ML19321B272
| ML19321B272 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 07/23/1980 |
| From: | Gallo J ISHAM, LINCOLN & BEALE |
| To: | Grossman H, Paris O, Shon F Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-0578 NUDOCS 8007300468 | |
| Download: ML19321B272 (2) | |
Text
<,g,
ISHAM, LINCOLN & BEALE COUNSELORS AT LAV/
1120 CONN ECTICUT AVENU E. N.W SulTC 325 WAS HIN GTON, O. C. 2 00 3 6 TELEPHONE 202*833-9730 egicago orriCE ON E FIRST NATIONAL #LAZ A FORTY-S CCONO FLOOR CHICAGO,8LLINCIS 60603 TE(cpHONE 312-558-7500 July 23, 1980 Tc'cx: =-sa r Herbert Grossman, Esquire Dr. Oscar H.
Paris Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Pane]
Board Panel U.S. Nuclear degulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Mr. Frederick J.
Shon f~
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
/-l Commission
/;;- ' '
t Washington, D.C.
20555 3
i ';, {
2 In the Matter of Consumers Power Ccmpany( (\\
/
~
Re:
(Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant),
\\ f;,,
q ;,,
s Docket No. 50-155
-/
~
N /sh w.,#-
Ell.ib&'
Gentlemen:
The NRC Staff served the Licensing Board and che parties with a copy of a letter, dated May 2, 1980, from Mr. Dennis L.
Ziemann to Mr. David P. Hoffman of Consumers Power Company.
Enclosed with the letter was an April 15, 1980 evaluation by the NRC Staff concerning the Company's compliance with certain NRC requirements resulting from lessons learned from the TMI-2 accident.
Section 2.1. 6.b of the Staf f's evaluation (pp. 4-5) discusses a plant shielding review of the Big Rock Point Plant that should not be confused as being applicable to any of the issues admitted in this proceeding, specifically Mr. O'Neill's Contention IIE-4.
The confusion stems from the obscure identification in Section 2.1.6.b of the source term used by the Staff to calculate the radiation level of 3
"10 R hour."
This source term is an unspecified accident involving a loss of all fission product inventory in the reactor core.
This source term was established by the NRC Staff as a post-TMI consideration to f acilitate their over-all study of reactor safity.
007300
o
- n. Contention IIE-4 places a more limited and separate issue into controversy, namely whetner the Big Rock containment can contain adequately the radiation calculated to be released as a result of a credible accident involving the spent fuel pool.
The maximum credible accident or design basis accident involving the spent fuel pool is the cask drop accident.
The radiation level inside concainment from such an accident is calculated on the basis of a source term derived from the spent fuel in the pool as distinguished from the fuel in the reactor core.
Thus, the Staff's evaluation in Section 2.1.6.b is irrelevant to Contention IIE-4.
The foregoing clarification is offered at an early_ time in order to avoid unnecessary confusion and con-troversy at the hearings to be held in this proceeding.
In this connection, it would be helpful if the NRC Staff took the time to explain the relevance, if any, of future " board notifications" filed in this case.
Sincerely,
/
ose" Gallo One of the Attorneys for Consumers Power Company JG/tjh cc:
Service List