ML19331A594
| ML19331A594 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 03/10/1977 |
| From: | Hoefling R NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8007180670 | |
| Download: ML19331A594 (5) | |
Text
.
' ~
3/10/77 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
)
Docket Nos. 50-329
)
50-330 (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2)
)
NRC STAFF'S ANSWER TO APPLICANT'S MOTION TO CONTINUE PROCEEDINGS Introduction By its " Motion to Continue Proceedings" (Motion) filed on March 4,1977, Consumers Power Company (Licensee) moved the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Board) to continue these proceedings.
The ground offered by the Licensee to support its Motion was that a continuance would be in order until such time as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Commission) rules on Licensee's motion for a stay.
On March 4, 1977 Licensee filed with the Commission its " Motion for Stay of Orders in Light of Changed Circumstances" which urged that the Commission should stay the Midland proceedings in light of.the order of the Supreme Court of the United States issued on February 22, 1977 in Consumers power Company v. Aeschliman No. 528, granting a petition for certiorari filed by Consumers Power Company.
h 8007180[pg
~
Discussion Licensee's Motion urges the Board to continue these proceedings until the Commission acts on Licensee's motion for a stay before the Commission.
No argument is offered by the Licensee ~in its Motion to support such action l
by this Board.
The Staff opposes to Licensee's Motion-l The Licensing Board was reconvened by the Comission's Memorandum and Order of August 16,197N and directed to consider only th'e fuel cycle issue remanded by the Aeschliman decision.
Upon issuance of the mandate 1
l in Aeschliman, the Comission expanded its instructions to the Licensing Board in its Memorandum and Order of September 14, o976 / directing the 2
Licensing Board to consider all issues remanded-to the Comission by Aeschliman.
The Comission's instructions to the Licensing Board to continue its inquiry into the Aeschliman issues was reaffinned by the Comission's November 5, 1976 Memorandum and Order.1/ The Comission's direction there was explicit:
1/ onsumers Power Company (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2), CLI-76-11, flRCI-C 76/8 65 (August i6, 1976)
U onsumers Power Company (Midland Plant, Units 1 and' 2), CLI-76-14, NRCI-C 76/9 165, 167 (September 14,1976)
SI Consumers Power Company (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2), CLI-76-11, NRCI-76/11 474, 475 (flovember 5, 1976)
~ _.
I In this case, however, examination of the first three issues listed above must continue.
As to these issues, as we have indicated previously in our Memorandum and Order of September 13, 1976, o
the mandate of the court of appeals in the Aeschliman case has issued.
The Aeschliman decision is now fully effective and binding on the Commission, which must proceed to implement it.
No sufficient reason has been shown to change our instructions to the reconvened Licensing Board. At page 475.
In light of such speci,fic, direction b;y the Commission, these proceedings
'beforetheLiceniini. Bo'dr'd' m0st'g6 f'ofward. 'The" Licensee offers no
. r.
...c..
argument in its Motion to challenge the presumption that these proceedings should go on, until such time as the Commission directs otherwise.
Conclusion The Staff opposes Licensee's Motion for a continuance of proceedings T
before the Licensing Board. This Board has explicit direction from the Commission to move these proceedings forward and, absent a change in Commission direction, Licensee's Motion for a Continuance should be denied.
Respectfully submitted, 16 L4 ichard K. Hoefling A'
V Dated at Bethesda, Maryland Counsel for NRC Sta this 10th day of March, 1977 l
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of C
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
)
Docket Nos. 50-329
)
50-330 (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF'S AflSWER TO APPLICANT'S 110 TION TO CONTIflUE PROCEEDINGS," dated March 10, 1977 in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by dep.osit in the United States
,,,,,,,,,,,j,J
.. mail,. fir,s.t c1, ass. or af.r.. mail,.,thi,s.,1.0th day,'of ifarch.,1p7,:
Frederic J. Coufal, Esq., Chairman Honorable Curt T. Schneider Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Attorney General U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission State of Kansas Statehouse Washington, D. C.
20555 Topeka, Kansas 66612 Dr. J. Venn Lebds, Jr.
Ms. Mary Sincla'ir Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 5711 Summerset Street 10807 Atwell Midland, Michigan 48640 Houston, Texas 77096 Harold F. Reis, Esq. -
Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke Robert Lowenstein, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Lowenstein, Newman, Reis &
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Axelrad Washington, D. C.
20555 1025 Connecticut Avenue Washington, D. C.
20036 t
Myron M. Cherry, Esq.
1 IBM Plaza L. F. Nute, Esq.
Chicago, Illinois 60611
~-
Dow Chemical, U.S.A.
Micitigan Division '
Judd L. Bacon, Esq.
Midland, Michigan 48640 Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Mr. Steve Gadler Jackson, Michigan 49201 2120 Carter Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55108
\\
l l
4
~ - - - ~ -
~
R. Rex Renfrow, III, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing '
David J. Rosso, Esq.
Appeal Panel Isham, Lincoln & Beale U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
One First National Plaza Washington, D. C.
20555 Suite 4200 Chicago, Illinois 60603 Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary Atomic Safety and Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Board Panel Washington, D. C.
20555 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555
........,..~-,.~
1'
' ' < ~ * ' '
^ ' ' ' ' ' '
i b
- /k M
i (<.L9' Richard K. Hoefling Counsel for NRC Staff /
4 J
t e
S
==
m.. _ _...
m _
m
_ %