ML20138D578
| ML20138D578 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/12/1993 |
| From: | Remick NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| References | |
| 2.206, NUDOCS 9302220447 | |
| Download: ML20138D578 (1) | |
Text
. _ _ _ _ _ . - - - - - - - - - - - -
-'~R
........................ 1 N 0 T A T I-0 N V0T-f RELEASEDTOTHEPDR ]
- 34W93 ct, ;
RESPONSE. SHEET dste ' ir *:
./4s ;
T0: SAMUEL J. CHILK, SECRETARY OF THE COMMISSION -
i FROM: COINISSIONER REMICK
SUBJECT:
SECY-92-415 - REVIEW 0F TilE COINISSION'S-l REGULATIONS AND PRACTICE GOVERNING CITIZEN l PETITIONS UNDER 10 CFR 2.206 FOR; INSTITUTING 1 PROCEEDINGS AGAINST LICENSEES ;
e X
APPROVED in part w/cmt DISAPPROVED in part ABSTAIN- j w/cmt- _i NOT PARTICIPATING REQUEST DISCUSSION l C0lWENTS:
I concur in Commissioner de Planque's vote, and in Commissioner ;
Curtiss' suggestion that the Part 52 2.206 process be. explicitly excluded from this undertaking. I would also suggest that the ;
background paper to be developed by the Office of the General ~
Counse! consider the impact any contemplated changes might have ';
on whether denials of 2.206 petitions are presumptively unre-viewable in the Federal Courts of Appeals. I am not persuaded ,
that it makes sense for us to alter the 2.206 process in a way i which would significantly call into question the position we have persuaded three Circuits in recent years to adopt;
- l Y
10;120 9302220447 930112 , , l- +
EoNaeEEESeEe' eon W ' SIGNATURE-RELEASE VOTE /X- / /2cMn PJ DATE o WITHHOLD VOTE ./- '
/
-ENTEREDLON "AS" YES X NO l 0!
jhj