ML20055D248

Discusses Changes in Aslap.Once ASLAP Completes Work on Pending Appeals in Seabrook Proceeding,Mainstays of Appellate Litigation Will Be Closed.Proposes Abolishment of ASLAP Once All Pending Appeals Accomodated

ML20055D248
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	06/29/1990
From:	Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
To:	Kohl C, Parler W NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP), NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
References
AD73-1-14, NUDOCS 9007060025
Download: ML20055D248 (3)

Text

,"

h

+

s@ City

. 'g. UNITED STATES

[ 'f S i'

,,q j I

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON,0.C,20$ES

\

• 4r+...J June 29, 1990 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY -

MEMORANDUM FOR: Christine N. Kohl, Chairman Atomic. Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel William C. parler General Counsel , j.

FROM: Samuel J. Chilk, Secre r SUBJECT. COMJC-90-005 - ATOMIC ShFE Y AND LICENSING-APPEAL PANEL '

From a review of the Controller's recent evaluation of workload and resource requirements for the Atomic Safety and Licensing

^

Appeal Panel, it is clear that the nature of the appellate litigation within the agency is undergoing substantial change.

Once the Appeal Panel completes its work on pending appeals in the Seabrook proceeding, appeals in construction permit and  ;

operating license proceedings for the existing generation of nuclear power plants -- the mainstays of appellate litigation within'the agency for many years -- will have drawn to a close.

At the same time, consistent with the shift in the agency's regulatory - focus frora- licensing . new power reactors to overseein the day-to-day operations of reactors and materials licensees, g NRC's administrative litigation in the foreseeable future will

' involve reactor license _ amendments, materials licensing, y enfcrcement matters, and power reactor license renewals.

The impending completion of the last major operating license proceeding, as well as the shift in the fundamental character of i agency: litigation, presents the Commission with an opportunity to-L restructure the NRC's appellate process to address some of the r criticisms that have been directed to that process over the l years. .In order that the Commission might increase its direct

l. involvement in agency adjudications, provide earlier regulatory and policy guidance in litigation, and remove some of the overly-judicialized layers of formal appellate procedures that.

have evolved over the years, the Commission, with all l

Commissioners concurring, has agreed to abolish the Appeal Panel

.and, in its place, establish a mechanism for direct review of Licensing Board decisions by the Commission. Accordingly, the Commission has agreed to begin an orderly phase-out of the Appeal-

' cans 1 and its-functions, with the ultimate objective of 3

^~~ '

i gg7%%85!$SShi3 pp

1 4.

. s ..- ..

abolishing the Appeal Panel once the rights of the parties to pending appeals have been properly accommodated.

p To assist the Commission in achieving this objective, the office

~

! of the General Counsel should provide:

i 1) a transition plan'to phase out the Appeal Panel, taking l= into account the procedural rights of parties to

pending proceedings to pursue appeals before the Appeal

Board; (OGC) (SUSPENSE: August 15, 1990) l~

2) a discussion of the options and procedures for direct Commission re'riew of Licensing Board decisiors, l . including a d:.scussion of such matters as the

effectiveness-of Licensing Board decisions during the

! pendency of the Commission's review, mandatory _versus l I discretionary appeals to the Commission, and possible mechanisms for parties to comment on Licensing Board decisions in the event that the Commission:does not l l provide an appeal as-of-right. The discussion should l also evaluate the merits of creating a Commission level opinion Writing Office which would work closely with l l the Commissioners in initially drafting decisions. The l L office would also work closely with the General l Counsel's Office to assure the Commission receives .

OGC's views on the defendability of any proposed l actions before acting on adjudicatory issues. The .

office would also maintain the variety of expertise, l including both legal and technical expertise, that currently exists on the Appeal Board and; (OGC) (SUSPENSE: August 15, 1990)

L 3) recommended changes to the procedural regulations in 10 L CFR Part 2 to reflect the abolition of the Appeal Panel and-the establishment of a mechanism for direct Commission review of Licensing Board decisions.

(OGC) (SUSPENSE: October, 1990)

OGC should coordinate its work on these evaluations and recommendations with the Appeal Panel so that the recommendations L can be provided to the Commission in a time-frame that would allow the Commission to terminate the' Appeal Panel when the Panel's work on currently pending appeals is completed.

l l

l l

l l ,

l l

1  !

l l l l

l

j ,, OGC should work with the Office of Congressional Affairs to provide notification of the Commission's. intent to terminate the Appeal Panel to the appropriate Congressional Committees in l accordance with the Conference Committee Report accompanying the l 1974 Energy Reorganization Act.

l (OGC/OCA) (SECY SUSPENSE: ASAP) cc: Chairman Carr Commissioner Roberts I Commissioner Rogers Commissioner Curtiss Commissioner Remick l EDO

.IG' I GPA l

ASLBP GPA/CA l

s i 1

(

l l

'l l

I o

l l

l l

l l

V l

\

1 L

1 l

l>

_ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . - _ _ _ _ _ ._.