ML19340A259
| ML19340A259 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 10/24/1974 |
| From: | Kuhlman C US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Muller D US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19340A260 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8001310579 | |
| Download: ML19340A259 (2) | |
Text
.
OCT 2 41974 t
D. R. Huller, Assistant Director for Environmental Projects, L
.i ENVIRONMENTAL TECTINICAL SPECIFIC.ATIONS DUKE POWER CO TMR, OCONEE We recomend a revision be made to clarify Specification 1.4.A of Appendix B Technical Specifications for the Oconee plants. A copy of that specification, titled " fish impingement on intake screens and entrainment of fish eggs and larvae," is attached for reference.
1.
The first sentence imposes a requirement which seems inadequate.
That is, it seems that a weekly visual inspection, made from the intake structure through several feet of water, is not adequate r
for the purpose of identifying the species of entrapped fish and eatinating the total number and length of cach species.
2.
The second sentence of the specification seems the best method of obtaining reasonably accurate fish impingement information.
It must specify a time interval, however, to be an enforceable requirement. Using this method, there is a question that remains
~
of the number of fish which may be lost fron the screen as it's removed from the water.
3.
The third sentence of the specification which requires the underwater visual inspection seems a valid requirement, but the time interval seems too infrequent to gather any meaningful information.
l l
Uc recocnend the specifications be changed to require a determination of fish impingement based on counting and analyzing those fish on the
+
screens as they are removed from the water.
Include in the require--
ment a time frequency or schedule for making this determination.
I
{
4.
In the second subparagraph of the specification, there is no time j
interval specified for the reporting level of 100 fish mortalities.
j At the pre.sent tima, the licensee is making his count only every i
other week when he " pulls" the screens to meet an EPA requirement.
We recomend the requirement be reworded to specify the time interval which applies for the report level of 100 fish mortalities; for example, 100 per day or 100 per week.
V o-i orrecs w sunwaw a k P
l pars >
Form AEC.318 (Rev,9-53) ARCM 0240 W u. a. oovsanusur casurine o,rscan son.ose. tee 8001s2o 5 7 7
y
- a D. R. Huller-
- 2.-
DCT 3 41974 1-Further, we reconumend yout a.
review the " significance" of the report level of 100 fish
{
mortalities.J Sines July 1974 the count has been in the
'l range of 800 to 3500 every two weeks when the licensee has pulled the screens.
I b.~. delete the requirement for the 24-hour reports-to the l
Regional Office of RO, but retain the 16-day written reports to Licensing and specify a ce be sent to the 4
' Regional Office. Our Regional Office does not. initiate j
any prompt action as a result of these. reports; therefore.
these prompt reports from the licensees serve no useful
'l' pn: pose to Regulatory.
The Regional Office has, as a matter of routine.-been publishing a local news release j
on these occurrences since the numbar reported greatly exceeds the 100 value specified as the report level.
4 We request your early consideration of these recommendations. If you have any questions about this request, contact Leo Rigginbotham j
(7413).
i Orl inal si d
c.w. r o:,tnad ty. - " a
---m
~. o-l 4
1 l
Carl W. Kuhlman, Assistant Director for Radiological, F.svironmental and Materials Trotection, RO Enclosuro:
As stated
{
cc:
C. Dicler, L:EPB2
~*-- - -
{
R. Clark, L:EPB2 G. Gower, R0 (H00259H2 E-ps, i
T
- t
. l.
t
= 1; i RO:
d~
I o,F.e s e L
liiggir ot amd_ ef -J;WRoy-ke > i b
eunseanes h.
g oaysp 30-22-7$
()
_/.
~
~
- l Perse ABC-)lt, (Rev. 9 33) AECM 0240 W u. e. eovangutwy pnewTswa OFFtCEe 19N.938-ISS
.4 x
/
T w
y y
?"
- 48 4
y-
-w 'M v
T w
'