fic tuides will be deployed only on LILCO property at the j monitoring stations specified in OPIP 4.2.3. l It is also error for the Staf f to suggest (see pages 53-54 of Staff brief) that Nassau County will provide traffic control under LILCO's Plan. The letter introduced at the hearing from 1/ By pointing out the misstatement discussed in the text, it should not be construed that the Governments agree with other portions of the Staff's Findings. As made clear in the Governments' September 14 Findings, the Governments find LILCO's relocation center scheme deficient on multiple grounds.

h G

kDO 2 >

KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART

' Richard G.-Sachmann, Esquire October 8, 1987

.Page 2 L

Nassau County. Executive Thomas Gulotta clearly states that'the -

Nassau County Police are not available to implement the LILCO Plan. .

J In~ light of the fact that the Staff's proposed finding on  !

. traffic control is contrary to _Cuomo v. LILCO, LILCO'.s Plan,. )

LILCO's testimony, and the' evidence offered at the hearing, the s Staff should correct its error.

Yours truly, Christopher M. McMurray ,

CMM/ mas

' cc : Service List l

l I

_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -