ML032760017

Control Room Alternate Source Term Review

ML032760017
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	10/02/2003
From:	Tam P NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD1
To:	Distel D, David Helker, Hufnagel J AmerGen Energy Co
References
TAC MA3465
Download: ML032760017 (3)

Text

From: Peter Tam To: David Distel; David Helker; Hufnagel, John G.; John Hufnagel Date: 10/2/03 1:45PM

Subject:

Oyster Creek: Control Room Alternate Source Term Review (TAC MA3465)

David Helker David Distel This application came to NRC as a "topical report" review (i.e., no application for an amendment) on 3/31/97. The next document in NRCs record was a letter dated 4/13/00 from GPU (i.e., apparent inactivity for 3 years), the former licensee of Oyster Creek.

Subsequently, NRC and the licensee exchanged a few more pieces of correspondence.

Among these, the RAI of 10/10/00 stated that, among other things, ".....to implement an alternate source term, 10 CFR 50.67 requires that a licensee apply for a license amendment under 10 CFR 50.90. Your submittals do not seem to fulfill that requirement." On 1/12/01 AmerGen responded to that RAI but it appears that AmerGen had not addressed this specific question about the lack of an application for amendment per 10 CFR 50.90.

In SECY-96-242, "Use of the NUREG-1465 Source Term at Operating Reactors," the NRC staff proposed to review pilot plant submittals. Subsequently, pilot plants were chosen: Surry, Grand Gulf, Perry. Acceptance as a pilot plant was signified by a letter from the NRC OCFO, exempting a licensee from the fee requirements of 10 CFR 170 (e.g., J. Funches letter to VEPCO, 1/16/01). No such letter was issued to Oyster Creek.

In the absence of an application for amendment, the Oyster Creek review is not a licensing action, but a plant-specific "topical report" review. Such review has very low priority compared to review of licensing actions. Furthermore, Oyster Creek has not been granted pilot plant status for its submittals, and it is not clear if such status can be granted in its current state of affairs (Surry, for example, received such status after it submitted an amendment application).

I propose that we hold a conference call in the near future to discuss the status and future prospects of this review. Please call me to set up such a conference call with our reviewers.

This e-mail aims solely to prepare you and others for a conference call. It does not state an NRC staff position, nor does it formally request for additional information.

Peter S. Tam, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate I-1 Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation e-mail: pst@nrc.gov Tel.: 301-415-1451 CC: Leta Brown; Michelle Hart; Richard Laufer Mail Envelope Properties (3F7C6437.575 : 10 : 20510)

Subject:

Oyster Creek: Control Room Alternate Source Term Review (TAC MA3465)

Creation Date: 10/2/03 1:45PM From: Peter Tam Created By: PST@nrc.gov Recipients Action Date & Time David Transferred 10/02/03 01:45PM distel (David Distel)

John Transferred 10/02/03 01:45PM hufnagel (John Hufnagel) owf2_po.OWFN_DO Delivered 10/02/03 01:45PM MLH3 CC (Michelle Hart) Opened 10/02/03 01:45PM owf4_po.OWFN_DO Delivered 10/02/03 01:45PM RJL CC (Richard Laufer) Opened 10/02/03 01:47PM exeloncorp.com Transferred 10/02/03 01:45PM david.helker (David Helker) john.hufnagel (Hufnagel, John G.)

nrc.gov owf2_po.OWFN_DO Delivered 10/02/03 01:45PM LAB2 CC (Leta Brown) Opened 10/02/03 01:45PM Post Office Delivered Route David INTernet:exeloncorp.

com John INTernet:exeloncorp.

com owf2_po.OWFN_DO 10/02/03 01:45PM owf4_po.OWFN_DO 10/02/03 01:45PM exeloncorp.com owf2_po.OWFN_DO 10/02/03 01:45PM nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 3682 10/02/03 01:45PM Options Auto Delete: No Expiration Date: None Notify Recipients: Yes Priority: Standard Reply Requested: No Return Notification: None Concealed

Subject:

No

Security: Standard To Be Delivered: Immediate Status Tracking: Delivered & Opened