ML19242D014
| ML19242D014 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | New Haven |
| Issue date: | 06/01/1979 |
| From: | Muller D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7908140359 | |
| Download: ML19242D014 (2) | |
Text
g e arcg
'4 4 ~
k UNITED STATES
-=
5Y
/ %
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4--
{. h3 is c i
WASW NGTON, D. C. 20555 s, rd$
j a
g s
JUN 01 ry9 Docket flos. STt! 50-596 STil 50-597 met 10RAtiDUM FOR:
Harold R. Denton, Director Office of fluclear Reactor Regulation FROM:
Daniel R. fluller, Acting Director Division of Site Safety and Environmental Analysis
SUBJECT:
El4VIRONMEiiTAL REVIEW 0F tiEW HAVEti CP APPLICATION Your Commission Paper concerning the interim [1RR organization (SECY 79-344, May 19, 1979) identified tiew Haven as one of the CP reviews that should be suspended until January 1980.
Several factors concerning the environmental review of this application call for some additional consideration of this proposed action.
On April 6,1979 the Executive Director for Operations signed an agreement with the tiew York State Departments of Public Service and Environmental Conservation (DPS and DEC).
This Agreement calls for the fly State Public Service Commission staff, with some support from the DEC staff, to provide substantial input to our Draft and Final Environmental Statements.
In addition, it specifies that the agreement shall be in effect as long as the Chairman of the tiew York State Public Service Commission an. the f!RC agree to conduct a joint hearing. The agreement to conduct a joint hearing was made by an exchange of letters betveen Chairman Hendrie and Charle, A. Zielinski, Chairman of the flew York State Public Service Commission.
The details of the conduct of the joint hearing were left to the Joint Board, consisting of the ASLB and tne liew York Siting Board Hearing Examiners. The staffs of the f;RC, DPS and DEC proposed to the Joint Board a " Protocol for the Conduct of Joint Hearings" and appended to it a schedule covering the prepara-tion of the DES /FES and the conduct of the hearing. The roposed schedule calls for issuance of the DES on April 1,1980 and the FES on August 1,1980.
The major pressure to complete the proceedings expeditously arises from the requirement of tww York law that the Siting Board render a decision within a specified period (January 22, 1981 in this proceeding). As it is, the Siting Board decision date called for in the proposed schedule (October 1, 1981) is beyond the pe.iod specified and will require that an extension be granted by the Siting Board.
The DSE staff has been attempting to establish an environmental review schedule that will be compatible with the t!ew York State review.
r bcr 0
7908140 M9 g
-J Harold R. Denton JW 01 T]N The major portion of the environmental review can probably proceed within the guidelines of your Commission Paper. However, in the areas of Accident Analysis and Radiological Assessment, the currently proposed schedule may not be met if our estimate of the TMI impact is correct.
Bill Kreger indicates that unless sre kind of priority is assigned to this review, at this time, he cannot i
schedule completion of the site analysis effort in a time-frame that will coincide with the proposed State review schedule. He does indicate that pending decisions on manpower and TMI activities may permit such scheduling.
The amount of effort required by the haaAuarters staff to accomplishing this review is approximately 1 man-month.
I believe that we can continue to pursue our effort to obtain State participation and cooperation if some indication of priority is gi,en to the environmental review for the flew Haven application.
The SER is currently scheduled to be issued in August 1980 and will no doubt be impacted by the current plans but should not influence the environmental review except in the areas of accident analysis and radiological assessment.
I request that you identify the flew Haven environmental review as a staff priority that is to take precedence over the other suspended activities listed in Enclosure 3 to the Commission Paper. Such designation would permit me to schedule resources in a way that would increase tne likelihood of our accomplishing our goal of mutual support and cooperation with the State of flew York.
OELD has informed me that we were directed at the recent special prehearing conference to advise the Joint Board promptly as to whether the TMI-related reviews will have an impact on our ability to meet the proposed schedule. A negative answer would affect this schedule with results which are not clear, at this time.
In view of the importance which has been attached by the Commissioners to the holding of joint proceedings. I believe every effort should be made to meet the proposed schedule.
If some indication of preferential treatment for the flew Haven environmental review cannot be given, then I feel that we should immediately initiate actions to advise the Joint Board and the State of flew York that we may not be able to meet the proposed schedule.
1
(,
-a,n/,
/ < m., /
/ / /4
/
Daniel R. Muller, Acting Director Division of Site Safety and Environmental Analysis cr er,
-