ML20132H194

Responds to Representative Jr Miller Requesting Explanation of Procedures NRC Used to Authorize Restart of TMI-1 & Description of Safety Risks That Communities Surrounding Plant Now Subj To.Served on 850719

ML20132H194
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	07/18/1985
From:	Plaine H NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
To:	John Miller HOUSE OF REP.
References
CON-#385-874 SP, NUDOCS 8507190561
Download: ML20132H194 (3)

Text

- - - - _

Wl 8 UNITED STATES C..

g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[ ',() g({.; 3

.. WASHING TON, D. C. 20555 C'^

%;,%+,,..J '

July 18, 1985 -

SERVED JUL 191985 75 a 19 pi 03 The Honorable John R. Miller LI .mi. 26.

United States House of Representatives b+ WH Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Representative Miller:

I have been asked to respond to your letter of July 5, 1985 in which you requested an explanation of the procedures the Nuclear Regulatory Commission used to authorize the restart of Three Mile Island Unit 1 ("TMI-1") , and a description of the safety risks the communities surrounding that plant are now subject to.

l After the March 28, 1979 accident at TMI-2, the Commission issued an order stating that TMI-1 would not be allowed to operate until after the Commission had conducted a public hearing on whether the facility should be allowed to

! restart. On August 9, 1979 the Commission issued an order setting forth the hearing procedures. The Commission appointed a three-person Atomic Safety and Licensing Board to conduct an adjudicatory hearing. The most comprehensive

, adjudicatory proceeding ever conducted by the NRC was held.

Thirteen parties participated. The issues proved to be

especially difficult and the hearing became protracted l hecause of additional issues that were raised regarding the

competence and good character of the licensee. More than 155 days of hearings were held over a five-year period and transcripts were generated that exceeded 30,000 pages. The total record of the proceeding far exceeded 100,000 pages.

On the basis of that record the Licensing Board, after imposing numerous conditions on GPU Nuclear Corporation, the licensed operator of TMI-1, found that the facility could be operated consistent with the public health and safety. )

l Among the issues addressed by the Licensing Board were management competence and integrity, emergency planning,

, adequacy of hardware / plant design, and whether ongoing TMI-2 cleanup efforts could interfere with the safe operation of j TMI-1.

! The Licensing Board's decisions were subject to appellate review by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board and thereafter by the Commission. That appellate review has been comple.ted except for two issues in the management 1 competence and integrity areas. As a result of an appellate remand one minor issue remains before the Licensing Board.

The Commission on May 29, 1985 determined that it had reasonable assurance that TMI-l could be operated consistent 8507190561 ADOCK 850718 0500028 ,

PDR O PDR-3S @ l

2 i

with the public health and safety and that the plant should be permitted to operate during the pendency of the remaining administrative proceedings. A copy of that order, which sets forth in greater detail the procedures used by the Commission and fully explains the Commission's restart decision, is enclosed for your information.

The Commission's decision has been challenged in the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. The Court has stayed the Commission's decision; the case has been briefed and argued and the Court's opinion is expected to be issued in the near future.

With respect to safety risks, before authorizing restart the Commission found that GPU Nuclear had satisfied the 155 conditions imposed upon it in the restart proceeding, and was in compliance with NRC regulations. The Commission determined that it had reasonable assurance that the plant could be operated consistent with the public health and safety.

I Sincerely, Herzel H. E. Plaine General Counsel

Enclosure:

May 29, 1985 Order i

i

,+ .,_- . . - . . , - _ - _ . - . . _ - . . . - _ . - - , - . . - . . . . _ , . . . . , . , . - . - - - . - - - . . - . . -

t*

JOHN R. MILLFR 1723 tono oet ewo .e 1st Dastste. Wann mofog Wissen.tTom. DC 2C515 coww? Tits ( C2) 2254311 y ,

G1YtT.hMENT OPERATIONS

"'=cata;r^;~' a~a Congregg of tfje Eniteb sintated u 7.'o.'.0 1 ..

915 Seco=o Avaseus J)ouge of Representatibes *l@ *^1l2.2 55asfjington, DC 20515 July 5, 1985 Nunzio J. Palladino Chairman Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street N.W.

Washington DC 20555

Dear Mr. Palladino:

During the past several weeks, I have received a number of letters from constituents expressing concern over the procedures the Nuclear Regulatory Commission used in relicensing the Three Mile Island facility.

Would you please forward to me an explanation of the procedures you used along with a summary of safety risks the communities surrounding the plant are now subject to.

Thank you dor your cooperation.

Yours truly,

'l.L;h ohn R. Miller

. . , Member of Congress v.. ...

JRM:cb

-