ML19210C210
| ML19210C210 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 09/12/1972 |
| From: | Harold Denton US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Muller D US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7911130471 | |
| Download: ML19210C210 (2) | |
Text
,'t UNITED STATES N.\\
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
- I
'l d 'b -
WASHINGTON D.C.
20545
'M#
ENVIR0h SEP 121972 D. Muller, Assistant Director for Environmental Projects, L
RESPONSE TO AGENCY C0'HIENTS ON THREE MILE ISLAND 1 and 2 PLANT NAME: Three Mile Island Units 1 & 2 LICENSING STAGE:
OL DOCKET NUMBER:
50-289 and 50-320 RESPONSIBLE BRANCH:
Environmental Projects Branch #3 REQUESTED COMPLETION DATE:
N/A APPLICANTS RESPONSE DATE NECESSARY FOR NEXT ACTION PLANNED ON PROJECT:
N/A DESCRIPTION OF RESPONSE:
Response to Agency Comments REVIEW STATUS: Accident Analysis Branch Review Complete As requested-by the memo from W. Regan to B. Grimes dated August 21, 1972, the agency comments on the Draft Environmental Statement for Three Mile Island have been reviewed with respect to the Plant Accident section.
The attached responses were prepared by the Accident Analysis Branch.
/
H. R. Denton, Assistant Director for Site Safety Enclosure Directorate of Licensing (As Stated) cc: w/o enclosure A. Gia'mbusso W. Mcdonald cc: w/ enclosure S. Hanauer J. Hendrie R. DeYoung W. Gammill A. Schwencer K. Kniel H. Faulkner H. Schierling J. Youngblood W. Regan y
Docket Files /
1590 352 yg11180 471 O-
AG 5. -
0:BIENTS FOR THREE MILE ISL IDENTS
- l. EPA Comments In addition to general comments, which do not require a response, EPA had a specific comment on hydrology.
As indicated earlier to Mr. Regan, a brief response on this should be obtained from the Site Branch.
- 2. Interior No Interior comments have been received to date.
i
- 3. Commerce Commerce commented on meteorological assumptions used in the accident analysis.
We suggest the following response be in-cluded in Section XII.
"A comment was made that X/Q values and their probabilities should be provided.
The meteorological conditions used in the analysis approximate the dispersion conditions which would prevail at least 50% of the time at a typical site.
The value used for a short duration release at 610 meters agrees with the applicants value.
However, use of alternative meteorological assumptions, such as indicated in the Department of Commerce comment, does not significantly affect the overall environmental risk."
t 7' '
e
~}
- - -. - ~ ~ -.. - - - - - - -
-. -.