ML17275B253

Comments on NUREG-0812,DES for Facility

ML17275B253
Person / Time
Site:	Columbia
Issue date:	09/25/1981
From:	Doherty J AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:	Rajender Auluck Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RTR-NUREG-0812, RTR-NUREG-812 NUDOCS 8109290446
Download: ML17275B253 (6)

Text

REGULA I'QRY INFORMATION DISTR IBUT'I i SYSTEM (RIDS)

ACCESSIOVi NBR 8109290446'OC ~ DATEi! ~ 81/09/25 NOTARIZED NO DOCKEiT' FACILe50, 397 WPPSS Nuclear ProJect< Unit" 2'i. Wash'ington Pub}ic Pbwe. 05090397 AUTHI,NAMEI AUTHOR AFFILIATiION DOHERITY, Ji, F ~ A f f i i a t i on Unknown 1

RECIP', VAMEI RECIPIENT AFF ILiIATIOiV AULUCK'iRis Division of Licensing

SUBJECT:

Comments- on NUREG-0812'iDES fori facility.

~

PM'5090397 DISTRISVTION CODEi: CODES COPIES RECE~IVED:LiTR g'NCL SIZE'.:

TiITLEI:"* Ehvir on ~ Comments;.

NOTES:2. copies all matl REC-I PS ENT'Oi COPIES RECIPIENT COP IKS CODE/NAMKI LTTR ENCL> ID CODE/NAME LiTTRI ENCU ACTiION:: LIICI BR 02! BC AULUCKiR~ 05 ACCXDNTI KiVAL 19 EF TREAT:- SYS 15 06'NTERNALi:

1 ~ 1 ENV ENG. BR 16' HYDRO GEO BR 21 1 LKI 130 2 0 1~

RAD< ASSESS BR' 1 KG FIl 01 1 SI 1'~ ANAL'R 18. i NCE 20 1 KXTERNALi'CRS 1. LPDR 03" NATL LAB 21 ~

5 iVRC PDR 02 NSIC 04 1 NTIS TOiTAL NU0IBER< OF COPIES REQUIRED: LiTTR

~ ENCl'

I tl 0 14 II

og September 25, 1981 gpss/Pp

'"<a ~s87m SE Dr. Rajender Auluck )

Division of Licensing Licensing Project Manager U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

Washington, D. C. 20555 RE: COMMENT ON DES RELATED TO OPERATING LICENSE FOR WPPS-2, HANFORD, WASHINGTON JULY 1981, NUREG-0812

Dear Dr. Auluck,

John F. Doherty, of 4327 Alconbury Lane, Suite f/3, Houston,'Texas 77021 comments as follows on the DES:

Comment 1 The DES, at Section 2.5 should indicate the record of unavailability of hydroelectric power in the region. One cannot tell if there is only a spec-ulative value of infinitely small amount from the current area.

Comment 2 The DES, at Section 2.2 is deficient, because it does not state that there is any mechanism by which power may be shifted to California. What should"'be indicated is that there are agreements between WPPSS and California if utilities to purchase power such agreements exist.

Comment 3 The DES, at Page J-15, which is a reproduction of the 1972 Final Statement states the Wye burial site is "adjacent" to the plant site. NUREG-0812 is is deficient in not covering the final status of the nuclear waste site adjacent to the proposed operating plant, particularly in regard to possible accidents, and particularly Class 9 Accidents. This of course would not be in the sense of site selection but rather if the burial site would pose or not pose unusual problems for the various accident event scenarios.

Comment 4 The Draft at Page 5-30, is unclear in its statement, "None (accidents) is known to have caused any radiation injury or fatality to any. member of the public." The statement should include a statement of the ability to know if indeed the accidents caused a death or injury to any member of the public.

Comment 5 The Draft at Page 4-11, Section 4.3.6.1 should provide an explaination for why the population estimate within,10 miles of the site 786 persons too small. This would permit commentors to forcast the 40 year duration of plant operation and provide guidance for emergency planning. As current there is no explaination, which is a deficiency.

8109290446 81092S'l '

PDR ADOCK 05000397, D .

PDR~ I

i ~

VLIg J

oherty, Comments REG-0812 Comment 6 On P. 5-30 of the Draft, the discussion of xenon and iodine release from the TMI-II accident is deficiently vague. It also appears to have omitted information from the report, "Assessment of Offsite Radiation Doses from the TMI-2 Accident," by Pickard, Lowe 6 Garick, consultants.,(TDR-TMI 116, July 31, 1979). This report indicates 7 million curies were released in the first one and a half days of the accident, and used information on releases that occured during the first three hours of the event unlike the Kemeny Commission Report (referenced) which reported the monitors at that time period could not give radiation release because they were off scale.

Therfore a correction and recalculation should be made as to the effects of a much, greater amount of x'adio-activity released, than a "few million curies of Xe 133" as in the text.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this Draft, I look forward to receiving the Final Statement.

~N~zo Sincerely, 4327 Alconbury //3 Houston, Tx. 77021

%I C