ML19344A623
| ML19344A623 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 08/15/1980 |
| From: | Ketchen E NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8008210360 | |
| Download: ML19344A623 (8) | |
Text
y m :
- w. 2.,-
L..
h *t:
I-6 1
t i
I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD i
L' In the Matter of i
DUKE POWER COMPANY Docket Nos. S0-369 0.L.
l (William B. McGuire Nuclear and 50-370 0.L.
Station, Units 1 and 2)
[-
NRC SMFF RESPONSI TO " APPLICANT'S MOTION 1
FOR LICENSE AUTHORIZING FUEL LOADING, INITIAL CRITICALITY,.ZERO POWER PHYSICS TESTING AND LOW i
POWER TESTING" (AUGUST 1, 1980) i g
I.
Introduction
)
By motion on August 1,1980, Duke Power Company (" Applicant") moved the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Licensing Board) to authorize:
j a license authorizing Applicant with res et to McGuire Unit 1 to (1) load fuela (ii) proceed to in tial crit cality, (iii) per-fann startup testing at zero power, and (iv) operate, for testing purposes only, at reactor core power levels not in excess of five percent of its pated power (i.e.,171 megawatts thermal.)"
(Motion E
at2-3.)
}t
}
The procedural history of this proceeding is'succintly stated by the h
Licens'ing Board in its Memorandum and Order of July 29, 1980:M L
An Initial Decision in the above-identified proceeding was issued ll by the Atomic' Safety and Licensing Board (" Board") on April 18, d.
l[
y: Duke Power Company (William B. McGuire Nuclear Station Units 1 and 2),
p Memorandum and Order, at 1-2 (July 29, 1980) ("I.D.").
1 800821034 0 k
1
3,-
I h
1979. Dure Power Company (Willia.: B. McGuira HJclear Station, j~
Units 1 and 2), LPB-79-13, 9 NRC 489 '(1979). Therein, the Board, on the basis of specific findings of fact and conclusicns of law
'l derived therefron, ordered that the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, upon making requisite findings with respect to uncontested matters not embodied in the Initial Decision, 9
was authorized to issue operating licenses for the facilities.
NRC at pp. 547-8. However, the Board stayed the effectiveness of t
I the Initial Decision "until further order by the Board following I
the issuance of a supplement to the NRC Staff's Safety Evaluation
[
Report ("SER") addressing the signifkance of aryr unresolved J
safety issues." Id.
[
In May 1980, the NRC Staff issued its safety Evaluation Report if Supplement No. 3 (SER, Supp. 3) addressing the significance of the t
unresolved generic safety issues as they relate to the McGuire j
facilities. Copies of the SER, Supp. 3 were furnished to members of the Licensing Board on June 19, 1980 and copies have been 4
furnished to the parties.
i! -
4-Based upon issuance of SER, Supp. 3. Duke Power Company (" Applicant")
L on May 30, 1980 filed a motion to terminate the stay of the Initial Decision. That motion has been opposed by Intervenor, Carolina Environmental Study Group ("CESG") in a pleading filed on June 9 1980 in which CESG asserts that matters being considered following r
k the Three Mile Island, Unit 2 ("TMI-2") accident raise unresolved r
safety issues that must be addressed in a further safety supplement before the stay ordered by the Board can be lifted. On the same day CESG also filed a motion requesting the Board to reopen the McGuire operating license hearing to add six new contentions arising out of the TMI-2 a ccident.
L In its July 29, 1980 Memorandum and Order, the Licensing Board found that jii CESG had failed to mpet the standards of the Commission for reopening a i
record.
(Memorandum and Order, at 3.) However, the Licensing Board granted f
CESG an additional time of ten (10) days [plus five (5) days] from July 19 g
j 1980_f to meet the' Commission requirements for reopening a record and to 2
i f
y An additional five (5) days is allowed where a document is served by mail.
i I
w
yt
~.z.s..... :-
.. u.....u.
a _.;._c_.
~ _ __. w _ -~.a
---c.---
reframe its contentions.
(Memorandum and Order at 3-4.) CESG's response to the July 29, 1980 Board Memorandum and Order was to be filed on July 13, 1980.
i
{
CESG's respon~se' to Applicant's motions for a fuel loading and low power testing license was due on August 11,1980.E
(.
L On June 20, 1980 the Nuclear Regulatory Connission issued a " Statement of H
Policy for Further Commission Guidance for Power Reactor Operating Licenses" 1
(hereinafter, Policy Statement)4l which referenced, inter alia, all of the requirements for applicants seeking authorization to load fuel and conduct low power testing. These requirements were set forth in NUREG-0694, entitled f
"TMI-Related Requirements for New Operating License" (June, 1980). The NRC t
of Staff is currently reviewing the Applicant's request for a fuel-loading and N
q low power testing license in accordance with the low power requirements of if) REG-0694. The Staff's Safety Evaluation Report Supplement (SSER) with respect to a low power testing license will be issued in September, 1980.
[
u y We understand that CESG will file both its response to the Licensing Board's July 29, 1980 Memorandum and Order on the reopening matter and its response to Applicant's August 1,1980 motion for a fuel 'soading and low power testing license on Friday, August 15, 1980. This infonna-tit,n was received through a telephone conversation by Staff Counsel with Mr. Riley on August 12, 1980.
f 4/~ 45 Fed. Rg. 41738 (June 20,1980).
1:
}.
1 1
7 L
i i
h^
ha
-. u.w,+..a.
w.. ;.
.. ~....~..--,aa.a.. -.
[I II.
D'scussion i
f.
A.
The Appropriateness of the Applicant Under 10 C.F.R. I 50.57(c) 0 Applicant's motion for a fuel loading and low power testing license is made pursuantto10C.F.R.I50.57(c). That regulation provides that such a h
motion shall be acted upon:
4 i
L
...with due regard to the rights of the parties to the proceedings, including the right of any party to be heard to the extent that his contentions are relevant to the activity to be authorized."
The regulation further provides that:
" Prior to taking any action on such a motion which any party opposes, the presiding 'afficer shall make findings on the matters specified in paragraph (a) of this section as to which there is a. controversy, in the form of an initial decision with respect to the contested activity sought to be authorized."
J But that:
1
...If no party opposes the motion, the presiding officer will issue an order pursuant to i 2.730(e)... authorizing the Director
.of Nuclear Reactor Regulation to make appropriate findings on the matters specified in paragraph (a) of this section and to issue'a license for the requested operation."
i In the prasent proceeding, the Licensing Board has already rendered a favorable decision on the " contested issues" as such issues are defined in Section 50.57(c).5/ Specifically, the Board has heard and made findings
)
W f.
6-5/- Duke Power Company (William B. McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and
(
2), LPB-79-13, 9 NRC 489.(1979).
1
).
.Y e
l
in the fom of an Initial. Decision on the matters specified in 10 C.F.R. 50.57(a). and on matters in controversy pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 50.57(c).6_/
Accordingly.-absent the reopening of the record in this action and the filing of late contentions, the present motion for a low power license is ripe for resolution by this Board in accordance with its previous findings.
On matters not in controversy,10 C.F.R. 50.57(c) provides that the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation will conduct the requisite review and make I
the appropriate findings, prior to issuance of any license. However, as noted above, the regulation also provides a right to any party to be heard to the extent that sud a party has contentions relevant to the activity for which authorization is sought. Consequently, if the motion for a low power license is opposed, and the record in this proceeding reopened for g
the filing of new contentions, it would be necessary for the Licensing Board to consider the effects, if any, of the Commission's Policy Statement r
{
in order to determine whether Applicant's present 5 50.57(c) motion should
{
be granted.
l B.
The Commission's Policy Statement In regard to the possible issues under discussion in a low power test license proceeding, the Commission's Policy Statement indicates that "...the Commis-!
sion has concluded that the... list of TMI-related requirements for new operating licenses found in NUREG-0694 is necessary and sufficient for
. responding to the TMI-2 accident." NUREG-0694, entitled " Requirements for New Operating Licenses", sets forth, inter alia, the Comission-approved
_T.)_ i d.
s
.o
, y o-m ; -no. _
_ m r'
e
=
w=em * *
-=*=<r2*:.=
p' o"
a*
.~_.u.
m, list of requirements to be completed by a license applicant prior to fuel loading and receipt of a low power testing license. 45 Fed. R3 at 41739. The Policy Statement further provides that "[t]he Commission believes the TMI-related operating license requirements list... must be the principal basis for consideration of TMI-related issues in the adjudicatory process."
As noted previously, there are at present no contested issues now pending before the Licensing Board. However, if the Licensing Board rules favorably
~
on a motion to reopen the record and admits contentions relating to the requirements of NUREG-0694 or upon other grounds, it would be necessary for the Licensing Board to consider and resolve those " contested issues" pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 50.57.
In addition, if the record is reopened, a decision on the contested issues should not b3 issued until the Staff issues its SER supplement addressing those matters in issue and required to be addressed by the Commission's Policy Statement, viz. NUREG-0694, for a low-power testing license. Although a Licensing Board's responsibilities are independent of those of the Staff, a Licensing Board should not proceed without the Staff's review which is essential to a Licensing Board's completion of its responsibilities.
Offshore Power Systems _ (Floating Nuclear Power Plants), ALAB-489, 8 NRC 194, 202(1978).
. I Finally, upon completion of any proceedings involving the low-power *esting license application by the Licensing Board, under the provisions of the Comission's Statement of Policy on Conduct of Adjudicatory Proceedings con-
~
tained in Appendix B to Part 2 of the Comission's rules, any Licensing Board 1
recommendation for the issuance of a low-power testing license would be reviewed by the Comission before becoming final and the license issued by i
the Staff.-
i III. Conclusion Accordingly, based upon the status of the present record, t'ie Staff does not i
oppose the Applicant's request that the Licensing Board issue the appropriate t
decision relating to the issues 1n controversy and authorize the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation to make the necessary findings for a fuel loading and low power testing license. We point out, however, that further procedures must abide the Licensing Board's rulings on the pending CESG motion to reopen the McGuire record, Respectfully submitted.
~
-~
j Edward G. Ketchen Counsel for NRC Staff f
Dated at Bethesda,' Maryland this,15th day of August,1980 I
k
p.
m..
_...... ~ _..
.._......a.
,,s
- s. -
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of DUKE POWER COMPANY Docket Nos. 50-369 i
50-370 i7 (William B. McGuire Nuclear j fl Station, Units 1 and 2).
rE
.i
=
h CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE fj
'by:
I hereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF RESPONSE TO
- APPLICANT'S MOTION FOR LICENSE AUTHORIZING FUEL LOADING. INITIAL CRITICALITY, ZERO POWER PHYSICS i.
TESTINGANDLOWPOWERTESTING'(AUGUST 1,1980)"datedAugust 15,1980, in the p 1..
above-captioned proceeding, have been servN on the following, by deposit in
, g' the United States mail, first class, or, as indicated by an asterisk through t it deposit in.the Nuclear Regulatory Comission's internal mail system, this 15th day of August 1980:
N~
- Robert M. Lazo. Esq., Chainnan Mr. Jesse L. Riley, President 5 p.,
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Carolina Environmental Study Group M-U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission 854 Henley Place
[ * ;';,
Washington, D. C.
20555 Charlotte, North Camlina 28207 I. 5-
- Dr. Emeth A. Luebke
- Atomic Safety and Licensing n,!
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Board Panel
- .. =
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cumission
. : C.
Washington, D. C.
20555 Washington, D. C.
20555 r'i s v
Dr. Cadet H. Hand, Jr., Director
- Atomic Safety and Licensing h
. Bodega Marine Lab of California Appeal Board
'h P.O. Box 247 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Bodega Bay, California 94923 Washington, D. C.
20555
.W
-J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.
- Secretary Debevoise & Libennan U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission 1200 Seventeenth Street, N.W.
ATTN: Chief. Docketing & Service Br.
r".
Washington, D.
C.-
20036 Washington, D.C.
20555 JWilliam Larry Porter, Esq.
Associate General Counsel
. t.,
Duke Power tompany P.O.- Box.2178
'i.-
422 South Church Street
. [..
Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 gr-h.
- ti
- l..
3 t.cs.u
'~
i Edward G. Ketchen L
Counsel for NRC Staff
-e.
{,.
..e