ML19208D203
| ML19208D203 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000599, 05000600 |
| Issue date: | 08/15/1979 |
| From: | Gossick L NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Jepsen R SENATE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19208D204 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7909280110 | |
| Download: ML19208D203 (3) | |
Text
IURG.Poq -
k UNITED STATES
!) c(Ej NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3,*- [
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 k.'.... /y AUG 151979 The Honorable Roger Jepsen United States Senate Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Jepsen:
The letter from your constituents Ms. Kelsay and Ms. Bloomberg, which you for-warded to the Nuclear Regulatory Comission for coments, has been referred to me for response.
The letter refers to the "... possibility of a nuclear plant being built upstream, within fifty miles of Burlington, on the Illinois side of the Mississippi."
We believe that your constituents are referring to the proposed Carroll County Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2.
On ' December 20,.1978, the Commonwealth Edison Company tendered an application with the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC) for construction pemits for Carroll County Station Units 1 and 2 and requested an Early Site Review (ESR) hearing and partial decision on issues of site suitability for the proposed facility. The Carroll County site is located in northwestern Illinois in Carroll County, about five miles southeast of the city of Savanna and three miles east of the Mississippi River. This is about 110 miles from Burlington, Iowa. It is anticipated that comercial operation of the Station in Carroll County would commence in the late 1980's.
As part of this application, the Commonwealth Edison Company has identified nine sites as possible alternatives for the nuclear power plant proposed to be located in Carroll County, Illinois. Three of these possible alternative sites are located within 30 miles of Burlington, Iowa; all are on the Illinois side of the Mississippi River.
The following presents a synopsis of actions that have been or will be taken by the NRC in conjunction with its review of the Carroll County application.
A.
Site and Environmental Review After staff review of the tendered application, the NRC indicated to Commonwealth Edison by letter dated April 4,1979 that the application was found acceptable for docketing and the NRC would proceed to conduct an ESR. An ESR performed in conjunction with a construction pemit review, such as that being conducted for the Carroll site, will permit an applicant to obtain NRC review and, as appro-priate, other Federal agency reviews in accordance with the regulation pro-mulgated by the Council on Environmental Quality and by specific NRC regulations presented in 10 CFR part 51.
1052 062 790928000 9
~. - -
The Honorable Roger ~Jepsen The ESR focuses on site suitability issues both in environmental and safety areas.
In particular, for the Carroll site, NRC will make findings as to whether the site is suitaole with respect to considerations such as geology, nydrology, meteorology, terrestrial and aquatic ecology, water use, radiological impacts of normal operation, regional demography, cormunity characteristics, economic factors, historical and natic ul landmarks, land use, noise, and aesthetics.
Included in the ESR will N a complete analysis of alternative site factors which led the applicant to select the Carroll County site over the other proposed alter-native locations. The staff will evaluate the Carroll site in relation to alter-native sites and will make a finding in the ESR as to whether the Carroll site is the preferred location.
In cenjunction with the ESR, the staff will prepare and issue a Draft Site Environmental Statement which will be circulated for public. comment, and a Final Site Environmental Statement which will include staff responses to comments received.
It should be noted that the Comonwealth Edison application is to construct a power plant at the Carroll County site. Any NRC decision will relate to its acceptability at that site. While other sites are identified as potential alternatives to the Carroll County site, for purposes of detemining whether an "obviously superior" alternative site exists, Comonwealth Edison would have to submit an application to construct a power plant at one of these sites before the NRC would make findings related to that location. The NRC does not, in its environmental reviews select sites for power plants, but reviews appli-
~
cations to assure, among other things, that an obviously superior site does not exist.
B.
Remaindet of Safety Review In addition to the Site and Environmental review described above, the NRC staff will also perform a ccmprehensive safety review of the proposed nu: lear plant.
The applicant (in this case Commonwealth Edison Company) will submit a Pre-liminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR) which describes the preliminary design and design criteria of the proposed plant. When the PSAR is submitted, the staff will review it in detail. Par..cular emphasis is placed on the ability of the plant's emergency systems to mitigate the consequences of a wide variety of postulated transients and accidents.
Before construction of the plant can begin, the following steps must be com-pleted :
1.
A comprehensive review by the NRC staff of the preliminary design and the principle design criteria. The staff publishes a Safety Evaluation Report which describes and presents the conclusions of its review 1052 063
The Honorable Roger.Jepse'n 2.
A review by the Advisory Comittee on Reactor Safeguards, an independent statutory comittee.
3.
A mandatory public hearing.
Another review is conducted prior to operation of the plant. When the construc-tion of the nuclear plant has progressed to the point where final design infor-mation and plans for operation are ready, the applicant submits the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) in support of an application for an operating license.
The FSAR sets forth the pertinent details on the final design of the facility, including final containment design, design of the nuclear core, and waste handling system. The FSAR also provides plans for operation and procedures for coping with emergencies. Again the staff makes a detailed review of the infor-mation. The staff again prepares a Safety Evaluation Report (re the operating license) and, as during the construction pemit stage, the ACRS makes an inde-pendent evaluation and presents its advice to the Comission.
A public hearing is not mandatory with respect to an operating license applica-tion. However, soon after acceptance for review of the operating license appli-cation, the Comission publishes notice that it is considering issuance of the license. The notice provides that anyone whose interest might be affected by the proceeding may petition the NRC for a hearing.
The entire review process is described in more detail in Enclosure 1, "The Reactor Licensing Process." Enclosure 2, "Public Participation in Nuclear
~
Power Reactor Licensing Hearings" will probably be of interest to Ms. Kelsay and Ms. Bloomberg since they indicated they wish to participate ir. the decision making process.
We trust this letter provides you, Ms. Kelsay and Ms. Bloomberg with an over-all perspective regarding the NRC review for the Carroll County Station.
Si ncerely,
' Tiigned)T. A 3*?
NeeV.Gossick Executive Director for Operations i
Enclosures:
1.
The Reactor Licensing Process 2.
Public Participation In Nuclear Power Reactor Licensing Hearings 3.
Letter Dated June 18,1979 from Ms. Kelsay and Ms. Bloomberg 1052 064
.-