ML20028F626
| ML20028F626 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 01/28/1983 |
| From: | Ellis J Citizens Association for Sound Energy |
| To: | Cole R, Mccollom K, Mark Miller Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8302020331 | |
| Download: ML20028F626 (3) | |
Text
p. . -. +. . p 1 C0
- s. ig,LW D a, xas 7522 N F .
21h/9h6-@h6
. CITIZENS ASSN. FOR SOUND ENERGY) '83 JM 31 All :54 January 28, 1983 ,
- M .M g"p: , d Administrative Judge Marshall E. Miller Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom, Dea'ri:CH Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Division of Engineering, Architecture U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commis. inn and Technology Washington, D. C. 20555 oklahoma State University '
Stillwater, Oklahoma 74074 Dr**. Richard Cole, Member :
Atomic Safety & Licensing Board '
l U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmiss son .
Washington, D. C. 20555 Gentleaen:
SUBal t'.T : In the Matter of Application of Texas Utilities Generating Company, et al. for ,t An Operating iiconse for 1, Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station ~i Units #1 and #2 (CPSES) '
Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-445
-y CASE's 1/18/83 Motion for Board Order for NRC Staff and Applicants to Provide Documents -- Supplemental Information With further reference to our 1/18/83 Motion for Board Order for NRC Staff and Applicants to Provide Documents, we are attaching a copy of a supplemental 1/19/83 i newspaper article regarding further infonnation about faulty steam generators in Unit 1 of Comanche Peak. If, as stated by the NRC source in the article, the use of the Urit I reactor is limited to 70% of full power and full-power vibrations in the ganarators could crack steel tubes and release radioactive water and steam, this appears to CASE to be a significant problem which should be looked at in these proce'edings.
We were contacted by the NRC Staff today and they advise that they are l currently considering whether or not to issue a Board notification on this matter.
Also, CASE has just learned that Brown & Root has recently filed a 70-page-plus pleading appealing the Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge's decision
-regarding Charles Atchison's firing at Comanche Peak to Secretary of Labor Raymond Donovan.- Mr. Atchison has not yet received this pleading and his attorney is not in town at the moment. We are not yet certain of any special significance of this but thought the Board should be advised regarding i t.
CASE wishes to clarify that our primary purpose in filing our 1/18/83 Motion was to get into the hands of the Board what we considered to be at least potentially significant information; wcondarily, if the Board wanted and received the infor-attori, we also wonted i t. the Staff has indicated that t hey hate recently sent a Board Notification which attached some I&E Reports; we have not yet received that Notification but perhaps it will relieve CASE of the burden of having to forward to the Board -I&E Reports which vie believe are significant.
8302020331 830128 PDR ADOCK 05000445 '
O PDR e -
W v u l
The Staff indicated that their interpretation of our Motion was that it was a discovery request and that we should have asked them and the Applicants .first ,
for the documents in question. However, as we have indicated, our primary i l
purpose was to inform the Board of potentially significant information, and to obtain clarification fran the Board's ruling of what they expect in this regard.
3 We waited a full month after the December meeting to file anything l with the Board, to give the Applicants and Staff opportunity to advise the j Board themselves. .
CASE'had thought that we understood the Board's intent regarding the reporting by all parties to these to the Board about potentially significant information pertinent proceedings. However, it is obvious from our discussion with the Staff that CASE's ir.terpretation of what is significant and what the Staff considers-significant differ quite a bit.
for all parties in its ruling on CASE's Motion what the Board expects of theIt wo parties insofar as reporting potentially significant information.
In regard to another matter (the significance of which may be questionable but which we thought the Board might be interested in), CASE witness Darlene Stiner gave father,birth andMonday baby are night (1/24/83) doing fine. to an eight-pound-ten-ounce baby girl. Mother, Respectfully submitted, CASE (CITIZENS ASSOCIATION FOR SOUND ENERGY)
, Mc usek h/O ,.
- '(Mrs.) Juanita Ellis President cc: Service List I .
-l
- I' .
., g . [ .
- i e
e
~
,L. --
- g. _ -
e . .
I b
CASE ATTACHMENT 1 9, 1983 DALLAS MORNING NEWS- 1/19/83 -
a XRC may limit useJ JJ,.
J AGlen~ Rose reactor
~
By Bill' Lodge .o lhethe'r to begin operation of its.
- z first 1,150-megawatt unit before re~
staff wreer of The News '
.The..ES. Nuclear. Regulatory Pairs are made. . .. . . .
Commission probably willlimit use . Texas Utilities plans to load the of the first'of Comanche Peak's unit with fuel and begin test opera-1, win nuclear reactors to 70 peicent - tio.n of the reactor this year, then:
of -full power 'if plant owners place it in commercial operation in ! ,
~
choose 'to operate the plant before 1984. The plant site is near Glen.l repairing faulty generators, ac. Rose. ,
cording to an NRC source. Chapman said Texas Utilities "We believe that there might be will decide what to do about the E a ~ problem above 70, percent," the steam generators after , Westing. -
source said. Full-power vibrations house submits a repair proposal to-in the generators could crack steet the firm Feb.1. .' ..
~"
' tubes and release radioactive water "You could conceivably start the .
' and steam, the source said. plant up (before the repairs),"- :t
- A spokeswoman for the Texas Chapman said. "That would be a ~-
Public Utility Commission said the part of (the) decision that we wont PUC may allow the plant's primary be able to make until we get the owner . Texas Utilities Co., to re- recommendations." ,
cover 100 percent of costs from cus- A source with a congressional tomers even if the NRC limits use subcommittee studying pr,oblems :
of the reactor to 70 percent of full with the Westinghouse generators power, said Texas Utilities should not op.
That decision will be made after crate the unit before correcting the the NRC acts on the limitation and problem because a 70 percent limi-Texas Utilities applies for inclusion tation on power generation would of the unit in the utility's rate base, deprive ratepayers of 30 percent of she said. the potential electricity the plant ,
Four Westinghouse steam gen- was designed to deliver.The plant erators at the Comanche Peak unit- is expected to co t between $3.44 are.similar to Westinghouse gener- billion and SS billion.
ators used at two plants in North Chapman said Texas Utilities and South Carolina,where the NRC could make the repairs after begin-has limited power generation to 50 ' ning operation of the unit but' percent os capacity. noted that Westinghouse probably
' David Chapman, a Texas Utili- would not be liable for the costs of ties spokesman, said Tuesday that replacement power purchased the; company has not decided while the unit is down.
- _ - _ . _ _ _ , _ . _ _