Agenda - 02-16-1999 - 3 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

02i16i99 09:45 HARMDN.CURRAN~SPI ~ 919 644 0246 ND.093 Dli -10- lll. THE PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF A LICENSE PRIOR TO COMPLETION OF A HEARING EXCEEDS THE AUTHORITY GRANTED BY THE SHOLLY A11~NDMENT. The Sholly amendment to the Atomic Energy Act allows the Commission to issue a license amendment before completion of a heating if it finds the amendment would pose "no significant hazards considerations," and directs the Commission m promulgate implementing regulations. The language of 10 C.F.R. § 50.92 provides that the Commission "may" make a determinatin that no significant hazards considerations are involved, if it finds that the criteria for such a determination are met. However, the regulations do not require a determination in every case where the criteria are satisfied. Even if the Staff finds that the criteria are satisfied here, it should withdraw the proposed finding in this case, because there are no circumstances warranting the immediate issuance of a license amendment before a hearing can be held. As former Commissioner Asselstine has previously pointed out, Congress intended the Sholly amendment to the Atomic Energy Act to have limited purposes; In requesting the enactment of the Sholly amendment, the Commission described in some detail the actions in which it foresaw a need for this authority. The Commission ~ emphasized the need for a large number of unforeseen and unanticipated changes to the i detailed technical specifications in the operating licenses for nuclear power plants that arise each year through such activities as refuelin; of the plant. The Commission argued that the need to hold a hearing on each of these changes, if one is requested, would be burdensome to the Commission and could disrupt the operation of a number of plants. In order to avoid this problem, the Commission asked the Congress to reinstate the authority that the Commission had exercised in similar situations since 19b2. A reracking amendment is substantially different from the situations described by the Commission in requesting the Sholly amendment because reracking involves a substantial physical modification to the plant and because the need for reracking can be anticipated. Pacific_~Gas and Electric Company (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2}, CLI- i 86-I2, 24 NRC 1, 17,Separate Views of Commissioner Asselstine (1986) (emphasis added).