ML20215D606

Requests Notification Whether Util Intends to Install New Higher Density Rack in Spent Fuel Pool W/O Prior NRC Approval.Order from ASLB Will Be Sought Prohibiting Rack of New Unapproved Design If Necessary.Related Correspondence

ML20215D606
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png
Issue date:	06/11/1987
From:	Weiss E HARMON & WEISS, NEW ENGLAND COALITION ON NUCLEAR POLLUTION
To:	Dignan T, Selleck K ROPES & GRAY
References
CON-#287-3759 OLA, NUDOCS 8706190078
Download: ML20215D606 (2)

Text

>ss S 3759l "'*o """

n0(M R.

~ UYh4

~ HAIIMON & WEISS 2008 S STREET, N.W. . .

15 M S SUITE ' 4 30 WASHINGTON, D.C. cocoo nes ,,

. GAIL' McGREEVY H ARMON OFF n gQ "$9 tt. yEtEngoug ELLYN R.' WEISS DIANE CURRAN 000bU .ppy (202)328 3500

. DEAN R. TOUSLEY ANDREA C, VERSTER June 11, 1987 Thomas G. Dignan, Jr., Esq.

Kathryn A. Selleck, Es q .

Ropes & Gray 225 Fr anklin Street Boston, MA 02110

'RE: Vermont Yankee, Docket No. 50-271-OLA l

Dear Mr. Dignan,

It is'our-understanding that Vermont Yankee has' requested (through NRC Region 1) and received, an " advisory opinion".from l NRC headquarters indicating that it would be lawful for the com . ,

pany to install a new higher-density rack in the spent' fuel pool' 2 without prior NBC approval, through the mechanism of 10 CFR S

.50.59,. so long as no more than 2000 spent fuel assemblies are placed.in the pool as-a whole. The NRC Project Manager for Ver-mont Yankee informs me that he has no knowledge of whether the company intends to'do so, however. l Therefore, please. inform me whether the company does intend 1 to install or is considering installing a new higher density rack I without an ASLB decision granting the pending request for a )

license amendment. If so, please provide me with the schedule for installation, or the earliest possible time at which the rack i may be installed. l You should know that it is NECNP's view that installation of a rack of the new design cannot lawfully take place without a favorable decision on the company's license amendment request.

To do so would be a blatant attempt to usurp the jurisdiction of the Licensing Board and to prejudice the outcome of the case. In particular, since the consideration of alternatives under the National Environmental Policy Act involves weighing costs against -

benefits, your clients may not artificially bolster their case by incurring the unnecessary cost of installing a new rack and then

' charge both that cost and the cost of removing it against the '

alternatives to reracking. This is to put you on notice that, if necessary, NECNP will seek an order from the ASLB prohibiting installation of a rack of the new unapproved design.

8706190078 870611'.

PDR 02) I G

ADOCK 05000271 j) b I PDR.

l

y. g l

HARMON & WEISS .

2-l I would' appreciate your prompt response.

i 1

Very truly yours,

_s .

~.. , ,. ,

/

, ,' -( . l ( t (_~sf,

' L.-' /l /~

El ly n' ~h . ,We i s s '-

HARMON & WEISS 2001 "S" Street, NW Suite 430 washington, D. C . 20009 Counsel for NECNP i cc: Service List, Docket No. 5 0-271 -OLA i-