ML19331A759
| ML19331A759 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 01/03/1973 |
| From: | Oconnor J, Wessel M DOW CHEMICAL CO., KAYE, SCHOLER, FIERMAN, HAYS & HANDLER |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8007210764 | |
| Download: ML19331A759 (3) | |
Text
i f
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
Docket Nos. 50-329*'
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
)
50-330
)
(Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2)
)
4 DOW MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO SAGINAW REQUEST FOR EXTENSION Intervenor The Dow Chemical Company ("Dow")
opposes the Saginav Intervenors' application for an ex-tension of their time to file exceptions.
The only ground asserted by Saginaw which dis-
~
tinguishes this case from any other, is counsel's' active' engagement in two other pending AEC proceedings.
Such other representations were undertaken subsequent to this one, with notice, full knowledge and even warning from the parties opposing Saginaw herein, and the ASLB itself,that l
l the inevitable resulting conflicts could not be permitted to interfere with expeditious progress of this litigation.
Yet despite that, Saginaw repeatedly sought adjournments and extensions from the ASLB by virtue of such other engagements.
In dealing with this issue in its Order of January 6, 1972, the ASLB stated:
l h[f l
8007210
a 4
"Unlike law suits the consequences of delay and postponement of this type of proceeding are potentially-very serious.
We will continue to try to accommodate hearing dates within reason but we cannot in good conscience regard par.ticipation in'other proceedings to be a justification for not meeting deadlines.
If Counsel are to continue to participate in more than one case at_a time they simply must be prepared to make arrangements for-handling the case load."
CONCLUSION The Saginaw Intervenors have not. stated any valid reason why their time to file exceptions should be extended.
Their application should be denied.
Dated:
]~~'
January 3, 1973 Respectfully submitted, i
a%.
! r, ( J 6
. / '-
u,.
/.,
.. =
KAYE, SCHOLER, FIERMAN, HAYS
& HANDLER, Hearing Attorneys for The Dow Chemical Company Milton R.
- Wessel, James N.
O'Connor, Of Counsel.
2
+
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD In the' Matter of
)
)
Docket Nos. 50-329 CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
)
50-330
)
(Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the attached Memorandum to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board, dated
- Januar, 3,
- 1973, has been served on the following in person or by deposit in the United States mail, first class, this 3rd day of
- January, 1973.
Alan S.
Rosenthal, Esq., Chairman David E.
Kartalia, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing U.S.
Atomic Energy Commission Appeal Board Washington, D.C.
20545 U.S.
Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D.C.
20545 Harold F.
Reis, Esq.
Newman, Reis'& Axelrod Dr. J.hn H.
Buck, Member 1100 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Washington, D.C.
20036 Appeal Soard
~,,
U.S.
Atomic Energy Commission Myron M.
Cherry, Esq. (2)
Washington, D.C.
20545 Jenner & Block 135 So. LaSalle Street William Parler, Esq., Member Chicago, Illinois 60603 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Irving Like, Esq.
U.S.
Atomic Energy Commission Reilly, Like and Schneider Washington, D.C.
20545 200 West Main Babylon, New York 11702 William J.
Ginster, Esq.
Suite 4, Merrill Building Hon. William H.
Ward Saginaw, Michigan 48602 Assistant Attorney Gcneral State of Kansas Mr. Frank W. Karas (20)
Topeka, Kansas 66612 Chief, Public Proceedings Branch Office of the Secretary of the Commission U.S.
Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D.C.
20545 James A.
Kendall, Esq.
'?
//
I 135 N.
Saginaw Road O A' MCd' # '
~~
l' /
Midland, Michigan 48640 Milton R.
Wessel
_