ML19261B462
| ML19261B462 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Washington Public Power Supply System, Satsop |
| Issue date: | 02/13/1979 |
| From: | Renberger D WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| FOIA-80-587 NUDOCS 7902230143 | |
| Download: ML19261B462 (2) | |
Text
y P
P W shington Public Power Supply System A JOINT OPERATING AGENCY S
P O Box 968 3000 Gro W AsHINGTON Wav R ICH L A ND. W AS HINo roN vs352 PHONE (SO9) 946 1611 Doclut ilos. 50-508, 50-509, 50-513 February 13, 1979 Mr. H. R. Denton, Director Office of fluclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission Washington D. C.
20555
Subject:
Dear Mr. Denton:
At the January 4,1979 meeting of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, tht NPC Staff provided its recommendations for meeting certain ATWS design requirements.
At that time it was stated by the Staff that those plants which received Construction Permits after January 1,1978 were to be co'isidered in the same category with new plants and thus must $nclude modifications required to mitigate an ATWS event. The Staff also r.oted during this discussion that those plants which would be affected by this implementation date were on notice at the time their construction permits were issued that mod-ifications would be required.
Three (3) of our nuclear projects (WIP-3, -4 and -5) received Construction Pennits after January 1,\\l978. Therefore, we have reviewed our docket files with respect to these three projects and are unable to find information therein which would have given us notice that the modifications being discussed would be required.
Two of these three plants (WNP-3 and WNP-5) are Combustion Engineering Reactors which were licensed under the reference plant concept (CESSAR).
The third (WilP-4) is a Babcock and Wilcox reactor which was licensed simultaneously with a duplicate plant (WNP-1) which is not impacted by the January 1 implementation date.
We consider that the effective date of this regulation strikes a severe bl.ow to the Commission's standardization program. One of the principle goals of standardization as espoused by the Commission was to introduce a degree of stability and predictability into the regulatory process, necessary to eliminate uncertainty. This can only be accomplished by both indLstry and reg-ulator forgoing introduction of changes having only marginal public 4
benefit.
r fd0 So 7902230 @
2/13/79 H. R. Denton Page 2 We view the decision that is to be made regarding implementation of ATWS modifications on standard plants to be of utmost importance to the future of standardization.
The summary of the January 2,1979 Regulatory Requirements Review 3
3 Committee (R C) meeting noted that R C was evenly divided on the question of what ATWS requirement should apply to standard plants re-ceiving construction permits after January 1,1978.
Since the R C has recommended that this question be decided by you, 3
we would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this item with you before that decision is made.
Dr. R. G. Cockrell of my staff contacted you on February 13, 1979, to arrange a meeting with you to discuss the concerns expressed in this letter, and to provide additional information that might assist in gaining a favorable decision.
It is our under-standing you would prefer to have such a meeting after receipt of all comments from industry, due on or before March 2,1979.
This is accep-table to the Supply System as we continue to cooperate with your staff in arriving at a rational resolution of the ATWS issue. As this matter is of extreme importance to the Supply System, Dr. Cockrell will contact you shortly after March 2,1979, to arrange the meeting.
Very truly yours, YY &, f D. L. RENBERGER Assistant Director, Technology DLR:GCS:ds/Im cc:
RJ Mattson, NRC A Bournia, NRC GW Kerr, ACRS MW Carbon, ACRS
.