Connecticut Light And Power Company v. Nrc

Facts

In the wake of a damaging fire at the Browns Ferry Nuclear Power Plant, a 1976 Commission report recommended improved fire protection standards for operating nuclear power plants. D developed technical guidelines for evaluating the fire safety of both new and operating nuclear plants. The guidelines for operating plants differed from those for plants not completed. D pursued the approach of evaluating the safety of operating plants by applying the guidelines on a plant by plant basis. Disagreements persisted, however, on some issues that were common to a number of plants. D decided to embark on the rule-making challenged here. D’s notice did not address plants that had been approved in the past. The final rules applied new requirements to all plants. The rules required D to grant an exemption if a plant could show that a required modification either would not improve or would be detrimental to, the plant’s overall safety. The rules also provided that D’s final-exemption decisions were subject to judicial review. P contends that the notice of proposed rule-making was inadequate because it gave no indication of the technical basis on which D had relied in formulating the proposed rules and because the rules as adopted differed in major respects from the rules proposed in the notice. P complains that d allowed only thirty days for comment, the statutory minimum for notice and comment rule-making, 5 U.S.C. § 553(d) (1976), a period P contends was inadequate given the complexity and relatively innovative character of the rules at issue here. P also argues that D failed to offer an adequate technical justification for the fire protection rules in the form in which they were ultimately adopted. P claims that the Commission failed to comply with its own regulations governing the imposition of new requirements for nuclear plants already in service.

Issues

Rule of Law

Holding and Decision

Legal Analysis

© 2007-2024 ABN Study Partner.