ML19290C135
| ML19290C135 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 02700039 |
| Issue date: | 01/02/1980 |
| From: | Reis E NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8001100107 | |
| Download: ML19290C135 (4) | |
Text
i 01/02/80 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of NUCLEAR ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC.
)
Docket No. 27-39
)
(Sheffield, Illinois Low-Level
)
Radioactive Waste Disposal Site)
)
NRC STAFF'S RESPONSE TO NEC0'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OR CERTIFICATION The NRC Staff opposes NECO's December,1979 motion for reconsideration or certi-fication to the Conmission of a Board order of December 3,1979, denying a motion by an Intervenor.
NEC0 seeks reconsideration or certification of language in that order which stated, inter alia:
This Board denied NECO's motion to withdraw its appli-cation for renewal of its license and to dismiss the proceeding. Thus, NECO is still in possession of its existing license on the 20 acre site until it is decided under what conditions, if any, the license should be terminated.
NEC0 states that the second sentence could be interpreted as a prejudgment of a material issue in the proceeding involving whether NEC0's license for the Sheffield low level waste site continues. However, when read in context it is plain that the issue has not been predetermined. For as the succeeding sentence states- "On June 6,1979, this Board was designated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to consider "whether NECO can unilaterally terminate License No.
i3-10042-01 for activities at Sheffield without affinnative action by the Commission."S Thus this Board knows full well the issues it must determine.
S At p. 3 of the instant motion NECO claims it does not have possession of material buried. As we have indicated in briefs formerly filed before--
this Board and Commission, the Staff continues to believe the NEC0 has possession of the waste, has responsibility for the waste, and has a continuing license for the Sheffield facility.
(7A 227 C
8001100
' As the matter said to be determined was never detennined there is no ground for reconsideration or certification of this question to the Comission.S NEC0's motion for reconsideration or certification should be denied.S Respectfully submitted, Edwin J. Reis Assistant Chief Hearing Counsel Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 2nd day of January,1980 S ertification is only proper when direct appeal would lie from a decision of C
a Licensing Board.
See e.g.:
Pennsylvania Power & Light Co. (Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 & 2), ALAB-563,10 NRC (September 19, 1979).
Under 10 CFR 2.730(f) no interlocutory ruling is to be certified unless it is necessary "to prevent detriment to the public interest or unusual delay or expense." Neither of these factors are shown in NEC0's attempt to raise incidental language in an interlocutory order for con-sideration by the Comission.
Further certification may not be had of a Licensing Board ruling directly to the Comission. See Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant, Units 1 & 2), CLI-77-23, 6 NRC 455, 456 TT977); Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Coro. (Vennont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant),
ALAB-421, 6 NRC 26, 27 (1977).
The Comission's Notice of Hearing of June 6, 1979, herein, gave the Appeal Board jurisdiction to perform review functions of the Comission.
S he denial of an intervention motion to require preparation of environmental T
impact statement could not be viewed as a " final order" allowing court review of the basic issues in this proceeding. See Port of Boston Marine Tenninal Ass'n. v. Rederiaktiebolaget Transatlantic Inc., 400 U.S. 62, 71 11970); Citizens for a Safe Environment v. AEC, 489 F.2d 1018 (3d Cir.,1974);
Dow Chemical Co. v. Ruckelhous, 477 F.2d 1317 (8th Cir.1973).
=
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
_BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
Docket No. 27-39 NUCLEAR ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC.
)
'E
)
(Sheffield, Illinois Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Site)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF'S RESPONSE TO NECO FOR RECONSIDERATION OR CERTIFICATION" in the above-cap been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class, or, as indicated by an asterisk, through de 80:
Cornelius J. Ho11erich, Esq.
Andrew C. Goodhope, Esq.
State's Attorney 3320 Estelle Terrace Bureau County Court House
~ Wheaton, Maryland 20906 Princeton, Illinois 61356 Dr. Linda W. Little Dean Hansell, Esq.
Research Triangle Institute Susan N. Sekuler, Esq.
P. O. Box 12194 State of Illinois Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27709 Environmental Control Division 188 West Randolph Street Dr. Forrest J. Remick Suite 2315 305 E. Hamilton Avenue State College, Pennsylvania 16801 Chicago, Illinois 60601 John M. Cannon, Esq.
Scott Madson, Esq.
Mid-America Legal Foundation Assistant State's Attorney Suite 2245 601 South Main Street 20 North Wacker Drive Princeton, Illinois 61356 Chicago, Illinois 60606 D. J. McRae, Esq.
217 West Second Street Kewaunee, Illinois 61443 m
p2% 280
Atomic Safety and Licensing Docketing and Service Section*
Board Panel
- Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Washington, D. C.
20555 l
Atomic Safety and Licensing Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esq.
Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esq.
Appeal Panel
- U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Conner, Moore & Corber Washington, D. C.
20555 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Suite 1050 Robert Russell, Esq.
Washington, D. C.
20006 Johnson, Martin & Russell 10 Park Avenue West Princeton, Illinois 61356 I
d5tephen M. Schinki r
Counsel for NRC Staff R2% 291
-