ML20071L759

Discusses NEPA Reviews for Design Certification.No Specific Effort Being Directed Toward Identifying Appropriate Scope of Severe Accident Reviews for NEPA Purposes for Design Certification

ML20071L759
Person / Time
Issue date:	10/05/1990
From:	Carr K NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:	Curtiss, Remick, Rogers NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20024G666	List: CLI-90-08, Forwards Three Ltrs from Utils Addressing Actions Prior to Issuance of Possession Only Licenses.Utils Found CLI-90-08 Incosistent w/SECY-89-247 Which Authorizes Licensee to Stop Maintaining Plant in Condition for Return to Power DCL-89-155, Response to Re Backfitting of Nuclear Power Reactors LD-90-005, Design Certification Licensing Review Basis Document ML20024G665 ML20024J065 ML20071J078 ML20071L328 ML20071L335 ML20071L340 ML20071L357 ML20071L363 ML20071L369 ML20071L395 ML20071L417 ML20071L444 ML20071L462 ML20071L478 ML20071L491 ML20071L665 ML20071L675 ML20071L688 ML20071L698 ML20071L702 ML20071L706 ML20071L711 ML20071L725 ML20071L730 ML20071L749 ML20071L751 ML20071L759 ML20071L794 ML20071L866 ML20071L868 ML20071L871 ML20071L879 ML20071L883 ML20071M181 ML20071M211 ML20071M262 ML20071M273 ML20071M294 ML20071M310 ML20071M317 ML20071M384 ML20071M403 ML20071M516 ML20071M521 ML20071M605 ML20071M610 ML20071M621 ... further results
References
NUDOCS 9408030248
Download: ML20071L759 (2)

Text

._.

q

[p %,*

/ O ~ [ 9 - fg, UNITED S A 5 y y,.,.,

'o,,

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l

~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~

g WASHING 1rON, D. C. 20555 y

a s

f g

.e COMKC-90-18 CHAIRMAN b

i October 5, 1990.

2 c3-s I

i c::

E-

-o 5

MEMORANDUM FOR:

Commissioner Rogers Commissioner Curtiss W

I Commissioner Remick Q

FROM:

Kenneth M.'

Carr

SUBJECT:

NEPA REVIEWS FOR DESIGN' CERTIFICATION In discussions with staff concerning their preparations for design certification review, a potential obstacle to rendering a final decision on designs was identified.- If the scope of NEPA review being performed for a design to be certified does not include severe accidents in accordance with the dictates of the I

Limerick decision, then there is the potential for litigation.and.

review of severe accident mitigation design alternatives (SAMDA) at the CP or combined license stage.

The staff has underway several reviews which address severe accidents, h, the GEIS on license renewal and the study of decouple siting criteria for

- Part 100.

However, so far as I an aware, no specific effort is being directed toward identifying the appropriate scope of severe accident reviews for NEPA purposes.for a design certification.

I i

propose that we direct the staff to assure that, as part of their ongoing efforts for design certification, they_ incorporate the j

necessary and appropriate NEPA review of potential severe accident mitigation design alternatives for the design to be certified.

In this connection, staff should.

lore potential-concepts for defining " remote and speculative SECY, please track.

l l

l Kenneth M. Carr cc:

J. Taylor, EDO 1 gg kh u,PC W.

Parler, OGC S.

Chilk, SECY 5

4 h CDA th, O g N hW/M 9400030248 940629 PDR COfftS NRCC h,,

CORRESPONDENCE PDR I

.%-3 #

10

l i

4 l

i 4 (/

tu b4 5

1 00 4

e 1

l:

a il e

i 1

1 i

1 i

I a

4 I!

i i

d.

1 i

i i

e i

1 I

i 4

1 l

I e

i j

' c, A