ML20211H381

Motion Opposing Intervenor Motion for Rescission & Expedited Consideration.Intervenors Have Not Shown Any Prejudice to Legally Cognizable Interests

ML20211H381
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	10/30/1986
From:	Irwin D HUNTON & WILLIAMS, LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML20211H366	List: ML20211H362 ML20211H381 ML20211H396
References
OL-3, OL-5, NUDOCS 8611050112
Download: ML20211H381 (2)

Text

.

LILCO, October 300 1986 y ,

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 00gTED Before the Chief Administrative Judge, '

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel CFrn - cr ^

GCCr Linn /;.

u. , ,

In the Matter of )

) Docket No. 50-322-OL-5 LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) (EP Exercise)

) Docket No. 50-322-OL-3 (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, ) (Emergency Planning)

Unit 1) )

LILCO'S OPPOSITION TO " MOTION FOR RESCISSION . . . AND FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION" Intervenors' motion for rescission should be denied for the following reasons, which are elaborated upon in more detail in an attached letter of even date from Donald P. Irwin to B. Paul Cotter, Jr.:

1. The forum requested by the motion is not one recognized for formal adjudi .

catory functions by the Commission's regulations, and thus the motion is not, as such, properly flied.

2. The matter is one committed to agency discretion.

3. The action taken by the Notice of Reconstitution and now complained of was (a) to expand the membership of Boards treating emergency planning matters in two related dockets, and (b) to preserve continuity of membership on the Boards in the two dockets. Failure to expand the Board resources with jurisdiction over these issues would have substantially delayed their resolution with no offsetting benefit in the quali-ty of decision-making, resulting in severe financial prejudice to LILCO and in prejudice to the public interest in reasonably prompt agency decision-making. Alteration of the 8611050112 861030 PDR ADOCK 05000322 G PDR

panel hearing the still developing "-5" proceeding, rather than that of the more mature and complex "-3" proceeding, minimizes any dislocation inherent in remedying the oth-erwise unavoidable delay prejudice problem. Retention of a common member on both Boards further develops continuity and minimizes overall prejudice.

5. No party has a vested interest _in the composition of any Licensing Board.

Intervenors have not shown any prejudice to their legally cognizable interests.

The motion should be denied.

Respectiully sub:nitted, Donald P. Irwin Counsel for Long Island Lighting Company Hunton & Williams 707 East Main Street P.O. Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212 DATED: October 30,1986

Attachment:

Letter, Donald P. Irwin to B. Paul Cotter, Jr., October 30, 1986.

l t

I

(

-_. _ . .._