ML19329F505
| ML19329F505 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 12/30/1971 |
| From: | Reis H CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.), LOWENSTEIN, NEWMAN, REIS, AXELRAD & TOLL |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8006300712 | |
| Download: ML19329F505 (4) | |
Text
_
?
e
?
u 1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION POOR QUAUTY PAGES In the Matter of pyg CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
)
Docket Nos. 50-329
)
50-330 i
(Midland Plant, ~ Units 1 and 2)
)
l REPLY OF APPLICANT, CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY, TO MOTION OF SAGINAW VALLEY ET AL., INTERVENORS FOR RECONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN PORTIONS OF BOARD ORDER
-DATED DECEMBER 22,1971'
)
Applicant, Consumers Power Company believes that it must in this' Reply express its dismay at the substan,ce and implications of Saginaw Intervenors' motion, dated December 24, 1971, asking "For Reconsideration of Certain Portions of Board Order Dated December 22, 1971."
Applicant requests this Board to take appropriate action in the circumstances.
Saginaw Intervenors state (p.2) that "the time limits set by the Board.
. do not permit an adequate exploration of necessary background information in order to take positions."
This contention is a travesty.
Applicant's Supplemental Environmental Report has been available since October 19,1971, and this entire proceeding, involving voluminous testimony and documentation, has already occupied more than one year.
Saginaw Intervenors' attempt further to delay the pro-
~
ceeding constitutes a clear detriment to the public interest in-fairly resolving all genuinely contested issues.
- Moreover, it follows,a consistent' pattern of obstructionism.
A recent similar example of this behavior was Saginaw Intervenors'
- 8006309 7 II h
. = -
O C
response, dated September 30, 1971, to the Board's Order of August 26,1971, requiring a statement of preliminary environmental contentions.
That response quite clearly avoided any specification of contentions adequate enough to identify the issues between the parties, which was obviously the Order's intent.
We trust that the Board will not stand l
idle and permit Intervenors to default in their obligations ;
nor can we conceive of a more timely or appropriate occasion for the imposition of stringent sanctions.
Saginaw Intervenors also advise (p.2) that " counsel will be away from his office on a pre-arranged trip until approximately January 6, 1972, and, thereafter, will be busily engaged in preparation for upcoming ECCS Rule Making Hearings."
But the obligations imposed on Intervenors by the Board's December 22, 1971 Order have hardly taken them by surprise, and they should not be allowed to abdicate their responsibilities in so cavalier a fashion.
Moreover, even on the most optimistic assumptions the
? upcoming ECCS Rule Making Hearings" will take a considerable period of time to complete.
Indeed, a tentative schedule prepared by the staff of the AEC suggests hearings beginning January 28, 1972, and reconvened hearings beginning on
^
February 29 - and March 21, 1972.
Reference by Saginaw Intervenors to Counsel's being " busily engaged in preparation for" those hearings after January 6,1972, clearly signals use of the
~
ECCS hearings as an excuse for attempts to obtain additional
. delay-in this proceeding.
.l
--ww.a-
_g4.e ma '* iegsym
- v mei=
]
. The foregcing makes it clear that the Board must now take appropriate measures to prevent further delay.
If this proceeding is to make any progress all parties must assume full responsibility for their actions and their derelictions ; and default must be treated as such.
Dated:
Decerber 30, 1971 Respectfully submitted, LOWENSTEIN, NEWMAN & REIS 1100 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D. C.
20036 b
~
By Harold F. Reis Attorneys for Applicant Consumers Power Company Of Counsel, Harold P.. Graves Robert Lowenstein John K. Restrick Richard G. Smith O
9 0
e e
b 9
O o
9
.N
UNITED STATES OF AMERICAr
~
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION o.
In.the Matter of
)
~
)
CONSUMERS.PO'.TER COMPANY
-)
Docket Nos. 50-329
)
50-330 (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby-certify that copies of " Reply of Applicant, Consumers Power Company, to Motion of Saginaw Valley et al., Intervenors for Reconsideration of Certain Portions of Board Order Dated December 22, 1971", dated December 30, 1971, in the above-captioned matter have been served on-the following in person or by deposit in'the United States mail, first class or airmail, this 30th day of December, 1971.
Arthur W. Murphy, Esq.,. Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Milton R. We sol, Esq.
i Columbia University School of Law Kaye,. Scholer, Fierman, ' Hays and Handler Box 38, 435 West ll6th Street 425 Park Avenue New York, New York 10027 New York, New York 10022 Dr. Clark Goodman Professor of Physics James N. O'Connor, Esq.
University of Houston The Dow Chemical company 2030 Dow Center 3801 Cullen Boulevard Midland, Michigan 48640 Houston, Texas 77004 Dr. David B. Hall Myron M. Cherry, Esq.
109 N.
Dearborn Street Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory Suite 1005 "P.O. Box 1663
~Los Alamos, New Mexico Chicago, Ill.
60G02 William J. Ginster, Esq.-
- Algie A. Wells, Esq., Chairman Suite 4 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Merrill Building U.S. Atomic Energy Commission
-Saginaw, Michigan 48640 Washington, D.C.
20545 James A. Kende.ll, Esq.
Irving Like, Esq.
135 N. Saginaw Road 200 West Main Street Midland, Michigan 48640 Babylon, New York 11702-l Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.
- Berlin, Roisman and Kessler Stanley T. Robinson, Esq.
Chief,Public Proceedings Branch 1910 N Street,'N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036.
Office of the Secretary. of the' Commission
~
Thomas F. Engelhardt, Esq.
',U.S.' Atomic Energy Cotraission.,
Washing' ton, D.C.
20545 U.S.-~ Atomic Energy Cornission Washington, Q.C.
'20545
[.g
~
- ?, ' & f~.
I
]l,-j
,e
_,.i,
. Harold'P.TReis
~,
~..
.~;
,...,n
..,--..-,v
- -,, -.,,, -