ML20126K673
| ML20126K673 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 11/09/1992 |
| From: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| To: | Mariotte M NUCLEAR INFORMATION & RESOURCE SERVICE |
| References | |
| CON-#193-13390 2.206, NUDOCS 9301070223 | |
| Download: ML20126K673 (2) | |
Text
..
M"/ 33 96 PROD. & UTIL FAC'N~
DOCKET NUMBER
%'o,
" * " " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
UNITED STATES f"
')
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION W ASHING f oN. D.C. 205b5 yy y [,
g.s
,j UML
.F g$,,,,,
Novenber 9, 1992
'92 10V 20 A9 :27 omce or TH Sf CRE T ARY 3 i i mi i c., -
f[ L
({#,f (I
l a
Mr. Michael Mariotte Executive Director Nuclear Information and Resource Service Suite 601 1424 16th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 Dear Mr. Mariottet In a letter dated August 19, 1992, Dr. Thomas Murley, the Director of the NRC Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) denied the emergency relief requested by you on behalf of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS)-in its petition dated July 21, 1992 and in the addenda to the petition dated August 12, 1992.
In his August 19, 1992
- letter, however, he~ indicated that appropriate action would be taken on the specific issues raised in the petition in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 2.206.
On September 3, 1992, you filed on behalf of NIRS an appeal of the Director, NRR's determination.
Therein, you suggested that in addition to the plants identified in your petition and addenda, the units of the Carolina Power and Light Company's (CP&L) Brunswick plant should be included for immediate suspension of operating license while the use of Thermo-lag in fire protection measures is examined by the NRC.
CP&L filed a response to your appeal on October 2, 1992.
Your appeal was submitted to the Commission pursuant to 10.CFR 2.206.
That section provides that, within 25 days after the date of a Director's Decisiony - the commission may on its own motion review that decision, in whole or in part, to determine if the director has abused his discretion.
Review-is at the discretion of-the Commission; no individual has-the right to nuch a review.
No petition or other request for commission review of a Director's Decision under this section will be entertained by the Commission (See 10 CFR 2.206(c)).
Thus, the appeal request,.as well as the response of CP&L, has been referred to the Director, NRR ' f or appropriate consideration -in conjunction with-his review of the issues raised in your petition.
P 9301070223 921109' O
ADOCK0500gG DR u
1 l To the extent that the Director, NRR's decision to deny emergency relief is an interim response to the NIRS petition, the Commission has determined not to undertake a formal review.
Accordingly, the decision became final agency action on September 14, 1992.
You may j
be interestod in the action recently taken by the Commission concerning issues related to Thermo-Lag 330-1 fire barrior matetial set forth in the onclosed memorandum to the Executivo Director for Operations.
31ncereld
\\
l a._
\\
Jamuel J.
Chilk Se retary of t le commission Enclosuret 9/21/92 Memo re COMSECY-92-026 cc: EDO OGC Director, NRR OPA OCA CAA Dale E. Nollar Associate General Counsel, CP&L
E*"
me
's-mw
-2 :_
.w..
,b"4 NUCLEAR REGULATCRY COMMISSION
!'E i
i w Asu evoTo w.o r 2aeas e,
t S,
/
September 21. 1992 o,, g,,,
SECRETARY MEMORANDUM FOR:
James M. Taylor Executive Director for ations FROMt Samuel.7, Chilk, Secretaj p
SUBJECT:
CONSECY-92-026 - STAF7 'S pIANNED ACTIONS TO ADDRESS ISSUES REIATED T3 THERMO-IAG 330-1 FIRE BARRIER MATERIAL By memorandum dated August 17, 1992, the Commission identified three matters related to the NRC staff's acceptance and rsview of the use of Thermo-Lag 330-1 fire barrier material in NRC licensed f acilities which required action by the staff.
On August 25, 1992, you forwarded to the Commission the staff's planned actions to identify and resolve programmatic issues and to resolve technical issues associated with the Thermo-Lag fire barrier material.
The Commission believes. that, although the staff actions to data are interim measures, they have addressed the immediate concerns regarding the safety of those plants using Thermo-Lag 330-1 material as a fire barrier.
The measures-put in place should compensate for the fire protection weaknesses found with the Thermo-Lag material.
Until the issues associated with the fire protection barriers are resolved, the compensatory measures should assure that an adequate level of fire safety can be maintained and that plants using Thermo-Lag material can continue to operate. The statf should continue to develop a longer-term resolution that obviates the need for compensatory measures.
The Commission has reviewed the staff's ac. ion plan and finds that its scope and dep h of review appear to be adequate to address and resolve any outstanding technical safety issues.
The staff should proceed in accordance with the schedule outlined.
The Commission still awaits the staff plans to resolve the three programmatic issues raised in the August 17, 1992 memorandum and intands to follow this matter closely.
The staff should provide the commission with periodic reports, at least every three months, on the progress toward completion and notify the Commission expeditiously of any significant findings or obstacles to the L
completion of the described actions.
(EDO)
(SECY Suspense:
12/18/92)
@d
~ cc:
The Chairman Commissioner Rogers commissioner curtiss Commissioner Remick Commissioner de Planque OGC 01G
-R-
- i..
, m i n.
a.
~""'
2-cc The Chairman Commissioner Rogsrs commissioner curtiss Commissioner Remick Commissioner de Planque OGC OIG A