ML20101S942: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 18: Line 18:
=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:ef.
{{#Wiki_filter:ef.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION                             cM  c [d BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD             g3 rre g In the Matter of                   )                                 ,    :    , .
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA c c [d M
                                                                                    -'t
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD g3 rre g In the Matter of
                                                )                                          i g ',
)
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY           )   Docket Nos. 50-329 OM & OL           M JM
)
                                                )               50-330 OM & OL (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2 )
-'t i g ',
MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME WITHIN WHICH TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL OF LICENSING BOARD'S PARTIAL INITIAL DECISION On January 23, 1985, the Atemic Safety and Licensing l             Board in the above-captioned case-issued a Partial Initial Decision (remedial soils issues). Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. S l
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
2.762(a) the normal period for filing a notice of appeal would expire on Monday, February 4, 1985.     The Partial Initial
)
  .            Decision is a document of 361 pages exclusive of appendices containing much very complex matter, both legal and technical, to be digested. Portions of this document may have
Docket Nos. 50-329 OM & OL M JM
              .significant implications for the Applicant in other fora.       The Applicant requires significant additional time to assess the various implications and analyze whether, and if so which,
)
        ,g                                          The requested additional o 3* procedural steps are appropriate.
50-330 OM & OL (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2 )
j       time is necessary to enable the company to consider various L
MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME WITHIN WHICH TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL OF LICENSING BOARD'S PARTIAL INITIAL DECISION On January 23, 1985, the Atemic Safety and Licensing l
      ,o     options with respect to the Partial Initial-Decision such as, D       for example, whether to seek reconsideration or appeal.
Board in the above-captioned case-issued a Partial Initial Decision (remedial soils issues).
      .g O       Accordingly, the Applicant hereby requests, pursuant to 10 Rg L4 0     C.F.R.               that this Appeal. Board grant it an S GRANT 2.711(a)dD *N                 # In granting the requested For the Appeal Boar'd . '-
Pursuant to 10 C.F.R.
re11.f, the Appeat Board does-not pass upon the Q,1q~ b         _ AM d. )-%$ ,
S l
question of the appealability Seckbtary to the Appeaj Board __       of the sion in partial question.initial deci E m
2.762(a) the normal period for filing a notice of appeal would expire on Monday, February 4, 1985.
The Partial Initial Decision is a document of 361 pages exclusive of appendices containing much very complex matter, both legal and technical, to be digested.
Portions of this document may have
.significant implications for the Applicant in other fora.
The Applicant requires significant additional time to assess the various implications and analyze whether, and if so which, o 3* procedural steps are appropriate.
The requested additional
,g j
time is necessary to enable the company to consider various L,o options with respect to the Partial Initial-Decision such as, D
.g for example, whether to seek reconsideration or appeal.
O Accordingly, the Applicant hereby requests, pursuant to 10 Rg L4 0 C.F.R.
S 2.711(a)dD *N that this Appeal. Board grant it an GRANT
# In granting the requested For the Appeal Boar'd.
re11.f, the Appeat Board does-not pass upon the Q,1q~ b
_ AM d. )-%$
question of the appealability of the partial initial deci E m Seckbtary to the Appeaj Board __
sion in question.


o b
o b
extension of 30 days, to and including March 6, 1985, within
extension of 30 days, to and including March 6, 1985, within
                                  ~
~
which'to file a notice of appeal. The Applicant has already requested from the Licensing Board an identical extension of the time within which to file a petition for reconsideration of the Partial Initial Decision, and Judge Bechhoefer has agreed by telephone to grant.the requested extension. Counsel for the NRC Staff and counsel for intervenor Ms. Stamiris have stated that they have no objection to the granting of the requested extension.
which'to file a notice of appeal.
The Applicant has already requested from the Licensing Board an identical extension of the time within which to file a petition for reconsideration of the Partial Initial Decision, and Judge Bechhoefer has agreed by telephone to grant.the requested extension. Counsel for the NRC Staff and counsel for intervenor Ms. Stamiris have stated that they have no objection to the granting of the requested extension.
Respectfully submitted, 14Ckk Frederick C. Williams Isham, Lincoln & Beale 1120 Connecticut Ave., N.W.
Respectfully submitted, 14Ckk Frederick C. Williams Isham, Lincoln & Beale 1120 Connecticut Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 833-9730 Dated:   February 1, 1985 9
Washington, D.C.
20036 (202) 833-9730 Dated:
February 1, 1985 9
+
+
t i
t i '
'                                                                          -    .      .          .          _              - - - _ - - . _ .}}
- - - _ - -. _.}}

Latest revision as of 03:58, 13 December 2024

Motion for Extension Until 850306 to File Notice of Appeal of ASLB 850123 Partial Initial Decision.Granted by Aslab on 850201
ML20101S942
Person / Time
Site: Midland
Issue date: 02/01/1985
From: Williams F
CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.), ISHAM, LINCOLN & BEALE
To:
NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP)
References
CON-#185-369 OL, OM, NUDOCS 8502050725
Download: ML20101S942 (2)
v • d • e


Text

ef.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA c c [d M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD g3 rre g In the Matter of

)

)

-'t i g ',

CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY

)

Docket Nos. 50-329 OM & OL M JM

)

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

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME WITHIN WHICH TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL OF LICENSING BOARD'S PARTIAL INITIAL DECISION On January 23, 1985, the Atemic Safety and Licensing l

Board in the above-captioned case-issued a Partial Initial Decision (remedial soils issues).

Pursuant to 10 C.F.R.

S l

2.762(a) the normal period for filing a notice of appeal would expire on Monday, February 4, 1985.

The Partial Initial Decision is a document of 361 pages exclusive of appendices containing much very complex matter, both legal and technical, to be digested.

Portions of this document may have

.significant implications for the Applicant in other fora.

The Applicant requires significant additional time to assess the various implications and analyze whether, and if so which, o 3* procedural steps are appropriate.

The requested additional

,g j

time is necessary to enable the company to consider various L,o options with respect to the Partial Initial-Decision such as, D

.g for example, whether to seek reconsideration or appeal.

O Accordingly, the Applicant hereby requests, pursuant to 10 Rg L4 0 C.F.R.

S 2.711(a)dD *N that this Appeal. Board grant it an GRANT

  1. In granting the requested For the Appeal Boar'd.

re11.f, the Appeat Board does-not pass upon the Q,1q~ b

_ AM d. )-%$

question of the appealability of the partial initial deci E m Seckbtary to the Appeaj Board __

sion in question.

o b

extension of 30 days, to and including March 6, 1985, within

~

which'to file a notice of appeal.

The Applicant has already requested from the Licensing Board an identical extension of the time within which to file a petition for reconsideration of the Partial Initial Decision, and Judge Bechhoefer has agreed by telephone to grant.the requested extension. Counsel for the NRC Staff and counsel for intervenor Ms. Stamiris have stated that they have no objection to the granting of the requested extension.

Respectfully submitted, 14Ckk Frederick C. Williams Isham, Lincoln & Beale 1120 Connecticut Ave., N.W.

Washington, D.C.

20036 (202) 833-9730 Dated:

February 1, 1985 9

+

t i '

- - - _ - -. _.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20101S942&oldid=4304421"