f, . . - . - - . - - - . . - . .

' -

~p ,n v s swwu. aco. c. uut. > Ac. M" M,'MO

LAW OrrtCd5

LOWENSTEIN, NEWMAN & Huis1800 CONNCCTICUT 4VENUC. N. W.WASHIN GTON, D. C. 20036

202 ase. Feesmostnf towtNSf tsN

$JACn n N L w s* A N

/?sp --0}.g)/xDecember 1, 1971-.noso ..nc.. -

*

/\ocw- n

{{' y:0 ;Ii971 * -hV"'

-

Arthur W. Murphy, Esq., Chairman M-.

..,q. , y; .:')Atomic Safety and Licensing Board g i.c. t : yf- ..o

.[ /Columbia University School of Law 4 g

dry.QTiBox 38, 435 West ll6th Street

/ t'New York, New York 10027

In Matter of Cone >mers Power CompanyMidland Plant, Unita 1 and 2Dacket Nos. 50-329 and 50-330

Dear Chairman Murphy:

In accordance with your direction at the November 23,1971 hearing, Applicant herein submit.s ,its response toMr. Wessel's Draft Order of November 24, and its revised-proposed schedule for further Midlaridj, proceedings.

We are satisfied with the form of the Draft order,-and strongly endorse its design to pinpoint the contestedenvironmental issues and resolve those matters at the earliesttime consistent with an appropriate respect for the rights ofall parties. In consideration, however, of the time alreadyexpended in this proceeding, we believe the suggested dates,

'

to be insufficiently tight, and accordingly suggest thefollowing revisions:

1. At 2.(a), incert " January 10, 1972" in the spaceleft blank;

2. At 2. (b) , substitute "two weeks" for "three weeks";3. At 3. (a) , substitute " forty-five days" for

" sixty days"; and,

4. At 3. (b) , substituto "two wooks" for "t.hron weckn".

If this schedule, which we believe would not unduly burdon anyparty nor prejudice its position, were strictly adhcred to,

.

8007140 W. h

. . . . .

_

.. _ . . . _ . _. _. _ _ . . _ _ . _ . _ _ . . . _ .

'

y

Low *nssTIMN, Nuwx As & Rnm

Arthur W. Murphy, Esq. -2- December 1, 1971 1

final environmental hearings could commence during the .~.onthof April, 1972. ,

As directed, Applicant hereby submits a revised proposedschedule for further proceedings. Again, we regard this time-table as tight yet fair to all parties. We suggest thatrigorous adherence to it, with extensions granted only inexceptional situations, would best serve all concerned.

Addressing ourselves further to the subject of expeditingthe proceeding, we wish again to express our strongly held viewthat a necessary condition to progress in this proceeding isthe imposition and enforcement of the requirement that theIntervenors state their position on the issues and that theBoard act on outstanding motions to that effect. In thisconnection, wo emphasize that on August 26, 1971, the Board" requested" all Intervenors to particularize their views onenvironmental issues, if only in a preliminary fashion. OnOctober 23, 1971, we filed our Motion For Order RequiringIntcrvenors To State Their Contentions, And The Bases Therefor,and for a Preclusion Order. .No ruling'on this motion appearedin the Board's November 4 Proposed Order.

We believe that in order to effectuate the Commissidn'srules, the Board should take'the path followed by the ASLB inPoint Beach 2. In ordering all Intervenors to particularizetheir contentions, the Board there recognized that no Intervenorthereby lost any legitimate rights. All that was sacrificedwas the opportunity and incentive for interminable delay. Wecall the Board's attention to so'me of the language in PointBeach 2 (Order of November 10/ 1971, at p.4):

1

...The purpose of prehearing procedures in"

a licensing proceeding before the Commission, . . .is to identify issues that can be framed asearly as possible. The fact that more infor-mation might become available in the futureis not excuse for failing to identify issuesin a timely manner. Thip proceeding is nota game in which any one bf the parties can liein wait to pounce on errors or omissions ofother parties. The point is to get issues outinto the open and proceep promptly to solvo them."

,

|- We unequivocally support this approach. A ruling by the

| Board to this effect would be of' substantial value to the? .

,

__ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _._ _ . . . _ . . . _ . - - _ . -- . _ _ .__

.,

._.. . ___ _ ._ ..

1.dwicxuri: x, N uw M A N & '''ts F j~'

;.

Arthur W. Murphy, Esq. -3r December 1, 1971

, orderly expedition of the prococdings at hand. We arc, ofcourse, awarc that the AEC has recently scheduled a pu'elicrule making hearing with respect to acceptanca critoria for- cmargency core cooling systems. However, that action in noway ditninishes the obligation of the Intervenors to statetheir contentions with respect to ECCS issues.

Copies of this letter and the attachment have bcon sontto all of the individuals whose names appear on the attachedlist.

Sincercly,. ,o .

,s

*%. * ,.-

/, -

.

HFR:mAttachments (2) -

.

O

b

*e *

, .

'

.

O

?

=

e - w , +Qv , -

_ _ _ . . . _ _ _ . . _ _ . .. . _ _. - . _ _

,, ,

k'c -

21971 *'hc.s9 ' ..a. <. unt. FAc. 5Mrl.3E. . . . ...

'"-.

.

b ; r. , T3 ATTACHNENT A*

L, . -. '.f

i -a.e *

g.3;gA>' 7A- 7s

\

roposed Schedule for Midland Proceedings'

.&&N I

December 6 Applicant to makc documents availab1c and fileresponces to interrogatories in categories asto which no objection has bcon made. Applicantto file list of witnesses on ECCS and environ-mental matters.

December 7 Westinghouse files appropriate pleadings,(Sct by Board affidavits and memoranda of law with respcctNov. 23 to proprietary documents.Tr. p. 5037)

December 7 Last day for opposition Intervcnors to file(Set by Board motions for discovery (interrogatories andNov. 23 document production) with respect to ECCSTr. p. 5015) matters.

December 10 Opposition Intervenors submit statement of~-

contentions together with the bases for suchcontentions, with respect to ECCS matters basedupon materials filed to date.

December 15 Saginaw Intervenors file written evidence with(Confirmed by respect to quality assurance (page 6, proposedBoard, Nov. 23 Board Order).Tr. p. 5042

December 15 Saginaw Intervenors submit written evidence with(Confirmed by respect to synergism contentions (page 7,Board, Nov. 23 proposed Board Order).Tr. p. 5042)

.

December 15 Mapleton Intervonors submit written evidence with(Confirmed by respect to contentions III and IV (page 8,Board, Nov. 23 proposed Board Order).Tr. p. 5042

December 15 Open for pre-hearing conference if Board(open date per considers appropriate.Board, Nov. 23Tr. p. 5057)

Januari,5, 1972 Hearing, if necessary, on Westinghouse proprietary*

(open date per documents.Board, Nov. 23Tr. p. 5057)

.January 10 Staff files safety evaluation as to Midland UCCS.

.

n . - - , , ,

._ _ - _ .

. . _ _ . . .-. . . . . . . - . .-- . . . -- ..- - - -. ..

. .

O r..

--.

.

-2-,

.

Janua_ry 15, 197_2, Itcconvenc hearing with respect to iodinoremoval offectiveness.

January 25 Opposition Intervonors submit statements withrespect to final contentions and bases thoroforconcerning ECCS adequacy with respect to mator-ials in AEC staff safety evaluation.

Januar;y 25 Opposition Intervenors submit written evidenceon ECCS adequacy.

February 10' Applicant submits supplemental evidence on ECCS~

adequacy in reply to January 25 filings by oppo-sition Intervenors.

Febr_uary 20_ Conference with Board..

Marcit 1 Hearings.on ECCS issucs of fact.

t

e

e

4

4

*4

e

4

e

'.

's

e

~.

ei. y e ;,-+- -e.- - - g -

, -. _ . - . - . . . .. ._

.. ..

[ a .. .... - ..3 g g, g, , ,

.mI,e :W wvrs:rN. N 8:Wal W l' lli;It - <'<

ATTACU!!UNT D

: ."*

Thomas F. Engelhardt, Esq. Honorablo Curtin B. Dochllavjd E. Kartalia, Esq. Assistant Attorncy GoncralRobert Nculon, Esq. Stato of Michigan

Regulatory Staff counnel 630 Savon Story Office BuildingU. S. Atomic Energy Co: micsj on 525 '.!:s t Otta*.taW.mhington, o. C. 20545 Lansing, !!ichigan 40013 -

John K. Rentrick, Eng. Anthony Z. Rois:can , Luq.

Harold P. Graven, Esq. Berlin, Roisman & Kesa.icr

Vice Proaident and General -1910 N Street, N. W.

Coun:iol Washington. D. C. 20036Con:nno. rn l'ouer Company212 West Michigan Avenue Jamen A. Kendull, Eng.

Jackson, Michigan 49201 Currio and Kendall135 North Saginaw Road

Richard G. Smith, Esq. Midland, !!ichigan 48640Smith &'Brooker, P.C.703 Washington Avcnuo Milton R. Uessc11, Esq.

Day City,I;ichigan 48706 Allen Kozsboa, Esq.J. Richard Sinclair, Esq.

William A. Crooning, Jr., Esq. Kaye, Schoicr, Picrman, naysJaucs H. O'Connor, Esq. and HandicrThe Dow Chemical company 425 Park Avenuo2030 Dow Contor New York, Now York LUv22Midland, Michigan 48640

William J. Ginstcr, Esq.

Myron it. Cherry, Esq. Suite _4, Morrill Building

109 North Dearborn Street Saginaw, Michigan 48602Suite 1005Chicago, Illinois 60602 Irving Like, Esq.

Reilly, Likc & SchneiderHonorabic William H. Ward 200 West Main StreetAssistant Attorney General Babylon, New York 11702 -

.

State of KansasTopcha, Kansas 66612 Algic A. Wolls, Esq., Chairman

Atomic Safety and LicensingDr. Clark Goodman Board PanelProfessor of Physics U. S. Atomic Encrgy CommissionUniversity of Houston Washington, D. C. 205453801 Cullen DoulevardHouston, Texas 77004 % anicy T. Robinson, Esq.

.

Chief, Public Proceedings BranchDr. David B. Hall -Office of the Secretary ofLos Alamos Scientific Laboratory the CommissionP. O. Dox 1663 U. S. Atomic Encrgy CommissionLos Alamos, New Mexico Washington, D. C. 20545

[,'

/m - w,QC .*.

f,r_REC 7,1971 * 3)

-

:

-\";<

~

g f: r;,..

,, v/. . .

-