ML16340C240

Ack Receipt of .Effect of Radioactive U Dioxide on Health,Emergency Preparedness & Proximity of Hosgri Fault to Facility Discussed

ML16340C240
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	12/31/1981
From:	Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Shepherd D AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
References
NUDOCS 8201210375
Download: ML16340C240 (12)

Text

t1s. Denise Shepherd 1261 Cortez 81 Sunnyvale, California 94086 OECEMBER S 1 198)

~pgg)gkFO JAN 6 1982

~ C~~

elm! ~SQ 10

Dear Ns. Shepherd:

I am pleased to respond to your letter of September 23,

'l981 which has been-referred to me for reply.

In your letter, you requested a response to the following three questions:

1.

What: is radioactive uranium dioxide and how does it affect'he health of the workers and people around the plant7 2.

Why did the NRC give permission to PGSE to operate the plant at 5 percent capacity when t<RC has not yet resolved the question of emergency preparations in case of leakage2 3.

I have been informed that the Diablo plant is 2.5 miles from an under sea*

earthquake fault.

'i!hat data,

evidence, or research do we have which can help me make judgements about the safety of operating plants in such'arthquake zones.

A Our response to your questions are delineated below.

Uranium Dioxide.

, In regard to question No.

1 above, the chemical formula for uranium dioxide is UO.

The fuel rods that will be used in the Diablo Canyon pl~~t consi,st 2

of uranium dioxide ceramic pellets contained in zircaloy-4 tubing which:ij plugged and seal welded at the ends to encapsulate the uranium dioxideIfuel,.

As a result of neutron interaction with the uranium dioxide fuel pellets')'uring the operation of the plant, radioactive gases and fission products viill' generated.

Assessment of the potential radiological impact from estimates of dose to.~qn from gaseous and liquid radioactive effluents released by the Diablo Cany Nuclear Station can be given some perspective by comparisons with (1) the recommended numerical dose limits and (2) the doses from the natural radia ion background.

The radiation dose to the total body and internal organs from he natural radiation backgrund in the area of Diablo Canyon averages about 115 millirem per year.

82012i0375 Bii23i PDR ADQCK OS000275

- A.

PDR

Q e

kl r

I, N

e p,

t

'ay

~f l,

~ ~

VC

OECEhlBER 3 y gg)

The release of radioactive effluents during normal plant operations is regulated through an operating license issued by the Commission.

This license requires that the station be operated according to written Technical Specifications approved by the Commission.

Numerical guidelines defining "as low as practicable" has been applied to the Diablo Canyon plant-The limitations set forth in 10 CFR Part 20 are based upon the recommended numerical dose limits of recognized national and international radiation protection groups.

The largest estimate of radiation dose to the total body from the gaseous effluent occurs at the residence at l-l/2 miles Ht)W of the station.

These estimates of dose have not been reduced by occupancy factors or by shielding factors provided by houses against radionuclides contained in the air or deposited on the ground.

Without any consideration of these factors, the sum of the dose estimates to the whole body of 0.14 millirem to an individual residing at 1-1/2 miles tiNW of the station is about O.ll of the dose from natural background and less than 0.03% of the recommended numerical annual dose limit, 500 millirem.

Emergency Planning The second question which you raised was in regard to the adequacy of the emergency preparedness at Diablo Canyon for low power operation, which we believe to be acceptable for the following reasons.

The Pacific Gas 8 Electric Company has upgraded onsite preparedness including an onsite technical support center.

The Pacific Gas and Electric Company has also established an interim Emergency Operation Facility(EOF) adjacent to the San Luis Obispo County Sheriff's Office and it is equipped with data display equipment and redundant communication systems.

In view of the actions that have already been implemented by PG5E, our review of PGPE's emergency preparedness, and our evaluation that any accidentswhich might occur during low power operation would not result, in significant consequences

offsite, we have concluded that emergency preparedness at Diablo Canyon'is acceptab'le for low power operation.

We will require the resolution of open items to assure conformance with NRC and Federal Emergency management,Agency (FEt1A) requirements prior to the issuance of a full power license.

I Proximity of the Hosgri Fault to the Diablo Canyon Facility The last question you raised was about the Hosgri Fault, which is located~

2 1/2 miles from the Diablo plants, which was discovered in 19?1 and" hasibeen the subject of intensive investigation by the Pacific Gas 8 Electric Company (PG&E), the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the nuclear Regulatory'.,Cori,ssion (HRC).

As a principal geologic advisor for the Commission, the USGS 4 1979 suggested that a magnitude of 7.5 be assigned as a potential seismiC value.; "

for the Hosgri Fault. It is important to note that the USGS did'no't sg'hat the Hosgri would experience a 7.5N ear thquake but from a conservative.s'tap)point that magnitude could not be ruled out.

Comprehensive public hearings on: tie)s matter were held by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) over abo'ut "

a two-month period (from December 1978 to early 1979).

Some of this natfol$ "s

PL<<

1 if

\\

)

, ~ s V ~

DECEMBER S 1 1SBl and the world's leading authorities, testified and were subject to cross-examination.

The experts from the NRC staff and POSE went on to say that the plant has been designed to withstand the greater seismic event of 7.5.

On September 26, 1979, the ASLB assigned to conduct the licensing hearings issued its partial initial decision which found that a 7.5 magnitude earthquake is reasonable and meets regulatory requirements.

On June 23, 1980, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board for this matter issued a decision to reopen the hearing record to obtain testimony related to a major earthquake which occurred in California's Imperial Valley..in October 1979 (shortly after the ASLB's favorable pat tial initial decision in September 1979).

The NRC staff testimony on this issue was submitted to the Appeal Board in August 1980 and a public hearing was held before the Appeal Board in October, 1980 in San Luis Obispo, California.

On June 'l6, 1981 the Appeal Board issued a favorable finding on this issue and concluded that the seismic design criteria used for constructing the Diablo Canyon facility was acceptable.

- On September 28, 1981 the Pacific Gas 8 Electric Company notified the NRC staff that incorrect vertical response spectra was used in the design of seismic restraints for certain piping and components.

The Cceeission suspended the low power operating license on November 19, 1981 and requested that additional information be submitted to assure that the piping and components restraints have been properly designed prior to a decision on re-instating the low power license.

I trust that the above information has been responsive to your'oncerns.

=-

DISTRIBUTION:

Docket File 50-275/323 PDR SHanauer RMattson TERA HThompson LB¹3 FilesRVollmer EDO Rdg.

BSnyd bess t'ai)

HDenton ECase DEisenhut RTedesco FMiraglia BBuckley JLee

Attorney, OELD GErtter (¹81-538)

SCavanaugh MWil]iams h.Berry BPaul Cotter, ASLB IE (3)

SECY (3) (81-2184)

PPAS Sincerely, Original signed by Robert I Tedesoe P

Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing Office of Iiuclear Reactor Regulation I

OFFICEW SURNAME/

OATEf D

L ¹ BB

.jb

~ ~ ~ ~

Ot

~ \\ ~ \\ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~

1 2/

/81

~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~

0 B¹3 lia 12 81 D

/L

~i~

tt

~ ~

~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~

desco

/81 DG DL:

2/

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I~i~ ~i~ IO~ 0 ~ 0 ~0it NRC FOAM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 0 FF ICIAL R ECOR D COPY USGPO1 1961~~~9rp

F.

I the

~

8 I!

No Wi 184 NRC SECRETARIAT 10/13/81 Logging Date 0 Commissioner XXXI'Exec. Dir.loper.

D Cong. Liaison Q Public Affairs Date 0 Gen. Counsel 0 Solicitor O Secretary C3 Inspector & Auditor Policy Evaluation Incoming:

From:

E Referral Denise She herd B

nie Betancourt--DOE To:

Subject:

Date 8 81

.r CI Prepare reply for signature of:

Q Chairman Q Commissioner 0

EOO, GC, CL,SOL, PA,SECY, IA, PE Q Signatureblock omitted 0 Return original of incoming with response Remarks:

docket

%t For direct reply'or appropriate action 0

For information OB(B

~Bc'g Ofs p....)

~

\\

~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s, For the Commission 1

1e

'Send three (3) copies of reply to Secy Correspondence end Records Branch NRC42 ACTION SLIP

C

(

September 23, 1981 James B.

Edwards 1000 Independence Ave.

SW 20585 Denise Shepherd 1261 Cortez Pl Sunnyvale California 94086

Dear t3r. Edwards,

I t

I am writing to you in hopes of discovering exactly what is transpiring with the nuclear plant and protestors at Diablo Canyon.

1 Here are the questions I would like answered; 1.

What is radioactive uranium dioxide and how does it affect the health of the workers and people-around the plant?

2.

Why did the NRC give permission to PG&E to operate the p1ant':at'5.*percent'~capaci:ty."whhn NRC:has-not..yet =resolved the.question.~of"emengency'preparations;in,.case of 'leakhge?

I have been informed that the Diablo plant is 2.5 miles from an under sea earthquake fault.

What data,

evidence, or research do we have which can help me make judgements about the safety of operating plants in such earthquake zones.

Anxiously waiting for your reply QgA7~/~/

Denise Shepherd

I g

vzt>ZO S3 g <)!.f7<tq pp )

SZSI tN gg gpss gg

Department of Energy Washington, D.C. 20585 Ms. Denise Shepherd 1261 Cortez 81 Sunnyvale, California 94086

Dear Ms. Shepherd:

This will acknowledge your recent letter to Secretary Edwards.

Because the subject of your letter does not fall within the purview of the Department of Energy, we have forwarded your letter to:

Mr. Thomas Combs Chief, Correspondence and Records Branch Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555 Sincerely, HMi'dM

<QLV~

Bonnie Betancourt Director of Special Projects Office of the Executive Secretary

~

1 ~

Jk<~.~

'I 4

k P

Sf 8 ~