ML17212A551

Requests That Memo Be Prepared & Transmitted to Mgt Asking Approval of 3-wk Delay in Issuance of Des.Delay Will Not Affect Licensing of Plant

ML17212A551
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	08/18/1981
From:	Sells D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Miraglia F Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8108270169
Download: ML17212A551 (4)

Text

gp,S RE0y c

~v O

D $

>>>>*+~

UNITEDSTATES t

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 MEMORANDUM FOR:

F. J. Miraglia, Chief, Licensing Branch No. 3, DL FROM:

SUBJECT:

D.

E. Sells, Project Manager, Licensing Branch No. 3, DL ST.

LUCIE DES In a follow-up call on August 14 to our telephone conversation with EPA, Atlanta on August 12, 1981 it was learned that the EPA draft NPDES will be delayed three weeks instead of two.

This means that it will not be available until October 1, 1981.

In spite of this, EPA will make every effort to provide the draft by September 24, 1981.

EPA informed us that the petition to the State of Florida to amend the site certification will not be submitted until September 1,.1981.

At that time the petition will be complete and both;EPA and NRC will be provided a copy.

It was also learned that the State will make every effort to provide a

preliminary analysis and indicate its tentative conclusion by September 24, 1981.

I In view of these projected schedules, I believe we can provide a much cleaner and less controversial DES if we wait on the draft NPDES and the State determination.

I see no reason to believe that a three week delay in the issuance of the DES,. October 15, 1981 instead of September 24, 1981, will effect the licensing of this plant. In addition the question of population density near the end of plant life will be more clearly'efined and can be more properly addressed in the DES.

I recommend we prepare a memorandum to management asking approval of the three week delay in the issuance of the DES.

~

~

~

onal E. Sells, Project Manager Licensing Branch No.

3 Division of Licensing

>I

~4

~

g j

I

AUG 1 8 )98$

MEMORANDUM FOR:

F. J. Miraglia, Chief, Licensing Branch No. 3, DL FROM:

SUBJECT:

D. E. Sells, Project Manager, Licensing Branch No. 3, DL ST.

LUCIE DES In a follow-up call on August 14 to our telephone conversation with EPA, Atlanta on August 12, 1981 it was learned that the EPA draft NPDES will be delayed three weeks instead of two.

This means that it will not be available until October 1, 1981, In spite of this, EPA will make every effort to provide the draft by September 24, 1981.

EPA informed us that the petition to the State of Florida to amend the site certification will not be submitted until September 1, 1981.

At that time the-petition will be complete and both EPA and NRC will be provided a copy.

It was also learned that the State will make every effort to provide a preliminary analysis and indicate its tentative conclusion by September 24, 1981.

In view of these projected schedules, I believe we can provide a much cleaner and less controversial DES if we wait on the draft NPDES and the State determination.

I see no reason to believe that a three week delay in the issuance of the DES, October 15, 1981 instead of September 24.i 1981, will effect the licensing of this plant. In addition the question of population density near the end of plant life will be more clearly defined and can be more properly addressed in the DES.

I recommend we prepare a memorandum to management asking approval of the three week delay in:the issuance of the DES.

Otr1ginal Signod BXg'rSTRI'BUTION; Docket File 50-389 LPDQ PDR NSrC TERA LB¹3 I-'iles DESells VN ses DL:LB¹3 DL'DES

': b OFFICE/

SURNAME/

FJMi'raglia 8/1 Nl oomph 169 810 8108270 818 NRc

-~ D PDR ADOCK 05000389 PDR Donald E. Sells, Project Licensing Branch No.

3 Division of Licensing OFFlCIAL RECORP C~pY Manager

• USGPO: 1980-929 92'

~ << l I

t

~

I ~ l 6

~

I ~

<<gq

~>>

I v

~

~

~

$ foal I

ll hre>>

e" P v

/

~

~

>>>>>> ~

4

~ I I I e

e l l',

~

J lll/

I 8

e. F,lv

~ '

1 he

~

fl p>>

~ Ie <<v

~ p'p I

F g g ~

l 5

~ '-'-

~ l

~I e

'IQO ".!".>>

>>/

Fe e ~ F

=~ e.'>>

PJ I

e C ~

l, I>>

.t ln'<<<<<<

J AJ

~PP4<<='>>

>>p(Nh<<f j f I!'ll F

e ~

~ F - ~

VF

~

1

-e "e I

<<e<<

<< ~

e r>>

u 'F<< l" =

"~ I

\\C IL F<<e I>>

I

~ ~ <<

e F

F I

C>>,

II

I I

>>F le I,.'l

'F "

I e ~

~

'e "l l

- ~ <<

<<1 Fe

~