1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 601 F.2d
  5. 601 F.2d 223 (1979)
 

MISS. POWER & LIGHT v. U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COM'N

Nos. 78-1565, 78-1871 and 78-2200.

601 F.2d 223 (1979)

MISSISSIPPI POWER & LIGHT CO., Offshore Power Systems, and Florida Power & Light Co., Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION and United States of America, Respondents. NUCLEAR ENGINEERING CO., INC., Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION and United States of America, Respondents. CHEM-NUCLEAR SYSTEMS, INC., a Washington corporation, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION and United States of America, Respondents.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

August 24, 1979.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Conner, Moore & Corber, Troy B. Conner, Jr., Harold D. Rhynedance, Jr., Washington, D. C., for petitioners in 78-1565 and 78-1871.

Wise, Carter, Child, Caraway, Sherwood W. Wise, Jackson, Miss., for petitioners in 78-1565.

Troy B. Conner, Jr., Washington, D. C., for Ark. Power & Light Co., et al.

Mark J. Wetterhahn, Keith H. Ellis, Washington, D. C., for petitioners in 78-1565 and 78-1871 and for Ark. Power & Light Co., et al.

Stephen F. Eilperin, Irwin B. Rothschild, III, E. Leo Slaggie, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm., Washington, D. C., for respondents in 78-1565 and 78-2200.

Neil T. Proto, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for respondents in 78-1565 and 78-1871.

Larry G. Gutterridge, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for respondents in 78-1565.

R. Lee Armbruster, Louisville, Ky., for petitioner in 78-1871.

Jones, Grey & Bayley, John L. West, Rudy A. Englund, Seattle, Wash., for petitioner in 78-2200.

Before GEWIN, HILL and FAY Circuit Judges.

JAMES C. HILL, Circuit Judge.

Appellants seek review of a licensing fee schedule adopted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) on February 9, 1978. In reviewing the fee schedule we must decide whether the charges assessed by the agency may properly be classified as "fees," or branded as unconstitutional "taxes." After careful examination of the assessments levied by the agency, we conclude that the fee schedule should be upheld.

I.

On August...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases