ML20043F039
| ML20043F039 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/27/1990 |
| From: | Carr NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Bevill HOUSE OF REP., APPROPRIATIONS |
| References | |
| BEVILL-900327, CCS, NUDOCS 9006140113 | |
| Download: ML20043F039 (1) | |
Text
toolof a
'd.
LMR. BEVILL:
' The Comittee is encouraged by your efforts on licensing reform. However, what is yWr position with regard to requiring
+
a second' adjudicatory hearing prior to issuing an operating license? Is there, in fact, a legal requirement for a second hearing?
x CHAIRMAN CARR:
No, there is no legal requirement that a second adjudicatory hearing ordinarily be held prior to the commencement of operation of a plant which has been constructed and will operate in conformity with the conditions of the combined license and in conformity with the provisions of-the Atomic Energy Act and the applicable rules and regulations of the Comission.
The final rule provides for an opportunity for an interested person to request a second hearing in a very limited area. This area is solely whether the acceptance criteria in the combined license have been met.
The Comission itself in its judgment would decide whether or not there should be any hearing and, if so, on what precise issue. A hearing, if any, would be held only if in the judgment of.the Comission itself the petitioner has presented substantial evidence of an actual safety problem which must be resolved prior to operation and there is no other lawful and practical approach but some type of hearing to assist the Comission in resolving the issue.
In'this regard, applicable law explicitly provides that no hearing is legally required for decisions based solely on the straightforward results of inspections and tests.
If the licensee and the NRC have developed sufficiently detailed and comprehensive acceptance criteria in the combined license, and the licensee has satisfied them in con-structing the plant, the '.ikelihood that a hearing would be required prior to operation is extremely small. As a practical matter, if there is a safety issue associated mth ;atisfying any acceptance criteria, the straightforward approach would be te. /ir the problem if one exists, and no hearing at all is needed to do that.
9006140113 900327 0 03!
CONG *****
'[gI BEVILLO34 pg'.
Question 34/Bevill/0GC 03/27/90
,