ML20042F995
| ML20042F995 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/28/1990 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | Lloyd M HOUSE OF REP., SCIENCE, SPACE & TECHNOLOGY (FORMERLY |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20042F991 | List: |
| References | |
| CCS, LLOYD-900228, NUDOCS 9005100274 | |
| Download: ML20042F995 (1) | |
Text
_
.s
' QUESTION 2.
Utilities'have' indicated that'some of the reasons for not considering new nuclear plants currently are adequate base-load generation capacity and a lack of a one-step licensing process.
- But through EPRI, utilities are demonstratingLsignificant interest both.in' technology and financial support for-certified-designs. Haven't utilities often said that certification is.a necessary prerequisite for them to apply for a combined con-struction, permit / operating-license-(CPOL)? Without certified
-designs, utilities will not order any new plants.
Why is the NRC insistent on an order as the demonstrated interest to set review priorities?
+
ANSWER.
The industry stated that certification would be a large step forward in demonstrating that 10 CFR Part 52 is workable.
The Commissihn has indicated that-review priority would be given to a design for which there is a demonstrated domestic interest. The Commission believes that NRC resources should be focused on designs that are likely to be built in the United States.
Until such a-domestic-interest is expressed the Commission has assigned equal priority to the General Electric (GE) Advanced Boiled Water Reactor (ABWR) and the Combustior.
Engineering (CE) System 80+.
l
.... -