Canon Law and the Chaplain issue

Thanks to Amette who left a comment regarding the school chaplain issue.
The appointment of a chaplain is covered under Canon Law 564....and the person appointed should be a priest. Does this place Archbishop Nichols in breach of CL?

This is what it says:

ARTICLE 2: CHAPLAINS Can. 564 A chaplain is a priest to whom is entrusted in a  stable manner the pastoral care, at least in part, of some community or  special group of Christ's faithful, to be exercised in accordance with  universal and particular law. Can. 565 Unless the law provides otherwise or unless special rights  lawfully belong to someone, a chaplain is appointed by the local Ordinary, to whom also it belongs to appoint one who has been presented or to confirm one elected. Can. 566 §1 A chaplain must be given all the faculties which due pastoral care demands.  Besides those which are given by particular law or by special delegation, a chaplain has by virtue of his office the faculty to hear the confessions of the faithful entrusted to his care, to preach to them the word of God, to administer Viaticum and the anointing of the sick, and to confer the sacrament of  confirmation when they are in danger of death. §2 In hospitals and prisons and on sea voyages, a chaplain has the further facility, to be exercised only in those places, to absolve from latae sententiae censures which are neither reserved nor declared, without prejudice to can. 976. Can. 567 §1 The local Ordinary is not to proceed to the appointment of a  chaplain to a house of a lay religious institute without consulting the Superior. The Superior has the right, after consulting the community, to propose a  particular priest. §2 It is the responsibility of the chaplain to celebrate or to direct liturgical  functions; he may not, however, involve himself in the internal governance of the institute. Well, that all seems pretty clear and straightforward.  Now how could a layman hold this position in the light of the law?