ML19321A649
| ML19321A649 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/30/1980 |
| From: | Ahearne J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Weiss E SHELDON, HARMON & WEISS |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19321A650 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8007240027 | |
| Download: ML19321A649 (2) | |
Text
'
fcrouq'e
[hf UfJITED STATES
'E '?g e.f[g g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION COMICSION (
t Sog/ e
/,. r WAssmoTon, o, c. 2c555 CORRESPONDE ME
.J..
g, ' wd
- jf June 30, 1980 CHAIRMAN L-
{-
Ellyn R. Weiss, Esq.
Sheldon, Harmon & Weiss j
1725 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 506
[
Washington, D.C.
20006 l
Dear Ms. Weiss:
l The Commission appreciates receivi,ng your dune 9, 1980 letter on the policy statement for Three Mile Island-related. operating license requirements.. As I am sure you are aware, on June 16, 1980 the Commission, with Commissioners Gilinsky and Bradford dissenting, voted to issue the policy statement you referred to in modi.fied form.
A copy of the final policy statement is enclosed.
-From your letter it is obvious that you strongly disagree with i
the action taken by the Commission.
However, I believe that 'at 1
least part of your concern is based on a misunderstanding of the l
Commission's intentions in issuing the statement.
At the outset it should be clear from a careful reading of the final statement that it in no way diminishes intervenors' present rights to litigate Three Mile Island related issues before Atomic Safety and Licensing Boards and Appeal Boards.
This is because parties are as free as they have been in the past to raise issues before boards regarding compliance with the Commission's safety regulations in the light of any new insights or information from Three Mile Island.
The policy statement does signal a Commission intention to depart from past decisions which generally have l
L restricted parties' rights to raise safety issues before boards to only those issues falling within the reach of the Commission's l
current safety regulations.
However, this change is in the l
direction of permitting parties to raise more issues, not fewer.
[
It is true that limits were placed on the ability of parties to
'I raise these additional issues which go beyond Commission regula-
- tions, i.e.,
parties may raise issues before boards regarding the i
need for or compliance with the supplementary Three Mile Island operating license requirements but may not raise issues regarding the sufficiency of those requirements which themselves go beyond our current regulations.
The Commission majority believed that, in light of the extensive studies and investigations of the Three Mile Island accident and the fact.that the only departure from past practice is one which broadens the litigation rights of parties, the policy statement is both reasonable and wholly within the Commission's legal authority.
8007240 agap
Ellyn R. Tieiss, Esq.
2 Moreover, under the special review procedures now in offec't under g
10-CFR Part 2,* Appendix _B, no operating license.may iJsue without
- 3 action by the Commission itself.
The Commission recognizes that -
a policy st&tement does not have the force and effect of law but merely indicates a policy which the Commission intends to apply in the future.
In the future should any _ question be raised before the Commission itself under Appendix B regarding the validity of any part of the policy statement as applied to a particular case, the Commission. recognizes its obligation to consider the question and reply on the merits based on the state of the record before it.
I hope the foregoing allays your concerns.'
S*n erely,
/
W John F. Ahearne
Enclosure:
Policy Statement l
l 2
f 6
,