ML20099A488

Forwards Amended Suppl Petition as Ordered by ASLB on 790111

ML20099A488
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	01/19/1979
From:	Marke D AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:
Shared Package
ML20099A491	List: ML20099A488 ML20099A493 ML20099A498 ML20099A502 ML20099A505
References
NUDOCS 7902220159
Download: ML20099A488 (2)

Text

. D,] , )

')

lll1NI E g'

f2 - -

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA %g

• NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION b 1

BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND I'ICENSING BOARD  % N l

~

In the Matter of

~

)

)

HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER ) Dockets Nos. 50-498 COMPANY, ET AL. ) 50-499

) .

(South Texas Project. Units 1 and 2) )

~

Cover Letter to "Ammended Supplemental Petition" As Ordered By ASLB Panel on 11Januarvi979 On 11 January 1979 in Houston, Texas, petitioner David Marke was offered opportunity by 19 January 1979 to clear certain deficiencies in his supplementary petition of 26 December 1978 in the above coptioned proceeding, as well as to clearly definiate the separation between his personal interests and those of Austin Citizen's for Economical Er.ergy. Mr. Marke had filed what amounted to (in both his estimation -

and that of ACEE) a co-joint petition expressing interests which both parties heId in common. At the direction of the Board, separate petitions are herewith filed, ammended so as to meet the requirements of -

10CFR 2. 714, and with such notation as may more clearly define, tne specificity of interests of Mr. Marke and/or ACEE.

This is done making no admission whatever as to the deficiency of any claims or contentions, or any withdrawal of same. By attached instrument ACEE has indicated its continued desire to be represented by Mr. Marke. Mr. Marke and ACEE both feel that this action will greatly enhance the development of a substantial sound record, and further that Mr. Marke's participation both as an individual and as the authorized representative of ACEE will significantly streamline the proceedings such that the Board may deal with fewer persons, hopefully assuring that the proceedings are not delayed unnecessarily.

All concerned part..s will note that while no contentions have been deleted inasmuch as ACEE and Mr. Marke both consider them valid.

Certain contentions have been elaborated upon following the original text of the 26 December 1978 petition. Such additions have been made in order to answe- the question of a' contention, "What if" as posed by the staff on 11 January 1973. Such portions are marked by an asterisk (*).

7M

3 .

] . ,t f

_ } ,

In conclusion petitioner Marke re' quests that the instument of 26 December 1979, and the instant documents he considered as the petition _

proper, superceeding and replacing the instument of 26 August 197'8 Further, the petitioners, both ACEE and Mr. Marke are grateful for the co-operation and assistance of the Board, ard the staff, and the patience of the Applicant as we strive to meet the form required by this proceeding. It is most certain that the public interest is served by the close 'nterest of such Boards in public input and opinion.

Respe #

lly bmit .

. . f

. Navrd f/

ar 'ti kr

• BWCd M&rke/Reprtsentative i -

for ACEE, Pe'titioner I'

i

• e e

e 1

l i

6 0

l _ _ . . - _ _ . - -_ - - - _.- .- .. -