ML20086L293
| ML20086L293 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 02/03/1984 |
| From: | Hiatt S OHIO CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE ENERGY |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8402080170 | |
| Download: ML20086L293 (4) | |
Text
-.
\\
February 3,c)98hgg
.w UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'84 FEB -6 P2 :25 Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing BI5drM.%sSErw,.
A
- N BRANCH In the Matter of
)
)
CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING
)
Docht Nos.
50-440 COMPANY, et al.
)
50-441
)
(CL)
(Perry Nuclear Power Plant,
)
Units 1 and 2)
)
4 OCRE REPLY 10 STAFF AND APPLICANT BRIEFS ON EEC4.!IATIONS AND GUIDANCE ADPLICABLE TO ISSUE #16 Pursuant to the Licensing Board's Me:Torandt n and Order (New Contention on Diesel Generators) of Dece:rber 23, 1983, intervenor Ohio Citizens for Pesponsible Energy ("OCRE") hereby replies to the briefs of Staff and Applicant on the applicable regulations and guidance.
1/
OCRE agrees with the Sta E and with Applicants that all of the regulations, general design criteria, and regulatory guides and standards they have cited are applicable to Issue #16. OCRE did not intend to imply by omitting specific mention of many of these i
M.p 1/
One aspect of the Staff's brief is troubling: its frequent assertion og Eat Issue #16 samehw lacks specificity and clarity (see Staff's n.
brief at 1, 2, 3, and 6). This position is clearly at odds with the Licensing Board's decision.
The Board had to make a finding (and did, Memorandum and Order at 5) that OCRE's diesel generator can'antion
'o nossessed both basis and specificity before admitting that contentien,
'n accordance with 10 CFR 2.714 (b). The Sta#f cannot now argue that O
i the contention lacks specificity. This is reminiscent of the Staff's mo assertion that Issue #9, on polymer degradation, lacked specificity and c<
W basis (see NBC Staff Motion for Stmiary Disposition of Issue 9, SE January 14,1983, at 4-5), a position to which the Board replied:
"That issue was admitted into this proceeding in an Order of this Board.
i Accordingly, it is part of the law in this case. Although parties may use the prior history of this case to interpret ambiguities in (NEXT PAGE)
4 i '
standards in its brief of January 16, 1984 that they are not applicable.
OCRE nerely focused its argtrnent on the nust relevant regulations, regulatory guides ( and standards.
khile Applicants agree with OCRE,that GDC 17 of Appendix A to 10 CFR 50 and Pegulatory Guides 1.9 and 1.108 (and IEEE Std. 387-1977) arc applicable, they claim that all these requirements and standards 2/
have been net, by referencing various FSAR sectics. It should be noted that the FSAR citations do not denenstrate cc pliance; rather, they are nerely prmises, Irade long before the deficiencies in Transamerica Delaval diesel engines became apparent. Applicants also claim confornance not with GDC 17 as intercreted by AIAB-603, as explained in OCPE's brief, but with GDC 17 assuming'a single fail'ure.
See Applicants' brief at 2, enphasis added. Clearly Applicants cannot neet their burden of proof by pramising to cmply with regulatory standards, a vital interpretation of which, established by the Appeal Board in previous litigation, has been blatantly ignored.
1/ ODNTINUED.
our order, no party may challenge the precedential
~'Ithority of our decision other than in a tinely notion for recon-asideration. Any other principle would leave the considered orders of this Board without effect and nake of this case a leaf endlessly turning in the wind, withcut cause or direction. We will not have it thus." March 30, 1983 Menorandtrn and Order (Polymer Decradation:
Strrary Disposition) at 5 (footnote mitted).
2/ It should be noted that Acclicants' c moliance with the testing
~
~
criteria of Regulatory Guide l 9 and TM Std. 387-1977 (300 start and load test) did not involve testing a PNPP diesel generator.
Rather, a " prototype diesel generator intended for use at Grand Gulf Nuclear Station" was subjected to this test.
See FSAR S 8.3.1.1.3.2 b
- 11. (c), p. 8.3-24, Volume 13. Given the existence of serious deficiencies with Delaval diesels, OCRE believes that subjecting the Perrv diesel engines to the 300 start and load test is incerative.
De O
The Ccr: mission's regulations again rnake it obvious that an applicant's rere canritment to ccrtpliance with regula* wry standards is. insufficient to preclude further consideration and scrutiny, 10 CFR 2.104(c) (2) and 10 CFR 50,57(a) (2) both require an affirmative finding that "the facility will operate in conforrity with the application as amended, the provisions of the Act, and the reculations of this chapter" before an operating license can be granted.
Tne unuual problems with Transa~ erica Delaval diesel genera *wrs raise the irportant question of whether the Perry facility will indeed be cperated in accordance with the application and the Ccerission's regulations.
In conclusion, OCRE urces the Licensing Board to adopt the standards and interpretations submitted by OCRE as the controlling standards for the litigation of Issue #16 in this proceeding.
Staff and Applicant, while identifying the appropriate reculatory standards, have failed to discuss their proper i:rplementation in this case, as interpreted by the legal precedents of the Cmrission's adjudicatory i
l boards. Similarly, A=plicants' bare couritment to conforn to these standards does not suffice in this unusual situation of demonstrated unreliability of Transaxerica Delaval diesel generators. Adcpting l
OCRE's intercretaticn of the standards will ensure that the E 's i
regulatory rission, safeguarding the public health and safety, is 1
fulfilled.
Respectfully submit'wd, i
,la-z.< Vlb N-h Susan L. Hiatt l
OCRE Representative l
8275 Munson Rd.
Mentor, OH 44060 (216) 255-3158
A,
~.rJ: :-.
L i_.
, j. =
.1 i
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
'8,4 RB '-6 P 2 : -c)
This is to certi'fy that copies of the foregoing were served b deposi+ in the U.S. Mail, first class, postA5elp'hihithe repaid, th4s F.x4 w (/
4
,5 day of
, 19g4.'t'd % b service list b,elow.
j VA A Susan L.
Hiatt l
2 SERVICE LIST i
Peter B. Bloch, Chairman Terry Lodge, Esq.
Atomic Safety & Licensina Board 6 B N. Michigan St.
U.S. Nuclear Reculatory Comm.
Suite 105 Washington,'D.C.
20555 Toleco, OH 43624
~
Dr. Jerry R. Kline
?
Atomic Safety.& Licensing Board.
U.S. Nuclear. Regulatory Commission WasEington,'D.C.
20555 e
Mr..Glenn O.
Bright Atomic Safety 6 Licensing Board 2
[.~
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washincton, D.C.
20555 Colleen P.
Woodhead, Esq.
Office of the Executive Lega'l Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Jay.Silberg, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts, & Trowbridge 1800 M Street, NW Washington, D.C.
20036 Docketing & Service Branch
.Offi'ce of'the Secretary U.S.. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Atomic Safety.& Licensing Appeal Board Panel y,]
f.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _