ML20069H643: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:}}
{{#Wiki_filter:,                                                              LILCO, April 1, 1983 6                                                                              ,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA    '83 ffR -1 P338 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of                          )
                                                              )
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY              ) Docket No. 50-322 (OL)
                                                              ) Emergency Planning (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,          )
Unit 1)                                  )
LILCO'S ANSWER TO
                                          " PETITION OF SUFFOLK COUNTY FOR LEAVE TO FILE A BRIEF IN REPLY" On March 29, 1983, intervenor Suffolk County filed its
                    " Petition of Suffolk County For Leave to File a Brief in Reply" and an accompanying "Suffolk County's Reply to LILCO's and the NRC Staff's Briefs in Opposition to Suffolk County's Motion to Terminate the Shoreham Operating Licensing Proceeding and the County's Motion for Certification."
LILCO does not oppose Suffolk County's petition.        The County has already had two separate opportunities to make its l
case for terminating this proceeding, and LILCO does not object i
to a third, even though the County uses the three opportunities to argue that LILCO should not be heard even once on the factu-al issue of whether the public can be adequately protected.1/
1/    LILCO does wish to reserve the right to object, if occasion arises in the future, to the practice of filing the
;                    unauthorized reply brief along with the request to file it.
(footnote continued)
]
l            8304060283 830401 PDR ADOCK 05000322 G              PDR
 
  .                                                                              The,only respect in w%ich the County's reply brief might cause some confusion is that it suggests, especially at page 19, that what we are now calling LILCO's offsite plcn cannot be implemented because the County will not implement it.            The fact that LILCO's offsite plan is written to include County person-nel should not mislead anyone into thinking that LILCO's factu-
[                    al case before this Board will depend on proving that anyone from the County government will participate.            Rather, as was stated in footnote 17 on page 64 of its brief of March 18, 1983, LILCO is developing alternative means for implementing the LILCO plan without the County's help. To litigate the im-plementation of the LILCO plan (the "second phase" mentioned on i
page 111 of LILCO's March 18 brief) will require additional in-formation from LILCO, such as a table showing what persons or organizations will perform the functions that the County was originally to perform.2/  It may even be desirable to revise (footnote continued)
See Public Service Co. of Oklahoma (Black Fox Station, Units 1 and 2), LBP-76-38, 4 NRC 435, 441 (1976). The tactic was ap-parently accepted in the case cited by the County, Metropolitan Edison Co. (Three Mile Island), CLI-80-19, 11 NRC 700, 701 (1980).
,                    2/    As soon as the County's motion to terminate the proceeding is decided, LILCO will be prepared to suggest to the Board how best to avoid confusion in the substitution of new parties in the LILCO plan, or whether a rewritten plan should be the focus of the litigation.
l
 
l the plan in substantive ways in order to better reflect the
!                      present reality of the County's refusal to participate.                                        If the County thinks that it is impossible to in.plement an offsite l                      plan without County personnel, it can submit a contention and I                      present evidence to that effect.                          The issue, as we said in our
{                      brief, is one of fact, not law.
l                                                                              Respectfully submitted, i
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY f\
Sy b                          '
O James N. Christman Andrea S. Bear Hunton & Williams P.O. Box 1535                                !
l                      707 East Main Street Richmond, Virginia 23212
!                      DATED:        April 1, 1983 4
i i'
        - - - - _ .    --  . . _ .  . , , , , .                _.      -..          .__    -.      --.        - +    - ,  -
 
i LZLCO, April 1, 1983 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE' In the Matter of LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1)
Docket No. 50-322 (OL)
I hereby certify that copies of LILCO'S Answer to
      " Petition of Suffolk County For Leave to File A Brief in Reply" were served this date upon the following by hand, as indicated by two asterisks, by Federal Express, as indicated by one as-terisk, or by fi;st-class mail, postage prepaid.
Lawrence Brenner, Esq.r*                                          Secretary of the Commission Administrative Judge                                              U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Atomic Safety and Licensing                                          Commission Board Panel                                            Washington, D.C.                20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission                                              Atomic Safety and Licensing Washington, D.C.                          20555                      Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Dr. Peter A. Morris **                                              Commission Administrative Judge                                              Washington, D.C.                  20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel                                            Atomic Safety and Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory                                            Board Panel Commission                                              U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
. Washington, D.C.                          20555                    Commission Washington, D.C.                  20555 Dr. James H. Carpenter **
Administrative Judge                                              Daniel F. Brown, Esq.**
Atomic Safety and Licensing                                        Attorney Board Panel                                            Atomic Safety and Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory                                            Board Panel Commission                                              U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Washington, D.C.                          20555                    Commission Washington, D.C.                20555 l
1
                                    -,    . . - _ , -                m      y -, ,-    _ _ . - , _              -- - - - - , - - - - - - - - - -
 
Bernard M. Bordenick, Esq.**      David J. Gilmartin, Esq.
David A. Repka, Esq.              Attn:  Patricia A. Dempsey, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory            County Attorney Commission                      Suffolk County Department of Law Washington, D.C. 20555          Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11787 Herbert H. Brown, Esq.**          Stephen B. Latham, Esq.*
Lawrence Coe Lanpher, Esq.        Twomey, Latham & Shea Karla J. Letsche, Esq.            33 West Second Street Kirkpatrick, Lockhart, Hill,      P. O. Box 398 Christopher & Phillips          Riverhead, New York    11901' 8th Floor 1900 M Street, N.W.                Ralph Shapiro, Esq.*
Washington, D.C. 20036          Cammer and Shapiro, P.C.
9 East 40th Street Mr. Marc W. Goldsmith              New York, New Yorn 10016 Energy Research Group 4001 Totten Pond Road              James Dougherty, Esq.*
Waltham, Massachusetts  02154    3045 Porter Street Washington, D.C. 20008 MHB Technical Associates 1723 Hamilton Avenue              Howard L. Blau Suite K                            217 Newbridge Road San Jose, California  95125      Hicksville, New York    11801 Mr. Jay Dunkleberger              Matthew J. Kelly, Esq.
New York State Energy Office      State of New York Agency Building 2                  Department of Public Service Empire State Plaza                Three Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12223            Albany, New York 12223 L      "
James N. Christman Andrea S. Bear Hunton & Williams 707 East Main Street P.O. Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia    23212 DATED:  April 1, 1983 l
l i}}

Latest revision as of 02:50, 24 May 2020

Answer to Suffolk County 830329 Petition to File Reply Brief to NRC & Util Briefs Opposing Suffolk County Motion to Terminate OL Proceeding.Petition Not Opposed.Offsite Plan Will Be Implemented W/O County Help.W/Certificate of Svc
ML20069H643
Person / Time
Site: Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date: 04/01/1983
From: Bear A
HUNTON & WILLIAMS, LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
To:
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8304060283
Download: ML20069H643 (5)
v • d • e


Text

, LILCO, April 1, 1983 6 ,

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA '83 ffR -1 P338 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )

)

LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-322 (OL)

) Emergency Planning (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, )

Unit 1) )

LILCO'S ANSWER TO

" PETITION OF SUFFOLK COUNTY FOR LEAVE TO FILE A BRIEF IN REPLY" On March 29, 1983, intervenor Suffolk County filed its

" Petition of Suffolk County For Leave to File a Brief in Reply" and an accompanying "Suffolk County's Reply to LILCO's and the NRC Staff's Briefs in Opposition to Suffolk County's Motion to Terminate the Shoreham Operating Licensing Proceeding and the County's Motion for Certification."

LILCO does not oppose Suffolk County's petition. The County has already had two separate opportunities to make its l

case for terminating this proceeding, and LILCO does not object i

to a third, even though the County uses the three opportunities to argue that LILCO should not be heard even once on the factu-al issue of whether the public can be adequately protected.1/

1/ LILCO does wish to reserve the right to object, if occasion arises in the future, to the practice of filing the

unauthorized reply brief along with the request to file it.

(footnote continued)

]

l 8304060283 830401 PDR ADOCK 05000322 G PDR

. The,only respect in w%ich the County's reply brief might cause some confusion is that it suggests, especially at page 19, that what we are now calling LILCO's offsite plcn cannot be implemented because the County will not implement it. The fact that LILCO's offsite plan is written to include County person-nel should not mislead anyone into thinking that LILCO's factu-

[ al case before this Board will depend on proving that anyone from the County government will participate. Rather, as was stated in footnote 17 on page 64 of its brief of March 18, 1983, LILCO is developing alternative means for implementing the LILCO plan without the County's help. To litigate the im-plementation of the LILCO plan (the "second phase" mentioned on i

page 111 of LILCO's March 18 brief) will require additional in-formation from LILCO, such as a table showing what persons or organizations will perform the functions that the County was originally to perform.2/ It may even be desirable to revise (footnote continued)

See Public Service Co. of Oklahoma (Black Fox Station, Units 1 and 2), LBP-76-38, 4 NRC 435, 441 (1976). The tactic was ap-parently accepted in the case cited by the County, Metropolitan Edison Co. (Three Mile Island), CLI-80-19, 11 NRC 700, 701 (1980).

, 2/ As soon as the County's motion to terminate the proceeding is decided, LILCO will be prepared to suggest to the Board how best to avoid confusion in the substitution of new parties in the LILCO plan, or whether a rewritten plan should be the focus of the litigation.

l

l the plan in substantive ways in order to better reflect the

! present reality of the County's refusal to participate. If the County thinks that it is impossible to in.plement an offsite l plan without County personnel, it can submit a contention and I present evidence to that effect. The issue, as we said in our

{ brief, is one of fact, not law.

l Respectfully submitted, i

LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY f\

Sy b '

O James N. Christman Andrea S. Bear Hunton & Williams P.O. Box 1535  !

l 707 East Main Street Richmond, Virginia 23212

! DATED: April 1, 1983 4

i i'

- - - - _ . -- . . _ . . , , , , . _. -.. .__ -. --. - + - , -

i LZLCO, April 1, 1983 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE' In the Matter of LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1)

Docket No. 50-322 (OL)

I hereby certify that copies of LILCO'S Answer to

" Petition of Suffolk County For Leave to File A Brief in Reply" were served this date upon the following by hand, as indicated by two asterisks, by Federal Express, as indicated by one as-terisk, or by fi;st-class mail, postage prepaid.

Lawrence Brenner, Esq.r* Secretary of the Commission Administrative Judge U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Atomic Safety and Licensing Commission Board Panel Washington, D.C. 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Washington, D.C. 20555 Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Dr. Peter A. Morris ** Commission Administrative Judge Washington, D.C. 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Board Panel Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

. Washington, D.C. 20555 Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. James H. Carpenter **

Administrative Judge Daniel F. Brown, Esq.**

Atomic Safety and Licensing Attorney Board Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Board Panel Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Washington, D.C. 20555 Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 l

1

-, . . - _ , - m y -, ,- _ _ . - , _ -- - - - - , - - - - - - - - - -

Bernard M. Bordenick, Esq.** David J. Gilmartin, Esq.

David A. Repka, Esq. Attn: Patricia A. Dempsey, Esq.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory County Attorney Commission Suffolk County Department of Law Washington, D.C. 20555 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11787 Herbert H. Brown, Esq.** Stephen B. Latham, Esq.*

Lawrence Coe Lanpher, Esq. Twomey, Latham & Shea Karla J. Letsche, Esq. 33 West Second Street Kirkpatrick, Lockhart, Hill, P. O. Box 398 Christopher & Phillips Riverhead, New York 11901' 8th Floor 1900 M Street, N.W. Ralph Shapiro, Esq.*

Washington, D.C. 20036 Cammer and Shapiro, P.C.

9 East 40th Street Mr. Marc W. Goldsmith New York, New Yorn 10016 Energy Research Group 4001 Totten Pond Road James Dougherty, Esq.*

Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 3045 Porter Street Washington, D.C. 20008 MHB Technical Associates 1723 Hamilton Avenue Howard L. Blau Suite K 217 Newbridge Road San Jose, California 95125 Hicksville, New York 11801 Mr. Jay Dunkleberger Matthew J. Kelly, Esq.

New York State Energy Office State of New York Agency Building 2 Department of Public Service Empire State Plaza Three Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12223 Albany, New York 12223 L "

James N. Christman Andrea S. Bear Hunton & Williams 707 East Main Street P.O. Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212 DATED: April 1, 1983 l

l i

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20069H643&oldid=2825440"