ML16340B720
| ML16340B720 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 05/08/1981 |
| From: | Sears J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16340B719 | List: |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8105120014 | |
| Download: ML16340B720 (22) | |
Text
UNITED STATES OF Af1ERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COilhlSSIOH BEFORE THE ATOflIC SAFETY AND LICEHSIHG BOARD 4
In the tlatter of
)
D
)
6 PACIFIC GAS AHD ELECTRIC COMPANY
)
7
)
8 (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant
)
9 Unit Hos.
1 and 2)
Docket Hos.
50-275 O,L.
50-323 O.L.
10 TESTIllONY OF JOHN R.
SEARS ll g.
Please state your full name.
12 AD John R. Sears.
13 g.
By whom are you employed?
14 A.
I am employed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
I am a 15 17 Senior Reactor Safety Engineer in the Emergency Preparedness Licensing Branch, Division of Emergency Preparedness of the Office of Inspection
& Enforcement.
18 g.
Describe the nature of your work with respect to the Diablo Canyon 19 operating license proceeding?
20 A.
I am responsible for review and evaluation of the Emergency Plan for 21 the Diablo Canyon reactors.
22 g.
Have you reviewed the emergency plans for plants other than Diablo 23 Canyon' 24 A.
Yes.
sxosxs605i
t
\\
25 g.
What previous review experience have you had with respect to 26 emergency plans?
27 A.
Prior to the summer of 1979, I was responsible for review of the 28 emergency plans for all operating reactors.
29 g.
Would you detai 1 your professional qualifications?
30 A.
Attached is a copy of my professional qualifications.
31 g.
Mas PGSE revised the Diablo Canyon Power Plant Emergency Plan?
32 A.
PGSE filed a revision to the Diablo Canyon Power Plant Emergency 33 34 Plan in February of 1980.
PGSE also provided additional information in letters, PG8E to NRC, dated January 13, 1981 and February 27, 35 1981.
36 g.
Did you participate in the NRC review of these documents?
37 A.
Yes.
38 g.
Mow was the Emergency Plan evaluated?
39 A.
The Emergency Plan was reviewed against the specific criteria of the 40 41 42 43 45 sixteen Planning Standards in Part II of the "Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency
Response
Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants,"
NUREG-0654, Rev.
1, November 1980.
The same sixteen standards are listed as requirements of 10 C.F.R. 50.47, Final Regulations on Emergency
- Planning, August 18, 1980.
The NRC Staff has prepared an Emergency Preparedness Evaluation Report which lists each of the sixteen
47 50 51 52 55 57 standards listed in 10 C.F.R. 50.47 in order, followed by a summary of applicable portions of the Emergency Plan as they apply to the Standard.
In addition, the Emergency Plan has been evaluated against the requirements of Sections II.A.1. 1 and III.A.1.2 of NUREG-0694 (now superceded by the same sections of NUREG-0737).
Furthermore, California nuclear plant licensees and applicants have been requested to provide analyses on the effects of earthquake on their emergency plans, specifically in terms of the utilities'apabilities to insure availability of personnel and equipment to the sites.
58 g.
Where are the results and conclusions of the NRC Staff's evaluation 59 reported 7 60 A.
The NRC Staff's results and conclusions are reported in Appendix B
61 62 Emergency Preparedness Evaluation Report, to Supplement No.
14 to the Safety Evaluation Report, April 1981.
63 g.
What is the NRC staff conclusion?
64 A.
The NRC Staff conclusion is that the Diablo Canyon emergency
- plan, 65 66 67 68 when revised in accordance with the commitments
- made, provides an adequate planning basis for an acceptable state of emergency preparedness and will meet the requirements of 10 C.F.R. 50 and Appendix E.
4 69 g.
Do you concur in the results and conclusions of the Emergency 70 Preparedness Evaluation Report?
71 A.
Yes.
72 g.
Are there deficiencies in the Diablo Canyon Emergency Plan?
73 A.
Yes.
74 g.
Has PGSE made commitments to correct these deficiencies?
75 A.
- Yes, PGSE has committed to correct these deficiencies before a
76 license for full power is granted.
77 g.
What are these deficiencies?
78 A.
The principal deficiency is that a fast public alerting system is 79 80 81 82 83 84 not in place.
10 C.F.R. 50 Appendix E requires a demonstration of a fast alerting system to the general public.
PGSE has described its proposed system in Section 7.2. 11 of the Emergency Plan.
PG&E has contracted for the installation of 52 electro-nechnical sirens to perform this function.
Installation will commence as soon as necessary local permits are obtained.
85 g.
What is the significance of this deficiency for low power operation?
86 A.
The requirement for a system to alert the public within 15 minutes 87 88 89 90 is based on an accident scenario which could result in an offsite release of radiation in as little as thirty minutes from the time of initiation of an accident.
The requirement is not necessary for operation at 5% power because, even if a credible LOCA occured, the
91 92 resultant heat up of the core to melting point would tal;e at least 15 hours1.736111e-4 days <br />0.00417 hours <br />2.480159e-5 weeks <br />5.7075e-6 months <br /> and consequently a fast alerting system is not required.
93 g.
Is there a deficiency regarding a public information program?
94 A.
- Yes, 10 C.F.R. 50 Appendix E requires the dissemination to the 96 97 98 public within the 10 mile Emergency Planning Zone of basic planning in ormation.
PGSE has a publ'ic information brochure in draft form.
The final version must be integrated with the emergency plans of local governments which are presently being revised and upgraded.
99 g.
What is the significance of this deficiency for operation to 5~?
100 A.
The purpose of the requirement for a public information program is 101 102 103 104 to inform the public of how they will be alerted and what to do in an emergency.
Since the alerting system is not yet in place, there is not yet,a need for a public information program explaining the system.
105 g.
Are there other deficiencies in the Diablo Canyon Emergency Plan?
106 A.
There are othe areas where the On-Site Plan is not in full 107 108 109 compliance with the elements of the guidance in NUREG-0654.
Many have been addressed in the letter, PGE to NRC, dated January 13, 1981.
110 g.
What is the significance of these deficiencies for 5X power?
111 A.
These deficiencies are not significant for operation at 5" power.
112 PGSE has committed in its letter to NRC, dated 2/27/81 that a full 113 power license NUREG-0654 will be substantially complied with.
114 g.
Will a supplement to the Emergency Preparedness Evaluation Report be 115 issued?
116 A.
- Yes, a supplement to the Emergency Preparedness Evaluation Report 117 will be issued.
118 g.
1lhat will the supplement contain?
119 A.
The supplement will set forth the findings and determinations of the 120 Federal Emergency Nanagement Agency
{FENA) as to whether State and 121 local emergency response plans are adequate and capable of being 122 implemented for full power operation.
123 g.
Has FENA made a finding for low power operation at Diablo Canyon 124 Power Plant?
125 A.
Yes.
126 g.
What was FENA's finding for the adequacy of the present emergency 127 plans at Diablo Canyon?
128 A.
FENA has made a finding that the present emergency plans at Diablo 129 Canyon adequately protect the public health and safety for the 130 purposes of low power testing.
131 g.
Where is FENA's finding documented?
132 A.
FENA's finding is documented in a Nemorandum for Harold R.
Denton 133 and John W. NcConnel from FENA/NRC Steering Committee and in the 134 FENA/NRC Interim Agreement on Criteria for Low Power Testing at New 135 Commercial Nuclear Facilities -- SER Supplements Hos.
10 and 12.
136 g.
Mow is PG8E complying with the HRC request that all California 137 nuclear plant licensees'nd applicants provide analyses on the 138 effects of earthquake on their emergency plans, specifically in 139 terms of the utilities'apabilities to insure availability of 140 personnel and equipment to the sites'?
141 A.
I have been informed by PGKE that a contractor, has been employed to 142 study the impact of earthquako's on the emergency plans of the 143 utility and of offsite authorities.
144 g.
When will the contractor issue their report'?
145 A.
The report is due in mid-tray of 1981.
146 g.
Mow has PG&E proposed "to utilize the contractor's report?
147 A.
PGEE will revise the Energency Plans to include the contractor's 148 recommendations.
This will be done prior to full power operation.
149 g.
Are there presently emergency plans for the Diablo Canyon facility?
150 A.
Yes.
I 151 g.
Does the licensee's plan presently have a notification requirement 152 as regards accidents at the faci lity7 153 A.
Yes.
154 g.
What does the licensee's present emergency plan require?
155 A.
The licensee's present energency plan requires prompt notification 156 of the county governments surrounding Diablo Canyon Nuclear 157 Facility.
Governor Brown has adnitted this.
153 g.
Did Governor Brown adnit anything else as regards energency 159 planning?
lo0 A.
Yes, both Governor Brown and Joint Intervenors have adni tted that 161 any accident occuring during low power testing would release a
152 fraction of the existing fission product inventory at the Diablo 163 Canyon Nuclear Facility.
164 g.
Are the present emergency plans in full force and effect?
lo5 A.
Yes.
166 g.
What is your opinion about the adequacy of Diablo Canyon's combined 107 Applicant, State and local emergency response plans if an accident 168 were to occur during low power operation?
169 A.
Hy opinion is that, if, during low power operation, an accident were 170 171 172 173 to occur, the combined applicant, State and local emergency response plans will insure that an adequate state of emergency preparedness is in place to minimize the risks of hazard to the health and safety of the public during fuel loading and operation to 5'A power.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO<lMISS ION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AHD LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COflPAHY
)
)
(Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Unit Hos.
1 and 2)
)
Docket Hos.
50-275 O.L.
50-323 O.L.
JOHN R.
SEARS PROFESSIONAL gUALIFICATIOHS EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM OFFICE Prior to 1952, I was employed in field jobs in various aspects of mechanical engineering.
In 1952, I joined Brookhaven National Laboratory as a Reactor Shift Supervisor on the Brookhaven Graphite Reactor.
While at Brookhaven, I completed a series of courses given by the Nuclear Engineering Department in nuclear engineering.
These courses were patterned on the ORSORT programs.
In 1956, I was appointed Project Engineer on the Brookhaven Medical Research Reactor.
I was a member of the design group, participated in critical design experiments, wrote specifications, coauthored the hazards
- report, was responsible for field inspection and contractor liaison, trained operators and loaded and started up the reactor.
About three months after start-up, in 1959, following the successful completion of proof tests and demonstration of the reactor in its design operating mode for boron capture therapy of brain cancer, I accepted a posi tion as reactor inspector with the Division of Inspection, U.
S. Atomic Energy Commission.
In 1960, I
transferred, as a reactor inspector, to the newly-formed Division of Compliance.
I was responsible for the inspection, for safety and
compliance with license requir ments, of the licensed reactors and the fu l fabrication and fuel processing
- plants, which use more than critical amounts of special nuclear mat rial, in tne Eastern United States.
In September 1968, I transferred to the Operational Safety Branch, Directorate of Licensing.
Hy responsibility included development of appropriate guides for evaluation of operationsl aspect of license applications and staff assistance in review of power reactor applicants submittals in the areas of Organization and Management.
Personnel gualifications, Training Programs, Procedures and Administrative Control, Review and Audit, Start-up Testing Programs Industrial Security and Emergencv Planning.
The Branch was reorganized as the Industrial Security and Emergency Planning Branch in April 1974 to place increased emphasis and attention upon areas of physical security and emergency planning.
In 1976, I transferred to the Division of Operating Reactors as the sole reviewer responsible'or review of emergency planning for all the operating reactors in the United States.
flew York City College, 1950 - Nechanical Engineering Argonne International School of Reactor Technology, 1961 - Reactor Control Course GE BWR System Design Course, 1972 Popo-U.S.
Army, 1974 - Course in Industrial Defense and Disaster Planning Instructor at DCPA, 1976, 1977 - Course in Emergency Planning
.1 Director, 1962 - Reactor
- Program, Atoms for Peace Exhibit, Bangkok, Thailand
- Director, 1966 - Ator>s for Peace Exhibit, Utrecht, Holland
t
~l