ML20033B929
| ML20033B929 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | West Valley Demonstration Project |
| Issue date: | 11/25/1981 |
| From: | Rachel Johnson ENERGY, DEPT. OF |
| To: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8112020458 | |
| Download: ML20033B929 (2) | |
Text
9 l
^
h 00tKETED
- f TiMC Deparunent of Enerm/
Washington, D.C. 20585 November 25, 1981
'81 NOV 30 P3:16 R,
' RC9E TARf C LG & SERVICE Samuel Chilk
,h>
V$
i:FANCH Secretary
/Q Y$bp _j Nuclear Regulatory Commission g,Gg1 p# Q 1717 H Street, N.W.
'C
~
g#
Washington, D.C.
20555 3
arFuel/S[ervices, O
9 Inc.
Re:
In the Matter of Ny and New York State EderyyTResearch and Development Authority,' Docket No. 50-201
Dear Mr. Chilk:
Pursuant to 10 C.F.R.
S 2.715, the United States Department of Energy hereby requests permission to make a limited appearance in the above-captioned action.
The United States Congress, by enacting the West Valley Demonstration Project Act, Pub. L.96-368 (Project Act), has given this Department the exclusive responsibility for carry-ing out a high-level radioactive waste demonstration project at the Western New York Service Center.
In order to institute this unique project, the Project Act required DOE to join in an application with the State of New York for a licensing amendment providing for the demonstration (section 2 (b) (4) (D)).
The application, submitted on August 14, 1981, was the subject of extensive negotiations with New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) beginning in January 1981.
Representatives of Nuclear Fuel Services were consulted a number of times during the fashioning of the license amendment applicauion.
The resultant license amend-ment, we believe, would vest DCE with exclusive possession and control of the NRC-licensed portions of the NFS Facility at West Valley, including exclusive responsibility for the health and safety of the public and the common defense and security during the course of the project.
DOE's exclusive responsibility for carrying out the demonstration project is, of course, subject to informal Commission review and consultation as provided for, and governed by, section 2(c) of the Project Act and the Memorandum of Understanding between DOE and NRC, effective September 23, 1981.
3
- >st slo 8112O20458 811125 PDR ADOCK 05000201 G
2 Since our ability to perform the project may be materially affected by this proceeding, we are most concerned that our views on the issues in controversy be considered at each stage of the proceeding.
While we recognize that DOE could petition the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board to intervene as a full party, we do not believe that such intervention is necessary or consonant with the expedited Commission pro-cedures of informal review envisioned by Congress in the Project Act.
Although we realize that the actual conten-tions to be considered by the Licensing Board have not yet been determined, we believe that, under the present circum-stances, a limited appearance will adequately present.the interests of the Department and will ensure a mechanism by which the Licensing Board can obtain the views of DOE as the age. icy charged by Congress with responsibility for this project.
Sincerely, l w nj Y
r
(
R.
Ie.
Johnson Genera ounsel
.