ML20149F100
| ML20149F100 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 02/05/1988 |
| From: | Matt Young NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) |
| To: | Bright G, Cole R, Cotter B Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#188-5562 OLA, NUDOCS 8802120023 | |
| Download: ML20149F100 (2) | |
Text
,
1
(
[
UNITED 8TATES
'y I
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
{,
,j wAsWNGToN,D.C 20606 g*....j
=c IOiEM February 5,1988 OFFICE d H ti.t. i.at,i 00CXElmG !.1Dmtf.
BR A NC6-B. Paul Cotter, Jr., Chairman Dr. Richard F. Cole Administrative Judge Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Glenn O. Bright Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 in the Matter of FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY (St. Lucie Plant, Unit No.1)
Docket No. 50-355-OLA: (SFP Expansion)
Dear Administrative Judges:
It has come to the Staff's attention that two contention numbers were trans-posed in the conclusion on page 26 of the "NRC Staff Response to Amended Petition to In te rvene," dated February 4,
- 1988, in order to avoid any possible confusion, attached is a corrected page which accurately reflects a summary of the Staff's position (i.e., Contention 8 should be rejected and Contentien 9 admitted).
Sincerely, Mitz A. Young Counsel for NRC Staff Encl.: As stated cc:
Service List 8802120023 800205 i
PDR ADOCK 05000355 O
PDR Y[
~...
e f
I.f Proposed Contention 16 states:
COllTENTION 16:
That FPL has not responded to con-cerns as presented by the NRC by outlining a loading schedule for the spent fuel pool detalling how the most recently discharged fuel and/or a full core discharge in order to mitigate potential risks from fires in the spent fuel pools resulting in releases in radioactivity into the environment in excess of Part 100.
Contention 16 alleges that Licensee has not responded to NRC "concerns" by outlining a loading schedule for isolation of recently discharged fuel from other fuel to mitigate potential risks from fires in the spent fuel pools.
As a basis for the contention, Petitioner providas quotations from the BNL Report that address reduction of the risks of beyond design basis accidents to support the assertion that a "loading and stora0e configuration for al! discharged fuel and a full core discharge is necessary." Amended Petition at 12.
As stated with respect to Contention 8, supra, Petitioner has not provided an adequately specific basis to support a contention asserting the occurrence of beyond design basis accidents, in addition, the basis makes vague reference to "NRC concerns" about loading schedules but does not provide a citetton for such concerns, Conse-quently, the Staff is of the opinion that the contention should be rejected because it tecks an adequately specific basis.
- Ill, CONCLUSION For the reasons discussed above, it is the Staff's view that proposed Contentions 1, 2,
3, 7,
8, 10, 12, 13, I to, and 16 are inadmissible and should be rejected.
However, Contentions 4, 5, 6, 9,
.