ML19256B019

Informs GE That Preliminary Design Approval Holders Are Charged 20% of Cost of Extension Review Unless Final Design Approval Is Granted Before Extension Review Is Completed. Hendrie Encl

ML19256B019
Person / Time
Site:	05000447
Issue date:	01/10/1979
From:	Heltemes C Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Sherwood G GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
Shared Package
ML19256B020	List: ML19256B019 ML19256B026
References
NUDOCS 7901170403
Download: ML19256B019 (2)

Text

/ /?, e -

Pi'

<3,

?

i o

8* pm af og%

UNITED S T ATES a

[w f' t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3,.k /.

,)

WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 Q4/j Jh,'; 1 i sgp-Docket No. STN 50-447 Dr. Glenn G. Sherwood, Manager Safety and Licensing Operation General Electric Company 175 Curtner Avenue San Jose, California 95125

SUBJECT:

FEES FOR PDA EXTENSION REVIEWS R. Boyd's letter to you dated December 22, 1978 forwarded /mendment 2 to PDA '., which extended the approval term for two additional years.

In that letter, he stated that the detailed review of the iDA extension matters would be initiated as soon as the staff is informed by a utility-applicant that it intends to reference the GESSAR-238 Nuclear Island design. He also noted that the staff would advise you of the Commission's decision as to whether a fee would be associated with that review.as soon as that decision becomes available.

On January 3,1979 in a letter to P. McGill of Combustion Engineering, Incorporated, Chairman Hendrie provided that decision.

In summary, i t requires that cach oDA-holder be charged the cost of the PDA extension review, on the basi 3 of twenty percent of the cost, as each of the first five units involving the extended PDA is referenced in an application filed by a utility or utilities. However, for those instances in which a Final Design Approval (FDA) for the design is tendered prior to com-pletion of the PDA extension review, the staff will, at the FDA applicant's request, include the cost for the PDA extension review as part of the FDA review cost.

I have enclosed a copy of the Chairman's letter which describes the considerations that led to the Commission decision.

If you require any clarification of the matters discussed in this letter clease contact the staff's assigned licensing project manager.

Sincerely, Ah.H t.n.

C ief Sta d< rdization Bra ch g Q4 y-OYO3 Divi on of Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Enclosure :

As stated

d Dr. Glenn G. Sherwood JAt,1 L 1973 General Electric Conpany 2-ccs:

Mr. W. r.ilbert, Manager Safety and Standards Genera Electric Conpany 175 Curtner Avenue San Jose, California 95125 Mr. L. Gi f ford, fianager Regulatory Operations Unit General Electric Conpany 4720 Montgonery Lane Bethesda, Maryland 20014 Mr. J. F. Quirk, Manager BWR Standardization General Electric Company 175 Curtner Avenue San Jose, Cali fornia 95125 i

i I

l i

k I

t l

4 i

i I

,