ML19290E550
| ML19290E550 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/12/1980 |
| From: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| To: | OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER |
| References | |
| RULE-PRM-51-4 NUDOCS 8003140195 | |
| Download: ML19290E550 (1) | |
Text
'$ -
g.
5-s p+* * * %a, UNITED STATES g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[ *r.Qky(y g W ASHINGTON. D.C. 20555
-[
% ' %J L.
February 12, 1980 h
OFFICE OF THE SECRETAR Y N.
h.
Di-ector Office of the Federal Register National Archives and Records Service /
[
Washington, D.C.
20403
Dear Sir:
Enclosed for publication in the Federal Register are an original and
[.
two certified copies of a document entitled:
BOSTCH EDISON COMPAflY, ET AL.
Docketi No. PFR-51-4 DDlIAL OF PETIT 05NFF0P RULEMAKIt'G i
Publication of the above doc'ument at the earliest possible date would be appreciated.
This material is to be charged to requisition number F-131.
Sirarerely, j
/
g
(
Samuel J. Chilk Secretary of the Commissioh I
l
Enclosures:
Original & 2 certified copies bec: _ Records Facility Branch office oT7d5 Tit Affaire Executive Legal Director Office of Congressional Affiars Office of the General Counsel
]) < g l' SECY - C&R Branch nll c
gp4 '
a
(,f h
8003140/95 i
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (Docket No. PRM-51-4)
Boston Edison Company, et al.;
Denial of Petition for Rulemaking AGENCY:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ACTION:
Denial of Pe'estion for Rulemaking, PRM-51-4
SUMMARY
- The Nucltar Regulatory Commission is denying a petition for rulemaking, cate'd February 8,1978, submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Comission by Mr. Robert Lowenstein on behalf of the Boston Edison Co., Florida Power and Light Co., and-Yankee Electric Co. (43 FR 9542, published 3/8/78). The petitioners requested that the Comission's regulations be amended to limit the scope of environmental review at the operating license stage to "those matters of environmental significance which have not been resolved in the environmental review conducted at the construction pennit stage."
In denying the petition, the Comission found that the petitioners' argument was based on an erroneous assumption concerning the scope of an operating license safety review.
In addition, the Commission found that if the proposed ame,ndments were adopted, the result would be to foreclose Commission consideration of even significant new information at the operating license stage, a result which would be undesirable as a matter of law and policy.
Comissioner Victor Gilinsky dissented from the denial.
He stated that a rule-making proceeding should be initiated matters can sensibly be excluded from r DUPLICATE DOCUMENT stage.
Entire document previously entered into system under:
&{/)hhhf ANO No. of pages: 'f