ML19331B906

Corrected Page 14 to 800807 Response in Opposition to Tx Pirg Class 9 Motion

ML19331B906
Person / Time
Site:	Allens Creek File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png
Issue date:	08/08/1980
From:	HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO., LOWENSTEIN, NEWMAN, REIS, AXELRAD & TOLL
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML19331B898	List: ML19331B897 ML19331B906
References
ISSUANCES-CP, NUDOCS 8008130511
Download: ML19331B906 (1)

Text

_ . _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _

t.

m O b' the Statement of Interim Policy.b! By promulgating the Statement of Interim Policy with knowledge of the legal arguments which the Commission has rejected the might be advanced against it, Since the Licensing Board legal theories espoused by TexPIRG.

is bound by the Commission's determinations, TexPIRG's Motion on this ground cust be denied.

Undoubtedly, the Commission's interpretation of NEPA is correct. Although NEPA is a full-disclosure law, it also em-NEPA doe's not compel a federal agency bodies a " rule of reason."

to consider remote and speculative environmental impacts of an agency action. For this reason, the courts have consistently Carolina ,

held Class 9 accidents need rat be considered under NEPA.

Environmental Study Group v. United States, 510 F.2d 796 (D.C.

Cir. 1975); Porter County Chapter v. AEC, 533 F.2d 1011 (7 th Cir. 1976), cert. den., 429 U.S. 945 (1976); Aeschliman v. NRC, 547 F.2d 622 (D.C. Cir. 197 6) , tev'd. on other grounds, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 435 U.S. 519 (1978).

2. Despite the position of the Commission and the judicial decisions cited above, TexPIRG apparently believes that the Commis-sion will violata NEPA unless it complies with the regulations of CEQ.

However, nowhere does NEPA confer power upon the CEQ to promulgate regulations which are binding upon other Federal agencies.

See 42 U.S.C. S 4344.

Thus, a failure of the NRC to honor CEQ Essentially, regulations cannot constitute a violation of NEPA.

b[These similar arguments were analyzed in "NRC Compliance 1979, pp. 12-19.with CEO NEPA Regulations," SECY-79-305, May 1,

• 0081 s o st5T If .. _