ML16341B458

Responds to Opposing Operation of Facility Due to Lack of Proper Emergency Preparedness & Evacuation Plans.Nrc Has Reacted Positively to Improve Safety of Nuclear Plants Following TMI Accident

ML16341B458
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	11/20/1980
From:	Miraglia F Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Anson W AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
Shared Package
ML16340B264	List: ML16341B458
References
NUDOCS 8012120203
Download: ML16341B458 (12)

Text

NOV 20 1980 fear.

and YIrs. Milliam B. Anson 1427 Thirteenth Street Los Osos, California 93402

Dear f<r. and Mrs. Anson:

I am pleased to respond to your letter of YIarch 15, 1980 to f)r. Richard

Salzman, Chairman, Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board regarding Diablo Canyon.

Since he is a member of the Appeal Board having review jurisdiction over this licensing proceeding, it would not be appropriate under current Commission rules for Hr. Salzman to comment on your concerns.

Your letter has been referred to me fot reply.

This also responds to your letter of t~Iarch 31, 1980, addressed to Mrs Denton, since the same concerns are expressed in both letters.

You expressed concern over the emergency preparedness and evacuation of the area surrounding Diablo Canyon in view of the accident at Three Nile Island (Tt<I).

Let me assure you that following the Tt>i

=*>>

~

I P

II I

y lhi ik" hk

't I ~

kg

~

4 'h 4~,

'I IP ~

I 4:

Cl 4M>>

"ih 4!

4 P

~

fir. and Roars.

Anson Under conditions which make movement difficult, the appropriate pro-tective measures likely would be sheltering in homes followed by a subsequent relocation of the population from any contaminated areas.

The emergency plans will set forth the mechanisms for deciding on the most effective protective actions for the public given tt}e-specific conditions which pertain at the time of'n accident.

Furthermore, we are enclosing a copy of our September 29, 1980 letter from fir. H. Dircks, HRC's Executive Director for Operations addressed to Senator Cranston (Enclosure 1), in response to your letter dated Hay 7, 1980 to the Senator.

This letter provides additional information and discusses some of your concerns.

In addition, following the Tf<I-accident, Intervenors moved to reopen the record on Class 9 accidents and emergency planning.

On tune 5, 1979, the Licensing Boar d stated that it would not rule on the motion until it receives the NRC staff's supplemental safety evaluation report on the effects of THI related to a full pov;er license for Diablo Canyon.

This report will be issued in early 1981.

In order to receive a full power license for Diablo Canyon, PGBE must complete all TNI safety-related requirements (including emergency planning) f'r such a license as identifed in f<UREG-0694 and obtain favorable rulings from the Licensing Board.

Before issuance of such a license by the HRC staff, the Corrmission will have the opportunity to review the determinations reached by the Board.

You were also concerned over the balance between needed power and human

lives, and the alternatives available in lieu of a nuclear power plant.

The Rational Environmental Policy Act (tIEPA) of 1969 requires the t/uclear Regulatory.Commission to prepare a detailed statement on each of the following environmental issues associated with the construction and operation of the Diablo Canyon facility:

(i)

The environmental impact of the proposed action, (ii) any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented, (iii}alternatives to the proposed-action, (iv) the relationship between local short-term uses of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and OFFICE s

~

SURNAME DATE$.

NRC FORM 318 (9.76) NRCM 0240 AU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979'289 389

I P

jl fj Il

'I W

'I Il II Ij 1j

~

t~r. and ttrs.

Anson (v) any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would he involved in the proposed act.ion should it be implemented.

tte did this.

All of your concerns mentioned above were addi essed in our Final Fnvironmental Statement (FES) for Diablo Canyon.

Chapter 13 of the FES addressed the benefits ta be derived from this facility; Chapter 7 addressed the environmental impact of potential accidents';

and, Chapters 11 and 12 addressed the matters of need for power and the alternatives available to meet that need.

Furthermore, hear.ings >>ere held on these environmental issues before construction permits were issued to construct this facility, and a favorable partial initial decision was issued on September 26, 1979 by the present Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.

That Board considered all issues (including environmental issues) that were brouoht before it for operating licenses for the Diablo Canyon facility.

l!ith regard to your question concerning the feasibility of coverting Diablo

'anyon to gas or coal, we believe that the time to consider alternative fuels and conversion of this facility has now passed as discussed in Enclosure 2 to this letter.

However, the NRC staff understands that certain conversion studies are being undertal:en and if'hese reports show such conversion to be feasible and desirable, they can be considered, at that time.

A copy of the

FES, PGEE's evacuation

study, as well as other licensing documents, correspondence and Board proceedings can -be. found in the Local Public Document Poom (LPDR) maintained for Diablo Canyon.

This LPDR is located at the California Polytechnic State University Library, Documents and llaps Department, San Luis Obispo, California 93407.

I trust that this information is responsive to your request.

Sincerely, Fnclosures:

As stated Frank D. Hiraglia, Acting Chief Licensing Branch No. 3 Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation OFFICE)

SURNAME DATE)

DL:LB3 KJabbour:cmh 10/go/80 FP 0~

0 rimes 1$/

/80 oELo g Qirl~

NRC FORM 318 (9.76) NRCM 0240 AU.S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: l979'289'369

!I 3

~

I lj, dP

~.

I I

$ n

~ h I

313 1

rd " 'I I

1$ f I tr.

Ir' I

~

~

t

~

I II t

r 13 r

I hrttt 3 N

I I fdII d t 1 ( I I, ctlrh p ~ I dP~C

~'

C I'

1<<V

~rir 3

UP 3

3 V j.

II 3

g 3 ~

v 3

3 II

'I

'I 3 3

I

~

't

$ 3'<t I

~

~

3 3 '1 CI O'O'I'I lI I ~ 3 Uc I

-1.3 I Ulh It Ih(

I

~ (

}~

II

L

~

P,r.

and 1rs. 14illiam B. Anson 1427 Thi teenth Street Los Osos, alifornia 93402 Dear Hr. and rs. Anson:

I am p'leased to espond to your. letter of f!arch 15, 1980 o Hr. Richard

Salzman, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Bo rd regarding Diablo Canyon.

Si e he is a member of the Appeal Boar presiding over issues in this case, it would not be appropriate unde current Comoission rules for t<r. Salzman to cogent on your concerns, y ur letter was referred to me f'r reply.

Nore ver, this will provide our sponse to your other letter of t!arch 31, 198 addressed to Nr. Denton

<hich has also been referred to me for reply, since the same concer are expressed in both letters.

You expressed concern over t e erne'rgency pre aredness and evacuation of the area surrounding Diablo C nyon fn viewidf the, accident at Three Niie Island (THI).

Let me assure yop that fol owing the THI accident, the NRC has reacted positively to impro0q the sa ety of all nuclear power plants in operation and under constructi'.

8 sed on the findings of the President's Comnission on the accident (the Ke eny CommIission), the recommendations of the Special Inquiry Group directed Nftchell Rogovin, recommendations developed by internal NRC special ty k'orces, and recommendations from other sources including the Adviso P ommittee on Reactor Safeguards, a

comprehensive

document, NUREG-066 tit qd, "NRC Action Pl'an Developed as a Result of the TlfI-2 Accident", was pre ared and published in Nay 1980.

Consistent with the Nuclear R

ulatory Co ission guidance, the NRC staff is requiring all applicants f r new operating licenses to modify the design and operation of their nucl r plants to conf rm to THI-related requirements.

NURFG-0694 titled, "TYII-Rel ted Requirements r

New Operating Licenses",

published in Dune 1980, ig ntified these requir ents and provided a schedule by which they must be imp]emented.

The Pacific s and Electric Company (PGBE) has met our emer kncy planning requirements for full loading and low power (below five perce t) testing.

For a full pow license., PG8E's'lan must be upgraded to be in compliance with NRC criten as stated in NUREG-

0694, NUREG-0654 titl O', "Criteria for Preparation an Evaluation'of

'adiological Emergen y Response Plans and Preparedness Support of Nuclear Power Plants",

a re ision to 10 CFR 50 and a new Appendi E to the Gorjmission's regulations.

4 In April 1980, P

8E submitted to the NRC an evacuation study r the't'en mile zone surro nding Diablo Canyon.

This study describes evac tion, r'outes, road capacitie and evacuation time estimates for both normal wea her"and hazardous con itions which include, among other things, fire, floo,', qa ', h-.

quake.and ra iation.

The study recognizes the impossibility of'va uatin I

OFFICE $

SURNAME OATE P..

NRC FORM 318 (9 76) NRCM 0240

'AU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979 289'389

E g i' I

EE'-,:

,E wl

~ I

<<i

/

g gv I

,r I

I~ ~

I I

EI IiI i

I

'E El I

E

<</

~

y I

I I

I

<<E'

~ w I/

I

/

I/<<

• w ~

w h w

It

,, ~ w W

w f."

I 1 '

,, lf 4

I Ww w

~

II<<

i

<<II 'll A

'I I

E w<<w II w

WI <<t.

w

~ w

Yr. and mrs. Anson w2w Baywood Park and Los Osos during some hazardous conditions.

However, the ten mfl zone is not necessarily an evacuation zone but it is an emergency plannin zone as stated in HUREG-0396/EPA 520/1-78-016 titled, "Planning Basis fo the Development of State and Local Government/Padfo1ogical Emergency

Response

Plans in Support of Light Mater Huclear Power Plants",

published Decemher ip78.

This report points out tp(at t'or the most severe accf nts, in order to limit life and injury threatening

doses, evacuation is the preferred protective measure uitfdn the rive mi'le zone surroundfng th plant, but in the zone between ffi0e and ten miles the appropriate act n may be to seek shelter in one' home subsequently followed by evac tion..Beyond the ten mile one, the document states that actions cou'I be tat.'en on an ad hoc basis.

Furthermore, we are nclosing a copy. of oup September 29, 1980 letter from t<r. V. Dircks, G's Executive Direct'or for Operations addressed to Senator Cranston {. closure 1), in response to your letter dated Nay 7,'980 to the Senator.

is letter prov des additional information and discusses some of your c ncerns.

In addition, following the Tf~I-accf ent, Intervenor s moved to reopen the record on Class,9 accidents and em rgency planning.

On June 5, 1979, the Licensing Board stated that 't wo d not rule on the motion until ft receives the HRC staff's supp em ntal safety evaluation report on the effects of Tf>hich ca not be avoided should the pr osal be implemented, (fff) altern ives to the proposed action, (fv) the elationshfp between local short-term uses o

an's environment a

d the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and OFFICE/

a.

SURNAME DATE).

NRC FORM 318 (9.76) NRCM 0240

+U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICEs 1979.289.369

e f

c

~

l I

t j

II Jf

ION:

Docket Fi 0-275/323)

R~D LPOR NRR Reading DL:LB 3 Files HDenton ECase HBerkow DEisenhut RTedesco Ftliraglia KJabbour FPagano BGrimes JLee SCavanaugh (NRR-3921/3936)

EHughes MFudge PPAS RVollmer DRoss SHanauer TNur 1 ey

ey lP

'h

'I ci C 1 f

1h 4