ML19330C026
| ML19330C026 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Allens Creek File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 07/31/1980 |
| From: | Wolfe S Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO., NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-CP, NUDOCS 8008070435 | |
| Download: ML19330C026 (9) | |
Text
4 a
w q)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA n
..I. t' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
-ecysto y
uccc THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD gG 4N# 10l
'~
3 9 add
/
Sheldon J. Wolfe, Esquire, Chairman
\\g 0
as t #
/
Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr., Member N
Dr. E. Leonard Cheatum, Member
- Ns3, In the Matter of
)
)
HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-466 CP
)
(Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, )
Unit 1)
)
ORDER RE:
IT' DIS AND QUESTIONS OF INTEREST TO THE 3OARD (July 31, 1980)
To date, in this proceeding, a number of items and questions of interest to the Board have surfaced.
Many of these have been noted in certain of our prior orders; some have not been previously noted.
We provide here an up-to-date compilation of all such matters, noting that, for certain ones, we desire that a preliminary discus-sion of how they are to be handled be addressed at the forthcoming Prehearing Conference beginning on August 13, 1980.
1.
Do the availability of lignite and the_ environmental costs of its use justify its consideration as an alternative fuel?
(Order of February 9, 1979)
The Applicant and/or the Staff are requested to present testimony in answer to this question.
2.
Did the Staff use WASH-1400 in arriving at its conclusions
- regarding environmental risks, as assessed in $5.7 of the.PSFES?
If so, do these conclusions need to be modified because of' subsequent
- emm,
_w.
996Z-jy o '
800807o435
o criticisms of and NRC policy changes regarding WASH-1400?
How and when will such modifications, if any, be presented?
(Order of February 9, 1979) 3.
In our Order of February 9,1979, at page 24, we stated our ~
desire that the Applicant testify on the record as to its intent and willingness to comply with NRC requirements regarding the subj ect of anticipated transients without scram.
4.
In our Order of February 9, 1979, ruling upon contentions, two contentions of John R. Shreffler (Contentions 2 and 3) were reworded by the Board and admitted.
In our Order of March 26, 1979, we granted Mr. Shreffler's motion for leave to withdraw from this proceeding and, in the Order of April 13, 1979, adopted his two i
reworded and adnitted contentions as Board questions.
They are repeated below:
A.
Will the ACNGS facility meet current NRC require-ments regarding standards for combustible gas control?
B.
Will the ACNGS faci-I-ity-meet-current NRCreq*e ____
ments with respect to GDC 50-Containment Design Basis?
Applicant and/or Staff are requested to present evidentiary testimony in support of the answers to these questions.
5.
Should control rods, control rod drives and their hydraulic control units (listed as Safety Class 2 in Table 3.9-4 of the PSAR)
3-be treated as Seismic Category 1 components in accordance with Reg.
Guide 1.29?
(Order of March 10, 1980)
Applicant and/or Staff are requested to present testimony in answer to this question.
6.
In our Order of March 10, 1980, ruling upon contentions, we rejected Mr. Doherty's Contention 38C but noted that he had referred (during the October 15-19, 1979 Prehearing Conference) to two ACRS letters to the NRC expressing concerns about the design of reactor heat removal systems (Tr. 1124).
The Board is interested in these concerns of the ACRS and requests the Staff and/or Applicant to present testimony as to whether these concerns are applicable to the ACNGS and, if so, what remedial measures are planned.
7.
In our Order of March 10, 1960, ruling upon contentions, we requested, at pag 1 34, that the Staff present evidence in response to the following Board questions:
Is there an opportunity for the permissible site boundary radiation level to be exceeded by virtue of a gap in NRC and/or EPA regulations, whereby an on-site transportation accident gives gise to a radiation field which, when added to the ambient radiation level from normal plant operation (including radiation from stored spent fuel),
might then result in a higher than permissible site boundary radiation level?
If not, why not?-If so, does this cor.stitute an oversight in the Staff's FES analysis?
. 8.
The Board requests the Applicant and/or Staff to present evidence regarding the adequacy of the ACNGS reactor building's foundation design with respect to the ability of subsurface soil to support such a heavy structure.
Soil mechanics rather than subsi-dence is of concern here, with respect to avoiding unacceptable settling of heavy structures.
This item appears not to have been
' addressed in our Partial Initial Decision.
9.
In our Order of March 10, 1980, ruling upon contentions, we requested, at page 24, that the Staff provide an evidentiary response to the following question.
What is the technical basis for concluding that maintain-ing containment atmosphere temperature and relative humidity values within prescribed limits is a practical method for minimizing bypass leakage?
10.
Applicant is requested to verify during the evidentiary portion of this proceeding whether the ACNGS drywell will be tested at some prespecified value in excess of design pressure.
-L1.--Applicane's-Environ = ental Report (Amendment 0, November 13, 1973, p. 5.6-2A) states in part that "...no instance of significant bird losses have been reported."
Since we do not find this matter in the FES as supplemented, we request the Staff to present evidence upon this matter.
. 12.
In our Order of March 10, 1980, ruling upon contentions we requested, at page 50, that the Applicant address the following question during the evidentiary phase of this proceeding:
Has it been definitively established whether a liquefied petroleum gas pipeline, located in the vicinity of the proposed plant site, might carry potentially more danger-ous materials such that, following a pipeline rupture, safe shutdown of the plant could be precluded?
13.
Under date of March 29, 1980, a letter from Mr. Clarence Johnson of PIRG to this Board advised that the output from Applicant's proposed two lignite-fired plants north of Houston, accounted for in the Staff's FSFES at Tables S.8.13 and S.8.14,should now be reassessed because a prospective load-sharing agreement between Applicant and the Dow Chemical (cmpany did not materialize.
'Je request the Staff to clarify this matter during the evidentiary phase of the proceeding.
14 In our Order of April 10, 1980, we requested that Applicant
. and Staff present evidence in response to the following Board question:
If there is no difference in principle between the ACNGS and the Dresden III MSLRM systems, why couldn't the
- -- Dresden-I-II-incident cited in the referenced Order, be repeated at the ACNGS?
(
- - ~ - *
-.n--
t 6-15.
There are numerous technical subjects that have arisen since the TMI-2 incident that appear to have applicability to the ACNGS.
We request Applicant and Staff to be prepared to advise us at the prehearing confera-beginning on August 13, 1980 how these matters will be handled at the evidentiary hearings.
16.
In our Order of February 9, 1979, at page 7, we noted that the Staft should address unresolved generic safety issues during the construction permit F'aring.
We request the Staff to advise us at the prehearing confercace beginning on August 13, 1980 how this matter will be handled at the evidentiary hearings.
17.
In light at a Board Notification of November 26, 1979 (3N-79-41), the Staff shall present evidence as to the acceptability of using non-satety grade equipment for the mitigation of transients.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD T ?") Y I
Sheldon J.NWolfe, Esq., Chairman Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 31st day of July 1980.
~
EEE
. M
==
.g.5
==
==
=-
55h UNITED STATES OF A> ERICA '.
- =
E___E NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO)SilSSION
[EEE
==
==
==
In the Matter of
)
lEEE
)
5
?.0USTON LIGHTING ANT POWER
)
Docket No.(s) 50-466 iEEE CO}L'ANY
)
EEEE
.=.__.
)
EEE (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating )
M Station, Unit Fo. 1)
)
EEE t= :
)
IEEE
)
iEIf um ggg CERTI?ICATE OF SERVICE M'
s EEE 6-
==
I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing document (s) iggE upon each person designated on the official service list compiled by 5
the Of fice of the Secretary of the Co=ission in this proceeding in g
accordance with the requirements of Section 2.712 of 10 CFR Part 2-EEE e=:.
Rules of Practice, of the Nuclear Regulatory Co=ission's Rules and EEE Regulations.
M bd
==.
- - ===
=
==
EEE
= = -
=
==--
==
Dated at Washington, D.C. this
!EEE N
day of du6 ic7C h
a
= =_
_==
==
E55 EEE-
/
=
a
=
==
=
~.
y
' A..:hdj,'
i y4LL%M. )
EEE n
==
Of fice ofithe Secretary of the Zo=ission M
- EEE M
m=
r.EE IEE
=-
E EEE W
C==
f eis
==
==
E+
4 c?E E.'E
.==
5"=
V.*."
..U'..
[
e
- x..
E. 1..
E, g-
"NI*ED STATES OF A'ERI".A
..u..n.o.. -..i_3.A 0..v.
Cnw.... e S,0.s-
.s
- n the Matter of
)
)
P.CUSTON LIGliTI!!G AND F0TER
)
Docket No. (s) 50-466
,,,,.3<,..y
)
o,...
)
(Allens Creek Nuclear Cenerating )
Station, Unit 1)
)
)
FI2TICE LIST Shaldon J.
.olfe, I s q. ', Chairnan Ecbert Lovenstein, Esq.
W
~6--
Atotic Safety and Licensing Loard Lewenstein, Reis, Nev=an,
+
U.S.
Muclear Regulatory Cornission Aneirad and Toll
_ 0,, 0 Conn :t, cut Avenue,
,.C.
3a...aa
.. a s a _, n g t o n,
a.
- lashington, 3.0.
20337
.:r. Custave A.
Linenber;.er.
Atenic Safety and Licensing 3 card J.
Grescry Copeland, Esq.
U.S.
iuclear Regulatory Co=rission Laker and Sotts
!sshington, I'. C.
23555 One Shell Plaza
__,3
..neuston, _enas i<v Dr.
2.
Leonard Chea*u
. cute 3, t, e :: 3.i 3 A 2cus:en Lirhtin-C 7c~er Cen anr fa:'.insv111e, Cecr:1a 3 4077 AI~3:
"r.
E.
A.
Turner Vice Presiden:
<- s.,. _s, r... _-._
..s.
...,e....e..,
s,
.- : : r i c I a f 2 0:- a n.: Licensin?. 7 %= 1 2custen, "e: a s 77;;l Tuclear T.s ula:Ory Ccn-ission T.ichard Le crra, Zsq.
-a s h i n,7 : o n,
D.C.
.J535 Issistan: Atterna;* Genercl T.C.
Lex 12540, Capitol Secticn E
,r.
John H.
Euch Aus:in, Tenas 7711 A:Onic Safety and Licensing A?paal scard Janes scett, Jr.,
Esq.
l.S.;uclear 1ctulatory Concission 3332 Albacore
.. asaington,.,. C.
0223 c.o u s t e n, texas
.:ichael C.
Fa rar, Esq.
Ms. Brenda A.
McCorkle A:ctic Safety and Licensing Appeal 6140 Carnell
,,,, 4 acarc nousten, iexas
,,ve
..C.
Muclear Regulatory Cc==ission
- shington. D. I'..
20535 Carro ninderstein 1
o739 Link Terrace Counsel'for KI.C Staff Houston, Texas 77325 Cffice of the Enecutive Legal.
Oirar m l'r. ' Wayne E.
Rentfro U.S. Nuclear. Regulatory Connission
?.0.
Box 1335 Washington, a C. -
20555 T.osenberg, Texas 77471 b
b I
Board and parties - continued 50-466 Mr. John F.~Doherty Ms. Robin Griffith Atmadillo Coalition of Texas, 1034 Sally Ann Houston Chapter Rosenberg, Texas 77471 4327 Alconbury Street Houston, Texas 77021 Ms. Carolina Conn 1414 Scenic Ridge Houston, Texas 77043 Ms. Elinore P. Cumings 926 Horace Mann Rosenberg, Texas 77471 Dr. David Marrack 420 Mulberry Lane Ms. Leotis Johnston Bellaire, Texas 77401 1407 Scenic Ridge Houston, Texas 77043 Mr. J. Morgan Bishop Mrs. Margaret Bishop Ms. Rosemary N. Lemmer 11418 Oak Spring 11423 Oak Spring Houston, Texas 77043 Houston, Texas 77043 Mr. Bryan L. Baker Mr. F.H. Potthoff, III 1923 Hawthorne 7200 Shady Villa, #110 Houston, Texas 77098 Houston, Texas 77055 Mr. W. Matthew Perrenod Mr. ~71111am J. Schuessler 4070 Merrick 5810 Darnell Houston, Texas 77025 Houston, Texas 77074 Stephen A. Doggett, Esq.
Pollan, Nicholson and Doggett, Esq.
P.O. Box 57 Richmond, Texas 77469 9
4 y