ML20115J546

Motion to Participate Amici Curiae in Resolution of Issue of Involuntary Dismissal of License Application as Identified in Aslab 850405 Memorandum & Order

ML20115J546
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	04/19/1985
From:	Charnoff G BECHTEL GROUP, INC., SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE
To:	NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP)
Shared Package
ML20115J539	List: ML20115J537 ML20115J546 ML20115J550
References
OL, OM, NUDOCS 8504230605
Download: ML20115J546 (3)

Text

o k

April 19, 1985 00CHETED USNRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i5 AM122 #1 CM)

BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD 0FflCE OF SECRt.iARY 00CMETING & SERVIC"i BRANCH In the Matter of )

) '

CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-329 OL&OM

) 50-330 OL&OM (Midland Plant, Units 1 & 2) )

MOTION BY BECHTEL TO PARTICIPATE AS AMICUS CURIAE On April 5, 1985, the Appeal Board requested additional views from the applicant and the NRC Staff on several subissues related to the question of whether the Appeal Board should dis-miss the operating license proceeding in the Midland Plant dockets. Bechtel Power Corporation and Bechtel Associates Pro-fessional Corporation (collectively "Bechtel") hereby request the Appeal Board's permission to participate as amici curiae in the resolution of the issue of involuntary dismissal of a li-cense application, identified by the Appeal Board in its April 5, 1985 Memorandum and Order. ~See 10 C.F.R. 5 2.715(d).

Bechtel is not a party to this consolidated operating li-cense and construction permit modification proceeding. Howev-er, Bechtel has been engineer / constructor of the Midland Plants, and Bechtel's involvement was the subject of statements made by the Licensing Board in its January 23, 1985 partial initial decision. See, e.g., LBP-85-2, 21 N.R.C. 24, 111 8504230605 850419 PDR ADOCK 05000329:

9 PDR

4 (1985). Moreover, dismissal of the Midland Plant license ap-plications may adversely affect the status of other plants in a number of which Bechtel has considerable involvement. See en-closed Bechtel Submittal in Response to the Appeal Board's Mem-orandum and Order of April 5, 1985, at 9. Bechtel also be-lieves its participation in this matter is appropriate because Bechtel's contribution will assist the Appeal Board in resolving the issues without in any way prejudicing the rights of the parties to present their views on this important matter.

See Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. (Western New York Nuclear Ser-vice Center), ALAB-679, 16 N.R.C. 121 (1982).

Submitted with this motion, for the Appeal Board's consid-eration, is Bechtel's Submittal in Response to the Appeal Board's Memorandum and Order of April 5, 1985. See Louisiana Power & Light Co. (Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3),

Appeal Board Order, Feb. 13, 1985 (the preferred practice fol-lowed in litigation is to tender the document that a party seeks leave to file along with its motion); compare Public Service Company of Oklahoma (Black Fox Station, Units 1 & 2),

LBP-76-38, 4 N.R.C. 435, 441 (1976). Bechtel respectfully re-l l

quests that its Submittal be considered along with the re-sponses filed by applicant and the NRC Staff, notwithstanding i

l l

-e h

Bechtel's previous failure to request amicus standing on this matter.

Respectfully submitted, i

Gdfald Charnoff FU/

Deborah B. Bauser SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE 1800 M Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 822-1000 Counsel for Bechtel Dated: April 19, 1985