ML17298C198

Poses Questions on NRC Position That Proposed Transfer of License R-81 from Union Carbide Subsidiary B to Cintichem, Inc Is Prohibited

ML17298C198
Person / Time
Site:	05000054
Issue date:	09/01/1983
From:	Simpson A SENATE, ENVIRONMENT & PUBLIC WORKS
To:	Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML17298C197	List: ML17298C198
References
NUDOCS 8310110620
Download: ML17298C198 (3)

Text

r ~

J I. footPT T, crkttoa4, vr Cakl.. w ckaca, ka Tcaa, 'caaIaac akaaaAta. r. vk.

~ CC, 14 LLOTO CCIITCCH TCX

~ IAC4II vtv4 OvcarIa a avaolca~ II Qka Aaa, C Oka ~ akar akar. 44A4.

~IAA, Iakaa owscI. rkraa:a IAoraIrka. a.r.

TCIICaICI, 1, CaaCACC1, IAC'C Iklaa, 4CaaaC A, IAITCIICIk IAAIAC AIAA CkvCUC IA4IIT, ~wfrtzfcb Eccfca %oner,ke Iataarr 1 1 COMAAITVSC ON CNVIRONMCVT ANO PIJdl IC WORK5

~ AI~ Cakaa, CTktt CIACCTCa 1 'a, TA44, Ia IAIaaaITT CTAtt OIACCTOa WA5HINOTON. O.C. 225 tO September 1, 19/ ~

Ho no rab le Fun= io J . Pall adino Cnai rman U, S..'nuclear Regulatory Comm ssion liashin-ton, D.C. 20SSS

Dear Joe:

On June 1, 198S, in response to a draft applicatioa fil.ed with the Commission for the retransfer of Facility Operating License Yio. R-Sl on behal~ oz Union Caroide Subsidiary "B",

Inc. and Cint.ichem, inc., william J. Dircks, Executive Director

o. Operations in ormed the joint applicants that'the proposed transfer of the facility operating license is precluded bv Sections 1038. and 104c. of the <tomic Energy Act of 1954, as'.

amencec.

Tn light o= tksis decision,

'n' g 1 would very much appreciate the Commiss prompt response toe t the following questions:

(1) 1~nat is the legal basis for the Commission's conclusion tha" this. application is precluded by Sections 203d. and 104d. of tne Atomic Energy Act?

(2) 4'hat standard is employed by the Commission in determin'ng whether the degree of foreign ownership, control, or domination of a corpora-tion or other entity would be inimical to the common de=ense and security or pose an unreason-aole risk to the puolic health and safety?

(5) liow does the Commiss ion disti nauish its decis ion

'n tnis case from earlie. Commi.ssion decisions in Tn he blat ter of Gen ral Electric Company and

>outnwest Atom' Energy Assoc'.ates ana zn tne General Atomic Company case.

(-") ls there a compelling public interes t, such as preservation of the sole domestic source of certain medical radioxsotopes, that would be served by allowing this and other similar license trans fers'. I f so, what legislative changes to Sections 10Sd. and 104d. would you think to be necessary to accomnodate the public interest in such license t,.ans fers? Mould the Commission support rnese proposed legislative changes?

Sai0ii0620 "oR ADGcw 0500005'DR V

0 C

~ (= 5 *~

Honorable Nun=so J. Palladzno Page Trio Thank you or your usual fine coo erati n.

-oD~ard <<)our response. E look 9 xth bes: regarcs iost sine r l r

Alan . Simpson Unit d States Senator AKS/j ch