ML060250068: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
Line 19: Line 19:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:February 25, 2006Mr. Mark D. SylviaTown Manager Town of Plymouth 11 Lincoln Street Plymouth, Massachusetts 02360
{{#Wiki_filter:February 25, 2006 Mr. Mark D. Sylvia Town Manager Town of Plymouth 11 Lincoln Street Plymouth, Massachusetts 02360


==Dear Mr. Sylvia:==
==Dear Mr. Sylvia:==


On behalf of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), I am responding to your letter ofJanuary 18, 2006, concerning NRC's review of the license renewal applications for the PilgrimNuclear Power Station (NPS) of Plymouth, Massachusetts, and the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) of Vernon, Vermont. In your letter, you requested that the NRC denyEntergy Corporation's request to merge the proceedings into one review process, so that the NRC staff could fully assess the specific characteristics of each plant individually.There appears to be some mis-communication about Entergy submitting a joint application forlicense renewal for the two plants
On behalf of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), I am responding to your letter of January 18, 2006, concerning NRCs review of the license renewal applications for the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station (NPS) of Plymouth, Massachusetts, and the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) of Vernon, Vermont. In your letter, you requested that the NRC deny Entergy Corporations request to merge the proceedings into one review process, so that the NRC staff could fully assess the specific characteristics of each plant individually.
. In fact, separate license renewal applications weresubmitted by letters dated January 25, 2006. The applications will be reviewed based on thecontent of the separate submittals and separate evaluations will be issued by the NRC. TheNRC will fully assess the specific characteristics of each plant on an individual basis todetermine if the plant can safely operate for an additional twenty years past its current license expiration date. The reviews conducted by the NRC may involve some of the same subjectmatter experts to ensure that the NRC actions are effective, efficient, realistic, and timely. Thereview process will include separate notices of the opportunity for a hearing on eachapplication.The NRC has established clear requirements, codified in Title 10 of the Code of FederalRegulations Parts 51 and 54, to assure safe plant operation for extended plant life. The NRCalso follows an established license renewal application review process to guide the staff's evaluation of an applicant's compliance with license renewal requirements. This process includes opportunities for public involvement. The NRC staff conducts a thorough review ofeach license renewal application and prepares a safety evaluation report and environmental impact statement to document the results of each review. During these reviews, the NRC implements a license renewal inspection program to verify that applicants meet these regulations and have implemented license renewal programs and activities consistent with their applications for license renewal. In addition, the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) conducts an independent review of each safety evaluation report before making a recommendation to the Commission. Established by Congress in 1957, the ACRS is a body of   experts representing diverse technical perspectives that is independent of the staff and reportsdirectly to the Commission. The ACRS reviews are conducted in public meetings. I hope this information addresses your concern. If you have any further questions, please contact Mr. Frank Gillespie, Director, Division of License Renewal at 301-415-1183.Sincerely,/RA/J. E. Dyer, DirectorOffice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation experts representing diverse technical perspectives that is independent of the staff and reportsdirectly to the Commission. The ACRS reviews are conducted in public meetings. I hope this information addresses your concern. If you have any further questions, please contact Mr. Frank Gillespie, Director, Division of License Renewal at 301-415-1183.Sincerely,/RA/J. E. Dyer, DirectorOffice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation   Docket Nos. 50-271 and 50-293DISTRIBUTION: See next pageADAMS ACCESSION NOS.: Pkg: ML060250057; Incoming: ML060230048; Response: ML060250068*by e-mailOFFICEPM:RLRA:DLRPM:RLRB:DLRLA:RLRA:DLRTechEditorOGCBC:RLRB:DLRNAMEKWeaverJEadsYEdmondsHChang*KWinsberg(w/comments)JZimmermanDATE1/27/061/27/061/27/061/24/061/25/061/27/06OFFICEBC:RLRA:DLRD:DLRD:NRREDOOCMD:NRRNAMELLund(KWeaver for)FGillespie(JZimmerman for)JDyer(concur)LReyesJDyer (signature)DATE1/27/061/27/062/01 /062/8/062/ 23 /062/25 /06OFFICIAL RECORD COPY DISTRIBUTION: Ticket Number G20060065KWinsberg JShea MSykes DScrenci MModes WRaymond DPelton CAnderson RidsNrrDorlLpla RidsNrrOd RidsNrrAdro RidsNrrDlr RidsNrrDlrRlra RidsNrrDlrRlrb RidsOpaMail RidsNrrWpcMail RidsOcaMailCenter RidsEdoMailCenter RidsOgcMailCenter RidsRgn1MailCenter}}
There appears to be some mis-communication about Entergy submitting a joint application for license renewal for the two plants. In fact, separate license renewal applications were submitted by letters dated January 25, 2006. The applications will be reviewed based on the content of the separate submittals and separate evaluations will be issued by the NRC. The NRC will fully assess the specific characteristics of each plant on an individual basis to determine if the plant can safely operate for an additional twenty years past its current license expiration date. The reviews conducted by the NRC may involve some of the same subject matter experts to ensure that the NRC actions are effective, efficient, realistic, and timely. The review process will include separate notices of the opportunity for a hearing on each application.
The NRC has established clear requirements, codified in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Parts 51 and 54, to assure safe plant operation for extended plant life. The NRC also follows an established license renewal application review process to guide the staffs evaluation of an applicants compliance with license renewal requirements. This process includes opportunities for public involvement. The NRC staff conducts a thorough review of each license renewal application and prepares a safety evaluation report and environmental impact statement to document the results of each review. During these reviews, the NRC implements a license renewal inspection program to verify that applicants meet these regulations and have implemented license renewal programs and activities consistent with their applications for license renewal. In addition, the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) conducts an independent review of each safety evaluation report before making a recommendation to the Commission. Established by Congress in 1957, the ACRS is a body of
 
experts representing diverse technical perspectives that is independent of the staff and reports directly to the Commission. The ACRS reviews are conducted in public meetings. I hope this information addresses your concern. If you have any further questions, please contact Mr. Frank Gillespie, Director, Division of License Renewal at 301-415-1183.
Sincerely,
                                                /RA/
J. E. Dyer, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
 
experts representing diverse technical perspectives that is independent of the staff and reports directly to the Commission. The ACRS reviews are conducted in public meetings. I hope this information addresses your concern. If you have any further questions, please contact Mr. Frank Gillespie, Director, Division of License Renewal at 301-415-1183.
Sincerely,
                                                          /RA/
J. E. Dyer, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-271 and 50-293 DISTRIBUTION: See next page ADAMS ACCESSION NOS.: Pkg: ML060250057; Incoming: ML060230048; Response: ML060250068
    *by e-mail OFFICE    PM:RLRA:DLR    PM:RLRB:DLR      LA:RLRA:DLR      TechEditor  OGC          BC:RLRB:DLR NAME      KWeaver        JEads            YEdmonds        HChang*     KWinsberg   JZimmerman (w/comments)
DATE      1/27/06        1/27/06          1/27/06          1/24/06      1/25/06      1/27/06 OFFICE    BC:RLRA:DLR    D:DLR            D:NRR            EDO            OCM        D:NRR NAME      LLund          FGillespie        JDyer            LReyes                    JDyer (KWeaver for)   (JZimmerman for) (concur)                                   (signature)
DATE      1/27/06        1/27/06          2/01 /06        2/8/06        2/ 23 /06  2/25 /06 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
 
DISTRIBUTION: Ticket Number G20060065 KWinsberg JShea MSykes DScrenci MModes WRaymond DPelton CAnderson RidsNrrDorlLpla RidsNrrOd RidsNrrAdro RidsNrrDlr RidsNrrDlrRlra RidsNrrDlrRlrb RidsOpaMail RidsNrrWpcMail RidsOcaMailCenter RidsEdoMailCenter RidsOgcMailCenter RidsRgn1MailCenter}}

Latest revision as of 22:59, 23 November 2019

G20060065/LTR-06-0042 - Mark Sylvia Ltr. Re Concerns Pilgrim and Vermont Yankee Relicensing Applications
ML060250068
Person / Time
Site: Pilgrim, Vermont Yankee  File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png
Issue date: 02/25/2006
From: Dyer J
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Sylvia M
Town of Plymouth, MA
Weaver, K, NRR/DLR/RLRA, 415-3407
Shared Package
ML060250057 List:
References
CORR-06-0018, G20060065, LTR-06-0042, TAC MC9597, TAC MC9598
Download: ML060250068 (4)
v • d • e


Text

February 25, 2006 Mr. Mark D. Sylvia Town Manager Town of Plymouth 11 Lincoln Street Plymouth, Massachusetts 02360

Dear Mr. Sylvia:

On behalf of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), I am responding to your letter of January 18, 2006, concerning NRCs review of the license renewal applications for the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station (NPS) of Plymouth, Massachusetts, and the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) of Vernon, Vermont. In your letter, you requested that the NRC deny Entergy Corporations request to merge the proceedings into one review process, so that the NRC staff could fully assess the specific characteristics of each plant individually.

There appears to be some mis-communication about Entergy submitting a joint application for license renewal for the two plants. In fact, separate license renewal applications were submitted by letters dated January 25, 2006. The applications will be reviewed based on the content of the separate submittals and separate evaluations will be issued by the NRC. The NRC will fully assess the specific characteristics of each plant on an individual basis to determine if the plant can safely operate for an additional twenty years past its current license expiration date. The reviews conducted by the NRC may involve some of the same subject matter experts to ensure that the NRC actions are effective, efficient, realistic, and timely. The review process will include separate notices of the opportunity for a hearing on each application.

The NRC has established clear requirements, codified in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Parts 51 and 54, to assure safe plant operation for extended plant life. The NRC also follows an established license renewal application review process to guide the staffs evaluation of an applicants compliance with license renewal requirements. This process includes opportunities for public involvement. The NRC staff conducts a thorough review of each license renewal application and prepares a safety evaluation report and environmental impact statement to document the results of each review. During these reviews, the NRC implements a license renewal inspection program to verify that applicants meet these regulations and have implemented license renewal programs and activities consistent with their applications for license renewal. In addition, the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) conducts an independent review of each safety evaluation report before making a recommendation to the Commission. Established by Congress in 1957, the ACRS is a body of

experts representing diverse technical perspectives that is independent of the staff and reports directly to the Commission. The ACRS reviews are conducted in public meetings. I hope this information addresses your concern. If you have any further questions, please contact Mr. Frank Gillespie, Director, Division of License Renewal at 301-415-1183.

Sincerely,

/RA/

J. E. Dyer, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

experts representing diverse technical perspectives that is independent of the staff and reports directly to the Commission. The ACRS reviews are conducted in public meetings. I hope this information addresses your concern. If you have any further questions, please contact Mr. Frank Gillespie, Director, Division of License Renewal at 301-415-1183.

Sincerely,

/RA/

J. E. Dyer, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-271 and 50-293 DISTRIBUTION: See next page ADAMS ACCESSION NOS.: Pkg: ML060250057; Incoming: ML060230048; Response: ML060250068

  • by e-mail OFFICE PM:RLRA:DLR PM:RLRB:DLR LA:RLRA:DLR TechEditor OGC BC:RLRB:DLR NAME KWeaver JEads YEdmonds HChang* KWinsberg JZimmerman (w/comments)

DATE 1/27/06 1/27/06 1/27/06 1/24/06 1/25/06 1/27/06 OFFICE BC:RLRA:DLR D:DLR D:NRR EDO OCM D:NRR NAME LLund FGillespie JDyer LReyes JDyer (KWeaver for) (JZimmerman for) (concur) (signature)

DATE 1/27/06 1/27/06 2/01 /06 2/8/06 2/ 23 /06 2/25 /06 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

DISTRIBUTION: Ticket Number G20060065 KWinsberg JShea MSykes DScrenci MModes WRaymond DPelton CAnderson RidsNrrDorlLpla RidsNrrOd RidsNrrAdro RidsNrrDlr RidsNrrDlrRlra RidsNrrDlrRlrb RidsOpaMail RidsNrrWpcMail RidsOcaMailCenter RidsEdoMailCenter RidsOgcMailCenter RidsRgn1MailCenter

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML060250068&oldid=2197009"