ML19338C183

Expresses Uneasiness Re Failure of ASLB to Issue Decision on Suspension.Urges ASLB to Bring Case to Prompt Conclusion

ML19338C183
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	09/08/1977
From:	Cherry M CHERRY, M.M./CHERRY, FLYNN & KANTER
To:	Coufal F, Leeds J, Luebke E Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
NUDOCS 8008050633
Download: ML19338C183 (2)

Text

.

m g

nELATED CORnr.S?ONDP.Nd kklY h

g 3

9

. uw errices Y

N' MY RO N.M. CH E R RY 2_/ f ep g

p h

N,!

' one seu nara

$'f)

. "h CHICAGO. lLLINols GoGil 4y s

3 e

September 8, 1977

Dr. Emmeth J. Luebke

- Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel-

- Dr. J. Venn Leeds, Jr.

10807 Atwell i

U. S.-Nuclear Regulatory Commission Houston, Texas 77096 Washington; D.

C.-

20555 Frederic J..Coufal, Esq., Chairman Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panci U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccmmission Washington, D.

C.

20555 Consumers Power Co(noany (Midland Plant)

Re:

Gentlemen:

- Uc have today complied with your most recent Order and have transmitted whatever other copies of Midland Intervenors '

Exhibits are necessary to reflect on Mr. Stephen's Docket Sheet receipt of11dland Intervenors' Exhibits 3-82 inclusive.

'~

Uith all due respect, I must express, on behalf of my clients, an uneasiness as to the failure of the Licensing Board tohave issued a decision on suspension.

While I know the Licensing Board is busy and the demands of an involved case: are substantial, I must remind the. Board that the original

' decision of the Court of Appals was in July 1976, more than 14: months ago, and that the record of this hearing has been closed since early May 1977, more than four months ago.

~ While'in the ordinary case a long delay in the Licensing Board's ; decision may be tenable (when, for example, u

in'a construction permit proceeding no construction is on-

.-going), _ any further delays. in this case cannot be tolerated.

.My clients 'have substantial rights.which we believe are being.

daily violated by construction at-the Midland site.

Thus while Consumers 'l construction -license is1in jeopardy (both by.the

' _ Court ofAppeals ' decisio'n and the ~ record compiled before the

Licensing Board)_'it'isLcxercising." rights" to continue con-struction.

Because of'the enormous cost: involved-(as woll

as the more practical considerations). each day :of delay can-ionly:make it more difficuirsfor: the Licensing Board'to order

'l suspension, and.give Consumers Power Company the-' opportunity

to continue to?make L the improper argu.

' Ta': lot of noney; on construction. ~

~ ment that they have spent 1

1

~

i 4

- 80LO8060ib h

~

.s,.

f

(

,, ' l, y

,-l3 gf '

'pis. Luebke, Leeds and Mr. Coufal j

September 8, 1977 y, Page W:o

~f

-~

Accordingly, I urge the Licensing Board to bring

^

j

/-

I do so, however, in this Inatter to a prompt conclusion.

light of all the considerations even though I understand

/

that the record of proceeding requires discrete attention by the Board member s.

hspectfully,

\\,

-b

.hI

/fj Myr 1 M.. Cherry leiC/dn Service List cc:

O t

e l

I-

...,,.._,