ML18030A300

Forwards Revised Response to SER Outstanding Issue 1 Re Transportation of Toxic Chemicals

ML18030A300
Person / Time
Site:	Susquehanna
Issue date:	06/02/1981
From:	Curtis N PENNSYLVANIA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
PLA-826, NUDOCS 8106090482
Download: ML18030A300 (5)

Text

~ W-~ >>

REGULATORY FORMATION'ISTRIBUTION, SY ":M (BIDS)

ACCESSION NBR: 8 1 06090482'OC ~ DATE: 8 1 /06/02 NOTARIZED: NO DOCKET SO 387 Susquehanna>> Steam Electric" Stations Uni t 1 i Pennsy'1 val OSJ)J)OZ ¹'ACIL'.

50 388 Susauehanna Steam'l ect r i c Stat i on < Uni t 2 < Pennsy l va 000388 AUTH',NAME AUTHOR'FFILIATION CURTIS/N ~ W ~ Pennsylvania power L Light Coo RECIP ~ 9AME REC1PIKNT AFFILIATION SCHWKNCER. A~ Li censing Br anch 2

SUBJECT:

Fo'rwar ds rev i sed r esponse to SER Outstanding Issue 1 re transpor tati on oil toxic chemicals ~

DISTRIBUTION COOK: 800 TITLE: PSAR/FSAR AMDTS 1 S COPIES and Rel ated Cor RECEIVED: LTR r espondence

~ ENCL .

I SIZE!

.NOTES: Send IEK 3 copies FSAR 8 al 1 amends, 1 cy: BWR LRG PM(I ~ RIB) 05000387 Send ISK 3 copies FSAR 8 al l amends, 1 cy:BWR LRG PM(L ~ RIB) OS000388 REC IP IENT COPIES RECIPIENT COP IES ID CnOE/NAME LTTR'NCL ZO CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL ACTION: A/0 LICENSNG 1 0 LIC 8R ¹2 BC 0 LIC BR ¹2 LA 1 0 STARKeR ~ 04 1 1 INTERNAL: ACCID EVAL BR26'HEM 1 1 AUX SYS BR 27 1 1 ENG BR 1 1 1 1 CONT S YS BR 09 1 1 CORK PERF BR 1 0 1 1 EFF TR SYS BR 12 1 1 E~4lKRG PREP 2? 1 0 KMRG PRP DEV 3S 1 1 EMRG PRP LIC 36 3 3 EQUIP QUAL BR 13 3 3 FE IA RKP DIV 39. 1 l, GEOSCIENCES 28 2 2 HUM FACT ENG 40 1 1 H YD/GEO BR '30  ? 2 IaC HAYS BR 1 1 IEE 06 3 3 LIC GUID BR 33. 1 LI C QUAL BR 32 1 1 MATL ENG BR 1 7 1 1 MECH ENG BR 1 8 1 1 MPA 1 0 NRC PDR 02 1 1

~

GELD 1 0 OP LIC BR 34 1 1 POWER SYS BR 19 1 1 PROC/TST REV 20 1 QA BR 21 1' S BR22 1 1 REAC SYS BR 23 1 1 R G FILE 01 1 1 SI l'NAL BR 2'4 1 1 RUC. 0 BR25 1 1 EXTERNAL: ACRS 4 1 16 16 l. P 0 R 03 1 1 NSIC 05 1 1 N I0 1SSf TOTAL NURSER OF COPIES REUUIREO: LTTR g ENCL 5

P TWO NORTH'NINTH STREET, ALLENTOWN, PA. 18101 PHONEr t215) T70-5151 NORMAN W. CURTiS Vice president-Engineering 8 Construction-Nuclear 770 5381 June 2, 1981 Mr. A. Schwencer, Chief Licensing Branch No. 2 Division of Project Management U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 SUSQUEHANNA STEAM ELECTRIC STATION SER OUTSTANDING ISSUE NO. 1 ER 100450 FILE 841-2 PLA-826

Dear Mr. Schwencer:

Attached is a revised response regarding 'transportation of toxic chemicals.

This revises the response submitted previously in PLA-694. We believe this completely addresses your concerns on this issue.

'I Very truly yours, N, W. Curtis Vice President-Engineering & Construction-Nuclear WEB/mks Attachment cc: R. M. Stark USNRC PENNSYLVANIA POWER 8 LIGHT COMPANY

QUESTION 3 In order to determine if the reactor control room for the Susquehanna(1)

SES is designed to meet a postulated hazardous/toxic chemical release an analysis of truck accidents within a radius of five miles of the station was undertaken. U.S. Route ll is the only major highway within the five-mile radius of the station. Both Interstates 80 and 81 are located outside this five-mile radius and were not co~sidered in this analysis. It was assumed that an occurrence of lxlO was an accep)~)le risk when using conservative assumptions in performing the analyses~ J.

In determining the probability of an accident information on the frequency of hazardous shipments per year along U.S. Route ll, the fj~tance along U.S. Route ll and the probability of an accident per mile was required in formulating the risk.

In a review of both state and federal highway accident statistics, it was impossible to determine the number of shipments traversing U.S.

Route 11 in the vicinity of the Susquehanna SES. In addition, most of the non-local traffic use the interstate system (I-80 and I-81) rather than U.S. Route ll. Therefore, to quantify the transportation data along U.S. Route ll, PP&L surveyed in person the manufacturing industries (approximately 60) along the U.S. Route ll corridor between the Interstate 80 interchange near Lime Ridge, Pa. and the crossing of the Susquehanna River at West Pittston, Pa. This survey included industries within a one-half mile radius on either side of the highway.

Each of the industries in the surveyed area was questioned as to their use of hazardous and toxic materials, the types, amounts, mode of transport, frequency and route. Of the sixty industries there were seven that used hazardous materials and six of these firms knew that transport of their materials was not along U.S. 11 within the five-mile radius of the plant. The seventh firm received one shipment per month (12 per year) of hazardous materials but was unaware of the route. To be conservative, it was assumed that all 12 shipments passed the plant along U.S. Route 11.

According to a study performed by Arthur D. Little(3) , the accident frequency of trucks carrying hazardous materials resulting in a serious breach is approximately 2.7xl0 accidents per mile. Therefore, the probability of accident per mile per year using a conservative assumption is:

~l.

1.2xl0

// /

2.7xl0

" // /i.-~/ 3.24xl0 Shipments of hazardous materials per month from this one firm include 4-6 barrels of naphtha UM and P grades and 4-6 barrels in total of xylene, toluene or Stoddards Solvent. A naphtha spilj<~as not evaluated because it is a solid and is,not an inhalation hazar . Xylene, toluene and Stoddards Solvent have comparable toxicities <~ . How~~~r, since the toxicity level of xylene is listed in Reg. Guide 1.78 it was used as the critical substance in this analysis. The weight for each shipment of hazardous materials is usually about 5000 pounds per shipment. In Pennsylvania, the vehicle weight limit for large semi-trailer trucks is 72,000 pounds. The approximate truck weight is 40,000 pounds and the maximum weight of hazardous materials would then be 32,000 pounds. In this analysis it was conservatively assumed that the total vehicular

weight limit of 72,000 pounds was used for the hazardous materials:

weight. This weight is used for the calculation for hazardous material accidents instead of the realistic weight of 5,000 pounds. Under the worst case meteorological condjgjons (Pasquill F-Stability) using Tables C-1 and C-2 of Reg. Guide 1.78('~, the number of pounds of hazardous materials that require consideration in accident analysis of a type 8 control room at the Susquehanna SES, at a distance of 0.3 and 0.5 miles is approximately 80,000 equivalent pounds of xylene. Since the control room is located a greater distance than 0.3 miles from U.S. Route ll, hazardous chemical accidents need not be considered.

In'being conservative we assumed that if the control were located on U.S. Route ll the probability of a hazardous/toxic struck accident along this route a distance of 0.5 miles in either direction (total of 1.0 mile) is as follows:

bill 3.24x10 i.. ~i1 ..

1 11 ~b./

3.24xl0 The extremely conservative probability of a truck accident along U.S.

Route 11, containing hazardous materials, affecting the reactor control room is less probable than 1.0xj 0 accidents per year, therefore in accordance with Reg. Guide 1.91', these risk estimates are acceptable.

REFERENCES (1) "Assumptions for Evaluating the Habitability of a Nuclear Power Plant Control Room During a Postulated Hazardous Chemical Release,"

Directorate of Regulatory Standards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide, 1.78, June, 1974.

(2) "Evaluation of Explosions Postulated to Occur on Transportation Routes Near Nuclear Power Plant Sites," Directorate of Regulatory Standards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide, 1.91, Rev. 1, February, 1978.

(3) Arthur D. Little, Inc., A Model Economic and Safety Analysis of the Transportation of Hazardous Substances in Bulk, report prepared for The U.S. Department of Commerce, Maritime Administration, Office of Domestic Shipping, Washington, D.C., Report No. COM-74-11271, 1974.

(4) Sax, N. I., Dan erous Pro erties of Industrial Materials, Third Edition, Van Nostrand Reinho d Company, 1968.