ML20055B095

Notice of 820823 Evidentiary Hearing & Prehearing Conference in Oak Ridge,Tn

ML20055B095
Person / Time
Site:	Clinch River
Issue date:	07/19/1982
From:	Mark Miller Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:
References
NUDOCS 8207200355
Download: ML20055B095 (7)

Text

l.

~

0 c,;r... g,-"'

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA '[2 S.19 P A IU NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g

ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD ,...a..

Before Administrative Judges SERVED JUL191982

~ Marshall E." Miller, Chairman _,

Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr.

Cadet H. Hand, Jr.

In the Matter of ~~

) Docket No. 50-537

. )

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY )

PROJECT PMNAGEMENT CORPORATION )

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY )

)

(Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant) ) July 19, 1982 NOTICE OF EVIDENTI ARY HEARING AND PREHEARING CONFERENCE Please take notice that a Prehearing Conference and an Evidentiary Hearing will be held in'this licensing proceeding before an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Board), pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 as amended (the Act), and the regt.ations set forth in Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 50,

" Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," Part 51, l

" Licensing and Regulatory Policy and Procedures for Environmental Protection," and Part 2, " Rules of Practice."

8207200355 020719 PDR ADOCK 05000537 G PDR )$ O2_

A Prehearing Conference will commence on August 23, 1982 at 8:30 AM at the Executive Seminar Center Building, 301 Broadway, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. An Evidentiary Hearing will commence

~

immediately followin~g the Prehearing Conference that same day and will continue until completion of taking evidence on the issues and contention admitted for the purpose of a-limited work authorization (LWA-1) h' earing, pursuant-to 10 CFR 50.10(e).

The Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant (CRBRP), a demonstration scale liquid metal f ast breeder reactor (LMFBR), was originally authorized by Congress in 1970. In April, 1975, t'he Project Management Corporation (PMC) and the Tennessee Valley Authority ,

(TVA) filed a 104(b) application with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC) for a license to construct and operate the proposed CRBRP. The Application and Environmental Report (ER) were docketed on April 11, 1975. The Preliminary 'S~afety Analysis Report (PSAR) was docketed on June 13, 1975. Legislation enacted by Congress in January 1976, authorized realignment of responsibilities of the participants in the project. The licensr application was accordingly amended in May 1976, to recognize that the U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA) had overall responsibility for managing the design, construction, and operation of the CRBRP. The NRC Staff conducted a review of the CRBRP between 1975 and 1977. The Staff issued a Final Environmental Statement (FES) in February,1977, which recommended the grant of a

b Construction Permit and issued a Site Suitability Report (SSR) in March 1977, which stated that the site was suitable f' rom the standpoint of radiological health and safety.

On April 20, 1977, Preside'nt Carter announced the Administration's decision to cancel the CRBRP. ERDA then requested

~

suspension of the hearings and this request was granted by the Board IonApIil 25' 1977. - --

On October 1,1977, ERDA became the Department of Energy (D0E) as a result of PL 95-91, Department of Energy Organization Act and Executive Order 12009.

On January 11, 1982, the Applicants filed a motion to lift the suspension of the hearings and to set a prehearing conference. In light of President Reagan's policy statement on October 8,1981 directing government agencies to proceed with completion of the CRBRP, and the Comission Order of D'ecember 24, 1981, the Board determined that there was no longer any reason for the suspension.

l Therefore, on January 18, 1982, the Board issued an order lifting l

l the suspension and setting a date for a prehearing conference.

(47 Fed. Reg. 3228) l A prehearing conference was held on February 9-10, 1982 at

~

l l Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The schedule governing the proceeding was 1

established in the Prehearing Conference Order of February 11, 1982.

A conference with the parties was held in Bethesda, Maryland on l

April 5-6, 1982 to consider the admissibility of proposed l

I.

contentions, and April 20, 1982 to determine the scope of the issues to be considered at the LWA-1 hearing.

The evidentiary hearing _commenci,ng August 23, 1982 will cover contentions 1(a), 2(a)-(d), (f)-(h), and 3(b)-(d), as limited in the Board's Order dated April 22, 1982, and contentions 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

- .and 11 b -( ) (d) as set out in the Order dated April 14, 1982. These

~

contentions are as f 011'ois:~

Contention 1(a) challenges the low probability of anticipated transients without scram (ATWS) or other CDA initiators, sufficient to enable CDAs to be excluded from the envelope of DBAs.

Contentions 2(a)-(c) question the validity of the Staff's ,

postulated radiological source term for site suitability analysis.

Contention 2(d) questions whether' the design of the containment is adequate to reduce calculated offsite doses to an acceptable level.

Contentions 2(f)-(h) question the validity of the codes used by Applicants and Staff.

Contention 3(b) questions Applicants' and Staff's analyses of potential accident initiator sequences and events.

Contention 3(c) alleges that accidents associated with core melt-through following loss of core geometry and 'aodium-concrete interactions have not been adequately analyzed.

Contention 3(d) challenges the analysis of the ways in which human error can initiate, exacerbate or interfere with the mitigation of CRBRP accidents.

4

b Contention 4 addresses the health and safety consequences of acts of sabotage, terrorism or theft directed against the CRBR or supporting facilities.

~

Contention 5 questions the suitability of the site selected for the CRBR.

Contention 6 alleges that the SER and FES do not include an adequate analysis of the environmental impact of the CRBRP fuel cycle.

Contention 7 alleges inadequate analyses of alternatives.

Contention 8 allege < inadequate analyses of unavoidable adverse environmental effects and the costs associated with decomission-ing.

Contentions ll(b)-(d) assert residual health and safety consequences if the CRBRP merely complies with current requirements for radiation protection of the public health.

This evidentiary hearing will be conducted by a Board which has been duly designated by the Chairman of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, consisting of Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr.,

Dr. Cadet H. Hand, Jr., Members, and Marshall E. Miller, Esq.,

Chairman.

Any person who wishes to make an oral or written statement in this proceeding but who has not filed a pet'ition for leave to intervene, may request in writing permission to make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.715 of the Comission's Rules of Practice. Limited appearances will be

F permitted in this proceeding at the discretion of the Board, at times, within such limits and on such conditions as may be determined by the Board. Persons desiring to make a limited appearance are requested to inform in writing the Secretary of the Comission, United States Nuclear Regulatory Comission,

_W ashington, D.C. 20555, not later than twenty (20) days from the date of publication of ~this notice in the Federal Register. A person permitted to make a limited appearance does not become a party, but may state his or her position and raise questions which he or she would like to have answered to the extent that the questions are germane and within the scope of the hearing as .

specified above. A member of the public does not have a right to participate in this evidentiary hearing unless granted the right ~to intervene as a party or the right of limited appearance.

Written limited appearance stat'ements may be submitted to the Board at any time prior to closing the record in this phase of the proceeding. Oral statements will only be received at times designated by the Board in order not to interfere with the taking of evidence in this adjudicatory proceeding. Oral limited appearance statements may be made on August 23, 1982, imediately following the final prehearing conference, and at such other times as the Board shall specify. Both oral and written statements will be made a part of the official record of this proceeding.

E.

It is so ORDERED.

FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD

'~

bkCUtA/ fa 6Ndetnall E. Millet, Chairman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 19th day of July, 1982 O

4