ML20148H339
| ML20148H339 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000451, 05000450 |
| Issue date: | 10/26/1978 |
| From: | Irwin D HUNTON & WILLIAMS |
| To: | Mike Farrar NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP) |
| References | |
| 28750.000002, NUDOCS 7811130435 | |
| Download: ML20148H339 (5) | |
Text
..
Huwrow & WILLIAMS 707 EAST MMN S7 met? P.o. Box 1535 RIcuxown, VIRGINIA 2021e O' s Tc Lc e w o N E (804) 788-8200 WAsutwo7ow, D. C. Orrten y 1730 PENNSYLVANIA Avt.N.W. 20036 .
d R O. Box 19230 '
.Q' October 26, 1978 Tu ~o mon ses-noo C-- ^S t
me~o.28759.000002
[3 $/ 7 .
i UED C0111:ESPO.NDtNCE A o Michael C. Farrar, Esquire Chairman .
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 In the Matter of Dcimarva Power & Light Company (Summit Power Station, Units 1 and 2): Docket Nos. 50-450, 50-451
Dear Mr. Farrar:
This is in reply to the Appeal Board's letter of August 8, 1978, which requested a status report by Delmarva '
Power & Light Company relative to its construction permit application for the Summit Power Station.
The background to this report is as follows. On October 27, 1975, Delmarva Power & Light Company (Delmarva) agreed, at the request of the General Atomic Company (GA),
to a termination of the contracts between them, under which GA had been obligated to provide twin High-Temperature-Gas-Cooled Reactor nuclear steam supply systems of approximately 770 MWe, along with associated nuclear fuel, for Delmarva's l proposed Summit Power Station. This agreement was announced to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) on October 28, at the opening of the safety phase of the construction permit i
4 g
, ha HuwTow & WILLIAMS hearings on-the Summit Power Station, and to the_ Appeal Board by ietter-of October ~30, 1975.
The ASLB had earlier. issued a Partial Initial Decision, -f LBP-75-43, 2 NRC-215-(1975) and a supplement thereto, LBP-75-44, 2 NRC 251 (1975), Land a Limited Work Authorization'had been issued to Delmarva for certain site preparation' work. 1At the j time-the contracts between Delmarva and GA were terminated, two matters related to the application were-pending before-the Appeal Boards-
- 1. An appeal by the Interested State of Maryland from that portion of the Partial Initial Decision which related to the treatment therein of the entrainment'of striped ~ bass eggs I and larvae in the proposed Summit intake structure; and i
- 2. A request, filed originally.with the' Atomic' Safety and Licensing Board, on behalf of three private organizations not -
parties to the construction permit proceedings, / for a stay of the limited work authorization'pending the outcome of an; appeal in the Delaware state courts of certain permits which had been
~
issued under Delaware law. '
By letter of January 26, 1976*1/ Delmarva notified'the Appeal Board and the ASLB'of several decisions and actions ,
relative to the-Summit application. First, Delmarva indicated that it wished to' study alternative nuclear.and fossil' generating '
capacity options at Summit and elsewhere. If, upon examination,-
the preferable' choice' continued to be a nuclear plant at Summit, Delmarva proposed,~and the Staff agreed, that amendment ~of the outstanding Summit application appeared on the basis of then available information to be the appropriate course. Delmarva q I
1
$/ South Summit and Territories Civic Association, Coalition l
for Tax Reform and Coalition for NuclearLPower Plant Post-ponement. q
.-**/
. Letter, Donald P. Irwin to Thomas W. Reilly, Esq. and. -~.
- Michael _ C. Farrar, Esq.
l l
HuwTow Sc WILLIAMS
-. 3 agreed to keep the Appeal Board, the ASLB and all parties informed. Second, Delmarva agreed not to undertake any ,
construction activities at the Summit site pursuant to its Limited Work Authorization other than those necessary to protect against environmental degradation and to maintain the physical security of the site. / Third, Delmarva voluntarily undertook to carry out the further ronitoring and related work on entrainment issues that had been re-quired as conditions attached to the ASLB's Partial Initial Decision. Fourth, Delmarva requested the Appeal Board to stay further proceedings relative to Maryland's appeal, pending the outcome of its evaluation of alternatives.
During the winter of 1975-76, Delmarva voluntarily relinquished the various Delaware state permics which had been issued to it in connection with the original Summit Power Station application. The Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation had pre-viously denied a request fcr a stay of these permits. This request had been filed by the same three groups which were seeking a stay of the Limited Work Authorization pending appeals of the Delaware permits in the Delaware state courts. ;
In the period since January 1976, Delmarva has evaluated a range of options for baseload generation on its system over the coming ten to fifteen years, and has concluded that preserva- l tion of the nuclear option at the Summit site is desirable. No nuclear steam supply system vendor has yet been chosen, however, nor has a specific date for commencement of operation yet been ;
decided upon. DeLmarva therefore believes that the east 1/ Agreement and Stipulation Regarding Limited Work Authoriza-tion, dated January 24, 1976.
~
l l
..s
.Huwrow 8: WILLI AM S appropriate course'of action for it to follow is to amend-its present construction permit application so as toiseek an- .
early partial' decision on issues of site. suitability. pursuant- t to Sabpart F of Part 2 of the Commission's regulatione, 10 CFR 55 2.600: et sea. Delmarva intends to file appropriate amend-- <
ments to its Preliminary Safety Analysis. Report and. Environ-mental Report to update-the record which underlies the Atomic-Safety and. Licensing Board's 1975. Partial Initial' Decision in-all. relevant' respects, but' presently believes that'in relatively i few area's'other than'entrainment effects.will significant amounts !
'of new information be required.: .Delmarva believes that it may I thus be possible to avoid unnecessary.relitigation of the many matters already resolved by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board and not appealed'from by any party.
Accordingly, Delmarva requests that the Appeal BoardLtake
~
the following. actions: g
- 1. The. stay requested by'the three local groups -- even q assuming, contrary to Delmarva's belief, that these non-parties had' standing to make such a request ---should be dismissed as moot. Delmarva has long since completed all actions under its Limited. Work Authorization, other-than those relating to neces-sary maintenance of physical security and prevention.of, environ-' ;
mental degradation on the Summit site. In addition, the Dela-ware permits on.which the stay request;is predicated have long -l since been rescinded. ;
- 2. The State of Maryland's appeal from that portion of 1
the Partial Initial Decision relating to entrainment-should-be ;
dismissed as moot. Delmarva has voluntarily. conducted the re-Esearch program outlined in the conditions to the Partial Initial Decision, and will have significant additional information to-present on this issue in connection with its amended application. <;
1 J
- c. . .
9 HUNTON Sc WILLI AMS Thus, while Delmarva believes that the result of and basis for the Partial Initial Decision were sound, the record presently .
underlying it is not complete.
- 3. Since the record underlying the treatment of entrain-ment issues, and perhaps others, will be supplemented in con-nection with the amended Summit application, the Appeal Board should set aside the effectiveness of the Partial Initial Decision and Supplement since there is no longer a basis for a complete Partial Initial Decision under the Commission's regulations. This should be done without prejudice to the possibility of summary reaffirmation of individual segments of the Partial Initial Decision in subsequent proceedings be-fore an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board pursuant to 10 CFR 55 2.600 et seq., on the basis of updatings of information contained in the initial application in those areas from which no appeal was taken.
The application should be remanded to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board for further proceedings consistent with the scope of Delmarva's amendment to the Summit application.
Sincerely you s, l .
Donald P. Irwin
( Counsel for Delmarva Power & Light Company l
1 cc: Edward F. Lawson, Esq.
I Thomas D. Whittington, Jr., Esq.
i Stephen H. Lewis, Esq.
Thomas Smith, Esq.
Mark First, Esq.
Edward G. Bauer, Jr., Esq.
l Secretary, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board l
Docketing and Service Branch
~
l l
l