ML20246P033
| ML20246P033 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/25/1988 |
| From: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Carr, Roberts, Zech NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20246D630 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8905220064 | |
| Download: ML20246P033 (2) | |
Text
h _-
~fp uri,9_ - - - - - ------ - - -
--^-
3
,_.,?
ENCLOSURE OF QUESTION 5 E
UNITED STATES.
4 of 5 a
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION '
s s
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20665 '
N.,,,,
OCT 2 51988 i
MEMORANDUM FOR: Chaiman Zech Commissioner Roberts Connissioner Carr Consissioner Rogers Commissioner Curtiss FROM:
Victor Stello, Jr., Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
MEETING WITH 00E ON MHTGR CONTAINMENT In my October 3,1980 memorandum to you on the Modular High Temperat Gas-Cooled Reactor (MHTGR) containment issue I indicated that Mr. Bec I were planning to meeting with representatives from DOE to discuss the apparently contradictory position taken by the Department on containment for L
two very similar desi version of the MHTGR)gns (the commercial MHTGR and the production reactor We had the subject meeting on 0:tober 18,1988 items are sumarized below:
and the key points and action 1)-
It was clear that the decision to put a containment on the ne' production reactor (NPR) version of the MHTGR was based upon policy w
considera tions, to DOE's technical evaluation of-the candidate technol irrespective of the reinote site location.
2)
If, in the future, the NPR-MHTGR designers were to make a case on technical grounds for no containment, it is very unlikely that DOE Defense Programs would seriously consider it.
3)
It is not clear that the technical differences between the two M concepts are sufficient to support the differing positions on containment.
beyond that provided in Mr. Garrish's SeptemberNo DOE te 16,1988 letter, to document the rationale for the differing positions. I requested that DOE prepare such an evaluation, but it is not clear that they will.
Mr. D. Bunch of DOE tr.dicated he will call me in 2-3 weeks w plans in this area.
In summary, I believe that we should not take action on the MNTGR containme question until we fully understand and have documented the Department's rationalc for their differing positions.
ir, a position of having to explain the difference.I do not went to put the Commission If and when such a 1
8905220064 890502 PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDC 6
d..*.
1.
Memo to Cheirman Zech.
i -
1:
L>
such a rationale is not-rationale is provided, we can resume action containment question or provided, we could continue to withhold action on the If MHTGR should have a containment until sufficier.t tes experience is gained to justify its removal.
I will keep you informed of DDE's response.
Ti }$5lsi.;:.:..; 20
~
.%Y f ctor Stello, Jr.
Executive Director for Operations cc: OGC SECY DISTRIUBTION:
Circ /Chron
'ARGIG Rdg.
ACRS Murray Beckjord Morris Speis Rosztoczy King-Wilson Williams VStello JTaylor JHoyle EDO r/f
[ MEMO TO CHAIRMAN ZECH]( (1 TD Y M
'0FFC:RES;AFJ1B : RES:D_ '
- EDQffi__
_NAME:UGigDF's :EBeckjord :VS'fefilo DATE cV 1.f /B6 :/B /2/ /88 :/8 iM/88 :
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
,