ML20246D650

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Commission Response to Pr Sharp Subcommittee on Energy & Power Question 4 for 890315 Hearing
ML20246D650
Person / Time
Issue date: 03/15/1989
From: Zech L
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To: Sharp P
HOUSE OF REP., ENERGY & COMMERCE
Shared Package
ML20246D630 List:
References
CCS, MARKEY-890315, NUDOCS 8907110384
Download: ML20246D650 (3)


Text

_--

[' i '-

4c-r

,q.

l CUESTION 4 Yourlpreparea statement also reports that DOE's version of

'the MHTGR is going-to be somewhat different from a

. commercial MHTGR, in that it "would employ.a containment structure not proposed to the NRC for the comercial version,"-

A)

Why is the DOE preposing a different containment structure for its MHTGR7 1.

ANSWER The Commission.has requestea the DOE to explain their rationale for proposing a containment structure for the new production reactor (NPR) version of the MHTGR but not for the connercial version. DOE's response is l

expected in June of this year.

1 H

i 8907110384 s90502 COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE F,DC PDR 1

I

'~ i

^

OVESTION a.

(Continued) B)

How does this proposed containment structure. differ from those being consicered for the commercial version of MHTGR? Is it more safe or less safe?

ANSWER The commercial version of the MHTGR, as proposed to NRC, has no containment structure. The non-power reactor (NPR) version of the MHTGR, as we under-stand it, has a containment structure. although its design and supporting design basis have not been reviewed by NRC. We cannot comment on the comparative safety of the two concepts since we have not reviewed the design of the NPR-MHTGR.

l 1

.I i

i

'4 L

OUESTION 4.

(Continued) C)

Your statement says that NRC needs additional information to resolve its concerns about this matter, What are NRC's " concerns"?

ANSWER We need to understand DOE's rationale for not including a containment structure on the counercial MHTGR concept while a containment structure was proposed for the NPR-MHTGR concept. Specifically, we are interested in knowing the technical and policy considerations which led DOE to these

' differing positions on two apparently similar designs in order to ensure that we are aware of all relevant safety considerations.

-- __