ML20247E402

Informs of Commonwealth of PA Vs NRC Litigation Re NRC Use of Authority to Issue Immediately Effective License Amends Upon Finding of NSHC Involved.Commonwealth Challenging Amends to Plant Licenses

ML20247E402
Person / Time
Site:	Peach Bottom
Issue date:	09/16/1988
From:	Briggs W NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
To:	Breaux J, Udall M HOUSE OF REP., INTERIOR & INSULAR AFFAIRS, SENATE, ENVIRONMENT & PUBLIC WORKS
References
CCS, NUDOCS 8904030066
Download: ML20247E402 (4)

Text

• . .

UNITED STATES j

1. o g i

• ! o NUCLEAR REGULATOR) COMMISSION

^i j WASHINGTON. D. C. 20666 September 16, 1988

...../

IThe Honorable John B. Breaux, Chairman i Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation Committee on Environment and Public Works -

! United 5tates senate Washington, DC 20510

Subject:

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA V.

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION,ET AL.

(3rd Cir. No. 88-3582)

Dear Chairman ~reaux:

This letter is to inform you of the above-named litigation, which involves the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's use of its authority to issue immediately effective license amendments upon finding that there are no significant-hazards considerations involved.

Petitioner is challenging immediately effective NRC amendments to operating licenses for the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3, located in York, Pennsylvania, based on the petitioner's having filed a petition to intervene in the license amendment proceedings before the amendments became effective.

The amendments in question modified the facility Technical Specifications to reflect (1) a new corporate and a new plant staff organizational structure, (2) a revised composition of the Plant Operations Review Committee, and (3) sevAral administrative changes. They became effective on June 22, 1988, upon the Commission's determination that the amendments involve no significant hazards considerations.

Pennsylvania is opposed to the determination that the amendments pose no significant hazards considerations, and in this litigation argues that the Commission erred in not providing for a hearing on their contentions before the amendments were made However, under its regulations, where the Commission effective.

has determined that no significant hazards consideration is involved, the Commission may issue and make an amendment immediately effective in advance of the holding and completion of a hearing, notwithstanding the pendency before it of a request for a hearing from any person. (NRC has issued an order referring the Commonwealth's Petition to Intervene to the ,

Chairman of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel for CCSX 8904030066 880916 PDR COMMS NRCc FULLTEXT ASOU SCAN f, CORRE9PONDENCE PDC

~

2 appointment of a Licensing Board to consider whether the petition should be granted, and a Licensing Board Panel has been established to preside over the proceading. That matter is still pending.)

We will inform you of the outcome of this litigation.

Sincerely, g s

/

William H. B s r.

Solicitor cc: The Honorable Alan K. Simpson

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____._______-_m

. ..g p m--

' ~

Y^ .

J ua b m#cg UNITED STATES

' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

.8.

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20666

^h

% September 16. 1988

' The Honorable Morris K. Udall, Chairman Subcommittee on. Energy and the Environment Committee nn IntpJ ior and Tnsular Affairs ~

1 United States House-of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 .

~

Subject:

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA V.

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION,ET AL.

(3rd Cir. No. 88-3582) f e

Dear Chairman Udall:

This letter is to inform you of the above-named litigation, which involves the Nuclear Regulatory-Commission's use of its authority to issue immediately effective license amendments upon finding that there are no significant hazards considerations involved.

Petitioner is challenging immediately effective NRC amendments to operating licenses for the Peach Bottom Atomic Power. Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3, located in York, Pennsylvania, based on the petitioner's having filed a petition to intervene in the license amendment proceedings before the amendments became effective.

The mnendments in question modified the facility Technical Specifications to reflect (1) a new corporate and a new plant staff organizational structure, (2) a revised composition of the Plant Operations Review Committee, and (3) several administrative changes. They became effective on June 22, 1988, upon the commission's determination that the amendments involve no significant hazards considerations.

Pennsylvania is opposed to the determination that the amendments pose no significant hazards considerations, and in this litigation argues that the Commission erred in not providing for a hearing on their contentions before the amendments were made effective. However, under its regulations, where the Commission has determined that no significant hazards consideration is involved, the Commission may issue and make an amendment immediately effective in advance of the holding and completion of a hearing, notwithstanding the pendency before it of a request for a hearing from any person. (NRC has issued an order referring the Commonwealth's Petition to Intervene to the Chairman of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel for

1. x

\

-0 . ,

2 appointment of a Licensing Board to consider whether the petition should be granted, and a Licensing Board Panel has been established to preside over the proceeding. That matter is still pending.)

We will inform you of the outcome of this litigation.

31ncerely, .q

. /

William H. B r.

Solicitor cc: The Honorable Manuel Lujan

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _