ML20205R356: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 34: Line 34:
ORDER We now have in hand the responsive briefs of both the applicants and the NRC staff on the appeal of the intervenor New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution (Coalition) from the Licensing Board's August 8,                                1988 memorandum and order.
ORDER We now have in hand the responsive briefs of both the applicants and the NRC staff on the appeal of the intervenor New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution (Coalition) from the Licensing Board's August 8,                                1988 memorandum and order.
LBP-88-20, 28 NRC          .
LBP-88-20, 28 NRC          .
An examination of those briefs, together with that of the Coalition in support of its appeal, persuades us that the issues presented by the appeal have been fully developed and that oral argument would not materially assist our resolution of them.                                          Because, however, if held, an oral argument would have presented the Coalition with the opportunity to rebut the arguments advanced in the briefs of its adversaries, we are permitting (but not requiring) the Coalition to file a reply brief for that purpose. As indicated in the October 27, 1988 letter from the Secretary to this Board to counsel for the parties, any INO          PD                                                                                              p
An examination of those briefs, together with that of the Coalition in support of its appeal, persuades us that the issues presented by the appeal have been fully developed and that oral argument would not materially assist our resolution of them.                                          Because, however, if held, an oral argument would have presented the Coalition with the opportunity to rebut the arguments advanced in the briefs of its adversaries, we are permitting (but not requiring) the Coalition to file a reply brief for that purpose. As indicated in the {{letter dated|date=October 27, 1988|text=October 27, 1988 letter}} from the Secretary to this Board to counsel for the parties, any INO          PD                                                                                              p


2 such brief shall not exceed ten pages in length and must be received by the Board no later than noon on November 17, 1988.
2 such brief shall not exceed ten pages in length and must be received by the Board no later than noon on November 17, 1988.

Latest revision as of 17:48, 6 December 2021

Order.* Permits New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution to File Reply Brief to Rebut Applicant & NRC Responses to Intervenor Appeal from Board 880808 Memorandum & Order,By 881117.No Oral Arguments Will Be Heard.Served on 881103
ML20205R356
Person / Time
Site: Seabrook  NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 11/03/1988
From: Shoemaker C
NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP)
To:
NEW ENGLAND COALITION ON NUCLEAR POLLUTION
References
CON-#488-7424 OL-1, NUDOCS 8811100007
Download: ML20205R356 (2)
v • d • e


Text

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

g

'7424 0

, a 4 'r ~

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

~

ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL B R Administrative Judges: {F' ,,

Alan S. Rosenthal, Chairman November Y," $988 Howard A. Wilber SERVE 0 tK)V -31988

)

In the Matter of )

)

PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF ) Docket Nos. 50-443-OL-1 NEW HAMPSHIRE, et al. ) 50-444-OL-1

)

(Sesbrook Station, Units 1 ) (Onsite Emergency Planning and 2) ) and Safety Issues)

)

ORDER We now have in hand the responsive briefs of both the applicants and the NRC staff on the appeal of the intervenor New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution (Coalition) from the Licensing Board's August 8, 1988 memorandum and order.

LBP-88-20, 28 NRC .

An examination of those briefs, together with that of the Coalition in support of its appeal, persuades us that the issues presented by the appeal have been fully developed and that oral argument would not materially assist our resolution of them. Because, however, if held, an oral argument would have presented the Coalition with the opportunity to rebut the arguments advanced in the briefs of its adversaries, we are permitting (but not requiring) the Coalition to file a reply brief for that purpose. As indicated in the October 27, 1988 letter from the Secretary to this Board to counsel for the parties, any INO PD p

2 such brief shall not exceed ten pages in length and must be received by the Board no later than noon on November 17, 1988.

It is so ORDERED.

FOR THE APPEAL BOARD k-C. v d'n a

't b oemalaer Secr}Jtarytothe Appeal Board I

In the event that the Coalition decides not to file a reply brief, it should promptly so notify the Secretary to I the Board by telephone, l

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20205R356&oldid=3326128"