ML19254B097
| ML19254B097 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 08/28/1979 |
| From: | Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Haifley D PEOPLE FOR A NUCLEAR FREE FUTURE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19254B099 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7909240284 | |
| Download: ML19254B097 (2) | |
Text
.'
'4 UNITED STATES y,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
)
y r,gfi g
W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 Q,1,fL August 28, 1979
....e Docket No. 50-312 Mr. Dan Haifley People for a duelear Free Future 515 Broaduay Santa Cruz, California 95062
Dear Mr. Haifley:
This is in response to your letter of July 10, 1979, which enclosed several signed petitions relating to the operation of the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station. We have also reviewed your subsequent letter of July 26, 1979 and the response of August 3,1979 from Janes Hanchett of the Commission's Region V Office in Walnut Creek, California.
You would probably be interested in a summary of the Commission's actions involving the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station that preceded the authorization for allowing restart of the facility on June 27, 1979.
As you noted, Rancho Seco's nuclear reactor system was designed bv Babcock & Wilcox (B&W) and is sinilar in design to the Three f tile Island, Unit No. 2 Nuclear Facility (TMI-2).
As a result of the accident at TMI-2 on March 28, 1979 the t'RC's Office of Inspection and Enforcement transmitted bulletins to operators of B&W plants on April 1, 5 and 21, 1979, which required certain changes in plant equipment, oper-ating procedures and operator training. These changes were specifically intended to preclude a TMI-2 type of accident from occurring again.
Based upon our review to date, the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD), which operates the Rancho Seco plant, has responded to these bulletins satisfactorily. Also, during the month of April, the NRC staff concluded that additional changes to L&W plants were necessary to further enhance reactor plant safety.
SMUD agreed to shut down the plant on April 28, 1979, to complete these changes. This shutdown was confirmed by an NRC Order of May 7,1979, which required that Rancho Seco remain shut-down until certain inmediate actions were completed and found acceptable to the hRC.
These inmediate actions were completed and subsequently found acceptable, and the plant was allowed to resume operation.
It is our understanding that a copy of the staff's safety evaluation report (SER) which allowed resumption of operation of the Rancho Secc !!uclear Generating Station was enclosed for your revio. with *:r. uanchett's resconse on August 3, 19'9.
The EE; describes the desicr and procedural changes that viere recuired rrMr to the ai#orization to resune operation.
Log terr, r.odifications continue ta be required and inglenented to inprcve the reliability of the.7 f ac il i ty.
%\\ b 9
D
,gi Db' on v
10 9 l T 2909240 2 %,;
1 o R JUJJJ/ u p
Mr. Dan Haifley We would like to emphasize that the NRC has the authority to shut down an 0.nerating nuclear power plant at any time when it considers that continued operation of the plant jeopardizes public health and safety. However, such a decision must be based on technical facts which bring into question the ability of a plant to be safely operated. At the present time, the NRC does not have any reason for believing that continued operation of Rancho Seco jeopardizes public health and safety.
I apologize for the delay in providing you with a response to your letter, and I trust that this additional information is responsive to your concerns.
- incerely, avn
, 4 D. G. Eisenhut, ng Director Division of Operating Reactors Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
\\
< u;