ML20030D294
| ML20030D294 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Mcguire, McGuire, Crane  |
| Issue date: | 08/25/1981 |
| From: | Smith I Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20030D295 | List: |
| References | |
| TASK-AS, TASK-BN-81-20 BN--81-20, BN-81-20, NUDOCS 8109010139 | |
| Download: ML20030D294 (2) | |
Text
Bd. 8/25/81 y
G UNITED STATES OF AMERICA cecxCED u WC NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Sy
.g AUO 2 I
Atomic Safety and Licensina Board P
cm-cettMtm M *//
W{l Before Administrative Judges:
03 Ivan W. Smith, Chairman 4
/p Dr. Walter H. Jordan y
Dr. Linda W. Little SERVED AUG 2G NI In the Matter.of
)
METROPOLITAN EDIS0N COMPANY Docket No. 50-289 ll1 D.
(Three Mile Island Nuclear
)
(Restart)
)
3 pI g'
Station,UnitNo.1)
)
August 25, 198' 9 6['hl
,y; ggb 3 1^.3B F ORDER TO NRC STAFF REGARDING BOARD NOTIFICATION u.n TN OF UNSATISFACTORY TEST RESULTS'0F SAFETY VALVE
,(,
y
%'IT V The Board has become aware of the enclosed NRC Board N No. 31-'20, dated August 11, 1981, filed in the McGuire proceeding.
The notification encloses an NRC Staff memorancum dated July 1, 1981 which notes, inter alia, that there were unsatisfactory Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) test results for the safety valve ir-tailed in TMI-1, and that the information may be relevant for Board notifica-tion. The Staff memorandum, in turn, encloses an ERPI memorandum of June 26,1981 which reports on the tests. No such notification has been received in this proceeding.
We request the Staff to infc m us promptly whether ' notification of this matter by the Staff would have been appropriate in this pro-ceeding, and if not why not. We also direct the Staff, and invite any other party with an interest in related issues, to explain th'e signi-ficance of the unsatisfactory safety valve test results in the context KO) s!/
/
8109010139 810825 PDR ADOCK 05000289 O
- of the proposed
.ndings and issues in this proceeding.
In par
- ular, we are interested in the effect, if any, of the test.results on the Staff's position that the PORV and associated block valve are not required to mitigate the consequences of any design basis accidents because ti,e pressurizer safety valves provide the required protection.
See, e.g., Staff Testimony of Jensen (Valves),. ff.
Tr. 8821; Staff Design Proposed Findings (June 1,1981), para. 203'_e_t' seq.
t FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD W
Ivan W. 5mrth, Chairman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE l
Enclosures:
a/s Bethesda, Maryland August 25, 1981 s
L L
l I
l
...