ML20150E388
| ML20150E388 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/01/1978 |
| From: | Hendrie J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Howton C GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7812190086 | |
| Download: ML20150E388 (4) | |
Text
-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
c# "'$,'s UNITED STATES e
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION um f.f WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 December 1, 1978
^
CH AIRMAN a
e Mr. Chcries F. Howton Committee Management Secretariat ~ ~ ' ~
General Services Administration Washington, D.C. 20450
Dear Mr. Howton:
Section 9 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. I and Executive Order No. 12024, 42 Fed. Reg. 61445 (December 1,1977) require all agencies to consult with your office prior to creation of a new advisory committee.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is seriously concerned about certain issues arising from the construction of nuclear power plants before completion of administrative review of the issuance of their construction permits.
The Commission desires to create an advisory committee to assist the Commission in its study of those issues and submits the following information and the enclosed draft advisory committee charter in support of creation of the group.
purpose of the Group Current Commission regulations permit construction of a nuclear power plant to begin shortly af ter an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board approves issuance of a construction permit or a limited work authori-zation.
A Licensing Board decision is subject to review by the Cemmis-sionls Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board, however, and that Board's decision may be further reviewed by the Commission itself.
Accordingly, in some cases construction of nuclear plants has begun years before a final administrative decision has been reached.
For example, in the case of +he Seabrook facility constru'ction began in the summer of 1976 and unresolved aspects of the proceeding are still pending before the Appeal Board.
While construction during adminis-trative review may speed completion and operation of a facility, assum-ing that it is ultimately approved, such construction creates a number
~
of problems Which the Commission believes should be studied as part of a decision on whether the current policy should be continued or modified.
7 8.1 2.1 9 0 6 8 6 I
t
M.' Charles F. Howton 2
T Cor.Dosition of the Group ine study group will be composed of nine NRC employees representing a variety of different Commission offices including both the Licensing and Appeal P6nels.
The Chairman of the study group will be Professor Gary Milhollin of the University of Wisconsin School of Law.
Professor Milhollin is not a full-time NRC employee, although he is a part-time member of the Licensing Panel from which members of the Licensing Boards are chosen.
The Commission believes that the study of the issues discussed in the draft charter enclosed with this letter can best be performed by a group f amiliar with the nuclear plant licensing process from a variety of perspectives.
Professor Milhollin was sele:ted as Chairman to ensure that the group could consider all relevant iss Jes and potential options f ree from normal internal organizational constraints.
Furthermore, selection of an independent chairman will enhance public and staff perception of the Commission's commitment to a thorough and open-minded re-examination of the subject of construction during adjudication.
Balance Since the group is almost entirely composed of NRC employees it does not need to be balanced in the customary sense.
Professor Milhollin, 3
the only member who is not a full-time employee, is a well-qualified and objective individual who will serve to balance any institutional bias that might otherwise occur.
Provision has also been made for fully opening the meetings of the study group and for soliciting public comment on an interim study group report and also on any regu-lations ultimately proposed.
We would be pleased to provide any additional information you may require to assess the merits of the study group.
Thank you for your attention to this matter, I
- interely,
\\
\\
n
\\~"
~6 rs-Q.
Joseph M. Hendrie
Enclosure:
Draft Charter cc:
The Hon. Gary Hart The Hon. Morris K. Udall The Hon. John D. Dincell The Hon. James McClure The Hon. Robert Bauman The Hor., Clarence J. Brown Library of Congress
8-r UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY CD:~RISSICH Charter for the Study of Nuclear Power Plant Construction During Adjudication 1.
Official Designation Study of Nuclear Power Plant Construction During Adjudication 2.
Obj ectives and Scope of Activities and Duties:
The study group will examine the present NRC licensing process in order to develop possible options for dealing with a number of issues which arise from the present practice of permitting construction of nuclear power plants while challenges to their construction permits or limited work authorizations are under adjudication.
Among the potential issues are:
a.
Irrevocaule changes can be made in the site environment during review.
b.
Large sums spent on construction, ultimately derived from the rate-paying or tax-paying public, as well as from investors, are being placed at risk.
c.
Construction work underway can create psycho-logical pressure on decision makers to uphold construction permits under conditions when a troper balance of factors might have led to revocation cr modification.
d.
Activities performed while a construction permit is under review might ultimately prove to be the decisive factor in tipping a cost-benefit balance in favor of a plant, when that ;;alance before construction would have been unfavrrable.
e.
The cloud of litigation juring construction, or fear of it, can make utilities' planning more difficult, and result in undesirable distortions of rational planning.
The study group will examine e?. erience under the Ccm-mission's current regulations permitting construction during adjudication as well as studying the experiences and practices of cther agencies with similar respensibilities and functicns.
t
i 2
1
~he study group will consider a variety of tcpics including
- he Ccrmission's immediate effectiveness rule, its stay regulations, adjudicatory proceedings other than direct review, increased use of rulemaking to resolve issues on a generic basis, and any other matters that its members may view as having a potential bearing on the issues considered in the study.
The study will not consider possible revision of the Commission's appellate structure which is currently the subj ect of a separate examination being performed by the Office of the General Counsel.
The report of the study group is expected to aid the NRC in establishing policy.in the important area of when and under what conditions it should permit construction of nuclear power reactors to begin.
The Commission desires the maximum practical public participation.
Opportunities will be given for public comment on the interim study group rep;rt and all meetings of the group will be noticed and will be open to the public.
3 Time Period The duration of the study group is nine months from the date of its first meeting.
.k.
Agency 'to whom the group reports United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 5
Agency responsible for providing necessary support:
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 6.
Duties:
As set forth in Item 2 above.
~.
Cest:
a.
S25,000 including travel and per diem for ncn-employees b.
One man-year i.
Estinated number of meetings per year: 9 Frequency.
At least monthly and possibly more eften depending upor the development cf the stud;..
ermination Date:
Deccater 11, 1979 cr befcre
~
- ate cf Filing:
1 1