ML18004A507

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Responds to Expressing Concern That Util Had Not Conducted Full Participation Test of Emergency Plan.Fema Review Concludes State & Local Emergency Plans Adequate & Capable of Implementation
ML18004A507
Person / Time
Site: Harris Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 09/22/1986
From: Buckley B
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Bowdie
AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
Shared Package
ML18004A508 List:
References
NUDOCS 8609240253
Download: ML18004A507 (3)


Text

~y,R RECT fp.0 Cy A00

'4~

qo

~+*++

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 September 22, 1986 Mr. and Mrs. Bowdie Route 2, Box 326 Pittsboro, North Carolina 27312 Oear Mr. and Mrs. Bowdie:

I am pleased to respond to your letter addressed to Mr. Denton dated June 7,

1986 in which you expressed certain concerns regarding the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant.

Specifically, you stated that "Carolina Power and Light has not conducted a full participation test of the present emergency plan."

You also stated that "the uncertainties of protection and monitoring after

'ecommissioning are of widespread concern to the citizens in this state."

In response to your statement that Carolina Power and Light (CP8L) has not conducted a full participation test of the present emergency plan, there was a full participation exercise conducted May 17-18, 1985, in which the State of North Carolina, and Wake,

Chatham, Harnett and Lee counties participated.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) reported that, based on a review of the exercise, the state and local emergency plans are adequate and capable of beino implemented, and the exercise demonstrated that offsite preparedness is adequate to provide reasonable assurance that appropriate measures can be taken to protect the health and safety of the public living in the vicinity of the Shearon Harris nuclear power plant in the event of a radiological emergency.

In re'sponse to your concerns regarding protection and monitoring after decommis-sioning, decommissioning as defined by the NRC means to remove a facility from service and reduce residual radioactivity to a level that permits release of the property for unrestricted use.

Therefore, after decommissioning is complete, the radioactive material would have been removed and no monitoring or protection would be required.

A decommissioning alternative which requires interim monitoring and protection, however, is one in which dismantling and decontamination of a facility is delayed.

This alternative, called SAFSTOR/mothballing, would involve on-site storage of residual radioactivity to allow the radioactivity to decay to levels which make dismantling easier.

Spent fuel may also have to be stored on-site until a

Federal repository is available.

This Federal repository, scheduled for comple-tion around 19 8, will most likely be available when the Shearon Harris plant is ready for decommissioning.

The enclosed Regulatory Guide 1.86 describes protection and monitoring require-ments at facilities that have been placed in a SAFSTOR/mothballed status.

If fuel remained on-site, additional security measures would be required in accordance with 10 CFR Part 73.

These protection and monitoring requirements for a facility that is in the SAFSTOR/mothballed status include:

8609240253 860922 PDR ADOCK 05000400, H

PDR g) ye%

Mr. and Mrs. Bowdie September 22, ll986 1.

Physical security in the form of multiple locked barriers to prevent inadvertent exposure of personnel; 2.

Physical barriers (e.g., fences, welded doors) to prevent unauthorized entrance into the facility; 3.

Security guards in accordance with 10 CFR Part 73 if spent fuel remains on-site; 4.

Facility radiation surveys to verify that no radioactive material is escaping or being transported through the containment barriers of the facility; 5.

Environmental radiation surveys to verify that no significant amounts of radiation have been released to the environment from the facility; and 6.

A licensee site representative designated to be responsible for controlling authorized access into and movement within the facility.

I hope that the above discussion has been responsive to your concerns.

Sincerely,

Enclosure:

As stated

/0/

Bart C. Buckley, Senior Project Manager PWR Project Directorate No.

2 Division of PWR Licensing-A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation h

DISTRIBUTION YT 869404 W/0 ENCLOSURE oc et e

w/incoming NRC PDR w/incoming L PDR w/incoming HDenton/RVollmer DMiller TNovak DMossburg LRubenstein AJohnson (2)

BBuckley PPAS JGui lien

  • PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE SEE DATE LA:PAD¹2*

DMiller 9/18/86 PM:SSPD*

PErickson 9/18/86 P

¹2 JG illen 9/iq/86 PM:PAD 2 BBuckley 9//~6 PD:PAD¹ LRubenstein 9f~z/86

1

~

~

~

ib'