ML20210G398

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses Review of Ltr Re Maine Yankee Backfit Appeal with Respect to Emergency Plan Exemptions for Decommissioning Plants
ML20210G398
Person / Time
Site: Maine Yankee
Issue date: 06/30/1999
From: Meisner M
Maine Yankee
To: Miraglia F
NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
Shared Package
ML20210G381 List:
References
MJM-99-23, MN-99-18, NUDOCS 9908030086
Download: ML20210G398 (2)


Text

.

cc i

MaineYankee l

321 OLD FERRY RD.

  • WISCASSET, ME 04578-4922 June 30,1999 MN-99-18 MJM-99-23 i

Frank J. Miraglia Deputy Executive Director for Regulatory Programs United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001

Reference:

(a)

License No. DPR-36 (Docket No. 50-309)

(b)

USNRC I.etter to MYAPC dated June 22,1999, " Appeal of Director's Decision on Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company's Backfit Claim Regarding Beyond Design Basis Accidents In Spent Fuel Pools"

Subject:

Response to EDO Backfit Appeal Determination

Dear Mr. Miraglia:

I have reviewed your referenced letter conceming Maine Yankee's backfit appeal to the EDO with respect to emergency plan exemptions for decommissioning plants.

As you know, our original backfit appeal in December,1998, noted that there was insufficient information about the staff's basis for backfit denial to formulate an appeal. Subsequently, we have had sufficient dialogue, and the staff has issued additional information, to clarify the staff's basis.

Now that we understand that basis, Maine Yankee should be afforded the opportunity to present our i

basis for appeal.

As we've discussed, there is not a sense of urgency in resolving the appeal because Maine Yankee is already operating under exemption for emergency planning. What remains ofconcern is the broad nature of the staff's position that no exemption request is afforded the protection of the backfit rule, allowing stafrunfettered latitude (at least in our experience) to impose new requirements. Since Maine Yankee may need future exemptions in order to optimize decommissioning safety and cost, I feel it necessary to continue to pursue the appeal.

9900030086 990728 PDR ADOCK 05000309 i

F pm t

i

ay 3

,,e

  • /

i i

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission MN-99-18 Attn: Mr. Frank J. Miraglia, Jr.

Page Two I believe that relevant additional information will be developed over the next several months as we work with the staff in developing a risk-informed basis for decommissioning. At that point, I propose we schedule a meeting with the EDO to complete the backfit appeal process. At the appropriate time, I'll work with you to make final angements.

Ve truly rs, rh cha J. Meisner P

ident c:

Document Control Desk Mr. W. Travers Mr. S. Collins Mr. H.J. Miller Mr. J. Zwolinski Mr. M.K. Webb Mr. M. Masnik Mr. Ron Bellamy Mr. M. Roberts Mr. P.J. Dostie Mr. U. Vanags l