The Atomic

Safety and

Licensing

Board Panel

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Washington, DC 20555-0001

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1

THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND 

LICENSING BOARD PANEL

Through the Atomic Energy Act, Congress made it possible for the

public to receive a full and fair hearing on civilian nuclear matters.

Individuals who are directly affected by any licensing action involving a

facility producing or utilizing nuclear materials can participate in a

hearing before independent judges of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel (ASLBP or

the Panel).

The ASLBP is the independent trial-level adjudicatory body of the NRC. 

Acting on behalf of the Commission, individual Licensing Boards conduct 

(1) public hearings concerning contested issues that arise in the course of 

licensing and enforcement proceedings regarding nuclear reactors and the 

civilian use of nuclear materials in the United States; and (2) uncontested 

hearings regarding matters such as the construction of uranium 

enrichment facilities. As such, the ASLBP fulfills both the NRC's obligation 

to afford the public and those subject to agency enforcement actions an 

opportunity to challenge proposed licensing and enforcement activities as 

required by Section 189(a) of the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) and its 

responsibility under AEA Sections 189(a) and 193 to conduct a public 

hearing regarding the construction of certain types of facilities, even if 

there is not a challenge by any affected person or entity. These hearings 

are conducted in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act and 

the Commission's implementing regulations, set forth at 10 CFR Part 2.

A unique feature of the ASLBP that distinguishes it from similar federal 

regulatory or administrative tribunals is that each Licensing Board 

ordinarily is comprised of three administrative judges, usually consisting of 

one attorney skilled in the conduct of administrative hearings and two 

experts in scientific or technical areas relevant to the subject matter of the 

dispute. This scientific enhancement of the adjudicatory function is 

statutorily mandated by Section 191 of the AEA.

Conduct of ASLBP Proceedings

The NRC practice and procedure rules (10 CFR Part 2) provide a variety of 

hearing procedures ranging from the relatively informal to something 

comparable to a federal or state civil trial. As a practical matter, most cases 

regarding contested issues, or contentions, involve typical pleading and 

motions practice, including summary judgment (called summary disposition 
2 Protecting People and the Environment

in NRC practice), mandatory document disclosure, and evidentiary 

hearings. As in many administrative proceedings, pre-filed written 

testimony is used extensively. Nevertheless, with few exceptions, 

evidentiary proceedings consist of public hearings with sworn witnesses or 

panels of witnesses subject to questioning by the three Licensing Board 

members and, under certain circumstances, cross-examination by 

opposing counsel. Evidentiary proceedings are followed by detailed written 

decisions that, depending on the number and complexity of the 

contentions, can be quite lengthy. Licensing Board decisions can be 

appealed to the NRC Commission, and review of Commission decisions is 

available in the United States Courts of Appeals and, ultimately, in the 

Supreme Court of the United States. Significant Licensing Board decisions 

are published in "Nuclear Regulatory Commission Issuances" and are 

available on both LexisNexis and Westlaw.

Location of ASLBP Hearings

The ASLBP's primary hearing room is located at the NRC headquarters 

complex in Rockville, Maryland. However, consistent with the AEA's intent 

that decisions regarding licensing nuclear reactors or the use or possession 

of nuclear materials be made in public hearings in which the voices of 

those most directly affected may be heard and considered, it is NRC policy 

that important aspects of Licensing Board proceedings be held as near as 

practicable to the location of the proposed nuclear facility or material at 

issue. What this means in practice is that early in the proceeding oral 

argument concerning a petitioner's standing and the legal adequacy of its 

petition to intervene likely will be held in the vicinity of the proposed project, 

with the Licensing Board returning to that area when it conducts the 

evidentiary hearing on the merits of the admitted contested issues. In 

contrast, hearings that involve classified or safeguards information are 

generally held in the Panel's Rockville hearing room due to security 

considerations. 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 3

Litigation Technology

To handle large, complex proceedings efficiently and effectively, the 

Panel's Rockville hearing room utilizes a state of the art electronic 

courtroom that includes voice-activated digital video recording with 

cameras and display monitors and tele/videoconferencing and 

webstreaming systems that permit parties and witnesses to participate from 

multiple remote locations and members of the public to view proceedings 

over the Internet. This system also provides for the electronic marking of 

evidentiary material provided by the parties prior to or during the hearing, 

which can then be incorporated into the digital record of the proceeding that 

is accessible to the parties and the public.

Hearing Room, Rockville, Maryland
4 Protecting People and the Environment

Issues for Adjudication

The ASLBP considers issues that arise from the operation of approximately

one hundred U.S. commercial nuclear power plants, dozens of research 

and test reactors, and programs related to several thousand nuclear 

materials licenses. In recent years, ASLBP proceedings have addressed 

such diverse matters as licensing new reactors and uranium enrichment 

facilities, reactor license extensions, decommissioning, enforcement 

actions, reactor and materials license amendments, reactor operator 

licenses, and spent fuel storage.

Broadly speaking, the issues in contested NRC licensing adjudications fall into 

two generic categories: (1) safety/technical issues arising under the AEA; and 

(2) environmental issues arising under the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA). By way of example, if a nuclear power plant's owner files an 

application to renew the facility's operating license for an additional 20 years 

beyond its original 40-year license, that application must include detailed 

analyses of the potential safety issues and environmental impacts posed by 

operating the plant for an additional 20 years. Members of the public, state 

and local governments, Native American tribes, and citizen organizations 

opposing the application can petition to intervene to contest the adequacy of 

the application's safety and/or environmental analyses. 

Regardless of the pendency of an intervention petition, the NRC technical staff 

(an agency entity entirely separate from the ASLBP) conducts a thorough 

review and analysis of the technical and safety aspects of the application, and 

subsequently issues a Safety Evaluation Report (SER) that describes the 

staff's review and related findings. The staff also conducts a similar review on 

the environmental side, which typically results in the preparation of a full 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Because major licensing actions 

generally require an EIS, Licensing Board cases regarding such activities 

usually have a significant NEPA component in addition to safety issues. By 

contrast, for uncontested hearings, the issues litigated are identified by the 

Licensing Board based on its review of the application and the draft and final 

SER and EIS prepared by the NRC staff.

ASLBP hearings often involve difficult, interdisciplinary questions at the cutting 

edge of science and technology. They are among the most complex and 

sometimes most controversial administrative proceedings conducted by the 

Federal Government.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 5

Cases on the Horizon

The volume and complexity of adjudicatory matters coming before the 

ASLBP has increased in recent years. This trend may continue as 

numerous applications to construct new nuclear power plants are pending 

with the NRC. These are the first new U.S. reactor licensing proceedings 

in over a quarter century. Each of these applications potentially constitutes 

an enormous undertaking by the applicant and the NRC staff, as well as 

the ASLBP.

Panel Members

The Panel’s judges include lawyers, physicists, engineers, and

environmental scientists. They are employees of the NRC whose decisions

are subject to Commission review, but the Administrative Procedure Act, as 

well as longstanding agency policy, grants them independence from the

Commission. The agency’s ex parte and separation of functions rules

dictate that the Panel and its members remain at arm’s length from the 

litigants, including the NRC staff, to avoid the appearance of a conflict of

interest.




Office of Public Affairs

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Washington, DC 20555-0001

NUREG/BR-0249, Rev. 4

December 2013