ML19210C094
| ML19210C094 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 10/26/1979 |
| From: | Varga S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Segnere A AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7911130249 | |
| Download: ML19210C094 (6) | |
Text
.
[
ga aseg d
0, UNITED STATES E } 0% ( j NUCLEAR REGULA TORY COMMISSION 3.,(
/. C WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 g.1
?
\\>&
o j#
UCT 2 8 E79 ws Mr. and Mrs. Al fred Segnere 21 Howard Street Stowe, Pennsylvania 19464
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Segnere:
Your letter regarding the Limerick Generating Station (Jnit Nos.1 and 2 has been referred to me for reply.
In the letter you expressed opposition to the Limerick facility because of (1) the problem of nuclear waste, (2) the popula-tion density around the Limerick facility, and (3) the uncertainty of the water supply for the Limerick facility. The subject of nuclear waste is discussed in the Enclosure; the population in the vicinity of the Limerick site and the water supply for the Limerick facility are discussed below.
Over the years, it has been the general policy of the Nuclear Regulatory Com-mission (NRC) to encourage power reactor siting in low population areas. To that end, the Comission's regulations on reactor siting criteria,10 CFR Part 100, require that every power reactor have: an exclusion area immediately surrounding the reactor which is under the control of the applicant; a low population zone, outside the exclusion area, where appropriate protective measures could be taken to protect the public in the event of a serious acci-dent; and a population center distance such that the nearest densely porlated center, of about 25,000 or more persons, be located at a distance no closer than one and one-third times the outer radius of the low population zone.
For the Limerick facility, the minimum exclusion area distance is 2500 feet, the low population zone outer radius is 1.28 miles, and the nearest population center, Pottstown, Pennsylvania (1970 population, approximately 26,000 persons),
is located about 1.7 miles southwest of the reactors.
As also required by Part 100, the radiological consequences of a postulated serious accident involving a major fission product release within the contain-ment must be shown to be within the guideline values (25 rem to the whole body and 300 rem to the thyroid gland) to an individual assumed to be located at the exclusion area boundary for a two hour period, and to an individual asstred to be located at the outer boundary of the low population zone for a 30 day period. Both the licensee and the Comission's staff analyzed such events and concluded that the combination cf plant safety features and site characteristics were such that the consequences of such an event would be within the regulatory guidelines.
1320 059 20 7911130
Mr. and Mrs. Al fred Segnere OCT 2 s E/9 In addition, the Comission's staff re/iens both current and projected popula-tion in the vicinity of the site, and antinually develops criteria for use in its reviews dealing with population density. These criteria, which are not part of the Comission regulation but which do offer guidance on staff review practices, have evolved with time. At the time (1970) that Limerick was under review for a construction permit, the Commission's staff used the guideline that the cunulative population in the vicinity of a proposed site should gen-erally not exceed the highest values for previously approved and licensed sites. Population levels for the Limerick site were generally found to meet this criterion.
With regard to your concern about the water supply for the Limerick f acility, I would like to point out that the cooling water required to safely shutdown the nuclear reactors in the event of an emergency or an accident will not depend on water from the Schuylkill River or water diverted from the Delaware River. The NRC requires that a plant's design include a reserved supply of water (called the ultimate heat sink) which can cool the plant for 30 days without the addition of water from other sources. The proposed ultimate heat sink for the Limerick facility is a spray pond. The embankments which form the pond, and the pipes and pumps which bring the water into the Limerick facility, must be designed to with-stand the effects of natural phenomena like earthquakes, hurricanes and tornadoes.
Loss of the normal water supply, be it water from the Schuylkill or Delaware River, will not prevent safe shutdown of the facility's reactors.
During most of the year, the Limerick f acility will cbtain makeup water for the cooling towers from the Schuylkill River. The cooling towers cool the water from the main condensers; a main condenser, in turn, condenses the steam discharged by a main turbine. The facility could not generate electricity if there were prolonged periods when makeup water is not available. The Delaware River Basin Comaission (DRBC) has established when the Limerick facility can obtain water from the Schuylkill River. The DRBC requires that the flow in the Schuylkill River at the facility be greater than 550 cucic feet per second and that the temperature of the water be below 59 degrees Fahrenheit. With these limits, based on historical data for the Schuylkill River, we calculated that the Limerick f acility would not be able to generate electricity for 47 days during a typical year unless an alternate source of makeup water, such as the diversion of water from the Delaware River was pro-vided.
The interruption in electrical generation due to low flows in the Schuylkill River would also occur if the turbine generators were powered from a coal, oil, or gas-fired boiler. Prior to the issuance of the construction permits for the Limerick facility, the NRC evaluated alternatives to a nuclear facility at the Limerick site. NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board ( ASLAB) concluded that all other potential sites in the region for an electrical generating station had similar operational problems concerning availability of water, therefore the 1320 060
Mr. and Mrs. Al fred Segnere OCT 2 8 77/3 shortage of makeup water at the Limerick site did not prevent the construction of nuclear units. Furthermore, the ASLAB ruled that the envircnmental costs and benefits weighed in favor of constructing the Limerick facility.
We trust that this information is responsive to your concerns.
Si ncerely,
///
Tl MLs b\\
,St ven A. Varga, Acting Assistant Director for Light Water Reactors Division of Project Management Enclosure :
Disposal of Radioactive Waste 1320 061
ENCLOSUN.__
DISPOSAL OF F 40I0ACTI'/E
'a ASTE Radioactive materials which result from the nuclear fuel cycle can te 7
separated into two main categories:
1.
Effluents those materials discharged to the environment as gaseous or liquid effluents (the radioactive ccnten-of these effluents must fall within establisnec NRC and EPA limits and must be as low as reasonably achievable) - and, 2.
Wastes those materials which are of sufficient potential g,
radiological hazard that they require special care.
-(
Radioactive wastes (the second category) are separated into two broad classifications:
"high-level wastes" and "other than nign-level wastes."
High-level wastes are radioactive wastes produced in the first solvent extraction cycle of fuel reprocessing operations anc spent fuei eierents should they be discarded.
They are hichly radioactive anc repaire shielding and remote handling. NRC regulations (Appendix F of 10 CFR parc 5C) recuire that the inventory of high-level liquid waste at a fuel reprocessing ::lant j
be limited to that produced in the prior five years and tnat it be con-3 verted to solid form and transferred to a federal repository wi:nin ten years of its separation from the irradiated fuel.
y With the reorganization of the Atomic Energy Comission into the Energy Research and Development Administration (now the Cepartment of Energy [COE])
and the Nuclear Regulatory Cocuission (NRC) NRC was given regulatory authority over storage and disposal of all cocrercially generated wastes and those DOE generated high-level radioactive wastes wnica are suoject to long-tem storage and which are not used for, or as part of, research J,
and development activities.
To implement this authority and to provice prompt guidance to DOE, the industry and the public, the NRC is
~. -
new or revised regulatory standards and guidelines for sucn scorage anc E
disposal.
The regulations will require confomance with a fixed set of gf minimum acceptable performance standards (technical, social and environ-
,g -
mental) for waste management activities while providing for flex cility
..VJ.
in technological approach.
These standards and guidelines sili be 7
designed to assure public health and safety and protection of the environ-y'."
ment.
Facilities for storage and/or disposal of hign-level wastes Of.
licensed by NRC will be designed and operated in accordance witn NRC W-standards.
W 00E was pursuing a program designed to accommodate tne anticipated need for disposal of high-level waste or spent fuel tnat is expectec to accumulate as the nuclear power industry continues to grcw.
Inis pro-gram included, among other things, plans to develop several operations for disposal of high-level wastes in stable geological fomaticns.
The purpose of these facilities would be to demonstrate tne acceptabi,ity cf a specific geological formation for pemanent disposal of high-level and D *
- lD
" lD 3 lh m m M J M""
1320 062
--w QM&~
.n.
~
~ ~'
v 007 2 a 1979 e
~
transuranic wastes.
These facilities will be treated as gemanen: d:s;; sal repositories.
00E is now awaiting a Presidential direction of pclicy and plans which will occur following completion of studies recom. mended by an interagancy task force formed by the President.
There are several methods high-level waste disposal which are technologically feasiblo.
SOE is expected to continue to investigate options to determine whe;.ner superior disposal alternatives can be developed.
For specific information concerning plans and arcgrams, contact the Director, Division of Waste Management, repartment of Energy, Washingt.on, D.C.
20545.
A In parallel with 00E's research and development activities, NRC is developing performance criteria for solidified high-level wastes.
These criteria are being developed based on a systems analysis model wnicn considers the normal and potential accident environments to wnich hign-le/el solid matrices could be exposed during interim storage, transpor-tation, handling, emplacement and post-emplacement.
Repository site selection criteria are being developed and will enccmoass a broac spectrum of concerns including earth science, geograpnic, demogra:: hic and
- .t '
socioeconomic factors.
A study to detemine the design and operating requirements for high-level waste repositories will provide a basis for the development of standards and staff review methodologies.
Radioactive wastes other than high-level are buried in near-surface shallow trenches, usually in the containers in which they are snippec.
There is no intent to recover the wastes once they are buried.
~here are presently six commercial facilities in the United States licensec to bury low-level radioactive wastes. They are located in West '.'ailey, New York; Morehead, Kentucky; Sheffield, Illinois; Beatty, Nevada; Hanford, Washington; and Barnwell, South Carolina.
At tne present time, 1
only the latter three sites are receivinc waste for burial Ihe 'lest
'4 Valley and Maxey Flats sites are closed.
The Sheffield site is filled tg to its licensed capacity. A contested application for exoansion of the Q.
Sheffield site is currently under review.
Burial of transuranium nuclides b
is limited at all but one of the sites, y
Five of the six commercial burial grounds are located in Agreement States t':
and are regulated by the states. However, at two sites, the NRC licenses P
special nuclear material because the quantities authorized for posses-sion by the commercial operator exceed those which the Agreement States may license under their agreements. The Sheffield, Illinois site, L
located in a nonagreement state, is reaulated bv tne NRC aitnouch tna
+
state licenses and controls activities"at the s'ite concerning naturally occurring and accelerator-produced radioisotopes which are not subject to NRC control.
The sites are all commercially operated.
The states t
have cssumed responsibility for long-tem care of the sites.
w-D 1320 063 om 0
Tl a.u oc cm... -
lm
- M. h %..'.+ ; '.
c.
f.'
.xu
OCT 2 a gJtj
..v Since the formation of NRC's waste P.inagement progran in mic-10'r. efforts 5$ ~
have been underway to identify regulatory needs for low-level oeste management and to perform technical studies to support inose re;u!ations.
This effort was accelerated in mid-1977 with the creation of a uow-tevei Waste Branch (LLWB) within the Office of Nuclear Material Safety anc Tne LLWS was Safeguards (NMSS) and increased resources throughout NRC.
assigned responsibility for technicai analyses to prepare a regulatory base, review license applications and coordination of NRC's technical and policy efforts for low-level wastes.
A creliminary low-level waste e.
management program plan, NUREG-0240, was iss'.ed in October 1977,
>f The NRC staff has continued to refine our concept of the low-level waste In addition, a number of supporting technical stecies have been program.
initiateo and preliminary results are being considered in program plan-ning.
Additional studies have been defined to support our regulation development efforts and these have been initiated or will be in the near future.
The principal objectives of the low-level waste (LLW) program are ta i',-
develop a framework of criteria and regulations for Icng-term manage. rent of commercial low-level waste disposal sites and to provide tne tools for applicants to prepare license applications and for NRC to make uniform, timely licensing decisions.
D**D D
' 3
} lb 11@
- wo e
g.'..
1320 064 x
.c N'
'.e a
m.
~
6 Pa* * {
-"'It~:.-
/
r y
,