ML20009H276

Ack Receipt of 810629 & 0710 Ltrs Re Addl Info for Facility Ser.Expresses Concern W/Situation That Has Continued to Present New Questions Preventing Resolution of Many Open Issues.Suggests That NRC Expedite Review of SER

ML20009H276
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	07/31/1981
From:	Pollock M LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
To:	Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
SNRC-609, NUDOCS 8108070135
Download: ML20009H276 (2)

Text

- .

[ .h) [ ' -D 2.^

[/04f/Afff///fMSfgg'O LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COM PANY

, s _,c, , 175 EAST OLD COUNTRY ROAD H IC K S VI L LE. NEW YORK 11801 AM .

MILLAND 5. POLLOCM vice pacs ocur-~ucocea -f)kh

/ ' ,

", l 4' l l

SNRC-609 O r f.

July 31, 198 1kN $

T1U G O G 19 Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut 6; U.s y gg f C q)

Acting Director /C Division of Operating Reactors 30' 5 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 'Ih[l]Th\

Washington, D. C. 20555 Shoreham Nuclear Power Station - Unit 1 Docket 50-322

Dear Mr. Eisenhut:

I am in receipt of letters from Mr. Robert L. Tedesco, dated June 29, 1981 and July 10, 1981 on the subject of Additional Information for the Safety Evaluation Report for the Shoreham Station. A written response to the request of June 29, 1981 for schedular information was provided in LILCO letter SNRC-592, dated July 8, 1981. The information was also provided via phone to your staff on July 6. I was subsequently advised that the NRC had delayed issuance of the Supplement to the SER to permit closure of more of the remaining Open Items.

In my meeting with you in Bethesda on May 29, 1981, I felt we had reached an understanding that we would both maintain a personal cognizance of this licensing effort and appropriately advise each other of any difficulties with Shoreham licensing matters in a time frame for us both to take corrective action. The NRC schedule for : csuing the supplement was July 1, 1981 contingent on all LILCO material being submitted by May 30, 1981. I assured that LILCO met this schedule and had licensing representation in residence at NRC during the period of June 4 to June 12 to assist the Staff.

On June 12, it was indicated our presence was no longer required.

I am extremely disappointed that the Supplement to the SER was not issued as scheduled.

I have been concerned with an apparently " moving target" situation that has continued to present new questions that prevented resolution of many open issues. I have been unable to reach your office or that of your Deputy on several occasions.

I feel, sincerely, that if we could discuss conditions under which we are both operating, additional mutually agreed to direction of our staffs could expedite completion 'of this effort.

8108070135 810731 [h0 PDR ADOCK 05000322 g PDR G: $

- LONG ISLAND UGHMNG COMPANY Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut Page Two July 31, 1981 I would respectfully bring to your attention the following areas of concern to us that we feel are negatively impacting our mutual effort to conclude this program:

1. A continuing reassignment of NRC Staff reviewers-has, in recent months, required LILCO to expend considerable resources in duplicative effort to restate previous discussions for the bcaefit of the new people involved.

2. In many cases, Staff reviewers were just beginning to review our responses on Open Items at a time when draft SER sections were to have been completed according to the NRC schedule. Thus, any additional questions arising out of this review were, by definition, late with respect to a July 1 scheduled SER supplement.

3. Internal distribution of submitted material to individual reviewers was, in many instances, apparently late and con-tributed to Item 2.

In .'ecent weeks I have maintained an appropriate licensing group of LILCO people in Bethesda to deal immediately with questions as they arise and will meet your required schedule of August 1. I cannot, however, see an end to this procedure if your Staff continues to raise new issues or new reviewers insist on re-review.

I would suggest that your personal attention in this respect would significantly expedite completion of this effort.

I have been apprised also that Mr. Denton has been in touch with our President, Mr. Uhl, and during their last converca-tion Mr. Denton essentially guaranteed an August 24 issuance of the SSER if we met the August 1 submittal schedule.

I am given to understand LILCO has appropriately responded to the Staff's questions and I would expect that no further issues will be raised. I assure you every personal effort will be made on my part to respond to your requirements and respect-fully request you again give this effort your personal. attention l to assure bringing it to a mutually acceptable conclusion as quickly as possible.

I look forward to your response to my concerns and would be pleased to meet with you at your convenience.

i Very truly yours, W

M. S. Pollock Vice President-Nuclear 1

- - - _ . , _ _ --- -. . - ,