ML19331A482
| ML19331A482 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 03/15/1977 |
| From: | Pribila L DOW CHEMICAL CO. |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8007170742 | |
| Download: ML19331A482 (3) | |
Text
__
o THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA P0OR QUAUTY PAGES rUCLEAR REGULATORY COXMISSION
- ,g Nf h
< y s
~
v*a l In the Hatter of the Application of )
)
CONSUMEP.S PCfdER CCtiPANY
)
Docket Ngs,-40:3293
)
50-330
)
l (Midland Plant, Unita 1 and 2)
)
i STATDir.NT ltY THE D74 CifDITCAL CD:fPANY IN RESPLNSF. TO V. orlon FOR STAY
("Dow")y/5-97 i
The Dou Che:mical Cunany sulnsits thic statement to the Nuclear Regulatory Coraionion ("NRC") in response to the motion made by Consumers Power Company (" Consumers") for a stay of the NRC's orders directing the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ("ASLil") to conduct t
hearings, pursuant to the remand of the Court of Appeals, pending final disposition by the United Sta es Supre:ne Court of the case of Consucerr.
Power _Co. v. Aesch11=an.
The recent grant of certf orari by the United States Suprene Court in Consoners_Pover Co.
v.
A,ecchlipan is of great conc e rn to Dov.
This decision by the Court has introduced an additional elmaant of uncertainty to the situation regarding the long-delayed Midland nuclear i
plant.
Dow's corporate position has been one of support of the nuclear project.
At the recent hearings before the ASLB, Dow testified that, i
under the present circumstances as known to Dow, the nucicar alternat.ive remains the most attractive one economically.
However, Dow has also made clear that it requires a dependabic supply of steam and electricity to operate its Midland manuf acturing cocplex.
Dow's present cover plants are outmoded and cannot be made to operate cately, reliably and economically beyond the end of 1984 If Dow cannot obtain st eam and electricity fro:n the Midland nuclear plant by that time, it may be compelled to construct its own new power and st eam facilitics.
While Consumers' schedules presently call for the placement of the nucicar plant in ecc=ercial operation by 1981-82, these schedules cake
"""?7 y (
c,_
o
~
no allowance for further delnyn r et.ul ting f ro:n actions t a.cn by courr a or regulatory agencien.
It le pou t hi c, therefore, thnt any delay which l
might. be caused by a r.unpennion of the ASLB henrinnu could r e r.u l t in thu Midland plant 's not beinr, ready f or operat ion unt il af ter the end of 1984.
This is a matter of deep concern to Dow.
1 Dow hopese that Consumers will request the Supremo Court to cons. ider the Aeschlir:nn appeal on an expedited basic, so that the mat.ter can be decided by the end of the current Court torn in June or July.
A prompt decision by t.he Court would certainly help to eliminate some of the l
uncertaintics which now surround t.he Midland nuclear proj ec t.
We believe that it would not be in cnyone's interest for the NRC to take any action which would result in further delay of the ASLB suspension hearings.
By allowing the present hearings to continue without interruption. I unnecessary delay may be avoided since, abould the Supreme Court affirn the Court of Appeals' decision pursuant to which the hearings are being conducted, the ASLB will already have reached a decision.
If the h e a r i n g. <.
are suspended, additional time may be lost following the Supr e:ne Cou rt ' u decision pending the completion of the hearings.
Dow appreciates Cont.umers' concern that unnecessary delay could possibly result if the ASLB s.uspends the construction permits and the Supreme Court subsequently reverses Judge Bar.clon's decision.
Similarly, Dow is aware of the possibility that the time and effort expended by the parties in completing the suspension hearings might be wasted should the Supreme Court eventually reverse the Court of Appeals, or order new proceedings to determine whether the construction permits should be continued under circumstances then existing.
In view of the foregoing, it is Dow's position that the NRC should not stay its orders to the ASLB to conduct the present hearings.
The hearings should continue and the ASLB should reach a decision on further construction of the Midland auclear plant.
If the ASLB decides to i
suspend construction, however, that decision should be held in abeyance pending final disposition of the case by the Supreme Court.
Such a course of action will assure minimum delay in the construction of the Midland nuclear plant should that be the ultimate decision of the courtr.
and the regulatory agencies.
. [b
(
D w
AA Q-Ds
- 1..
W.
I'r ib i la, Attorney MevwahJULJWD?
0
=
UNITED STATES OF A!IERICA NUCLEAR Kl:CULATORY CO: MISSION In the Matter of the Application of )
)
CONSUMERS l'OWER COMPANY
)
Docket Hos. 50-329
)
50-330
)
(Midland I'lant, Units 1 and 2)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1 hereby certify that copies of the attached " Statement by The Dow Chemical Company in Response to Motion for Stay" dated March 15 1977, were cerved upon the individuals whose names appear on the attached 1
nervice lint by deposit in the United Staccs mail, postage prepaid and properly addressed, on the 15th day of March, 1977.
l
[The Dow Chemical Company udith A. Sinderman Legal Department 47 Buildinn Hidland, Michigan 48640 l
i March 15, 1977
^
Attachment:
Service List l
l m
---we-e--
e
,--,n
,-,,,