ML20204A443
| ML20204A443 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 05/06/1986 |
| From: | Au T PENNSYLVANIA, COMMONWEALTH OF |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#286-088, CON-#286-88 OLA-1, OLA-2, NUDOCS 8605120221 | |
| Download: ML20204A443 (5) | |
Text
._
/g a
2
[
Ma r
- 6, 198 ga U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4
s BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
./
In the Matter of Docket No. 50-289 OLA-1 50-289 OIA-2 GPU Nuclear Corporation, (Steam Generator Plugging (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Criteria)
Unit No. 1)
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA'S RESPONSE TO TMIA'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME By motion dated April 11, 1986, Three Mile Island Alert, Inc.
("TMIA") requested this Board to grant a six month extension of time 1.
to complete discovery in these two consolidated proceedings.
l In a response dated April 17, 1986, the Licensee GPU Nuclear a
Corporation has opposed this requested extension. In a response dated April 30,1986, the NRC Staff stated that it does not oppose the requested extension for OLA-2, and that it does not oppose an 1
extension for a lesser period for OLA-1.
l The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, an interested state in this proceeding, supports TMIA's request for a six month extension for completion of the discovery process. As a practical matter, the Commonwealth believes that the grant of the extension will not substantially prejudice any party and that the grant of the extension will not materially delay the ultimate resolution of these proceedings.
8605120221 860506 PDR ADOCK 05000289 G
With respect to OLA-2, the requested extension does not prejudice anyone. The Licensee's requested amendment is in effect, and is due to expire on its own terms at the next fuel outage (scheduled for approximately December, 1986) 51 Fed. Reg. 10472 (March 26, 1986).
If a hearing cannot be completed prior to the expiration date of the amendment, the matter may become moot.
With respect of OLA-1, the requested six month delay in the completion of the discovery process is reasonable because the case will not be ripe for a full hearing on all the issues before the Board prior to the completion of tests on the pulled tubes, which will occur sometime during the next scheduled fuel outage in December,1986. The NRC Staff has stated quite clearly that it must await the testing of certain pulled tubes during the next fuel outage before it can make a final determination on the acceptability of the Licensee's proposed amendment. Although the NRC Staff is offering to provide certain testimony on the proposed amendment prior to the testing of the tubes, this testimony would be subject to certain assumptions and conditions.
The value of this testimony is somewhat speculative. The " final Staff position" will not be known until af ter the NRC has evaluated the test results. Acceptance of the NRC Staff's proposed method of proceeding would lead to two hearings on the same subject matter, with duplication of witnesses and of cross-examination. Judicial economy would be promoted by holding one full hearing on all the relevant materials. Such a hearing would add only a day or two of time, and need not delay the Board's ultimate consideration of the case.
The requested licensing amendment in OLA-1 involves issues which may have significant safety consequences. The Commission has not chosen to issue this requested amendment under its authority to consider amendments which involve "no significant hazards." Instead, the Commission and the Staff have conducted more detailed review.
Universal concern for the safe operation of nuclear plants dictates a careful consideration of a technical amendment of this type, which can have a significant impact on safety.
This is the first time that the Commission and the Staff have considered such a major change to the technical specifications relating to plugging criteri for nuclear plant design. In fact, the Commission has not permitted any nuclear plant in the country to operate with 70% throughwall defects in the steam generator tubes.
This is one of the rare instances where the Commission has declined to make a finding of "no significant hazards." For these reasons, and others, the Commonwealth has concerns about the technical merits of the requested license amendment.
In the NRC Staff's Response to TMIA's Motion for Extension of Time, the Staff has stated that its Safety Evaluation Report would not be completed until the end of July. It would be premature to end the discovery process before this important document is available to the parties for review. At this time, the issues before the Board are not ready for hearing, and there is no sound reason for the Board to 3
/
~
expedite the consideration of this case before the necessary facts are developed.
For these reasons, the Connonwealth of Pennsylvania supports TMIA's request.for an extension of six months to complete discovery.
Respectfully submitted, i k [f-Thomas Y. Auf Assistant Counsel Barry M. Hartman Deputy General Counsel Counsel for the Connonwealth of Pennsylvania 4
/
., \\ i ', / ' Q ks UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'i m;V
-s t
.t' E'
Before the Commipsion In the Matter of
~
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, Docket No. 50-289 OLA Sui al.
(Steam Generator Plugging Criteria)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1)
ASLBP No. 86-520-01 OLA SERVICE LIST Sheldon J. Wolfe, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Administrative Judge Board Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissior Board. Panel Washington, D.C.
20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Docketing and Service Section (3)
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissio:
Oscar H.
Paris Washington, D.C.
20555 Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Joanne Doroshow, Esquire
)
Board Panel Three Mile Island Alert, Inc.
U.S Nuclear Regulatory Commission 315 Peffer Street Washington, D.C.
20555 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17102 Frederick J. Shon Bruce Churchill, Esquire Administrative Judge Shaw, Pittman, Pots &
Atomic Safety and Licensing Trowbridge Board Panel 18100 M Street, N.W.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20036 Washington, D.C.
20555 Mary E. Wagner, Esquire (2)
Office of Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 I certify that I have served the above by First Class Mail, postage prepaid, this 6th day of May, 1986.
f(
Al?V's THOMAS Y.
AJ Assistant counsel
-