ML20050C006
| ML20050C006 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 04/05/1982 |
| From: | Cowan B ATOMIC INDUSTRIAL FORUM |
| To: | NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP) |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-CP, NUDOCS 8204080002 | |
| Download: ML20050C006 (6) | |
Text
p } f 1l
- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal B8ard'po -6 R2'.09 r
In the Matter of
)
)
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
)
Docket Nos. 50-329 CP
)
50-330 CP (Midland Plant, Units 1
)
and 2)
)
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE OUT OF TIME The Lawyers Committee Steering Group of the Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc. (" Lawyers Committee") hereby moves the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board (" Appeal Board")
pursuant to 10 C.F.R. Section 2.715(d) for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae in connection with the appeal of the Partial Initial Decision (Remand Proceeding) dated December 22, 1981, of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (" Licensing 9
4 6
Board") in the above-captioned case.
RECegg g
app y The Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc. (" Forum") is an j
association of over 600 domestic and overseas organization' /
v interested in the development of peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
Its members include electric utilities, manufacturers, architect-engineers, consulting firms, mining and milling companies, and others who design, build, operate and service facilities for the production of nuclear fuel and the generation of nuclear power.
Applicant Consumers Power Company is'a member of the Forum.
The Lawyers Committee is a standing i
9 8204080002 820405 PDR ADOCK 05000329 40 0
PDR t
o
3 2-committee of the Forum whose meioership comprise a wide spectrum of lawyers with extensive experience in the law relating to nuclear regulation and practice.
Many members are actively engaged in practice before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and its licensing and appeal boards.
Amicus desires to address two issues involved in the appeal of the above-captioned case which are of significance to the bar and which relate to the entire fabric of Commission licensing proceedings.
The issues desired to be briefed by the amicus are as follows:
1.
Whether the Licensir.g Board decision sets forth the appropriate standard to be applied in preparation of direct testimony with respect to the nature and extent of the duty of affirmative disclosures of information to be included in such direct testimony.
The brief of amicus curiae will take the position that the standard apparently adopted by the Licensing Board concerning such duty is overly broad, impossible of attainment and not in accordance with sound administrative practice.
2.
Whether the Licensing Board decision sets forth the appropriate standard of conduct for counsel in connection with assistance to expert witnesses in preparation of direct
6 testimony.
The brief of amicus curiae will take the position that the standard apparently adopted by the Licensing Board is inappropriate, inconsistent with the obligations of counsel and not in accordance with sound administrative practice.
In the Partial Initial Decision (Remand Proceeding) the Licensing Board recognized that the standards of testimony preparation and other conduct which it suggests "have not previously been specifically addressed by the NRC Appeal Board or the Commission" and that such standards "may not necessarily have been recognized or followed in other administrative proceedings" (pp. 40-41).
Amicus believes that the decision of the Licensing Board would involve the imposition of new and novel standards not followed heretofore in administrative or judicial proceedings.
If such standards are not modified and clarified, serious questions may exist concerning the ability of counsel to properly advise clients in nuclear licensing proceedings.
Amicus believes its participation can assist the Appeal Board in connection with consideration of these matters.
Amicus does not intend to address in its brief the factual determinations of the Licensing Board or the conclusions reached by the Licensing Board concerning the intentions of the parties and their counsel in this proceeding or the question of imposition of sanctions.
Thus, amicus will not address the i
u l.
\\
i i
. merits of the Exceptions to Partial Initial Decision (Remand Proceeding) filed by Intervenors other than DOW ("Intervenor")
on January 17, 1982, but wili limit its brief to discussion.of the two legal issues referred to above.
Amicus believes that the position it will take with respect to the above issues will.be supportive of the position of Licensee in this proceeding.
Apicus is aware of th'e provisions of 10 C.F.R. Section 2.715(d) whereby such brief is to be filed within the time allowed to the party whose~ position,the brief will support, except as otherwise provided by the Commission or Appeal Board.
Amicus hereby requests permission _to file its?
brief out of time on the due date of the last reply brief in the proceeding.
The decision of the Licensing Board in fthis proceeding was issued on December 22, 1981, and the exceptions
~
to the decision were taken by Intervenor on January 1 7,- 1 9 8 2.
However, the undersigned, as Chairman of the Lawyers Committee, did not become aware of the decision or the_ exceptions thereto until March'22, 1982.
Thereafter, time was, required to review i
the decision and conduc't appropriate' consult'ations before this'
)
motion could be filed.
Such. process was not completed until today, April 5, 1982, and it will be impcssible for amicus to J
prepare its brief by the filing date of Licensee on April 5, u
1982.
No prejudice should result to any party from granting
, l o!
amicus permission to file its brief at the time requested since-3 3
s 4-m
%n
,.m.
~
e
}
=
t 5
?
the issues to be addressed are issues only of the legal fL standards utilized by the Licensing Board which are being addressed by the parties to the proceeding in their briefs to the Appeal Board.
WHEREFORE, the Lawyers Committee Steering Group of the Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc. respectfully requests leave to file a brief as amicus curiae in the above-captioned proceeding on or before the due date of the last reply brief in this
, proceeding.
Respectfully submitted, Barton Z. ' Cyan, Esqdire Chairman, AIF Lawyers Committee 42nd Floor, 600 Grant Street Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219 (412) 566-6029 Date:
1e a
f e
I s t
m 3 x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2[ Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board 5 In the Matter of ) ) Docket Nos. 50-329 CP . CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY ) 50-330 CP M '(Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2) ) l N l [ \\ Certificate of Service I hereby certify-that a copy of the " Motion for Leave to File Brief Amicus Curiae Out of Time," dated April 5, 1982, has been served on each of the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid, this 5th day of April, 1982: Christine N. Kohl, Chairperson Docketing and Service Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Office of the Secretary Board Panel U.S.' Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 4, Washington, D.C. 20555 Gary J. Edles William C. Potter, Jr., Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Fischer, Franklin, Ford Board Panel Simon and Hogg U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1700 Guardian Building Washington, D.C. 20555 Detroit, Michigan 48226 n 9. Dr. W. Reed Johnson R. L. Davis, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Michigan Division Board Panel Legal Department U.SJ Nuclear Regulatory Commission Dow Chemical Company Washington, D.C. 20555 Midland, Michigan 48640 r' William J. Olmstead, Esquire Myron M. Cherry Williao D. Payton, Esquire One IBM Plaza Office of the Executive Legal Suite 4501 Director Chicago, Illinois 60671
- h U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7
Washingtoh, DC 20555 = 8,E Gerald Charnoff, Esquire Shaw, Pittman, Potts 6 Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 J M Ba~rron Z. Codin Chairman, AIF Lawyers Committee = a 3-d.}}