ML19331A498

Objects to Assumption in 711013 Ltr to ASLB That Applicant & Saginaw Intervenors Will Jointly Decide Timetable.Insists on Right to Be Party to Agreements of Extension

ML19331A498
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	10/15/1971
From:	Wessel M KAYE, SCHOLER, FIERMAN, HAYS & HANDLER
To:	Sharfman J LOWENSTEIN, NEWMAN, REIS, AXELRAD & TOLL
References
NUDOCS 8007170771
Download: ML19331A498 (2)

Text

a

.- A M,0 ttur.w<

' }

htuu. & urjt, ig/A.tyf,3 KAYE. SCHOLER. FIERMAN. HAYS E. HANDLCR '

42S PARK AV C N U E NPW YORK.N.Y. locac )Ns

[,,,,

f212; PL^za 9 84oo -

g i, .-r ,

.. ,,,........ . ., . ,,., ...s -

,';, .:: :::.:. . . .., t.::::: .';:: - U v:: .: : - -  : .::.:::.:::-- ., .., ,..,..<.....

. ,, s,,. 7., , ,,

'::::f! 7.,*".'"- rf.7:' '..' :::Il0 0etober 15,19'/1 "'I"4

w::::: mu:'. ::- ~ u, v , . w m

w:x.w~~ w:mw.tw

n.s=;:r~

ww ".~

.:c=:: ::,L

,u

=:..

~ " "

• n::m e-" =:n :.:rr. G /cL194.4,,\ n ..,...........

,a;a,

c, :,;-

t

,v:

=.ew "".'.r

v:

w.-l:n et::,:::::. :~ c-oo; -

ca  %

,,;:::;,::w.w,

n..,m.tc::.

. . . . . . a ..  : w.'.:.e.n=',n 6 ,,

\. ~ . - -

g 7 .i 1971 '" i .:- .

u..tw w.;Mr ~3 Jerome E. Sharfman, Esq. G .

rm q,*  ;

Lowencteln and ficuman .. g,3 <:

1100 Connecticut Avenue,li.W. '

l/'- - ' v/

Wachington> D. C. 20036 NiCYM -

In the Matter of Conuumera Power Company Midland Plant, Unite 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-329 and 50-330

Dear Mr. Sharfman:

Although we do not at thia point object to the extennion of time referred to in your October 13 letter to the hoard, we do object to the implicit accumption that Applicant and the Saginaw Intervenors have the right an between themselves to decide on a timetable.

We have objected to the Mapleton Intervonorn' ex parte extenalon of their own time to nubmit app 11 cations for discovery, in disregard of the Board's Auguut 26 Order; -

to the e_x_ parte understanding between Applicant and the Staff extending the date for Applicant's further ECCS submissions from September 1 to November 1, 1971, and to many other similar efforts at adjourning the. Hearing Board 's timetable, irrespective of whether the party. eceking thc adjournment wau Applicant, the Staff or an Opposing Intervonor. Indeed, we have even objected to extencionn granted by the Board on Ita own initiative.

We are not cuggenting that we wotild object to a limited extenulon reasonably reque:ted by any party. Ilowever, we do insint upon our right to be a party t:0 any cuch agr< omr:nt of extension, and succent that in the future any party neeking such an extencion cimply circulate to all other partien the 3 o omo 77 /

t ..&

o  %

KAYE, SCHoLER, FIERMAN, HAYS & HANDLErt

)

Jeror:e F. Sharfman, Eng. October l'; , 19'/1  ;

. routine stipulation normally used in liticatienc

.with respect to'such matters,.for submission to the Board for its approval following cxecution by all partiec.

Sincoroly,

)r, g

' ' /,' '

. s Milton R. We: cel T1RW:sk1 ec: Ac per attachml Certificate of Service

/

l e

e i

2

, ,. _ . . -. . . . . . . - , . , . . . , , . , _ . , . - , - . . ,, - - - . . _ , . , , , _ , , . . - _ - - - , , , ,