ML20088A812
| ML20088A812 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Byron  |
| Issue date: | 04/10/1984 |
| From: | Hicher J, Whicher J BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL PEOPLE FOR THE PUBLIC INTERES, DEKALB AREA ALLIANCE FOR RESPONSIBLE ENERGY, LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF ROCKFORD, IL, SAFE ENERGY FOR NEW HAVEN, WHICHER, J.M. |
| To: | Gotchy R, Kohl C, Rosenthal A NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8404130156 | |
| Download: ML20088A812 (2) | |
Text
_
^
BPI h
Business and Professional People for t$ffublic Interest
( 'T 109 North
Dearborn Street,
Suite 1300 Chicago, lilinois 60602 Telephone: (312) 641-5570 j
'84 AP112 M1 :24 April 10, 198/-
r q f3ECfali mio.)e. SEE W
- 3Hl.NCH Alan S. Rosenthal, Chairman Dr. Reginald L. Gotchy Administrative Judge Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Christine N. Kohl Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Re:
Commonwealth Edison Company (Byron Station, Units 1 and 2) Docket Nos. 50-454, 50-455
Dear Administrative Judges:
I have received a copy of a letter to Judge Rosenthal from one of my clients, Dr. Bruce Von Zellen of DAARE.
The letter requests that the Appeal Board hear Edison's appeal from the denial of its request for an operating license for Byron Units 1 and 2 in Rockford or, alter-natively, Chicago.
My other clients, SAFE and the Rockford League of Women Voters, have asked me to make a similar request on their behalf.
Accordingly, all three intervenors respectfully request that the Board hear commonwealth Edison's appeal in Rockford, Illinois (which has been the sight of the hearings).
Alternatively, we would request that that appeal be heard in Chicago.
~
f 3
.o n g's I
C
.e,n d Go, uge.
O e D, to,
,,.i v.topm.at A*a".,b!';%
Eid$O'"
cE$fE, EE$'E*"*
7tOL'"##
'T#1.i'.L.....,
- 0;",,.
"O" f2""
- "J.tX"k..,
C':t2 Fam'., ""
r.;aa"*,;*;,.
~~
g=ydr,'
!Ta 'O'"'"
%"a"o.T",.
!*"a#0" c--*
.!"'T.
i*. '.'.WOl'
.T *o'0'.T, 2 s %"
d;";;~'
- nz.,
L:L"at";"
~ ~ ' * '
(
e404:301sa e4o4to J
PDR ADOCK 05000454 DSO3 i
G PDR m
Administrative Judges April 10, 1984 Page Two Ue believe that this request -- albeit unusual --
is narticularly anoropriate here.
The Byron hearings have been subj ect to a great deal of public attendance.
Indeed, Judge Smith denied Edison's oral request to hold the reopened hearings in Chicago because of the extra-ordinary number of members of the nublic who attended the Byron hearings in Rockford.
I have requested attorneys for Commonwealth Edison to join in our request.
They have informed me that not only will they not join in that request, they see no reason for the hearings to be held other than in Bethesda.
As this Board is surely aware, both transnortation and housing costs are extraordinary expenses for inter-venors who are private citizens simply wishing to observe the oral argument.
These exnenses do not annear to be a consideration of Commonwealth Edison and its attorneys.
Accordingly, we respectfully request that the Board consider moving the site of the oral argument to a place more con-venient to the intervenors who wish to observe the proceedings.
Very truly yours, d c=L. a Janc !!. Whicher JMW: atah cc:
Service List 4
__ _ _ _ _ _