ML19257A301
| ML19257A301 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Atlantic Nuclear Power Plant  |
| Issue date: | 12/21/1979 |
| From: | Haga P OFFSHORE POWER SYSTEMS (SUBS. OF WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRI |
| To: | Baer R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19257A302 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-0578, RTR-NUREG-0585, RTR-NUREG-578, RTR-NUREG-585 IEB-79-06A, IEB-79-6A, NUDOCS 8001030686 | |
| Download: ML19257A301 (2) | |
Text
_
k r
FNP-PAL-069
,,,s 50-G+
Offshore Power Systems
-- ~~
=.
,L:
Dec eber 21, 1979 Mr. Robert L. Baer, Chief Light Water Reactors Branch No. 2 Division of Project Management U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7920 Norfolk Avenue Bethesda, MD 20852
Subject:
Transmittal of Offshore Power Systems Responses to Post 'IMI NRC Recuirments, Topical Report No. 36A93
Dear Mr. Baer:
Enclosed are 4 copies of Offshore Power Systems Topical Report No. 36A93, " Offshore Power Systems Resoonses to Post'IMI NRC Requirements", December 1979. An Addi-tional 36 copies have been shipped to you via United Parcel Service. The report addresses IE Bulletin 79-06A, (including Revision 1);" 'IMI-2 Lessons Learned Task Force Status Report and Short-Term Recuirements",
NCREG-0578 (as modified by D. B. Vassallo's letters dated 10/10/79 and ll/9M9); additional short-term requireraents in D. B. Vassalo's letter dated 10/10M9; and "'IMI-2 Lessons Learned Task Force Final Report",
NUREG-0585. While Offshore Power Systems recognizes that a response to the IE Bulletin was not recuired, we felt that our responses would contribute to the com-pleteness of the overall report and provide a frameerk for understanding how the Floating Nuclear Plant and our application for a Manufacturing License relate to the requirments resulting frm the IMI accident.
The intent of our report is to provide sufficient input (including certain Offshore Power Systss' comitments) on the subject of the 'IMI accident to supoort the issuance of a License to Manufacture Floating Nuclear Plants. Based on the review of our report, the NRC should be in a position to issue a Safety Evaluation g
Report Suppleent addressing the 'IMI accident. It is p
g Q' #
s'
\\
1668 335 R
8001030 g
M
a R. L. Baer FNP-PAL-069 Page 2 important to note that many of the post-M I NRC re-quirements are understandably smewhat subjective in tone (especially those in NUREG-0585) and as such should be used in establishing new regulatory direc-
- i. ions of an intermediate-or long-term nature. Such requirments are not amenable to imediate implementa-tion as a condition for issuance of a Manufacturing License.
The Manufacturing License is unicue and differs from the Construction Permit in that sites and plant owners are unspecified. This leaves ample time during the site selection and Operating License approval process to review the Floating Nuclear Plant final design and assess how well it addresses the lessons learned frcm the m I accident. Accordingly, implementation of long-term requirments, scme of which will not be finalized until after rulemaking proceedinas, nee.1 not delay completion of the NRC review of our application for a Manufacturing License. We already have shown that the Floating Nuclear Plant is quite resilient regarding the types of design changes now being considered for possible eventual impleentation. There is little doubt that long-term lessons learned can be incorporated into the Floating Nuclear Plant.
Based on the above, we ask the NRC to ccuplete its review and issue a supplement to the SER in March, 1980 as originally planned and stated to the Hearing Board on November 2, 1979.
Ve:y truly you s, L
1668 336 CC: A.R. Collier V.W. Campbell