ML16340B218
| ML16340B218 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 10/24/1980 |
| From: | Miraglia F Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Clucas J LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8011060037 | |
| Download: ML16340B218 (14) | |
Text
D Docket Fi e 0-275/323)
I Local PDR NRR Reading DL:LB 83 Files HDenton ECase HBerkowf@hrcmR DEisenhut RTedesco FMirag 1ia BBuckley KJabbour JLee SCavanaugh (NRR 84180)
EHughes MFudge PPAS BSnyder BGrimes RVollmer DRoss SHanauer e~~ r~ho4~
- Attorney, OELD FPagano
wE 1
4
OCT 24 198G t"s. Janice A. Glucas, President Leaque of 'i~omen Voters of San Lufs Obf spo, Cal ffornia 1727 Corral itos San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Dear Ys. C'iucas:
Your June 24, 1980 letter to Hr. Harold R. Denton, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, regarding the,Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant has been referred to me for reply.
I am pleased to make this response.
You expressed concern over the emergency planning, radiation monitoring and safety issues based on the Three Nile Island (TNI) accident.
As you are no doubt aware, on July 14, 1980 the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PGSE) requested the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) for Diablo Canyon to authorize fuel loading a'nd low povrer (up to ffve percent) testing.
On August 6, 1980 the NRC staff responded to the ASLB on PGRE's request and submitted a supplemental NRC safety evaluation report dealing with TVI accident-related safety issues as they apply to fuel loading and low power testing. It fs expected that hearings will be held before the Licensing Board on low poorer aspects of the TNI lessons learned late this year.
Also following the THI accident, Intervenors moved to reopen the record on Class 9 accidents and emergency planning.
On June 5, 1979, the Licensing Board stated that it would not rule on the motion until ft receives the Nl?C staff's supplemental safety evaluation report on the effects of TNI-2 related to full power'license for Diablo Canyon.
This report will be issued in early 1981.
Mfth respect to radiation monitoring, PGSE has met all current NRC requirements including those added since the TNI accident.
Potential release paths wf'll be monitored fn the control room.
In addition, the area surrounding the plant will be monitored for potential radioactivity releases.
Thus, corrective and protec-tive action measures can he taken in a timely manner.
Regarding safety issues related to TflI, these issues are presently before the ASLB and the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board as noted above.
In order to receive a low power testing 'license for Diablo Canyon, PGKE must complete all THI safety related requirements for such a license as identified in NUREG-0694 and obtain favorable rulings from these Boards.
Before issuance of such a license by the NRC staff, the Commission will have the opportunity to review the decisions reached by the Boards.
OFFICE)
SURNAME DATEI NRC FORM 318 {9.76) NRCM 0240 4U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979.289 369
t l
4
I4's. Janice A. Clucas
}lith regard to your question concerning ho~< low-level testing might affect the conversion of the plant, we helieve that the low power tests viill not sub-stantially affect the cost associated with the convers'ion of the plant.
This is due to the fact that the fission product inventory of such operation will be less than 0.10 of one percent of that generated by the plant during one year of operation at full power.
Furthermore, we believe that the time to consider alternative fuels and conversion of this facility has now passed as discussed in the enclosure to this letter.
A copy of all of the above cited documents can be found in the local Public Document Room (LPDR) maintained for Diablo Canyon.
This LPDR is located at the California Polytechnic State University Library, Documents and f/aps Department, San Luis Obispo, California 93407.
I trust that this information is responsive to your request.
Sincerely,
Enclosure:
As stated P
Frank J.
~ iraglia, Acting Chief Licensing Branch t/o.
3 Division of Licensing OFFICE)
SURNAME DATE$
DL:LB 83 I'
~
~ ~ ~ ~
~
~ '
~ ~ ~ ~
~
KJabbour:ch 10/ 8/80 p5:
F a
10lg/80
~
3 F
lia 10/
/80 NRC FORM 318 (9-76) NRCM 0240 O'U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICEI 1979.289.369
I I
ll
%l'!
'E
ENCLOSURE Concern:
Pesponse:
Feasibility of converting Diablo Canyon to an alternative fuel source.
Prior to the construction permit proceeding, the NRC staff considered alternatives to this facility in its envi'ronmental impact statement, as no doubt did the utility.
Other alternative energy sources were considered in the environmental hearings which were held before issuing construction permits.
Furthermore, a partial initial decision has been issued by the present ASLB which consid-ered all remaining environmental issues which were properly brought before it at the operating license stage.
Thus, while these consid-erations are not inalterable, they do represent the product of several years collective experience on the subject.
Raving weighed and balanced the alternatives in favor of constructing Diablo Canyon, construction of that facility was authorized and is now complete.
For that reason, essentially all costs related to that construction of approximately about
$ 1.7 billion dollars have now been incurred.
In that regard, a very major portion of that cost is associated with the nuclear steam supply system and special design features for other systems and structures that could not effectively or efficiently be converted for use in an alternative fuel cycle (such as coal, oil, gas or-geothermal).
Examples of non-convertible items include the reactor, pressure
- vessels, steam generators, special heat exchangers, protection and control instrumentation, reactor containment buildings and all safeguards features.
Further-more, there is no assurance that such alternate fuel sources would be readily available for the affected service area over the expected operating life of Diablo Canyon.
In view of these matters we do not think conversion feasible at this time.
However, if a conversion plan showing feasibility is completed after criticality, the low fission product buildup from the low power (below five percent) tests would not make conversion impossible.
I
~
~
1 k
4
Hs. Janice A. Clucas, President League of Nomen Voters of San Luis Obispo, California 27 Corralitos.
San uis Obispo, California 93401 Dear Hs.
C'1ucas:
Your June 2
198P letter to Hr. Harold R. Denton, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regul ion, regarding the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant has been referred to me r reply.
I am pleased to make this response.
You expressed conce over the emergency planning, radiation monitoring and safety issues based o
the Three t"Iile Island (TNI) accident.
As you are no doubt aware on July 14, 1980 the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG8E) requested th Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) for Diablo Canyon to authorize f 1 loading and lo<< power (up to five percent) testing.
On August 6, 1980 the
<RC staff responded to the ASLB 'on PGRE's request and submitted a supplemen al t)RC safety evaluation report dealing with Tt/I accident-related safety i ues.
It is expected that hearings will be held before the Licensing Bo d on low power aspects of the THI lessons learned late this year.
Also llowing the THI accident, Intet ve-nors moved to reopen the record on Class accidents and emergency planning.
On June 6, 1979, the Licensing Board state that it <<ould not rule on the motion unti 1 it receives the NRC staff's rep rt on the effects of Tf1I-2.
This report will be issued in early 1981.
With respect to radiation monitoring, PGEE has me all current NRC requirements including those added since the TMI accident.
Pote tial release paths will be monitored in the control room.
In addition, the are surrounding the plant will be monitored for potential radioactivity releases.
Th
, corrective and protec-tive action measures can be taken in a timely manner.
Regarding safety issues related to TNI, these issues are pre ently before the ASLB and the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board as noted abo In order to receive a low power testing license for Diablo Canyon, PGSE must complete all TNI safety related requirements for such a license as identified in HUREG-0694 and obtain favorable rulings from these Boards.
Before issuance of= such a license by the HRC staff, the Coenission will have the opportunjty to review the decisions reached by the Boards.
OFFICE) g..
SURNAME DATE$..
NRC FORM 318 (9 76) NRCM 0240
'0 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979 289-369
J
~Q rl t
S
'f V
g I
f
Ys. Jan e A. Clucas, President League o
Nomen Voters of San Luis 0 spo, California 1727 Corrall os San Luis Obis o, California 93401 Dear Ns. Clucas.
Your June 24, 1980 letter to Yir. Harold R. Penton, Direc or, Office of Nuclear
, Reactor Regulation, egardinq tpe. Diahlo Canyon nucleai power plant has been referred to me for r
'ly.
I am p'teased to make thigresponse.
You expressed concern o er the emergency p'lannin. radiation monitoring and safety issues based on t g Three Iiile Is'land (Tl(l) accident.
As you are no doubt aware, he applicant, Pdcific Gas and 5'lectric Company (PQAH) has asked the Atomic Safety d Licensing Hoard to rule on tbe issuance of a fuel loading and lou pouei testing up to fiv percent poner) license, for Hiablo Canyon, at this time.
A'Iso fo cuing t(e TIII accident last year, the Joint Inter-
-venors in this proceeding requested that the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLH) to reopen the hearing racon+ on emergency planning.
On June 5, 1979, the Licensing Board reserved its ruliyrg, on that request pending receipts of an NRC staff report on the need for mo)ff$8ytions to the design and operations of Diablo Canyon as a result of the TMI ccideg.
A partial safety explanation report, covering fuel loading'and lo power teqting was issued by the NRC staff in.
= August 1980.
Another repo,, covering he remainder of the TNI requirements for full power operation is exPected to be i sued next spring.
l~ith respect to radiat n monitoring, PG&E as met all current NRC requirements.
including those added since the TNI accident Potential release paths will he monitored in the control room.
In addition, he area surrounding the plant will he monitored for p tential radioactivity relea es.
Thus, corrective and protec-tive action measu es can be taken in a time'ly m nner.
Regarding safe issues related to Tt/I, these iss es are presently before an ASLB
'and an Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board as noted above.
In order to receive a
1 i power testing license for Diablo Cany, PG&E must comp'1ete all Tf)I safety rel ted requirements for such a license as id tified in NUREG-0694 and obtain f@ orable rulings from these Boards.
Before i uance of such a license by the NRC Staff, the Coomission will have the opportunit to review the decisions reache by the Boards.
l<ith regard to your question concerning how low-level test ng might affect the con ersion of the plant, we believe that the low power tes will not sub-st ntially affect the cost associated with the conversion o
the plant.
This due to the fact that the fission product inventory of suc operation will be ess than 0.10 of one percent of that generated by the plant d ring one year of OFFICE) s..
SURNAME DATE),
NRC FORM 318 (9.76) NRCM'0240 4 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979 289.369
'I I
) e II
tls. Oanice A. Clucas operation at full poser.,
urthermore, v,e believe t at the time to consider alternative fuels and convergion of this facility s now passed as discussed in the enclosure to this letty.
I trust this~'information is respon.ive to your request.
incer y,
Enclosure:
As stated ran); J.
f iqaglia, Acting Chief Licensing Br>hach ho.
3 Division of Li'b nsing OFFICE P SURNAME DATE$
,.... OL;N.¹3........EPPO;KPLB
. XWabbour.:.me
..EGPagano 10(.....(80....10/......./8.0.
OELD...
10/...... /80
....DL:LB..¹3.
. FDMixag.l,ia.
...1.0/....... NO....
NRC FORM 318 (9.76) NRCM 0240 AU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICEI 1979 289'369
P'1 POO
'0 F
J