ML18037A145
| ML18037A145 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 12/13/1978 |
| From: | Dise D NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP. |
| To: | Ippolito T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7812200194 | |
| Download: ML18037A145 (46) | |
Text
ml
~
~
LI T HIASARA H.~~MK HIAQARAMOHAWKPOWER CORPORATION/300 ERIE BOULEVAROWEST, SYRACUSE. N.Y. 13202/TE~~HONE (315) 474-151I December 13, 1978 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention:
Hr. Thomas Ippolito, Chief Operating Reactors Branch NG.
3 U. S. Regulatory Commission
'Washington, D.
C.
20555 Re:
Nine Nile Point Unit 81 Docket Ho. 50-220 DPR-63 Radwaste Reduction System Gentlemen:
Niagara mohawk Power Corporation plans to install a radwaste reduction tern at Nine Mile Point Unit 81.
This system was previously described in Ietter to you dated September 1, 1978, with an attached report.
A new radwaste building is being constructed to house improved equipment for normal waste solidification and handling operations.
The cons ruction of this building and installation of that equipment is not'dependent upon installation of Jie radwaste reduction system.
The solidification and handling system was described in a separate report dated November 30, 1978.
The advantage of the radwaste reduction system will be to decrease the amount of solid waste that is shipped to off-site burial grounds.
This system is expected to reduce the volume by about ten to one.
This will result in fewer shipments of radwaste, will extend the existing space at off-site. burial grounds, and result in fewer radwaste containers.
Increases in off-site doses during normal operation are expected to be insignificant.
t
"'This-letter requests approval for the radwaste reduction system described ~n Attachment A pursuant to the requirements of 10CFR20.305.
t An evaluation has been made by the Station Operation Review COIIIIittee and Safety Review and Audit Board relative to 10CFR50.59(a),
and it was concluded that the radwaste.reduction system does not involve an unreviewed safety question since:
{1)
The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to syfety previously evaluated in the Safety Analysis Report will not increase.
Vsta200iS ]
l
4 n cember 13, 1978 2
(2)'he possibility for an accident or malfunction of a different type than any evaluated previously in the Safety Analysis Report will not be created.
(3)
The margin of safety's defined in the basis for any technical specification will not be reduced.
This modification does not affect any technical specifications.
'nalyses have been performed assuming release, within the building, of the maximum amount of incinerated, but non-solidified radwaste.on-hand.
The results show that conservatively calculated doses to the public are well within regulatory requitements, such as outlined in 10CFR100.
,The building will be equal to or better than the existing radwaste building in terms of probability or consequences of failure.
The building will be designed to the Class I seismic requirements described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.
The final product (incombustible residue) from the radwaste reduction system will be processed through a solidification and handling system into 55-gaTIon containers.
The solidified product will be a solid cement matrix.
In the event that the radwaste reduction system is not operating, any reason, the waste can go directly to solidification.
The radwaste
>ction and solidification and handling systems will be remotely
~yerated.
wastes include:
(1 2
Filter sludges Deep bed and powdered demineralizer resins Concentrated wastes Filters, paper, wood, and other combustible materials which may have been radioactively contaminated.
Any spillage of liquid waste will be controTT'ed by the floor drains in the building.
There will be no increases in liquid waste effluents to the environment due to operation of the system.
The equipment will be designed.
to the requirements outlined in Nuclear Regulatory Comnission Branch Technical Position ll-l (Revision 1).
Mastes processed by the radwaste reduction system will be no different from those previously described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.
These LMM/kmb Attachment Very truly yours, NIAGARA MOHAMK POMER CORPORATION 1(,
Donald P. Disc Vice President - Engineering
A
,l I
ATTACHt1ENT A RADWASTE REDUCTION SYSTEM
'Q. Backoround
. The radwaste reduction system for radwaste Volume re$ uction has been described in detail in the Licensing Topical Report.
The installation at Nine Mile Point Unit 1 will not vary signifcantly from the system described in the Licensing Topical Report.
As was stated in the Licensing Topical Report, the basic processes of liquid calcination and combustible waste incinceration which are used in the radwaste reduction system have been used in industrial plants for decades.
Fluidized bed calcination of radioactive was.e was developed during the period 1952-1959 at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory.
Use of calcination for liquid radwaste reduction was first demonstrated in an engineering scale facility, the Waste Calcining Facility, at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant in 1963.
The successful operation of the waste calcining facility has demons. rated that 1'iquid wastes can be r'outinely calcined into a granular free-flowing powder and can subsequently be handled in a simplified manner.
Since 1963, the Waste Calcining Facility has handled over 2.5 million gallons of radioactive aqueous waste which have been calcined to approximately 42,500 cubic feet of solids.
Incineration of combustible radioactive wastes has been in use as a disposal technique since 1948 when a pilot plant incinerator and off-gas cleanup system were built at t1ound Laboratory.
Early systems were adaptations of standard refuse incinerators and did show that considerable volume reduction in waste handling was possible.
The radwaste reduction system is based on advanced fluidized bed technology using an inert bed medium to incinerate and calcine within a single-chamber process vessel.
The purpose is to reduce the volume of the radwaste shipped offsite.
Efficient volume reduction depends upon complete combustion and effective separation of gases and solids in the effluent gas stream.
This separation takes place in the off-gas cleanup system.
The high heat capacity of the fluidized bed gives high temperature stability and results in very efficient. combustion.
The air, which maintains. the bed in its fluid state, provides an ample supply of oxygen Vow combustion.
Some wastes such as sludges and slurries do not have sufficient caloric content to maintain the bed at the desi~ed temperature.
In these
- cases, additional heat is provided by the combustion of supplemental fuel.
The thermal inertia of the bed insures that the system is relatively insensitive to moderate variations and caloric
,content of the feed.
1.
Topical R'eport, Radwaste Volume Reduction System, EI/NNI-77-7-P, Newport News Industrial Corporation and Energy Incorporated, 0une 1977.
In the calcination mode, heat is used to drive off water as a
vapor, leaving behind an incombustible residue.
This incombustible residue is ground off the bed particles by the agitation of the bed.
It exits from the process vessel to a dry cyclone.
The calcination
, process is endothermic, and heat is supplied by the combus ion of supplemental fuel.
The use of special inert bed material means that the bed does not have to be changed when switching from incineration to i calcination.
S stem Description The system consists of the process
- vessel, a dry cyclone,'
product hopper, a wet scrubbing system and filtration system.
Solids (ash or incombustible residue) are removed as the gas exits from the process vessel to the cyclone.
Host of the solids are deposited in the dry cyclone; while the gases and raraining solids are scrubbed and treated by an offgas system.
A product hopper collects the solids from the dry cyclone.
Figure 1 shows the major components in a block flow diagram.
Process off-gas leaving the cyclone is cleaned by a we. scrubbing and filtration system.
The wet scrubbing system is comprised of a spray quench tank, a high energy venturi scrubber followed by a wet
.cyclone, a condenser, and mist eliminator.
Gaseous fission products (particulates and iodines) are removed by the scrub liquid and the filtration system.
Particulate material is removed by the wet. scrub
- system, and high efficiency particulate absolute filters.
Cleaned off-gas is vented to the atmosphere (via the plant stack) while the
- product, a dry granular residue from the dry cyclone; is removed for solidification, storage and sh'ipment.
Scrub liquid will be processed through the liquid waste system.
There are alternate routes for this Iiquig to be returned to the waste concentrator or to a day tank which feeds the radwaste reduction system.
The system is designed to operate at a negative pressure with respect to its surroundings, thereby providing further assurance that no leakage of radioactive material will occur.
Continuous air monitors are intended to monitor the room air.
Alarms will indicate locally high airborne activity in the unlikely event of leakage.
In addition, ventilation air is routed to the main stack where all effluents are monitored prior to release.
The efficient treatment of the offgas cleanup system minimizes the release of gaseous effluents to the atmosphere.
In case a portion of the offgas cleanup system should fail to clean adequately the ra4vaste reduction system has the capability of recirculating the offgas through the cleanup system instead of releasing it to the atmosphere.
This action is initiated by the radiation monitor in the exhaust stream.
There will be no liquid releases from the system directly to the environment.
Scrub liquid returns to the liquid radwaste system as described above.
Appropriate instrumentation will be provided to detect conditions that may result in excessive radiation levels within the system.
Controls designed to sense and activate an alarm upon the oc"urrence of
a wide variety of off-normal operating conditions will be included.
A part of the controls will be an annunciator
- panel, which will provide identification of the causes of an alarm.
Corrective action will be taken either automatically or manually, depending on the potential seriousness of the occurrence.
Off-gas from th'e system is routed to I the main stack.
The stack monitoring system will monitor these releases.
In addition a, separate system radioactivity monitor will be
':located in the off-gas exhaust'line to the plant stack.
The incremental dose rates, as shown in Table 1 for normal operation, are well below the limits set fn Appendix I to 10CFR50.
The radioactive effluents produced by the system during normal operations will.be so small that this addition to other effluents curt ently discharged from Nine Mile Point we'll have no significant environmental impact.
Table 1
compares the maximum permissible concentrations from Table 2, column 1
of 10CFR20 Appendix 8 and the maximum average boundary co'ncentrations resulting from radwaste reduction system operation.
for all isotopes discharged, the maximum average concentration is well below the values of 10CFR20.
The6highest maximum nuclide (Cs>>137) concentration is a
factor of 5 x 10 below its maximum permissible concentration.
The solid granular residue, or product, from the system will be packaged and transported to a licensed disposal site.
In accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.21, provisions will be made to monitor the radiation from each package of solid waste.
This will permit the operator to control radiation exposure to personnel and to meet the regulatory requirements of 10CFR71
~Anal sis The system as installed at Nine Mile Point'nit 1, will be in
. compliance with federal regulations. concerning protection of personnel against radiation and other technical and legal licensing requirements.
The system design results in very low radiation levels.
The individual cubicles formed by the concrete shield walls, and the operation of the system at less than atmospheric pressure, will assure that the operational dose rate is below the levels required by 10CFR20 and.are consistent with as low as reasonably achievable criterion.
The emissions from normal operation of the system result in concentrations
- and dose rates at the site boundary,'which are well below the limiting values of 10CFR20-for unrestricted areas.
It may be noted that even ff.
no credit fs taken for any system cleanup (system decontamination factor is 40,000 from Table
- 1) the maximum permissible concentrations of 10CFR20 will not be exceeded.
The hfghest isotopic concentration, that of Cs-137, would still be a factor of 130 below the 10CFR20 maximum permissible concentration for that isotope.
The normal release rates from this sytem have been computed, and are sttown in Table 1, using the maximum activities and composition shown on Table 2 and the decontamination factors from Table 4-2 of the Licensfng Topical Report.
The dose factors are from Regulatory Guide 1.109; a breathing rate of 20 cubic meters/day has been used.
The annual dose contributions are all less than 0.001 millfren.
~
~
Exposures from transient events and accidents have been discussed in Section 4.3 of the Licensing Topical Report.
No additional coverage of transients will be presented here.
None of the transient events have. consequences which are more severe than the maximum credible accident.
As in the Licensing Topical Report, the maximum credible accident for the'ine Mile Point Unit I radwaste reduction system is
, the gross failure of the product container.
The doses for this accident are presented in Table 3.
These doses are conservative since it was assumed that only 90 percent of the activity was retained within the cubicle, the building and ventilation system combined.
The building housing this system is a seismic Class I structure and the building ventilation discharges to the plant stack.
In addition, the product container will also be located in a cubicle within the radwaste building. If the product container were to catastrophically fail, much of the material would be retained inside the cubicle.
The amount escaping the cubicle would be drawn into the ventilation system.
No credit is taken for ventilation system removal efficiency.
However, the ventilation system will contain a high efficiency particulate filter having a design removal efficiency of 99.97 percent.
The capacity of the product container is equivalent to three 55-
'allon drums (0.624 cubic meters),
and it is conservatively calculated that 1,710 curies is the maximum credible activity that can be expected to accumulate in the. product container.
This is based on the maximum specific activity for filter sludge shipped and reported for any 6
months (68.5 curies/cubic meter).
This occurred in the second half of 1975.
The figure is felt to be conservative since specific activities were highest during this period.
The specific activity of 68.5 curies/cubic meter has been multiplied by a factor of 2 to allow for variations within the 6 month period.
Thus, it is assumed that enough feed is available at 137 curies/cubic meter to fill up the product container.
The maximum volume reduction factor envisioned for waste other than dry, combustible solids is 20 to 1.
The 1,710 curies is over two-thirds of the annual expected activity for resin/sludge.
It is extremely unlikely that such a large portion of the activity in a year's waste would accumulate in such a small volume.
The composition of'the 1;710 curies is taken to be that given in the resin/sludge column of Table 2.
Oespite We above, it is conservatively assumed that 10 percent of the granular ash "(171 curies)= in the product container escapes from the area containing this system and remains airborne long enough the reach the site boundary.
The doses due to this release are shown in Table 3.
The site boundary closest to Nine Mile Point Unit 1 fs 1,500 meters in the southwest sector.
The dilution factor, X/g, is from Regulatory Guide 1.3 for an elevated (100 meter) release and fumigation conditions are assumed.
The material was assumed to be released in the first four (4) hours.
These assumptions are from the latest Regulatory Guides and are therefore different from the assumptions used in the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Final Safety Analysis Report.
The dose factors have been taken from Regulatory'uide 1.109, and the breathing rate was 20 cubic.
meters/day.
The maximum dose was found to be 534 mrem to the lung.
The maximum total body dose was found to be 141.5 mren.
'I a
Effects due to construction of the radwaste volume reduction system will be minimal.
The system will be placed in a building described in a separate'report.
Cons. ruction effects related to the building were considered in that report.
Additional effects due to the installation of this system will be very minor.
Some heavy equipment and a crane will be necessary for installation.
Precautions will be taken in the movement of the equipment to prevent damage to safety related structures.
Gaseous r'eleases from the equipment will be kept below those allowable by state regulations.
/'IV. Conclusion A report in accordance with the requirements of Section 102 C of the Nation'al Environmental Policy Act is not necessary.
The releases from this system will not significantly effect the quality of the environment, as was stated in Secti~ns II and III.
Normal average releases will be a factor of 5 x 10 below the amounts on Table II, Appendix B of 10CFR20 using conservative system decontamination factors.
Taking no credit for any system decontamination factor would result in average releases that are a factor of 130 below Table II,
~ Appendix B of 10CFR20.
There are no other
- gaseous, liquid or other releases from this sytem that would constitute a significant effect on the quality of the environment.
Effects of construction will be minimal, as stated in Section III above.
Precautions will be taken in the movement of heavy equipment or cranes to prevent damage to any safety related structures.
Effects due to the construction of the building were considered in a separate report.
TABLE 1 e, ~
~
ADDI'fIONALE."Il'SSION RATES ~
BOUNDARY Cv..uENTRATIONS ~
AND DOSE RATES'UE TO OPERATION OP TIIE RADMASTE REDUCTION SYSTEH Haximum Feed Rate Ci/ ear Decontamination Release Factor Rate Ci/ ear Haximum Concentrationt>>
Boundary Lhnlt Concentration Ci m3 Ci/m3 Thyroid Dose Rates
'Lung Total Body mrem/ r NA-24 Hn-54 Co-60 Sr-89 I-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 15 125 915 10 50 1225 2160 4 x 10 4x10.
4 x 10 4,x 10 lx104 4 R 10 4x10 4'.8 x 10 3.1 x 10 2.3 x 10 2..5 x 10 5.0 x 10 3.06 x 10 5.4 x 10 5000 1000 300 300 100 400 500 6.7 x 10 5.5 x 10 4.0 x 10 4.4 x 10 8.8 x 10 5.4 x 10 9.5 x 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 x 10 2.2 x 10 5.6 x 10 9.6 x 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.8 x 10 6.6 x 10 8.3 x 10 8.3 x 10 8.3 x 10
'.2 x 10 5.5 x 10
'.5 x 10" 1.7x 10
'.6 x 10 3.7 x 10
'OTAL 4500 1.16 x 10 2.1 x 10 '.5 x 10 2.4 x 10 7.4 0
(1) 10CFR20, Appendix B, Table II, Column l.
A
r4 peg TABLE 2 t
f'ROJKGTED,ACTIVITIES IN THE LIqUID AND RESIN/SLUDGE FEED TO THE fNDMASTE REDUCTION SYSTEN FOR NINE NILE POINT UNIT ONE Liquid Expected Haximum
~ercent
~(Cf/ r
'fC(/~r Resig/Sludge Expected Haximum
~ercent
~Cf/ r
~Cf/ r)
Ha-24 Hn-54 Co"60 Sr"89 1-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Total 1.5
'2
~
11 1.5 35 48 9
12 66
'10 288 600 15 20 110 10 15 350 480 1000 3
23 1
25 48 75 575 25 625 1200 2500 105 805 35 875 1600 3500
~
~
o
~ ~ ~
'4
TABLE 3 DOSES AT THE SITE BOUNOARY OUE TO THE MAXIMUM CREDIBLE ACCIDENT FOR THE NINE MILE POINT UNIT 81 RADMASTE REDUCTION SYSTEM 1% of the Ash Released Organ Dose (mrem)
Nuclide Bone Liver Thyroid Kidney Lung Total Body Mn-54 Cr 0
Cs-sA Cs-137 0;0 Q.D 0.1
- 33. 5 82.8 0.4 1.0 0.1 76.5 107.7 0.0 0.0 43.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 26.1 38.7 15.3 496. 5 0.0 8.7 13.2 0.1 1.2 0.1 65.7 74.'4 TOTAL 116.4 185.7 43.2 65.1 533.7 141.5
~ 8
~
~
<<'gj'c'+<<@P i
'I Radwaste Reduction S s' Block Flow Dia ram r
Cases aad Water Vapor Quench Tank Cases Scrubber Wet Cycloae Coadeaser 25st Elhaiasto Cases Scrub Liquid Liquids Process Vessel Dry Cycloaa Solids Scrub Liquid Tank High Efficiency Pettlculetc Piltet Wastes Product Contilaer To Liquid Waste Proceiisfag (Waste Concentrator or Day Tank Feed to RWR).
Iodine Filter dsorber To Soliditication High Efficiency Pilter To Pleat Stack
4 II I
FROM:
HtcAQP~ >~47.:26%
4~f" k~I@VQ C{Q)ftfoi3 kX c~Hf Qi'j'C~'h~
ACTIONCONTROL COMPL, DEADLINE ACKNOWLEDGMENT INTERIMREPLY DATES 05311 DATEOF DOCUMENT I ac.
X'O:
0:24YM>'uI~~HC FINALREPLY/
FILE LOCATI N
~/g/,
PREPARE FOR SIGNATURE OF:
Q CHAIRMAN Q EXECUTIVEDIRECTOR DESCRIPTION Q LETTER Q MEMO Q REPORT Q OTHER CC<Cea e~ ',aai: i1 yaA'i L:="".dA~K PL8
'~fwPggg~ fsji~Q')4%+ hfdft/~gQ<Cf Q 4e
~%) Cf@ f+j)6 T'@~I4 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS'Z.
'I DOCUMENT/COPY NO.
NUMBER OF PAGES POSTAL REGISTRY NO.
CLASSIFIED DATA CLASSIFICATION CATEGORY Q
NSI QRD Q FRD KCV 79<<QP>>
ASSIGNED TO:
DATE INFORMATIONROUTING LEGALREVIEW Q
FINAL P
COPY ASSIGNED TO:
DATE NO LEGAL OBJ ECTIONS NOTIFY:
Q EOO ADMIN& COR RES BR EXT.
COMMENTS, NOTIFY:
EXT JCAE g4OTIFICATION RECOMMENDED:
Q YES Q
NO
,- =. NRC.FORM 232 01-75)
I AXE'CUTIVEDIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL DO NOT REAIOI/E THIS COPY
- d n,
FROM:
TO:
s
< ~.sGFfv; COMPL DEADLINE ACKNOWLEDGMENT INTERIM REPLY i
'2 7N FINALREPLY FILE LOCATION ACTION CONTROL DATES CONTROL NO.05311 DATE OF DOCUMENT PREPARE FOR SIGNATURE OF:
P CHAIRMAN Q EXECUTIVEDIRECTOR OTHER:
DESCRIPTION Q I ETTER Q MEMO -Q REPORT Q OTHER MAL~ ofmF1C FM )i gra J5 yes>>m/9C'mme 4~% ~wad 4 VV'+
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS DOCUMENT/COPY NO.
NUMBER OF PAGES POSTAL REGISTRY NO.
CLASSIFIED DATA CLASSIFICATION CATEGORY Q
NSI QRD p FRD ASSIGNED TO:
DATE INFORMATIONROUTING LEGALREVIEW Q
FINAL Q
COPY ASSIGNED TO:
DATE NO LEGAL OBJECTIONS NOTIFY:
P EDO ADMIN8,CORRES BR EXT.
COMMENTS. NOTIFY:
EXT.
JCAE NOTIFICATIONRECOMMENDED:
Q YES Q
NO NRC FORM 232 Ill-751 "EXECL3TIVEDIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL DO NOT REMOVE THIS COPY
li ll t
FROM:
TO; L'
e-&~1 4 6 11@Ilk ~l; 8 4>>
44flt 4 eel <<
ACTION CONTROL CO M PL DEA0LINE ACKNOWLEDGMENT INTERIMREPLY FINALREPLY FILE LOCATION DATES CONTROL NO.
DATE OF DOCUMENT PREPARE FOR SIGNATURE OF:
Q CHAIRMAN Q
EXEC UTIVE 0 IRECTO R OTHER:
DESCRIPTION Q LETTER Q MEMO Q REPORT Q OTHER SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS
<<1"i=~ ~ w
>w 4e>>>>4r& 'VI1 g<<124 4'~
'>>-<<DFJIL'-"",~>>
>>,.P-..e-ked>>,'<<e r a'i l>>~
1 DOCUMENT/COPY NO.
NUMBER OF PAGES POSTAL REGISTRY NO.
CLASSIFIED DATA CLASSIFICATI0 N CATEGORY Q
NSI QRO Q FRD i'~'w1'
~~ >4~w ASSIGNED TO:
DATE INFORMATIONROUTING LEGALREVIEW Q
FINAL Q
COPY gg C
g~r ASSIGNED TO:
DATE NO LEGAL OBJECTIONS NOTIFY:
Q EDO ADMIN& CORRES BR EXT.
COMMENTS, NOT IFY:
EXT.
JCAE NOTIFICATIONRECOMMENDED:
Q YES Q
NO NRC FORM 232 Ill-751 EXEC'VE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL DO NO7 REiHOVE THIS COPY
I'I lh II
FROM:
C>'F4 ~:~~V 4'.'3II$4k'3 @'P '-~w VWk @MB~
TO:
5+&.44t, ~ ~ %II fQ ACTION CONTROL COMPL DEADLINE ACKNOWLEDGMENT INTERIMREPLY FINALREPLY FILE LOCATION DATES 0531K DATE OF DOCUMENT PREPARE FOR SIGNATURE OF:
,Q CHAIRMAN Q EXECUTIVEDIRECTOR DESCRIPTION Q LETTER Q MEMO Q REPORT Q OTHER 444'i'CCCA3 Fm 4444 4j g-"JA$C &~s~~F$ ~ii~ et FAR@
PI C'CC QcccCc8 7&%,S"<@ ocr~ )e4)FQA %i)
ICPi <'fH ~cia'cc E~i$;4 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS CLASSIFIED DATA DOCUMENT/COPY NO.
NUMBER OF PAGES POSTAL REGISTRY NO.
ASSIGNEDTO'ATE CLASSIFICATION CATEGORY Q
NSI QRD Q FRD INFORMATIONROUTING 4gMY Z~ <<44~WC LEGAL,REVIEW Q
FINAL Q
COPY CIE'SSIGNED TO:
DATE NO LEGAL OBJECTIONS NOTIFY:
Q EDO ADMIN8cCORRES BR EXT.
COMMENTS, NOTIFY:
EXT.
JCAE NOTIFICATIONRECOMMENDED:
Q YES 0
NO NRC FORM 232 I11-75)
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL DO ItIOT REMOVE THIS COPY
I
No 79-0136'RC SECRETARIAT goggi g gg tg lll26 79 Q Commissioner Xgg(Exec. Dir./Oper, 0
Cong. Liaison Q Public Affairs Date
'0 Gen. Counsel 0 Solicitor O Secretary Richard Hermans, Chair erson F.
Safe Eeer Coa Itlon of New or State Tol
Subject:
Date E
S eetbe 0
Prepare reply for signature of:
0 Chairman 0 Commissioner 0 EDO, GC, CL, SOL, PA, SECY 0
Signature block omitted 0
Return original of incoming with response r9~~ 9 gt AE'f.'GO Bat,o le
=,
X%9 For direct reply'K(N8~5ltIQ 0
For appropriate action (See 0]so SEC) T)chelae jfigX5 78-1587 Cl For recommendatiorl
78 j570 78t j.80l }
Remarks NRC62 For the Commission:
Send three (3) copies of reply to Secy Mail Facility ACTIONSLIP
If J
~
~.,'II~
g J8 1801 NRC SECRETARIAT Logging Date~t2 TO:
P XXKX0 O
D Commissioner Exec. Oir,/Oper.
Cong. Liaison Public Affairs Date CI Gen. Counsel 0 Solicitor O Secretary Incoming: John R.
Z From:
To:
subject:
Re uests ub hea QKK Prepare reply'forsignatureof:
0 Chairman 0 Commissioner XQI EOO, GC, CL, SOL, pA, SECY C3 Signature block omitted 0
Return original of incoming with response CJ For direct reply Lj For appropriate action Q
For information 0
For recommendation Suspense;
- Jan, 3
C s to:
RF.
Ovi inal to Docket NRC42 For the Commission:
Send three (3) copies of reply to Secy Mail Facility ACTION SLIP
y
~
P
~
~
g 1
P
/*
S F
'I
FROM:
8' R. Zan=~, casse&'I~I>>
S+WI" Of'sr~ York TO:
Nafman if@:dr$e ACTIONCONTROL COMPL DEADLINE ACKNOWLEDGMENT INTERIMREPLY FINALREPLY FILE LOCATI zmJ rg-~
DATES 05081 DATE OF DOCUMENT PREPARE FO IG ATURE OF:0 CHAIRMAN P
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DESCRIPTION
+ LETTER Q MEMO Q REPORT Q OTHER SPECIAL IN RUCTIO S
R E
ARKS
$QPpott8 Sly Cs44Q Cat:Ahj~
LcglslGCMP~
RfNsC foe fQ)4 4eN')rg~ N PacPNG4 CQASCVQCC)GI) 'Cf 8, )CV tt~VH b8$ 1C VQdPC'L'I0 V@tQQ Q8 wlA8 N I8 J
.Tr,ee~)>>~
@:d. wp)g to b put
$v ltd 3$III3f~eQdslg DOCUMENT/COPY NO.
NUMBER OF PAGES POSTAL REGISTRY NO.
CLASSIFIED DATA CLASSIFICATION CATEGORY 0
NSI QRD Q FRD ASSIGNED TO:
DATE INFORMATIONROUTING LEGALREVIEW, Q, FINAL:
Q COPY ASSIGNED TO:
DATE NO LEGAL OBJECTIONS NOTIFY:
Q EDO ADMIN4CORRES SR EXT.
COMMENTS, NOTIFY:
EXT.
JCAE NOTIFICATION RECOMMENDED:
Q YES Q
NO
- p. NRC FORM 232 I11 75I EXECUTIVEDIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL DO jVOTREIlIIOVE THIS COPY
+ a t
1 r
lt I
l k
1 t
II,
,r I
I,
FROM:
V@iN I4>> ZQ'A~~g f%8~1$~>~
5844~ Gf sic,.l P@'g TO:
CK~1F~MQ ii@~4A'$6 ACTIONCONTROL, DATES FINALREPLY = 'g F ILE LOCATIO COMPL DEADLINE ACKNOWLEDGMENT INTERIM REPLY CONTROL NO.
DATE OF DOCUMENT A
PREPARE FOR SIGNATURE OF:
Q CHAIRMAN Q
EXECUTIVEDIRECTOR OTHER:
DESCRIPTION Q LETTER Q MEMO Q REPORT Q OTHER Sup;@rR 8~~ asm'Qt84 Lcgks~@4~
e~g~esc fcf'H.Near)n 5 ee prcpQM8
%%ZFU@)6< Gf ~> lcm'QY~~Ti Ms'". FQdvcC)cG sg8468 Q5 w'tAP f<$)8 X SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR'REMARKS lsaCC~AIGg CAN 6?p)g i@ 59 ply 4P. F4'2 5'CPU) CMcc4$ tg DOCUMENT/COPY NO.
CLASSIFIED DATA CLASSIFICATION NUMBER OF PAGES POSTAL REGISTRY NO.
ASSIGNED TO:
DATE CATEGORY Q
NSI QRD Q FRD INFORMATIONROUTING LEGALREVIEW 0
FINAL 0
COPY ASSIGNED 'TO:
DATE NO LEGAL OBJECTIONS NOTIFY:
Q EDD ADMIN&CDRREc BR EXT.
COMMENTS, NOTIFY:
EXT.
JCAE NOTIFICATIONRECOMMENDED:
QYESQND NRC FORM 232 Ii@751 EXECUTIVEDIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL DO IVOTREiÃOI/E THIS COPY
TO:
QQ$ f'g~3g 7""I 'TfG ACTION CONTROI COMPL DEADLINE ACKNOWLEDGMENT INTERIM REPLY FINALREPLY F ILE LOCATION DATES CONTROL NO.
DATEOF DOCUMENT PREPARE FOR SIGNATURE OF:
Q CHAIRMAN Q EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DESCRIPTION Q LETTER Q MEIVIO Q REPORT Q OTHER SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS
'I fgCNifly-BA+W~P)g 49 4." g~Ji k0 I~
s)F~A WMvB5)g
. CLASSIFIED DATA DOCUMENT/COPY NO NUMBER OF PAGES POSTAL REGISTRY I<<IO.
ASSIGNED TO:
DATE CLASSIFICATION CATEGO RY-Q NSI QRO QFRO INFORMATIONROUTING Q<<A 1g85 LEGALREVIEW ASSIGNED TO:
DATE Q
FINAL Q
COPY NO LEGAL OBJECTIONS NOTIFY:
Q EOO ADMIN&CORRES 88 EXT.
COMMENTS, NOTIFY-EXT.
NRC FORM 232 Ill-75I JCAE NOTIFICATIONRECOMMENDED:
Q YES Q
NO EXECUTIVEDIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS DO IIIOjREO'OVE THIS COPY PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL
FROM:
TO:
ACTION CONTROL COMPL DEADLINE ACKNOWLEDGMENT INTERIM REPLY F INAI R EPLY FILE LOCATION DATES CONTROL NO.
DATEOF DOCUMENT PREPARE F R SIGNATURE OF:
Q CHAIRMAN Q
EXECUTIVEDIRECTOR OTHER:
DESCRIPTION 0 LETTER Q MEMO Q REPORT Q OTHER SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS C~a 'W 4~4 1 "M~lM~ 4lk 6 I'M 4 4M7 ~~ 4F~
P4
~c DOCUMENT/COPY NO.
CLASSIFIED DATA CLASSIFICATION NUMBER OF PAGES POSTAL REGISTRY NO.
ASSIGNED TO; DATE CATEGORY Q
NSI QRD Q FRD INFORMATIONROUTING LEGALREVIEW 0
FINAL Q
COPY ASSIGNED TO:
DATE NO LEGAL OBJECTIONS NOTIFY:
Q EDO ADMINIICORRES BR EXT COMMENTS, NOTIFY:
EXT.
JCAE NOTIFICATION RECOMMENDED:
0 YES Q
NO NRC FORM 232 I11-75)
EXECUTIVEDIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS PRINCIPAL CORRESPON DENCE CONTROL DO NOT REMOVE THIS COPY
t
FROM:
Mfi@K<<<<61 4<<<<<<4 Vwl4 TO:
Cl8$F~ 1 f~~~l'1Q ACTIONCONTROL COMPL DEADLINE AC KNOW LEDG MENT INTERIM REPLY FINALREPLY FILE LOCATION DATES Q509l DATEOF DOCUMENT L~H2 f..
PREPARE FOR SIGNATURE OF:
Q CHAIRMAN Q
EXECUT IVE 0 IRECTO R OTHER:
DESCRIPTION Q LETTER Q MEMO Q REPORT Q OTHER SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS 1@+%6<<>>w VG1 448) s~wHG~~
4~4 CXDSQl."~$GQ CS G. 1I>>'+~3~YII~3>>
<"C~CG 5'~JC4IQ~
DOCUMENT/COPY NO.
CLASSIFIED DATA CLASSIFICATION NUMBER OF PAGES POSTAL REGISTRY NO.
ASSIGNED TO:
DATE CATEGORY Q
NSI QRD Q FRD INFORMATIONROUTING
$KCV 7-"- i~A LEGALREVIEW 0
FINAL Q
COPY L~34~"<<~
ASSIGNED TO:
DATE NO LEGAL OBJECTIONS NOTIFY:
Q EDO ADMINEcCORRES BR EXT.
COMMENTS, NOTIFY:
EXT.
JCAE NOTIFICATIONRECOMMENDED:
Q YES Q
NO NRC FORM 232 Ill-751 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL OO /tIOT REIÃOI/E THIS COPY
I I
ll I.
I I
ff I4 I
If I
I I'
ement7 p
qigp Marvin P eahe'.n.senI coyie8 40 ii'"' ifi Is Lewis.
Algand g anbre Coleman PA d, 55
=K i4 Pennyvill.j,,yj,J'.0807Q
<<<i)
'V'-grg-'q).Johns 433,,0rghhda AV'8tikte Opllbge~
r v)
.'i
.~ V.X:"l"'
harv~~ >.'ewis 650$ g>~dfa>d terrace lf Phyla; Pp'.l9yyg SHRG 1ip
-0/(~79
~,4 -g Sirs;,
<<>Csee send'me info<<motgon on ghe
<<e oeeg g gL gag j~ <<t g<~gg ll a lo~ level radioactive waste incQe
.theirjNine Nile point Nuclear Power plight,
'%hah fS the 3ocket Number and may I send jn ai Rpyea~rance stat' I
~ ef
JQ~
,~
i+~
l I
4 j
V