ML18079A831: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| issue date = 07/06/1979 | | issue date = 07/06/1979 | ||
| title = Request Submitted by Util for Denial of Intervenors Coleman 790625 Request for Reconsideration of Dismissal of Coleman Contention 7.NRC Must Remand Matter to Aslb. Certificate of Svc Encl | | title = Request Submitted by Util for Denial of Intervenors Coleman 790625 Request for Reconsideration of Dismissal of Coleman Contention 7.NRC Must Remand Matter to Aslb. Certificate of Svc Encl | ||
| author name = | | author name = Wetterhahn M | ||
| author affiliation = CONNER, MOORE & CORBER | | author affiliation = CONNER, MOORE & CORBER | ||
| addressee name = | | addressee name = | ||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:}} | {{#Wiki_filter:UNITED STATES OF A~IBRICA NUCLErlR REGULriTORY C0~1.MISSI0~1 Before the Atomic Safetv and Licensing Board In tl:e i:.1a t ter o £ PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GriS Docket ~jo. 50-272 CO.MP.'LNY, et al. (Proposed Issuance of | ||
.~endment to Facility (Salem Nuclear Generating Operating License Station, Unit 1) No. DPR-70) | |||
!..ICE~ISEE Is J..NSWER TO II INTERVE~WRS COLZZ*L~'i"S I :*10TIC:-1 FOR RECONSIDERZ:..TION OF DISMISSAL OF COLE~,L~)JS' | |||
[CONTENTION] NO. S:2VEN" On June 25, 1979, the Public Advocate of New Jersey, representing Mr. and Mrs. rilfred C. Coleman, Jr. in the captioned proceeding, moved for reconsideraticn of dis~issal of the Colemans' Contention 7 by this Ato~ic Safety and | |||
___!_/ | |||
Licensing Board ("Board") . As grounds for reconsideraticn, the Public Advocate cites a decision of the c. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Col u.i-;illia Circuit, :*linnesota v. | |||
,.~, | |||
--c *,*o ~ | |||
~* ;:::. | |||
Q. - _', 2 o'° 9 , 78-2032, (D.C. Cir. May 23, 2.979). | |||
discussed below, Licensee, Public Service Electric and Gas Company, et - i opposes ::-.otio:::. reconsideration. | |||
~' | |||
It is undisputed th2t ~~= Court c= ~??eals 0ist=ict o= Col~~bia Circuit has remanded the two cases pendi::g before it to the Kuclear ?.eg'.J.la tory C:Jrrtl:lis s i.o:::: | |||
( "~;?..c" or "Corrl:rnis s icr. n) fer further ac-=ion regarding a | |||
__l1I The Board's ~-!c.~- 2~, l978 OrC.e~ ?c:..:c~.*li::g S~ecia.:.. ?.:-e-hearing Conference denied the Cole~a~s 1 | |||
?reposed Contentio::: 7. | |||
ru H 1D ct Ill I-'* | |||
A I.~.- .... Ill ~J .. rt Ul | |||
'-. (D 1-* | |||
r::(D I-'* 'd I-..,vJ' .."'ro | |||
... p, I-' rl* Ii r 1* fll ::i | |||
!.J.. tJ- <D !:J () I-'* *o 0 ~J* CD | |||
:r-Jth<ll*J H H n ~o n I-'* !J :::i CL <D Ill fll 1-i CD Pl 10 f-J UI :-s p, :::i* Ii 0 !JI l/l () Ill (J) ti Ill Ul | |||
'0 1-*'* r11 I*'* fll () 1-* rt* (D r:: rt rl* 1-i 0 CDOCl>UI I I.o. f-J n m 'CJ I~ | |||
= <D I-'* I-'* er CD ~:l Ill r1* ~J 111 I-' CD 8 l*i ~:; (D ~J fll Pl | |||
() () | |||
I*-* rl* UI rt* ro m ru 0 lu"-.1 ?i1 0 Ul I..........''"" :::i0 ro b" l/l :.<:; I**'- rl* :::i 0* ~J (l rt f-J Iii I-' rt I-' | |||
1-'- Ill Ill Iv lQ I-'* Ill w fD I] 0 :_J" () I-'* 0 0 CD 1*11 rt* 1~ r1* rop_,,n!.J Cl> n, :.J.. *-j er CD 0 0 () 1-i 0 :J* (I) 0-* (D *Q ::r Ii 1-h CD s ru r: w ;J Ul tJ' I-'* I fD (D rl* H () ::i ti Ul (I) | |||
::J rt* I-' Ill f-J Ii ~j 'D n* I*'* rt ::.i* n* I-'* Ul I-'* I-'* (J) 0* ;Y (D :J I-'* 11* I*'* *£1 r.. m :-:i :.).. ..... Ii 1-'* (/) ct* ~ | |||
w Fl r1* 0 :.Y ClJ ID Ul f-'* () !.J (J) CD 1-i 0 (D <D ID t*h tJ" | |||
...... 8*~ (I) r:: ,q 1-'- fll | |||
:1 UI :J 0 ::.s I-'* n 1Q I-'* o ::J rt* rr th Ul 0 Ill () ::.J 0 r:: Pl rr o* ::J INO | |||
'0 IU ru o rt ~] CD 1--' 0 '-... CD r1* 0 rt* r:: :1~ ()1-:: ~ UI Ul (/) Pl !J' m 1*1i :J* [11 t*~ I*-* fl* I-' I-'* rr 0 l*i Pl I-' ;J OJ ~ ro Ill I-'* 8 0... (J) | |||
;::.i r** | |||
rll r1* CD 0 Ill Ill 0 n* Pl Ul 0 ::J *1* ~I ~j p, () I~ I-*'* ::.s CD :::i ;:.I 1 h rl* CD fli (1, I-'* H u* Ill 0 p, ;:: 0 N r1* ;:i n. r1* ru rt* <: :::i *-~ | |||
0 fll ::i* rt* | |||
rt 0 1*~ r1* ru 1-** (D [II :.:i rt CD | |||
:J' 1*11 (IJ w :.1 **:i ,._J. Ul en tJ' p, m n* I-'* | |||
(D Ii rl* Ul 111 rt* IA ::i* | |||
tJ 0 -~ :.:i 11* [II Ill CJi rt* CD 1---' Iw CD Ul | |||
( ) ')' '"j ni ti I-'* <D '-...Ii rr Pl 0 io 0, Ii Ill f-J 0 Ul rt* :..3 t*h ~i Ul I-' W m u1 rt ct* () !:j r1* !:J 0 l*h t*j OJ IJ* Ill ;J r1* o .... 0 0 r::() | |||
rop, r:: | |||
~) CJJ ::1 Ill 0 Ii 'O rt* Ii rt* (]) | |||
fll (/) 0* :J Pi rt* :-J Ill I*~ | |||
,_ . 0 ~-y ([l f-J | |||
::.S c~ CL Ul I l c: l[l (l> fJJ :.:i* 0 p. :1 UI CD 1-'* CD 1.J. r: ~:s er lll Ul rr n* ~ llJ 0 Ul Cll D* fl, (]J rr 0 ru (j) Ill r1* r::: b' rt* rt ll' ro IJ* 0 ::i I_, r1* ~* ty CD 0 t;* L:~ l- 1 | |||
* I--* r1* I-' 'd ::.s rt* J"':~ l_J* ~1* <D 1--' ti t~ :J (lJ 0 ::1* ([) rr CD I-'* (I) ru IJ* 11* Ill Ii f\J rt* Ii ~ *< <: n n* *Q m :-r CJ, ": rr :*y :J ti pi= rt* fll () (Jl l*h (IJ l*J* ([J (II (]) I-'* rl* 1~ 1u ~3 :~ 1-i Ii en 11* I-'* rt* I-'" 1~ i';" ~; I*'* (0 n rn 1u ::J () l*h n () CD IJl 0 n. | |||
0 CJ 0 I*' | |||
.... 0 (II I-'* () :;,:: ::1 r1" r::: | |||
f.: r I ~; r1* ~-1 r.: n :::i Ul I~ ! t* rt* ::I" E1 () I-'* Ill fll IJ* rt* | |||
r1* n :.i* 0 f(" l*'- ;s fll CD !:1 ~-i fll !.J. | |||
() !U (J) Ill 0 (Jl I-' I i.-:: iJ r1* CD tr | |||
() : 1 :i ([) (ll 0 I-' 0 Ii ro Ih I I-'* 1*11 ([l ::Cl II> | |||
0 I .... | |||
:-J n | |||
- 3 - | |||
consider any aspect of the remanded question on its own initiati?e. Because of the remand's generic nature, it ~ay very welJ. be that the Cor:i.Inission decides net to ha'1e this illatter considered in individual adjudicatory proceedings instead, elects to have i .:.. | |||
-'- considered in an ongoing or new generic proceeding. The c. c.:..rcui t 6/ | |||
clearly leaves such an alternative open to the Commission. | |||
In such an event, no further consideration ~y this 3oard ~av be necessary. | |||
_]_/ | |||
\'iith regard to the ":nani£est injustice" alleged ':Jy the Public Advocate, such assertions are spec~lative at l:lest. In any event, anv claim of injury and request redress must be directed to t:"1e Co.mnission, net to this Licensing 3oar*:::. To ~epeat, it is quite possi~le t~at intervenors will be required to ?Ursue this =atter through present proceeding. | |||
6/ ~*1innesota v. ~'-JRC, slio op. at ll, """:::;;. _S_e_-=_- _a_l_s_o_ ~.rer~c:::--_:. | |||
Yankee ~uclear Power Ccrp. v. ~RDC, ~35 G.S. 519, | |||
~~____,_,....,._-=____,........,........,........,...,_.........,_,..___.........,........,~........,_,.._,..........,........,~ | |||
n.13 (1978); Cnion of Concerned Scientists~. A~c,* ~99 | |||
?.2d 1069 (D.C. Cir. 1974); ~ader v. ~a~, 363 F.S~pp. | |||
946 (D.C.C. 1973). | |||
_]_/ Cols!:',a::1s' :::irie:: ==-~ ..:;. | |||
Under these circumstances, the mo~ion for reconsidera-tion should be denied. | |||
Respectfully submitted, CONNER, MOORE & CORBER Mark J. Wetterhah~ | |||
Counsel for ~~e Licensee July 6, 1979 | |||
UNITED STATES OF -~E:EEC.; | |||
1:-iUCLEAR REGUL.;:,_TORY cm~*lISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the ;;.1atter of PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC fil-iD GAS Docket ~o. 50-272 CO.MPA:::.iY, et al. (Proposed Issuance 0£ Amendment to Facility (Salem Nuclear Generating Operating License Station, Unit 1) No. DPR-70) | |||
I hereby certi£y that copies of ~icensee 1 s Ans*..;er to 11 | |||
'Intervenors Colemans' Motion for Reconsideration of Dismissal of Colema::is' [Contention] ~l'o. Seven 11 and 11 Licensee 1 s ~-nswer to ~*lotion by In tervenors, Coleman, to Compel Suppleru.e!'lta tio::i of .?-.nswers to Interrogatories by Licensee, 11 both dated July 6, 1979, in the captioned matter, have been served upon the fol-lowing by deposit in the United States mail this 6th dav of Jllly, 1979: | |||
Gary L. Milhollin, Esq. Chairman, Atomic Safety an~ | |||
Chairman, Atomic Safety Licensing Board Pa~el and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 1815 Jefferson Street Commission Madison, Wisconsin 53711 Washington, D.C. 20555 | |||
~=* Frederick J. Shon Barry Smith, 2sq. | |||
Member, Atomic Safety a~d Office of t~e 2xec~tive Licensing 3oard Panel Legal Directer C.S. N~clear Reg~lat.ory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Com.mission Cc~uissior:.. | |||
Washingtcn, D.C. 20555 \*lashi:::gtcn, D. C. | |||
Dr. James c. L~-nb, III Z..ls:nbe.:-, Atomic S2.::ety and Deputy Attor~ey General Licensi~g Board ?a:::el Depa!:"t.uent of Lar,.,..~ and 313 Woodhaven Road :?ublic Saf et.y Chapel Hill, N.C. 27514 Environraental Protection Section Chairman, Atomic Safety and 36 West State Street Licensing Appeal Board Panel Trenton, ~.J. 08625 C.S. Nuclear Reg~latory Co::i..-nission | |||
\~7a.sn~.z:gton, D. c. 20555 | |||
Richard ?ryling, Jr., Esq. Carl Valore, Jr., Esq. | |||
Assistant General Solicitor Valore, McAllister, Aron Public Service Electric & Wes tr:1ore lar:d | |||
& Gas Company ~ainland Pro~essional Plaza 80 Park ?lace P. O. Box l/5 Newark, N. J. 07101 Northfield, N. ~. CS225 Keith Onsdorf=, Esq. Office of t2e Sec~2tary Assistant Deputy Public Advocate Docketing and Service Section Department of the Public Advocate U.S. ~uclear ~egulatory Division of Public Interest Cormniss ion Advocacy Washington, Q. C. 20555 Post Office Box 141 Trenton, N. J. 08601 June D. ~acArtor, Esq. | |||
Deputy Attorney General Sandra T. ~yres, Esq. Tatnall Building, P. O. 3ox 1401 Departnent of the Public _;.dvocate Dover, Delaware 19901 520 East State Street Trenton, N. J.. 08625 Mr. Alfred C. Coleman, Jr. | |||
Mrs. Eleanor G. Coleman 35 11 :{ 11 Drive Pennsville, ~ew Jersey 08070}} |
Latest revision as of 10:16, 3 February 2020
ML18079A831 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Salem |
Issue date: | 07/06/1979 |
From: | Wetterhahn M CONNER, MOORE & CORBER |
To: | |
Shared Package | |
ML18079A830 | List: |
References | |
NUDOCS 7908220144 | |
Download: ML18079A831 (6) | |
Text
UNITED STATES OF A~IBRICA NUCLErlR REGULriTORY C0~1.MISSI0~1 Before the Atomic Safetv and Licensing Board In tl:e i:.1a t ter o £ PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GriS Docket ~jo. 50-272 CO.MP.'LNY, et al. (Proposed Issuance of
.~endment to Facility (Salem Nuclear Generating Operating License Station, Unit 1) No. DPR-70)
!..ICE~ISEE Is J..NSWER TO II INTERVE~WRS COLZZ*L~'i"S I :*10TIC:-1 FOR RECONSIDERZ:..TION OF DISMISSAL OF COLE~,L~)JS'
[CONTENTION] NO. S:2VEN" On June 25, 1979, the Public Advocate of New Jersey, representing Mr. and Mrs. rilfred C. Coleman, Jr. in the captioned proceeding, moved for reconsideraticn of dis~issal of the Colemans' Contention 7 by this Ato~ic Safety and
___!_/
Licensing Board ("Board") . As grounds for reconsideraticn, the Public Advocate cites a decision of the c. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Col u.i-;illia Circuit, :*linnesota v.
,.~,
--c *,*o ~
~* ;:::.
Q. - _', 2 o'° 9 , 78-2032, (D.C. Cir. May 23, 2.979).
discussed below, Licensee, Public Service Electric and Gas Company, et - i opposes ::-.otio:::. reconsideration.
~'
It is undisputed th2t ~~= Court c= ~??eals 0ist=ict o= Col~~bia Circuit has remanded the two cases pendi::g before it to the Kuclear ?.eg'.J.la tory C:Jrrtl:lis s i.o::::
( "~;?..c" or "Corrl:rnis s icr. n) fer further ac-=ion regarding a
__l1I The Board's ~-!c.~- 2~, l978 OrC.e~ ?c:..:c~.*li::g S~ecia.:.. ?.:-e-hearing Conference denied the Cole~a~s 1
?reposed Contentio::: 7.
ru H 1D ct Ill I-'*
A I.~.- .... Ill ~J .. rt Ul
'-. (D 1-*
r::(D I-'* 'd I-..,vJ' .."'ro
... p, I-' rl* Ii r 1* fll ::i
!.J.. tJ- <D !:J () I-'* *o 0 ~J* CD
- r-Jth<ll*J H H n ~o n I-'* !J :::i CL <D Ill fll 1-i CD Pl 10 f-J UI :-s p, :::i* Ii 0 !JI l/l () Ill (J) ti Ill Ul
'0 1-*'* r11 I*'* fll () 1-* rt* (D r:: rt rl* 1-i 0 CDOCl>UI I I.o. f-J n m 'CJ I~
= <D I-'* I-'* er CD ~:l Ill r1* ~J 111 I-' CD 8 l*i ~:; (D ~J fll Pl
() ()
I*-* rl* UI rt* ro m ru 0 lu"-.1 ?i1 0 Ul I.........."" :::i0 ro b" l/l :.<:; I**'- rl* :::i 0* ~J (l rt f-J Iii I-' rt I-'
1-'- Ill Ill Iv lQ I-'* Ill w fD I] 0 :_J" () I-'* 0 0 CD 1*11 rt* 1~ r1* rop_,,n!.J Cl> n, :.J.. *-j er CD 0 0 () 1-i 0 :J* (I) 0-* (D *Q ::r Ii 1-h CD s ru r: w ;J Ul tJ' I-'* I fD (D rl* H () ::i ti Ul (I)
- J rt* I-' Ill f-J Ii ~j 'D n* I*'* rt ::.i* n* I-'* Ul I-'* I-'* (J) 0* ;Y (D :J I-'* 11* I*'* *£1 r.. m :-:i :.).. ..... Ii 1-'* (/) ct* ~
w Fl r1* 0 :.Y ClJ ID Ul f-'* () !.J (J) CD 1-i 0 (D <D ID t*h tJ"
...... 8*~ (I) r:: ,q 1-'- fll
- 1 UI :J 0 ::.s I-'* n 1Q I-'* o ::J rt* rr th Ul 0 Ill () ::.J 0 r:: Pl rr o* ::J INO
'0 IU ru o rt ~] CD 1--' 0 '-... CD r1* 0 rt* r:: :1~ ()1-:: ~ UI Ul (/) Pl !J' m 1*1i :J* [11 t*~ I*-* fl* I-' I-'* rr 0 l*i Pl I-' ;J OJ ~ ro Ill I-'* 8 0... (J)
- .i r**
rll r1* CD 0 Ill Ill 0 n* Pl Ul 0 ::J *1* ~I ~j p, () I~ I-*'* ::.s CD :::i ;:.I 1 h rl* CD fli (1, I-'* H u* Ill 0 p, ;:: 0 N r1* ;:i n. r1* ru rt* <: :::i *-~
0 fll ::i* rt*
rt 0 1*~ r1* ru 1-** (D [II :.:i rt CD
- J' 1*11 (IJ w :.1 **:i ,._J. Ul en tJ' p, m n* I-'*
(D Ii rl* Ul 111 rt* IA ::i*
tJ 0 -~ :.:i 11* [II Ill CJi rt* CD 1---' Iw CD Ul
( ) ')' '"j ni ti I-'* <D '-...Ii rr Pl 0 io 0, Ii Ill f-J 0 Ul rt* :..3 t*h ~i Ul I-' W m u1 rt ct* () !:j r1* !:J 0 l*h t*j OJ IJ* Ill ;J r1* o .... 0 0 r::()
rop, r::
~) CJJ ::1 Ill 0 Ii 'O rt* Ii rt* (])
fll (/) 0* :J Pi rt* :-J Ill I*~
,_ . 0 ~-y ([l f-J
- .S c~ CL Ul I l c: l[l (l> fJJ :.:i* 0 p. :1 UI CD 1-'* CD 1.J. r: ~:s er lll Ul rr n* ~ llJ 0 Ul Cll D* fl, (]J rr 0 ru (j) Ill r1* r::: b' rt* rt ll' ro IJ* 0 ::i I_, r1* ~* ty CD 0 t;* L:~ l- 1
- I--* r1* I-' 'd ::.s rt* J"':~ l_J* ~1* <D 1--' ti t~ :J (lJ 0 ::1* ([) rr CD I-'* (I) ru IJ* 11* Ill Ii f\J rt* Ii ~ *< <: n n* *Q m :-r CJ, ": rr :*y :J ti pi= rt* fll () (Jl l*h (IJ l*J* ([J (II (]) I-'* rl* 1~ 1u ~3 :~ 1-i Ii en 11* I-'* rt* I-'" 1~ i';" ~; I*'* (0 n rn 1u ::J () l*h n () CD IJl 0 n.
0 CJ 0 I*'
.... 0 (II I-'* () :;,:: ::1 r1" r:::
f.: r I ~; r1* ~-1 r.: n :::i Ul I~ ! t* rt* ::I" E1 () I-'* Ill fll IJ* rt*
r1* n :.i* 0 f(" l*'- ;s fll CD !:1 ~-i fll !.J.
() !U (J) Ill 0 (Jl I-' I i.-:: iJ r1* CD tr
() : 1 :i ([) (ll 0 I-' 0 Ii ro Ih I I-'* 1*11 ([l ::Cl II>
0 I ....
- -J n
- 3 -
consider any aspect of the remanded question on its own initiati?e. Because of the remand's generic nature, it ~ay very welJ. be that the Cor:i.Inission decides net to ha'1e this illatter considered in individual adjudicatory proceedings instead, elects to have i .:..
-'- considered in an ongoing or new generic proceeding. The c. c.:..rcui t 6/
clearly leaves such an alternative open to the Commission.
In such an event, no further consideration ~y this 3oard ~av be necessary.
_]_/
\'iith regard to the ":nani£est injustice" alleged ':Jy the Public Advocate, such assertions are spec~lative at l:lest. In any event, anv claim of injury and request redress must be directed to t:"1e Co.mnission, net to this Licensing 3oar*:::. To ~epeat, it is quite possi~le t~at intervenors will be required to ?Ursue this =atter through present proceeding.
6/ ~*1innesota v. ~'-JRC, slio op. at ll, """:::;;. _S_e_-=_- _a_l_s_o_ ~.rer~c:::--_:.
Yankee ~uclear Power Ccrp. v. ~RDC, ~35 G.S. 519,
~~____,_,....,._-=____,........,........,........,...,_.........,_,..___.........,........,~........,_,.._,..........,........,~
n.13 (1978); Cnion of Concerned Scientists~. A~c,* ~99
?.2d 1069 (D.C. Cir. 1974); ~ader v. ~a~, 363 F.S~pp.
946 (D.C.C. 1973).
_]_/ Cols!:',a::1s' :::irie:: ==-~ ..:;.
Under these circumstances, the mo~ion for reconsidera-tion should be denied.
Respectfully submitted, CONNER, MOORE & CORBER Mark J. Wetterhah~
Counsel for ~~e Licensee July 6, 1979
UNITED STATES OF -~E:EEC.;
1:-iUCLEAR REGUL.;:,_TORY cm~*lISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the ;;.1atter of PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC fil-iD GAS Docket ~o. 50-272 CO.MPA:::.iY, et al. (Proposed Issuance 0£ Amendment to Facility (Salem Nuclear Generating Operating License Station, Unit 1) No. DPR-70)
I hereby certi£y that copies of ~icensee 1 s Ans*..;er to 11
'Intervenors Colemans' Motion for Reconsideration of Dismissal of Colema::is' [Contention] ~l'o. Seven 11 and 11 Licensee 1 s ~-nswer to ~*lotion by In tervenors, Coleman, to Compel Suppleru.e!'lta tio::i of .?-.nswers to Interrogatories by Licensee, 11 both dated July 6, 1979, in the captioned matter, have been served upon the fol-lowing by deposit in the United States mail this 6th dav of Jllly, 1979:
Gary L. Milhollin, Esq. Chairman, Atomic Safety an~
Chairman, Atomic Safety Licensing Board Pa~el and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 1815 Jefferson Street Commission Madison, Wisconsin 53711 Washington, D.C. 20555
~=* Frederick J. Shon Barry Smith, 2sq.
Member, Atomic Safety a~d Office of t~e 2xec~tive Licensing 3oard Panel Legal Directer C.S. N~clear Reg~lat.ory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Com.mission Cc~uissior:..
Washingtcn, D.C. 20555 \*lashi:::gtcn, D. C.
Dr. James c. L~-nb, III Z..ls:nbe.:-, Atomic S2.::ety and Deputy Attor~ey General Licensi~g Board ?a:::el Depa!:"t.uent of Lar,.,..~ and 313 Woodhaven Road :?ublic Saf et.y Chapel Hill, N.C. 27514 Environraental Protection Section Chairman, Atomic Safety and 36 West State Street Licensing Appeal Board Panel Trenton, ~.J. 08625 C.S. Nuclear Reg~latory Co::i..-nission
\~7a.sn~.z:gton, D. c. 20555
Richard ?ryling, Jr., Esq. Carl Valore, Jr., Esq.
Assistant General Solicitor Valore, McAllister, Aron Public Service Electric & Wes tr:1ore lar:d
& Gas Company ~ainland Pro~essional Plaza 80 Park ?lace P. O. Box l/5 Newark, N. J. 07101 Northfield, N. ~. CS225 Keith Onsdorf=, Esq. Office of t2e Sec~2tary Assistant Deputy Public Advocate Docketing and Service Section Department of the Public Advocate U.S. ~uclear ~egulatory Division of Public Interest Cormniss ion Advocacy Washington, Q. C. 20555 Post Office Box 141 Trenton, N. J. 08601 June D. ~acArtor, Esq.
Deputy Attorney General Sandra T. ~yres, Esq. Tatnall Building, P. O. 3ox 1401 Departnent of the Public _;.dvocate Dover, Delaware 19901 520 East State Street Trenton, N. J.. 08625 Mr. Alfred C. Coleman, Jr.
Mrs. Eleanor G. Coleman 35 11 :{ 11 Drive Pennsville, ~ew Jersey 08070