ML19319A790
| ML19319A790 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 01/19/1972 |
| From: | Muntzing L US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Johnson, Ramey, Schlesinger US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7912120859 | |
| Download: ML19319A790 (4) | |
Text
.
- ~ ~ -
~
i f
4
~
JAN 191972
{d-16f Chairw: Schicsinger Ccewissioner Raney ~
Comissioner Johnson Comissioner Larson Cocaissioner Doub EPA REVIEW OF OCC" LEE DRAFT DIVIROT*. ENTAL STATEMENT i
Reference is'nade to my comoranjum of January 14 on the saw -
subject to Comissioners Fasey and Doub which has been circulated to the Comission. The nemorandum identified four cafor out-standing problems requiring resolution with EPA and which were to be discussed with CEQ & EPA on January 18, 1972. Cordon Mcdonald, CEQ, Deputy Administrator Fri. EPA and Comissioner Doub and respective staff r. embers attended the meeting. The full-list of attendees is attached.
As a result of. discussions. of each issue the following positions and-agree:':ents were reached.
- 1. Extent and Timeliness of P.*, Coments EPA recognized it should have identified additional data requirements on a more ti. moly bases in accordance with previous agreements with AEC and CEQ. They plan to take steps to assure core timely coments for future cases. AEC agreed on the need for obtaining more detatis in certain areas in order to permit a more comprehensive inpact analysis, but also reitented concern over potential overburden of unnecessary detail.-
It was agreed by EPA that reques,ts for additin 1 datai
- ~
related to site selection were inappropriate for cases such
~
as Oconee. EPA offered to work with AEC on the natter of site selection for new cases (in the course of discussion
)
EPA learned of AEC's proposed rule for early site hearings and they plan d review and cc: ment on it).
'[
r l
Of71CE >
~
j
.$URNAME>
payg y Forun AEC-318 t.ev.9-53) AECM 0240 e u s cown.asswt enem cnct seriass 4.s R
u
s The Comission,
All parties agreed on the need to separate coments f
specific to the imediate needs of Oconee from those coments requiring consideration for future cases. EPA volunteeced to outline for AEC their general areas of concern that should be remedied in fut0re environmental statements..
2.
"As 1.ow As Practicable"
/
Both agencies recognized the need for establishing specific "as low as practicable" limits for_ regulating pur-
~ "
poses and the philosophical view of promulgating less discharges than "as low as practicable". EPA agreed not to include coments addressed to the matter of alternatives and of enforced levels below established "as low as practicable" limits. Instead, they will address the philosophical aspect by advocating that applicants be encouraged to use good management practices to reduce discharges to the lowest level practicable whenever possible.
3.
Accident Analyses Although EPA maintained its previous position (need for quantification of probabilities and need for further treatment of the Class 9 accident); they expressed the intent to make it clear in the coments that EPA supports AEC's approach for establishing generic guidelines. EPA agreed to eleminate specific coaments on Oconee that were contrary to this position and to maintain equivalent sensitivity in this area when com-menting on subsequent statements. AEC agreed to expedite the full development and establishment of guidelines. EPA plans to send AEC a letter requesting the opportunity to participate with AEC in the final development of the guidelines.
A discussion of emergency planning in the environnental statenent was considered appropriate by EPA. Since emergency planning considerations are treated in the reactor safety review AEC agreed to make reference to this in the statement.
~
4.
Transportation Although EPA agreed This catter was not fully resolved.
~
in principle with the need to treat the subject on a generic bases they urged early issuance of the report presently being prepared by AEC. In addition EPA continued to maintain the need to evaluate the most populated route to arrive at the worst environmental impact. They were not satisfied with the published material for justifying the AEC position that safety was not dependent on special routing. More detailed discussions are to be held between the respective staffs.
e OFFIG )
i Wj$
- Q.; ISU8tNA8E >
- f. ' i g e-f n.'
DAM >
Poes ABC-3te (Rev.9-53) AECM 0140 o u s ooven maa.a pe n a oe,.cc sayisiga,
l a. --.-
i L
- JZT c
The Comission <
5.
The meeting was considered to be informative and productive and it was agreed by all that the principles and restraints discussed should apply to all future cases.
(signed) L. Manning Muntzing L. Manning Muntzing Director of Regulation
Enclosure:
List of Attendees cc: General Manager (2)
General Counsel (2)
Secretary (2) m bec:
L. M. Muntzing E. J. Bloch C. K. Beck C. L. Henderson L. Rogers A. Giambusso
.[ --
~
~
DREP
-DREB: DIP
~
omcz,
AGiambusso:sr LRo,gerJ tmunui X
.m, b
W772 1/ /72
.1.././.f/73. <
l
.?
~
Form AEC.)le (Rev.9-53) AECM 0240
- u s coviewcwt reme.s cover ;evidisses > -
r C-
-.o 2.
~
i 4
MEETING AT CEQ TO DISCUSS GENERIC PROBLEMS A!iD SPECIFIC CGil4ENTS ON OC0!!EE JAWARY 18, 1972 ATTEllDEES Gordon McDonsid. Itember. CEQ tiilliam Dircks. Staff. CEQ Timothy B. Atkeson General Counsel. CEQ Robert Fri. Deputy Administrator. EPA David Dominick. Assistant Administrator. EPA David liarward. EPA William tiolmberg. Assistant Director. OFA. EPA Stan Greenfield. Assistant Administrator for Research & Monitoring. EPA Cmraissioner Doub
.,a t
L. Hanning Huntzing
~
H Martin Domagala Lester Rogers 4
Howard Shapar A. Girabusso l
2
?!
r Oma>
, ~ ~ ~ -
ll
,. n i:
' :)k r1 SURNA M >
.V DAW >
l
' f ym ABC-31. (Rev.9-53) AECM 024.
e v s novame **w=4 otrace t o71.ase 4es
+--s
_~..
' " ' ' " " " ~ " '