ML19323C083
| ML19323C083 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 02700039 |
| Issue date: | 05/07/1980 |
| From: | Goodhope A, Little L, Remick F NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP), Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | U.S. ECOLOGY, INC. (FORMERLY NUCLEAR ENGINEERING |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8005150013 | |
| Download: ML19323C083 (3) | |
Text
- -.
'o 80051500l'3 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA g4 9/
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ll t@3 ERD 0
'0{ MAY 81980 > [4, ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Andrew C. Goodhope, Chairman Officsof the Secretan Wh8'N 8
Dr. Linda W. Lit,tle ro g
Dr. Forrest J. Remick
.o In the Matter of
)
)
NUCLEAR ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC.
)
Docket No. 27-39
)
(Sheffield, Illinois Low-Level
)
Radioactive Waste Disposal Site)
)
ORDER RULING ON NUCLEAR ENGINEERING COMPANY'S (NECO) MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OR CERTIFICATION TO THE COMMISSION (May 7, 1980)
The Applicant (NECO) bases its motion, dated December 13, 1979, for reconsideration or certification upon a statement this board made in an order (December 3, 1979) denying a motion by an intervenor, Chicago Section of the American Nuclear Society (Chicago Section) to compel the NRC Staff to file a Draft Environ-mental Impact Statement (DEIS) and to study reasonable alterna-tives to suspending operations by NECO at its Sheffield, Illinois low-level radioactive waste disposal site.
The Applicant states that this board materially prejudged the central issue before the Commission when it stated in its 1
l l
L
-N
s ruling on the Chicago Section's motion as follows:
i This Board denied NECO's motion to withdraw its application 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.
The Applicant, however, immediately shifts to other grounds and argues that
"... the Commission has no jurisdiction over any activities at Sheffield because there is no
' possession' of radioactive material which has been disposed of by burial in accordance with the terms of the previous license.
The NRC has no other basis for asserting the right to prevent NECO from terminating its license at Sheffield.
The holding by this Board, if it was intended as such, without the hearing and without providing NECO the other rights to which it is entitled pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act, the Administra-tive Procedure Act, and the Commission's regulations, deprives NECO of due process of law."
l A substantial difference exists in this board's opinior. as.
to whether NECO possesses a license or possesses radioactive i
material.
Whether NECO possesses radioactive material is an j
issue, raised by Applicant, upon which this board will do its best to grant NECO all of its legal rights, i
In its last Memorandum and Order, the Commission specifically stated that this board was to " consider whether NECO could uni-laterally terminate its license for activities at Sheffield with-I out affirmative action by the Commission."
Commission Memorandum and Order dated January 22, 1980.
Applicant's reasoning appears
to be the same as it used when it claimed that the Commission itself had prejudged the issues pending before this board when it issued its Memorandum and Order of June 6,1979.
The Commis-sion rejected this argument in its January 22, 1980 Memorandum and Order.
This board also rejects this argument since it has' not pre-judged any issue which may be before it.
Consequently, Appli-cant's motion for reconsideration is denied.
Since the Commission's rules provide in 10 CFR S 2.730(f) that a decision may be referred to the Commission only when a
" prompt decision is necessary to prevent detriment to the public interest or unusual delay or expense", and no-such finding can be made in this matter, the board denies NECO's motion for certification to the Commission.
As pointed out above, the issue before this board, as framed by the Commission, is whether NECO can unilaterally terminate its license without affirmative action by the Commission, and this board declines to certify l
this question back to the Commission.
THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Linda W. Little (13" Foytytt'J. Remick 3
^
Andrew C. Goodhope, Chairmad May 7, 1980 w