ML19338D367
| ML19338D367 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/12/1980 |
| From: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19338D365 | List: |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OLA, NUDOCS 8009230033 | |
| Download: ML19338D367 (1) | |
Text
\\
4 c'
s (Corrected Page) In summary, we do not question Licensee's right to operate under the operating license granted prior to the effective date of NEPA without having been environmentally reviewed.
However, to the extent that we are asked to approve a Federal action granting a license amendment for the sole purpose of enabling Licensee to uti-lize a greater term of the license than would otherwise be possible, we consider the action to have a significant effect upon the environ-ment which must be environmentally reviewed under S,..ction 102(2)(C).--4/
If such review were to result in a determination thac the costs of continued operation over that greater term outweigh the benefits, Licensee's operating license would still be intact and Licensee could continue to operate even over the full term if it could find some manner to operate within the terms of the license that does not require a further major Federal action.
As stated by the Licensing Board in Lacrosse, supra, p. 80:
All that an adverse decision in this SFP [ spent fuel pool]
proceeding could or should do is to prevent the Appl'1 cant from undertaking the SFP modification.
If DPC [ Applicant]
found an alternate method of disposing of its spent fuel, an adverse decision in this proceeding could net prevent it from continuing to operate.
IV The Bit Rock Plant does not Stand in the Same Position as an Environ-mentally Reviewed Post-NEPA Facility.
We do not dispute the Staff's assertion (p. 7) that it
--#l It is wel.1-established that operation of a nuclear power plant has
-See, e.g.,
Calvert a significant effect upon the human environment.
Izaak Walton League o? America v.
449 F.2d atll29;(D.C.
Cliffs, suora, 337 F. Supp. 287 1971).
In the Board's opinion, Senlesinner, making such operation possible for a period of ten years cl.early constitutes a major Federal action and obviates the need to await the Staff's reco=mendation on this point.
80092300%3