ML16341C647
| ML16341C647 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem, Crane  |
| Issue date: | 10/03/1979 |
| From: | Gossick L NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Lagomarsino R HOUSE OF REP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16341B242 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7912040107 | |
| Download: ML16341C647 (10) | |
Text
OCT 3 1979 The Honorable Robert J, Lagomarsino United States House of Representatives Mashington, D.C.
20515 Dear Congressman Lagomarsino:
DISTRIBUTION T FILE 50-275, 50-323 NRR R/F CKammerer MASB R/F Jeanne Cook DSE:SA R/F GErtter (07416)
LPDR NGroff/AFerguson PDR SECY <'9 LVGossick EDO R/F HRDenton/EGCase OCA DMuller VStello HBerkow RHattson DVassallo RRyan FSchroeder NHaller DEisenhut HShapar MEKreger ELD Tt4I A/D CPaul In response to your letter of September 13, 1979 to Bill Kreger, I am en-closing several items that explain the current position of the NRC staff, as well as contrasting opinions of individual staff members.
The first enclosure is the "NRC Staff Response to (Sa'lem 1) Board guestion No. 4 Regarding the Occurrence of a Class 9 Accident at Three Nile Island,"
This is the staff's current formal position.
The second enclosure is the Staff Counsel's explanation to the board of our change from the corn>>
ment in my letter to you on June 29, 1979e The'hext two enclosures rep-resent individual staff member opinions regarding the classification of the Three Nile -Island accident.
These have also been forwarded to the board.
It can be further commented that the definition 'of Class 9 accidents is provided in the proposed Annex to Appendix 0, 10 CFR Part 60, which was never adopted as part of the Code of Federal Regulations, but is currently carried as Appendix I to Regulatory Guide 4.2, copy enclosed.
Sincerely, (Sl~ned) Lee V Gossmls
<<e V. Gossick Executive Director for Operations Enclosures; 1.'RC Staff Response 2.
Staff Counsel's Explanation 3.
Note dtd. 09/24/79 fm. F. D. Anderson to R. J, Nattson 4.
Note did< 08/30/79 fm. J. Nartin to R. J. Nattson 5.
Reg.
Guide 4.
/
/79 orricn9 SUnNAMEW DATS~
DSE MEKreger:dr
( /~/7o DSE Q
- Dpd,-;--,
/Q/79 OE
/j(/ g RR:
HR on g/+7i-""
'RC FORK 818 (9 76) NRCK 0240 A us e. oovnnnMenv rninvino orrica sore-eee.eat
1 EE ES E
h
'I
~
E h
E h
e I Ih>>
~
~
4 E-I h "e ee gs se>>ss
QUEST IOh The proposed Annex to Appendix 0 10 GFR Part 50, appears to define a Class 9
accident as a sequence of failures which are more severe than those which the safety features of the plant are designed to prevent, The sequences of failures at Three Nile Island produced a breach of the containment and a release of radiation which could not be prevented by the safety features.
Has the occur-rence at Three Mile Island therefore a Class 9 accident2 E."as the risk to the
.health and safety and the environment "remote in probability" or "extremely low" at Three Mile Island, as those terms are used in the Annex2 RESPONSE.
The proposed Annex (1) to Appendix 0, 10 CFR Part 50, states "the occurrences in Class 9 involve sequences of postulated successive failures more severe than those postulated for the design basis fo'i the protective systems and engineered safety features of the plant."
The accident at Three Mile Island Unit 2 involved a
sequence (3) of successive failures (i.e. small-break loss-of-coolant accident and failure of the emergency core.cooling system) more severe than 'those postulated for the design basis of the plant, Therefore, we conclude that the accident at Three Mile Island was a Class 9 event.
However,.at no time during the TMI-2 accident were the radiological consequences to the public more severe than those calculated for the design basis of the plant.
The common definition of Class 9 accidents are those events whose consequences are severe but whose probability of occurrence is extremely low.
The accident at Three Mile Island did occur, yet the release of radioactive material to the.offsite
. Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in the matter of Public Service Electric and Gas Company Salem Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool Expansion Docket 50-272 July 10, 1929
'l
~
'e J
1 population was very small.
Me conclude that the accident at THI-2 can only be considered a Class 9 event from the standpoint of possible, rather than actual, radiological consequences of the given sequence of failures.
I In response to,the final question of the risk to health and safety and the environment beina "remote in probab-il <ty" or "e"tre-,ely low" a+ Thre Nil
- Island, we conclude that the radioactive material released during the TNI-2 accident "represents minimal risks (that is, a very small number) of additional health effects to the offsite population." (4)
1.
Proposed Annex to Appendix D, 10 CFR 50.
Originally published in ihe Feoerai iceoiaier on D ceebel I, 1-o71 (35 FR 22851).
A1tho a"h the Annex was never adopted as part of the Code, it is currently carried as Appendix I to Regulatory Guide 4.2 (listed below}.
2.
Regulatory Guide 4.2, Revision 2, "Preparation of Environmental Reports f'r Nuclear Power Stations,"
NUREG-0099, July 1976.
3.
"Investigation into the March 28, 1979 Three Mile Island Accident,"
h NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement, NUREG-Q600, August 1977.
4.
"Population Dose and Health Impact of the Accident at the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station," Preliminary Estimate Prepared by the Ad Hoc Interagency Dose Assessment
- Group, NUREG-0558, May 1979.
'I P
r
Cg cc Sty(q
~c O
~ hB>>.=: (f; o~ '-~~jlij.~ -"
~4, '%~~
0 o % ~*~A UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY GOVT'.".lSS1QN Vc'ASHII4a toN, D. C. 20555
~
SEP Z8'igy9:-
Dr. James C. Lamb, III 313 Noodhaven,Road Chapel H'll,,".'orth Carol na c
Gary L. Milhollin,Zsq., Chairman 1815 Jefferson Street h<adison, Nisconsin 53711
~
h<r. Frederick J. Shon Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 3'i'ashington, D.C.
20555 2751 8 In the 1'.atter of Public Service Electric Ij Gas Company (Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit No. I)
Docket No. 50-272 (Proposed Issuance of.
.Amendment 'to Facili 0 eratinp License No. DPR-70 Gentlemen:
In an Order dated September
- 10. 1979, the Board made reference to the enclosed letter of June.29, 1979 from Mr. Lee V. Gossick, Executive Director for Operations, to Congressman Robert J. Lagomarsino in which the statement was made that "[i]t should be noted that the Three VileIsland accident is not a Class 9 accident."
Since the date of that )etter, the Staff has had an opportunity to consider this question
~
further, and its'current position on the c)assiGcation of the Three hfile Island accident is found in the "NRC Staff Response to Board Question No. 4 Regarding the Occurrenc of a Class 9 Accident at Three h!ile Island."
~
\\
~
I
'incerely, c
Barry H. Smith
. Counsel for NRC Staff
Enclosure:
As stated cc avi encJosure-
~cI~ Scr-~-1c~.