ML20052D083
| ML20052D083 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 04/29/1982 |
| From: | Potter W DOW CHEMICAL CO., FISCHER, FRANKLIN, FORD, SIMON & HOGG |
| To: | NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP) |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-CP, NUDOCS 8205060259 | |
| Download: ML20052D083 (4) | |
Text
. _ _ _.
.,e_s. ?. l'
- f.igTf UNITED STATES OF. AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION.22 - ng -3 P4:00V ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD
$.grn fr
)
IN THE MATTER OF
)
)
Docket Nos. 50-329 CP CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
)
50-3 9
)
e (Midland Plant,
)
-g 9
Units 1 & 2)
)
9 9
I y)b, A ~$
)
S-
', 4 e?p
~
J 5qilW I2
% pG e hb RESPONSE OF THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY
/j TO INTERVENOR SAGINAW VALLEY NUCLEAR STUDY GROUP %gv, W1 l
MOTION TO TEPMINATE ORAL ARGUMENT THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY, for its response to the Motion of Intervenor Saginaw Valley Nuclear Study Group to Terminate Oral Argument, says:
1.
THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY (Dow) currently has pending before this Board a Motion for Reconsideration of Appeal Board-Order dated April 13, 1982.
In that Order, the Appeal Board're-fused to allow Dow to~ file a brief responding to certain arguments contained.in the Brief filed by Consumers Power Company.
h 5 2.
The. thrust of the Motion of Intervenor Saginaw Valley
./ /
Nuclear Study Gro'p is that this Board has all the information it, l_
u paeds to render'a' decision because of (a) the record compiled below and (b) the. Briefs of the parties filed with this Board.
8205060259 820429
- - r
-PDR ADOCK 05000329
~
~. b. :
G PDR.
M
~~l-
"\\
~
~
- -, :.d-4.,
..; y.:_.
3-
1__. _
3.
Dow would agree with the position of Intervenor Saginaw Valley Nuclear Study Group if the Board grants Dow's Motion for Reconsideration and permits it to file a brief in response to arguments raised in the Brief of Consumers Power Company.
If Dow's Motion for Reconsideration is granted, then all parties will have been permitted to file all briefs that they feel are necessary to fully present their position to this Appeal Board.
4.
If Dow's Motion for Reconsideration is not granted, then Dow does not agree with the position of Intervenor Saginaw Valley Nuclear Study Group because it will have been deprived of the right to file a brief setting forth its position regarding certain statements and arguments contained in the Brief of Consumers Power Company.
In that eventuality, the record before this Board will not be complete and Dow would demand oral argument so that it does have the opportunity to present its position to this Appeal Board..
5.
In conclusion, if the Appeal Board grants Dow's Motion for Reconsideration of Appeal Board Order dated April 13, 1982, and allows Dow to file its reply brief, then Dow would agree with the position taken by Intervenor Saginaw Valley Nuclear Study Group in its Motion to Terminate Oral Argument.
If the Appeal Board denies Dow's Motion for Reconsideration, then Dow disagrees
a
'as.
e a
d' with the position of Intervenor Saginaw Valley Nuclear Study Group, and contends that oral argument is necessary to ensure that its position is brought to the attention of this Board.
. DATED: April 29, 1982 Respectfully submitted, T. J. Cresswell, Esq.
Division Counsel Michigan Division The Dow Chemical Company 47 Building Midland, Michigan 48640 (517) 636-4781 Fischer, F 'anklin, Ford, Simon
/
& Hogg
,/
^
By:
William C. Potter, Jr. (P-19042) 1700 Guardian Building Detroit, Michigan 48226 (313) 962-5210 Attorneys representing The Dow Chemical Company I
t l.
N -
e c.p CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 82 ng -3 p 4 00 I, WILLIAM C.
POTTER, JR., hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Response of The Dow Chemical Company:.to Inteyv_enor Saginaw Valley Nuclear Study Group's Motion to Terminate-OralhArgument was-
~
mailed by first class mail, postage fully prepaid, to each of the following on the 29th day of April, 1982:
Christine N.
Kohl, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.
C.
20555 Gary J.
Edles, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.
C.
20555 Dr. W.
Reed Johnson Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.
C.
20555 Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.
C.
20555 William J.
Olmstead, Esq.
Office of the Executive Legal Director U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.
C.
20555 Gerald Charnoff, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.
C.
20036 Myron M.
Cherry, Esq.
Three First National Plaza Suite 3700 Chicago, Illinois 60602 l
Barton Z.
Cowan, Esq.
42nd Floor, 600 Grant Street Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15210
/
/
4.n WILLIAM C.
POTTER, JR.
',/
DATED: April 29, 1982 e
/
.