ML20056B483

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Staff Requirements Memo on SECY-90-074A Re Rev to Rules of Practice,Considered to Be Final Commission Decisions
ML20056B483
Person / Time
Issue date: 06/01/1990
From: Chilk S
NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
To: Carr, Roberts, Rogers
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML19336C343 List:
References
FRN-55FR27645, RULE-PR-2 AD60-1-06, AD60-1-6, NUDOCS 9008280338
Download: ML20056B483 (4)


Text

f)DGO - l 4

N

N./,.n ec o

[g UNITED 5TATES

/\\

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3.,,,,

{-

W A SHIN GT ON. D.C. 20$$5 D.,

a

%, ' '"..'. /

June 1, 1990 1

},,

OFFICE OF THE SECRETAR)

MEMORANDUM FOR:

Chairman Carr i

Commissioner Roberts Commissioner Rogers Commissioner Curtiss commissioner Remick FROM:

b sh 1 J. Chilk, Secretary

SUBJECT:

STAFF REQUIREMENTS MEMORANDUM Attached is a staff requirements memorandum on SECY-90-74A.

In accordance with the Commission's decision, the SRM will be released at the c.o.b. Tuesday, June 5, unless I hear otherwise.

The attached SRM and the subject SECY paper are considered.to be

" final Commission decisions" and as such will be released to the public when the Federal Register Notice is published.

Commissioner Curtiss also indicated that his vote sheet should be released.

His vote will accompany the paper and SRM.

Attachment:

(

As Stated L

cc:

OGC l

l EDO 9

1 1

een y

9008280330 900821 PDR PR PDR 2 55FR27645 3

9002551

s ** *8 :0,

{ %,,, fe,

/*

UNITED $TATES g

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i

i W ASHINGTON D.C. 205$5

%,, f OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY MEMORANDUM FOR:

William C.

Parler, General Counsel Office of General Counsel FROM:

Samuel J.

Chilk, Secretary

SUBJECT:

SECY-90-074A - REVISION TO RULES OF

{

PRACTICE (13 C.F.R.

PART 2, SUBPART B)

This is to advise you that the Commission (with all Commissioners agreeing) has approved the proposed revision to 10 CFR Part 2, Sub.part B subject to the attached modifications.

The Federal Regis';er Notice should be revised as noted, forwarded to the Regulatory Publications Branch, ADM fcr review to assure consistency with the requirements of the Federal Register, and forwarded to SECY for signature and publication.

(OGC)

(SECY Suspense: '6/29/90)

The Cognizant Congressional Committees should be notified of the publication.

(OCA should assure the letters are addressed to the appropriate members in light of recent Committee assignment charges.)

Attachment:

As stated cc:

Chairman Carr Commissioner Roberts Commissioner Rogers Commissioner Curtiss Commissioner Remick EDO GPA ASLBP ASLAP IG NOTE:

TO BE MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE WHEN THE FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE IS PUBLISHED.

4

b

~ challenges to be made at the outset on the need for immediate effectiveness.

Suen a challenge can be initiated by a motion by the recipient of the order-to set aside the immediate eff ectiveness of the order.

A motion to set aside immediate effectiveness must be based on one or both of the following grounds:

the willful misconduct charged is unfounded or the public healthrsafety or interest,does not require the order to be-made immediately effective. No other ground for challenge is permitted inasmuch as no other ground is relevant.

The motion must set out specifically its supporting reasons and must be secompanied by any necessary affidavits providing the factual basis for the request.

The added provision 6150 specifies that a motion to set aside the immediate eff ectiveness of an order will be decided prerrptly by the presioing officer (6n atomic safety and licensing bo6rd or an administrative law judge as designated by the Comissien) before the presiding of ficer takes up any other matter not necessary to the resolution of that reouest.

shork hmt. Pe.neh To assure prompt decision, the provision establishes n; M ti g for action by the parties as well as by the presiding officer.

It is expecteo that the presicing officer normally wili oecide the question cf immediate ef fectivenEss solely en the basis of the order and other filings in the reer".. The presiding cfficer may c611 for oral argument. However, an evidentiary hearing is to be belo chly it the presiding officer finds the record is inocequate to reach a proper oecision on imediate ef f ectiveness.

Such a situation is expected to occur only rarely.

In deciding the question of irrar.ediate effectiveness under section 2.20C as propnsed herein, the presiding officer will apply an adequate evidence standard. This standard is analogous to the evioence necessary to fino 4

M d 'i ( d h% di d w ech A Y d YLCW df l* & Ordev l

ate vueft veness of the ordeP. on M g

\\

s sufficient to sustain the imme

~

\\yVblic ard does not require evidence by person' with first hand knowleoge he b

t s, M t u... ; i....

.r' ' M :';;' : :: th f.it.C.di::te p Pb l

M rap-f Nor does it call for a balancing of evidence between that provid

%g g staff and that provided by the person seeking to set aside Wit i nweds pTY, effectiveness.

It is not a preponderance of the evidence test. Pam.Jist N.% y the staff's evidence is sufficient to,cause a person f IId5$ 1 strip'e"riv7o SIie'dyftne" d

caution to believe that t afficer is recuired to uphold the immediate effectiveness of the this regard, the presidir; of ficer must view the evidence presented in it favorable to the st6ff and resolve all inferences it. the

'or.

mission intends that a motion to set aside the imediate ss of an order will be the only mettanism for challenging ffectiveness. In the circumstance, a presiding officer will not ny motion to stay the irmediate effectiver.ess of an order;.wr icing officer issue sua sconte such a stay.

In entral,d CVWCf the expects thet a$h 61t.httlj asWd'$ iM(Mihch c

,1 6 fed b

.$h0(ftA N

motion to st ide imme iate ei ectiveness will M

gg within fif tken (15) days of the date ef "

'-- -- --' r P4Y't% Yeqy@ttl dLed MC tw%p ab egin th sh o w dr[y yg] be

$p n La t h 4Rd 2 ef haArino.g d (* f.

5f t. I e C f $

T..~7 7 2 b e 4 din of ficer's order uphciding the imediate effectiveness 'of an

=

coristitute the final agency action on immediate effectiveness. A fficer's order setting aside immediate effectiveness will be orptly to the Cccmission for review and will not be effective

~

ther order of the Comission.

'Yc @t h f0/Q@hrWA.rd CM k /M41&/NL weg eve n lt 4. o w/w m m s h s

H1e. immed<als eHeOiM M fyewam. Ti<

of fe60a.sion en Hse afprofmknen ofM

.ih e,c(ghmeu l::.:.1s on &

de

'