ML16340B478
| ML16340B478 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 03/10/1981 |
| From: | Bradley Jones, Tam P Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Ellen Brown CALIFORNIA, STATE OF |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16340B477 | List: |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8103120373 | |
| Download: ML16340B478 (12) | |
Text
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO.
Docket Nos.
50-275 O.L.
50-323 O.L.
(Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units Nos.
1 and 2)
NRC
RESPONSE
TO GOVERNOR BROWN'S INTERROGATORIES Interro ator 1
Do you contend that the combined PGImE, state and local emergency response plans for Diablo Canyon presently comply with the revised emergency planning regulations promulgated by the NRC on August 19,
- 1980, 45 Fed.
~Re 55402?
~Res onse No.
The Diablo Canyon onsite plan is in substantial compliance with the revised 10 C.F.R. 50; the State and county plans are currently being upgraded.
The combined plans must comply with the revised emergency planning regulations prior to issuance of a full power license.
Interro ator 2
If the answer to Interrogatory 1 is affirmative, specify each and every fact which supports this position and identify all documents, including
- state, local and PGIIE emergency response
- plans, which support this position or otherwise relate to compliance with the NRC's revised emergency planning regulations.
~Res onse N/A Interro ator 3
If the answer to Interrogatory 1 is negative, does the NRC staff contend that PGIIE can be granted the requested fuel loading and low power licenses and undertake low power testing without compliance with the
NRC's revised regulations?
Explain the basis of any such position, including identification of all documents relating to this position.
~Res onse Yes.
The Staff originally stated, in NUREG-0694, that for a low power license, an applicant need only substantially meet requirements in 10 C.F.R. 50 and Appendix E (as amended at 38 Fed.
Rece.
1272, January 11, 1973),
and conform to the guidance in Regulatory Guide
- 1. 101.
The Staff published an evaluation of the applicant, State and local emergency plans in August 1980 (Safety Evaluation Report, Supplement No.
10, Docket Hos.
50-275 and 50-323).
These plans were found acceptable for low-power operation according to the standards in NUREG-0694.
Since that time, NUREG-0694 has been clarified by NUREG-0737 which references a revised 10 C.F.R. 50 and NUREG-0654 with respect to low power operation.
This reference is found in a table in Enclosure 2 of NUREG-0737 although the textual words in NUREG-0694 were not modi ied.
The above finding is, however, consistent with paragraph 50.47(c)( 1) of 10 C.F ~ R.
50 (August 19, 1980) which states that the Commission may issue a license to operate a plant if the applicant can demonstrate that deficiencies in the plans are not significant for the plant in question or that adequate interim compensating actions have been or will be taken
- promptly, The offsite plans (State and County) do not currently meet HUREG-0654, Rev.
1 requirements, but they are being upgraded and will be completed later this year.
In addition, under 10 C.F.R. 50.57(c) for purposes of low power testing, it must be found that the applicant has met the requirements of the regulations which are relevant to the low power testing authorization.
The finding in the Safety Evaluation Report
(SER) Supplement No.
10, Docket Nos.
50-275 and 50-323, supports tho conclusion that any areas of non-compliance with the revised emergency planning regulations are not relevant to the public health and safety during low power testing.
- Further, FEMA has specifically made the finding that the present emergency plans at Diablo Canyon adequately protect the public healtn and safety.
(FEMA/NRC Interim Agreement on Criteria For Low Power Testing at New Commercial Nuclear Facilities--Supp.
10; Memorandum for Harold R.
Denton and John
'H. McConnell from FEMA/NRC Steering Committee, see attachment,)
Meanwhile, all of the previously approved offsite plans are still in effect.
The onsi te plan has been upgraded and is in substantial compliance with NUREG-0654, Rev.
1 requirements.
(Staff evaluation o.
the upgraded onsite plan will be published in Supplement No.
13 to the SER.)
If, during low-power operation, an accident were to occur that would release a fraction of the small fission product inventory that would hav accumulated during testing, offsite doses would be insignificant and no offsite protective actions would be anticipated (See Page 3 of Diablo Canyon Safety Evaluation Report, Supplement No.
10 for discussion of risks.)
The current onsite and offsite plans are sufficient for such an unlikely events The Staff technical position thus remains that adequate emergency preparedness is in place for fuel load and low-power operation.
4 Does the NRC Staff contend that the state, local and Applicant emergency response plans for Diablo Canyon satisfy the requirements set forth at page 2-11 of NUREG-0737, specified as clarification items III.A.1. 1, III.A.1.2, and III.A.2?
~Res onse Yes.
See
Response
to Interrogatory 5.
In terr~pa thor 5
If the answer to Interrogatory 4 is affirmative, specify each and every fact which supports this position and identify all documents which relate to compliance with these requirements.
~Res onse Item III.A.1. 1. - The applicant has made these improvements.
Our evaluation of these improvements are documented in NUREG-0675, Safety Evaluation Report for Diablo Canyon, Supplements No.
10 and No.
12.
Item III.A.1~ 2. - Improvements and commitments have been made by Pacific Gas and Electric Company, and are acceptable (NUREG-0675, Supplements No, 10 and No.
12).
Item III.A.2. - See response to Interrogatory 1 and 3.
Oocument Re uests Re<euest 1
The Staff has attached one document to these responses.
All other documents referred to in these responses are either already in the possession of Governor Brown or are available in the Public Document Rooms.
~Re uest 2
The Staff objects to Request 2 as being overly broad in that it requests e
all documents relevant to one of the subjects of this proceeding.
As the Appeal Board specifically noted in Illinois Power Com an (Clinton Power Station, Unit Nos.
1 and 2), ALAB-340, 4 HRC 27 (1976),
requests for documents which request all documents relevant to the subject matter of the proceeding are generally without merit and must be further limited in scope.
In the interest of expediting this proceeding, however, if counsel for Governor Brown will notify the Staff wi th more specificity as to what documents they wish to see, the Staff will promptly attempt to reach a
mutually satisfactory agreement with Governor Brown for making the document available to Governor Brown.
Attorne makin objections:
Bradley W.
ones Counsel r NRC Staf Dated at Bethesda, Haryland this 10th day of triarch, 1981.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO, (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Pow r
)
Plant, Units Nos.
1 and 2)
)
Docket Nos.
50-275 O.L.
50-323 O.L.
AFFIRMATION OF PREPARATION I prepared the answer to Interrogatories I, 2, 3, and 4.
They are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 5~
day of 7Y/~A, /'ll,'eter S.
Tam Notary Public in hand for the State of Maryland, Montgomery County My Commission expires:
July 1, 1982
JO