ML19256B546
| ML19256B546 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 05/09/1979 |
| From: | Kleimola F NUCLEDYNE ENGINEERING CORP. |
| To: | Hendrie J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19256B545 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-0560, RTR-NUREG-560 NUDOCS 7908060481 | |
| Download: ML19256B546 (2) | |
Text
.
- c: :
L.
acusDms
~
ENGINEERING CORPolL4 TION 728 West Michigan Asenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 May 9, 1979 Represented by O. B. Fus. Jr.
Conultant Dr. Joseph M.
Hendrie, Chairman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. '20555
Dear Dr. Hendrie:
The current urgency for new concepts with distinct improve-ments in light-water reactor safety features prompted Mr. O.
B.
Falls, Jr. to send you a Mailgram on May 7, 1979.
Hopefully, you received the original from the Western Union people; a copy is enclosed.
We are ready to meet with you, to substantiate our claims, as requested therein.
To support the contention made in the Mailgram a NucleDyne document is enclosed.
This is a copy of a paper presented at the American Power Conference on April 24, 1979, " Passive Containment System - A New Concept to Solve Safety Concerns."
This paper responds specifically to the five safety research projects recom-mended to Congress by the NRC in Report NUREG-0438.
Our correspondence to you on August 16, 1977 requested a safety review of the unique safety features of the Passive Contain-ment System (PCS).
Your response on November 10, 1977 stated that the " Concept has in principle the possibility of being engineered into a licensed light-water reactor system".
Since your review, a number of improvements have been in-corporated into the design, now designated as PCS-2.
These improve-ments are discussed in the enclosed NucleDyne document.
Also, some of the benefits that are derived from a licensed nuclear power plant with the new safety features are enumerated in the enclosed.
" Application of the PCS produces the following results".
Effectively, NucleDyne and the PCS is stagnated between two points of view.
On the one hand, the NRC takes the position that extensive preliminary design and evaluation is required before licenseability can be adequately supported.
Industry, on the other hand, in light of an emphasis on plant standardization and 7908060 L' f/
/
/t
i j
I Page 2 May 9, 1979 Dr. Joseph M.
Hendrie j
i i
escalating plant costs - desires reasonable assurance that the I
~
PCS can provide an acceptable and ultimately licenseable contain-ment system.
Such assurance is the responsibility of the NRC.
It would appear, therefore, that the NRC should be able to find f
some " vehicle" to establish the PCS licenseability in a preliminary fashion.
In response to the NRC suggestion that certain R & D work on PCS is needed, we submitted an unsolicited proposal to l
ERDA/ DOE to undertake such an R & D program.
DOE now has our proposal under consideration.
However, it now appears that there is little, if any, funding available for the intended R & D work.
(
As indicated in our Mailgram we request your urgent attention and support of action by NRC and DOE to review PCS, including i
adequate funding, so that industry is assured of timely regulatory i
licensing of plants using PCS.
We await your response to our
{
request for a meeting with you.
t Sincerely h
E./
E" Frank W. K[eimola President i
l FWK/mr cc:
O.
B.
Falls, Jr.
I 4