ML20206U971

Responds to & Addl Info Re Appeal of NRC Determination Re Claim of Backfit Concerning Permanently Shutdown Reactor Security Plan

ML20206U971
Person / Time
Site:	Maine Yankee
Issue date:	05/18/1999
From:	Collins S NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Meisner M Maine Yankee
References
NUDOCS 9905260075
Download: ML20206U971 (4)

Text

. . . . . .

(

1:

3r a M%4 g

ih 4 UNITED STATES (I #

j t

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 h l 4.....

May 18, 1999 Mr. Michael J. Meisner, President Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company 321 Old Ferry Road Wiscassett, Maine 04578-4922

SUBJECT:

APPEAL OF NRC DETERMINATION CONCERNING MAINE YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY CLAIM OF BACKFIT REGARDING PERMANENTLY SHUTDOWN REACTOR SECURITY PLAN

Dear Mr. Meisner:

By letter dated March 16,1999, Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company (MYAPC) appealed a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRW staff determination of February 3,1999, that MYAPC had not raised a valid backfit claim in a July 16,1998, letter to the NRC. In your March 16,1999, letter, you submitted additional background and details on your July 16,1998, backfit claim, in which you stated that the NRC's letter of June 29,1998, in response to a MYAFC exemption request, included "several statements which contain requirements beyond the scope of the current regulations " The two issues in question pertain to maintaining isolation zones and the vehicle barrier system at your permanently shutdown and defueled Maine Yankee Atomic Power Station (MYAPS).

In response to your March 16,1999, letter, and the additional information in it, the NRC staff reevaluated your backfit claim. The staff's reevaluation of your claims is discussed in the paragraphs that follow.

Isolation Zones Backfit Claim: MYAPC notes that in NRC's letter of June 29,1998, as part of the denial of MYAPC's request for exemption from 10 CFR 73.55(c)(3) regarding isolation zones, the NRC staff asserted that an " external isolation zone is required at defueled reactor sites in order to maintain a clear area outside the walls of the spent fuel building to be used for assessing unauthorized activities concerning radiological sabotage of the spent fuel." MYAPC believes that this statement goes beyond the regulations and, therefore, constitutes a backfit. MYAPC recognizes that 10 CFR 73.55 requires defueled reactor sites, as well as operating units, to maintain vital equipment within vital areas and that these vital areas must be located within protected areas surrounded by an adjacent externalisolation zone. The bas!s for MYAPC's claim is that because MYAPS no longer has any vital areas, there is no need for a protected area, thereby eliminating the requirement for isolation zones. Therefore, MYAPC believes that Q

the staff's statement in the NRC letter of June 29 concerning the need to maintain isolation zones constitutes a requirement beyond that required by the regulations and is a backfit.

k NRC staff response: The staff now understands the basis for MYAPC's position. After reviewing the structure of the 10 CFR 73.55(c)(3) requirements, the staff agrees that MYAPC has interpreted the regulations correctly and that the lack of vita! areas at MYAPS has eliminated the requirement to establish protected areas and concoident i a 9905260075 990518 " -

.h ' E PDR ADOCK 05000309 "

F PDR

_----__j

Mr. Michael J. Meisner May 18, 1999 l

Vehicle Barrier System Backfit Claim: MYAPC states that as part of the denial of MYAPC's request for exemption from 10 CFR 73.55(c)(7) regarding vehicle control measures, the NRC's letter of June 29,1998, stated that "Until the Commission has determined how much damage an explosive-laden l vehicle could cause to the spent fuel, vehicle barriers must remain in place (to maintain the proper ' standoff' distances to the spent fuel pool)." MYAPC contends that the NRC staff's position is more restrictive than the current regulations because the regulations contain a mechanism that allows changes to be made to the security plan without prior NRC approval (10 CFR 50.54(p)). For the staff to state that licensees may not use this change mechanism ,

until the Commission makes some sort of determination is a more restrictive position than that prescribed in the regulations and, therefore, constitutes a backfit.

NRC staff response: The staff has reviewed its June 29,1998, statement regarding the MYAPC exemption request from 10 CFR 73.55(c). NRC wrote this statement specifically to address your vehicle barrier system exemption request as proposed; it was not intended to limit your ability to make changes to the security plan using 10 CFR 50.54(p). The staff agrees with MYAPC that 10 CFR 50.54(p) presents an acceptable means by which licensees may make changes to the security plan without prior Commission approval if the changes do not weaken the safeguards effectiveness of the plan. Although the staff can understand how its June 29, 1998, statement regarding vehicle barriers could be interpreted more broadly than the staff intended, the statement was not meant to restrict MYAPC's use of this regulation and, therefore, cannot be construed to be a backfit as described in MYAPC's letter.

I believe that I have addressed the backfit issues that you have raised and trust that this letter adequately addresses your concerns. If this response does not adequately address your issues or if you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter, please contact me.

Sincerely, '

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:

Samuel J. Collins, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-309 cc: See next page DISTRIBUTION: Docket Files 50-309 PUBLIC ACRS RBellamy, RI OGC

'SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCES DOCUMENT NAME: A:\MYSECLTR.WPD 0,RECElVE A COPY OF THIS DOCUMENT, INDICATE IN THE BOX: "C" = COPY WITHOUT ENCLOSURES *E" = COPY WITH ENCLOSURES OFFICE PDIV-D/PM TECH ED

• PDIV/LA PDIV-D/sc PDIV-D/D* E NAME MWebb W Rsanders EPeytY MMasnik dN sRichards DATE 5/ 10 /99 4/21/9 . . _5/ [ O /99 _ g 4/26/99 g

g g g OFFICE DLPM/D* E ADPL& tj NR NRR/DIPM/HOHB* OGC*

NAME JAZwohnski Bsheron $f? sCo DTrimble for R. Gallo KWinsberg DATE 4/28/99 5/ // /99 #/&I0 5/ 6 /99 04/26/99 05/07/99 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY x <f  ;

\{

Mr. Michael J. Meisner Vehicle Barrier System

- Backfit Claim: MYAPC' states that as part of the denial of MYAPC's request for exemption from 10 CFR 73.55(c)(7) regarding vehicle control measures, the NRC's letter of June 29,1998, stated that "Until the Commission has determined how much damage an explosive-laden vehicle could cause to the spent fuel, vehicle barriers must remain in place (to maintain the prr>per ' standoff' distances to the spent fuel pool). MYAPC contends that the NRC staffs p>sition is more restrictive than the current regulations because the regulations contain a inechanism that allows changes to be made to the security plan without prior NRC approval

' (10 CFR 50.54(p)). ' For the staff to state that licensees may not use this change mechanism until the Commission makes some sort of determination is a more restrictive position than that prescribed in the regulations and, therefore, constitutes a backfit.

NRC staff response: The staff has reviewed it's June 29,1998, statement regarding the'MYAPC

. exemption request from 10 CFR 73.55(c).' NRC wrote this statement specifically to address

- your vehicle barrier system exemption request as proposed; it was not intended to limit your ability to make changes to the security plan using 10 CFR 50.54(p). The staff agrees with MYAPC that 10 CFR 50.54(p) presents an acceptable means by which licensees may make changes to the security plan without prior Commission approval if the changes do not weaken

the safeguards effectiveness of the plan. Although the staff can understand how its June 29,

~

1998, statement regarding vehicle barriers could be interpreted more broadly than the staff intended, the statement was not meant to restrict MYAPC's use of this regulation and, therefore, cannot be construed to be a backfit'as described in MYAPC's letter.

I believe that I have addressed the backfit issues that you have raised and trust that this letter

. adequately addresses your concems. If this response does not adequately address your issues or if you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter, please contact me.-

Sincerely, a ue . Co ins, Director i Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation j Docket No. 50-309 cc: - See next page i

l g

W .A.

Mrina Yankee Atomic Pawir C:mptny

)

- r- D:ckst No. 50-309  !

~

j

cc: l Mr. Charles B. Brinkman Friends of the Coast Manager . Washington Nuclear P.O. Box 98 Operations Edgecomb, ME 04556 ABB Combustion Engineering 12300 Twinbrook Parkway, Suite 330 Mr. William O' Dell ' l

. Rockville, MD - 20852 Operations Director Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company Thomas G. Dignan, Jr., Esquire. 321 Old Ferry Road -

. Ropes & Gray Wiscasset, ME 04578-4922 One International Place i Boston, MA 02110-2624 Mr. George Zinke, Director

{

Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Affairs Mr. Uldis Vanags ]

Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company J State Nuclear Safety Advisor 321 Old Ferry Road State Planning Office Wiscasset, ME 04578-4922 State House Station #38

' Augusta, ME 04333 - Mr. Jonathan M. Block i Attorney at Law Mr. P. L. Anderson, Project Manager f

P.O. Box 566 Yankee Atomic Electric Company Putney, VT 05346-0566 580 Main Street Bolton, MA 01740-1398- Mr. Michael J. Meisner, President Main Yankee Atomic Power Company

. RegionalA' dministrator, Region i . 321 Old Ferry Road U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Wiscasset, ME 04578-4922 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Mr. Robert Fraser, Director Engineering First Selectman of Wiscasse- Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company Municipal Building 321 Old Ferry Road U.S. Route 1 Wiscasset, ME 04578-4922 Wiscasset, ME 04578 Mr. Patrick J. Dostie Mr. Mark Roberts State of Maine Nuclear Safety

- U.S.= Nuclear Regulatory Commission Inspector 475 Allendale Road Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company King of Prussia, PA 19406 321 Old Ferry Road Wiscasset, ME 04578-4922 Mary' Ann Lynch, Esquire Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company Mr. Mark Ferri, Vice President 321 Old Ferry Road Decommissioning Director Wiscasset, ME 04578-4922 Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company 321 Old Ferry Road Mr. Neil Sheehan Wiscasset, ME 04578-4922 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA '19406 g

C_