ML20151B264
| ML20151B264 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 11/14/1980 |
| From: | Ketchen E NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Fryberger P AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8011240197 | |
| Download: ML20151B264 (2) | |
Text
.
p:pq=~rt ? ? 9"~] ' 5 ,]*
w.
a.
November 14, 1980
'j
~
s "r.
Philip Fryterger Cornelius, North Carolina Cear Mr. Frycerger:
Ycur letter cated September 29, 1980 to the Huclear Regulatory Comissien, received on Cetoter 7,1980 has been referred to me for response.
Ymr letter requests that the hearing regarding the "cGuire facility he reopened to consider problems asscciated with the low pressure containment and the danger of a hycrogen explosion at the McGuire Nuclear facility.
You also express concerns about ecergency plans to be feplemented for the McGuire Nuclear facility.
An Initial Cecision accreving the operation of the McGuire facility in the preceeding was issued by the Licensing Board on Acril 13, 1979.
In the Initial Cecision, the Licensing Coard, on the basis of specific findings of fact and conclusions of law ordered that the Director of Nuclear Peactor Regulation, ucon making the requisite findings with respect to uncontested matters not embodied in the Initial Cecision, was authorized to issue an coerating license for the McGuire facility. However,' the Board stayed the effectiveness of the Initial Cecision "until further order by the Scard following the issuance of a supplement to the NRC Staff's Safety Evaluation Report ("SER") addressing the significance of any unresolved safety issues."
In May 1980, the NRC Staff issued its Safety Evaluation flepert Supplement Based No. 3 (SER, supp. 3) addressing the generic unresolved safety issues.
on issuance of SER, Supp. 3, on May 30,1980, Duke Power Certpany filed a
- rotion reouesting the Licensing Boarc to terminate its stay of the Initial Cecision.
In regard to the ratter of contaitrent rupture in the event of a TMI-2 type of accident, I have enclosed copies of Comissien materials which address your concerns, i.e., " Proposed Interim Hydrogen Control Recuireents for Small Containments" SECY-8C-107 (February 22,1980); " Additional Infernation Proposed Interim Hydrogen Control Recuirements", SECY-80-107-A (April 22, Re:
Prooosed Interim Hydrogen Control 1980); and " Additional Infonnation re:
9ecuirerents, SECY-80-107 B (June 20,1980).
I have also enclosed a copy of "Further Comission Guidance for Power Reactor Operating Licenses, Statement of Policy", (45 Fed. Reg. 41738; June 20,1920).
(" Policy Statement").
As explained in the Policy Statement with respect to TMI-2 issues:
l w})s oocuna com oo m, ~, ~ ~
~~~~**-~~
l a)
- "'sn
^
a 801124og.7
J 2-Pr. Philip Fryberger i
i "the Commission believes that dere the tire for filing contentions has eXDired in a giVen Case, no new 7I-relateo Contentiens should be accepted absent a showing of gcod cause and balancing of the factors in 10 C.F.R. 2.714(a)(1). The Ccemission expects strict adherence to its regulations in this regard."
On August 15, 1980, CESG, the Intervenor in this proceeding, filed a motion to recpen the McGuire proceedings with respect to matters involving hydrogen generation and the potential for breach of containment.
These tretions are currently pending before the Licensing Board for resolution.
Thus, CESG's concerns, which are si:rilar to yours, are being censidered with rescect to the cuestions of whether the record will be reccened.
With rescect to your ccncerns about Cuke Power Ccepany's evacuation plans, the NRC Staff is currently reviewing Duke's evacuation plans for the McGuire facility to detennine wncther they meet the mergency planning recuirements of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccmission as set forth in 10 CFR Part 50 of the Comission's regulations.
I am also enclosing a cepy of the Ccmmission's Rules of Practice contained in 10 CFR Part 2, for your use in the event you desire to forcally petition i
to intervene in the proceeding before the Licensing Scard and recuest a hea ring.
These procedures also explain the "gcod cause" shewing recuirement and the other criteria that must be met before a late cetition to intervene will be granted.
I reccmmend that you also read Appendix A to 1C CFR Part 2 l
for a general understanding of the practice and procedure gcverning Cemission,
proceedings.
If you have further questions regarding this matter, you may contact the undersigned at (3C1) 492-7502 i
Sincerely, i
Edward G. Xetchen
}
Counsel for NRC Staff DISTRIBUTION:
Enclosure:
As stated 7/
Enclosure:
l cc (w/o encl.):
Reg. Central LPOR l
Robert M. La:o, Esc.
w/o enclosure:
)
Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke FF (2)
JCurtiss l
Or. Cadet H. Hand, Jr.
J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.
Shapar/Engelhardt/
RSirkel Christenbury Chron.
William Larry Porter, Esq.
Tourtellotte Mr. Jesse L. Riley EXetenen Atomic Safety i Licensing Scard Panel LChandler Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board e-.,,_
Q FEICt.
.M,~~.
WANAME k'. X8 Cnen:.C?
l OA?E kl,l.I /
. / SO.
N A C 8C A M 3 ; 4 :946) saCM 1240 D M, Mv E MMENT 2 AtN?tNG OFriCE: ' U9 2 S9161
"r. Philip Fryterger "the Ccemission believes that where tne time for filing contentions has excired in a given case, no new T"I-related contentions shculd be accepted absent a shewing cf Scod cause and balancing of the factors in 1C C.F.R. 2.71A(a)(1).
The C u ission expects strict acherence to its regulations in this regard."
Cn.Sugust 15, 1980, CE!G, the Intervencr in this croceeding, filed a rotien to recoen the "cGuire preceedings with respect to ratters involving bydrogen generation and the potential for breach of contairrent.
These tretions are currently pending before the Licensing Board for resolution,. Thus, CESC's concerns, which are similar to yours, are being considered with respect to the cuestions of whether the record will be reopened.
6 M WH5 Witt respect to your concerns attut Duke 4 evacuation plans, the imC Staff is currently reviewing Cuke's evacuation plans for the "cCuire facility to p. u-
- determine whether tney meet the ecergency planning requirements of the U.S.
) /* g_
Nuclear Regulatory Ccanission as set forth in 10 CFR Part 50 and Part 70 of
/
the Ccemission's regulations.
(45 Fed. Reg. 55402; August 19, 1980, effec-tive!!ovember3,158C.)
/
I am also enclosing a copy of the Commission's Rules of Dractice contained in 10 CFR Part 2, for your in the event you desire to formally petition to intervene in the procet
'efore the Licensing Board and recuest a hearing. These procedures a s explain the "gcod cause" shewing recuirerent and the other criteria that must be met before a late petition to intervene will be granted.
I recaend that you also read Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 2 for a general understanding of the practice and procedure governing Cceissien proceedings.
If you have further cuestions regarding this matter, you may contact the undersigned at (301) 492-7502.
Sincerely, Edward G. Ketchen Counsel for NRC Staff
Enclosure:
As stated l
cc (w/o encl.):
)
Robert M. Lazo. Esq.
Or. Erfneth A. Luebke
)
Cr. Cadet M. Hand, Jr.
J. 'iichael "cCarry, III, Esq.
j William Larry Porter, Esc.
Fr. Jesse L. Riley J
Atemic Safety i Licensing 3 card Panel At-4c sa %rv re Liewsinc acceal BoaM C ['k, are c
$5$$
L l
w~a.
Wch u.4Mn.
wow
{
c c._,.,,r.. c m
~. - - _. m..
. m.,. m
_