ML20057B597

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Partially Withheld Commission Paper Re TMI-1 Restart Hardware/Design Separation of Units 1 & 2 & Emergency Planning Issues
ML20057B597
Person / Time
Site: Three Mile Island  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 07/13/1983
From: Zerbe J
NRC OFFICE OF POLICY EVALUATIONS (OPE)
To:
Shared Package
ML20049A457 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-92-436 SECY-83-281, NUDOCS 9309220296
Download: ML20057B597 (3)


Text

}t...

^

Rg.,,, Od -

(-

C

...,.s

.L. c f a li) e s

1

\\, u...../

ADJUDICATORY ISSUE secy-83-281 au1y 13, 1ss3 M

(Information)

MEMORANDUM FOR:

Th miss ~ ners E(p'. Gk e, Director FROM:

Joh ice olicy Evaluation

SUBJECT:

TMI-1 RESTART - HARDWARE / DESIGN, SEPARATION OF UNITS 1 AND 2 AND EMERGENCY PLANNI11G ISSUES j

)

PURPOSE:

Analyze decision options.

Discussion:

OPE has examined L

~

9309220296 930428 f nb.;;a,:, ; ; 1:. 3 g,;,,'.,

GILINSK92-436 PDR U M'0;ince e,a ::.; f recdyn cl :",,' ",.ma t e n PDR FOIA 4

Act. cxt: gas, j l

Contact:

TC:n f.2

'/' 7 V ~ ~~ ~

~ ~ ~

l.

John Montgomery, OPE

/

g

}j [7[

X-43295 r

g Lc

r 1

-(i~

m 2

a Comission paper to provide the Comission with a draft order to resolve the E0F issue on emergency planning. That paper is scheduled to be delivered to the Comission by August 15, 1983. An order could be expected to be issued in early September. The Comission may wish to combine this issue with the hardware / design issues, if a hardware / design decision and order can be completed at approximately the same time.

Hardware / Design and Separation Issues The hardware / design and separation issues within the proceeding have been decided on the m?rits by the Appeal Board in ALAB-729. OPE and OGC are now analyzing that decision.

If the Comission determines not to review ALAB-729, a declaratory statement could be issued by mid-September explaining that the Comission's declining review of ALAB-729 completes all action on contested hardware issues. This statement could also address the uncontested issues remaining for Comission action and could thus complete all necessar Comission action for restart on the hardware / design and separation issue If the Comission decides to review ALAB-729, however, the merits decision date would change from mid-September to mid-November or later. Assuming that the reasons for such a review would be procedural and that the Comission could find that the fundamental safety issues had been satisfactorily resolved, and also assuming that other events allowed a restart in September or October, we would then recomend issuing an immediate effectiveness decision on hardware / design, separation and management so that delay of restart could be minimized.

To complete Comission action on the contested and uncontested hardware / design issues that require consideration prior to restart, the Comission should set up a schedule for required actions.

A suggested schedule is attached.

Note that in general the schedule would track the overall immediate effectiveness schedule dated June 16, 1983 previously provided except for substituting the merits review process for the imediate effectiveness process on relevant issues.

Also note that we have provided you alternate estimates of a hardware / design decision date depending upon whether or not you choose to review ALAB-729.

Recomendations We, therefore, recommend that

e

., s \\ )1

.r -

3 i

These reFoinEendations do~ilbi~aiter our recormiihdition

~

[ggi-f l

DISTRIBUTION:

Commissioners OGC l

OPE SECY E

I

>