ML19344A131

Recommends That Nuclear Power Plant Currently Being Built Be Converted Into Coal Burning Plant Because It Would Assure Dow Chemical Co Steam & Will Solve Radioactive Threat & Waste Problem.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML19344A131
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	07/05/1979
From:	Marshall W MAPLETON INTERVENORS
To:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML19344A132	List: ML19344A131
References
NUDOCS 8008050682
Download: ML19344A131 (4)

Text

k hMAf8 kW e '

j hak %DM10M;ySII$I k

.d q3  %  %

@g Qd!DL4 a w:s u y , p ,,p x sIge40@;. p .g,*

/:. s.  :. +a

,y +

7

)

ll $,Yl f-k.?? '  ?'

w :- T. I .',

_ .. .. ~

f'cfg}6063299E186'J07/05/19ICS'.IPM8NGZC3PW8H8 j51;7,8943091NGM'T08NMIOLAND.MI..

00CKE1 NUMBER 100107n05 1026P EST

k

- ';-,

PRCD. & UT!r FAC,30-N2t.1%

1M' ' .

~

fi7

~

D ,l COMMISSION, NRC. CHAIRMAN OF THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY

}Tf. WASHINGTON"DC 20555-s

( 15 e.

L' DEAR 3185: r

(: IN VIEm 0F THE = ELL KN0hN FACT, THAT THERE IS No SOLUTION TO THE

' RADIDACTIVE.

0FFING, aASTE PROBLEM AND THAT OTHER I STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT THE NUCLEAR POWEJ THE 3 MILE I _

PLANT SEING CURRENTLY BUILT IN PLANT.

$HIFT5 24 THI$

HOURS aILL EVERY ASSURE MIDLAND MICMIGAN BE 00w CHEMIC AL COMPANYYEAR, STEAM CONVER 3 365 DA

?

MILE ISLAND AND RADICACTIVE THREAT AND aASTE PR WENDELL H MARSHALL, VICE PRESIDENT MIDWEST RFD 10 MIOLENVIRONMENTAL AND MI 46440 PROTECTION ASSOCIATES T 23:25 EST _ -

( ,, ,, s.? hat ~ "  :

'w .

~

• O u

• k.

t m,y

? (W xmm 8

yewma

. . . . .1. ..

Sm < -

w + & n me ..

p + *, m ~

i . ..

%. . . -:_yu

. < . g.: 'F j .

,a y=lg.4

- . . M.c),..Q;;;.g, l W J., . ,;f ,r. ;;;5  : - 'f'g%yf - .% m. ...L<,  :

_ 4., - ' / ' ,- - ~ rm

. QGK., .:lf . , . :n.,'n'.' ; * . -

JL ' ' '

<-.~~.

', , y, s z (0w,'n.  :% , , a, , m , 3 :: .. . .

u, y.g.g.

~ ,

. , + ,

n - o * , .

r e e"

r;M- :

,.'1

7. . . , .

,, . m n.,. -

-d.> >' * . . . . . . . . . .

a.; . IRtITED STATES.' 0F/ AMERICA . -- ...2.

f 7 E i..< -'. ' n 1 o J NUC12AR RECULATORY C00NISSION 7 <

i..'

.. .?"

e

-a .

_e '

, i=.. %...

T< Q. >.A: ?InI tihe Matta'r/ofi f.) . 5~~?

.c.s

-*y . -

,s

) .,- .

. =

.x '

ICONSUM RS M COMP m .

- j)) DocNet. No.'(s) L 50-329 50-330

, ,3 - - -

w.

.. . . ..  :=.e m

y "(yea 1 - a: Plants Units '1 and 2) .. y' ) - '(Pa==ad Proceeding) *~"

,  ; +--+

a- -.

a... . . .

s 5 ~

, ) ....-

^).

, . .a.. . .4 .u .

m.

)- -

:-...m...

. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE; '

,. - y y j ,.

& hereby;eertifyTchat I havejthis iday served the foregoing document (s). OC#

@6?Supon 'esch' person designatedTon thel official' service list compiled by .

i-b

' 1s.c the~i0fficeiof the; Secretary of the' Commission:in this proceeding in' ,m;

! 0accordance with the' requirements of Section 2'.712 of 10 CFR Part 2 -  :=?d

'

• N Rule'sCof Practice . ofiche Nucleac Regulatory Commission'.s Rules and'

Regulations.

9

' ^ i y~.

1:. :f_.

~.

~a.n

. ~...

~

.= =

.: :+.-

,=~= - >

t 9

, D.C. this -

t.

. Dated M at-' Washington, day of b4 197_h. Y.. 5

=-

/[ lf .

. .m -

r s 1 --.

e .p.T..

e =

L ' Q / ~

.5 Lw%W

~

.246)f} I.  ;-

E g -

' Office /of the Secretary of the Cdamission '.., .-7

-.-*-*~:

-?  :. .v.

4 w i; e (' i w99.. .*

9 W

..* * * * ^.. * '

..?.'. ..

b 4' '

4 ^.'

e 3'_ ,..,g.a.

4 t'.

i ..

N~

s f g _ , g .'

s -

.I..'..EOdM

^' ,* ~ * *

• * =

.b W' A m

y ,',' 1

,' , .u_. ' e 4 . . .

, ,j, N' '

.s v

. S

_4.e.

~ If en

• . _ *n f W. - '

1 4 P

,n,. , ;) ,3.

. x

,~a; *

-' _ { S ,

rr er

-^ ^ ^ * - ' ' **

.m',',.. .~k '

y, d . ,,

p 4 p , - ,,-1r r g :, , y - ' ' i,s@,: - )', g: S , - , ' *. ,,

._ , . , i

,( y <,, ~ ' ' w, 1 +

Q .7 ,' 3: O...,

;, n , s; '_

Q= n -$_ 7 ' ' ' '

q e. , ,

,, , ,' s

^i,.

5; i ' :. i ,i.

a7 ../<v...,g. .

1 ** * .

_ <s 3 t .

i pf.. . , ~

!. ., , s

, m, . . , m.w

.m.. .

)

4 ' O b(^

,a :.c .M .'

cMan.n. - x %Jw. .a < ' ~

d w h.  : <: &T+.\

.N: :,. - : %-- .. .

3, ; gw, gr

, ..; c  : r;

19 y

a( ;gv ' q , .gW; ~ q,. _-~

T. -

i;;;;;

. gr. .~:.

/ ' . #-

sg lW , ;C .S' , . '<4 V - ' iS ,, , <  ;

d' .

.v, lp ' -.2 ij-to ,

.: t',

4)

, <l a

>< _w .,

< i -

, .a,

? L 9  :; , i L  ; + :, .

~. ' -

.' [3;;._.'.

6.g z);.:; -2 u. ,

- , - - u, .  :.:.u; guyg.

- < 3: . . . .

n-n., ~., , ,

_ ~ r-

/ .y ;tariTED STATES OF AMERICA1 . 22 b ,h , , '] 7

~

[y 1 ,>; NUCLEAR. REGULATORY COMMISSION :

&[; '

~

• :.) .

l . #.

.y.-

.InthdMatterfo.f ry  ;'

~

?)' .:.M

"'~v, ,.-

~ c . . .

< . . = =

x;

' iCONstmIRS POWER COMPA1T .

), Docke't No.(s). 50 2329 4.~C.

"=

) l50-330 *

(Midland Plant, Units l11and 2)[ ;)' -

1.9 M ): (Remasd . Proceeding).

s

[y",d

"). " =M

.. ir?.

.~:

SERVICE LIST. GE?

n. '

p+-

r y:-

Marshall E.-Miller, Esq.C Chairman Ms. Mary Sinclair fq.. n

Ator.ic Safety and Liceowing Board 5711 Summerset Street j

:c):.]

U.S. Uuclear Regulatory Connission' ~ Midland, Michigan *8640 Vashington, D.C.) ~ 20',55 3. .=.

i"E

+

Mr. Steve Gadler. ' ;tf; Dr. E= math A. Lueti.e ~2120 Carter' Avenue tfi".

t ,

Atomic ' Safety and Licensing; Board -

U.S.1Muclear hegulatory Commission St.' Paul, Minnesota 55108 5$

J.kr.

."ashington,LD.C.- 20555 ~

Judd L. Bacon',~Esq.. b: .;; H

. . . ... . Consumers Power Company- c Dr. J. Yann. Leeds,-Jr. .

212 West Michigan Avenue . . N. .

10807LAtwell. . , Jackson, Michigan' 49201 g.;;(

Ecuston,' Texc.s 77096

. . . iMichael I. Miller, Esq.; .

["[l,1 Counsel: for. s NRC Staff-. Isham,1 Lincoln & Beale .  :+ .v.

J0ffice:of:the Executive Legal Director One First National Bank Plaza E. '

U.S. Nsclear Regulatory.concission -Chicago, Illinois: 60603

• leshington, ; D. C. - 20555  ! ".~;

" ' e Grant Ji Merritt, Esq. J.-;j;'d Harold F. Ref.s.;Esq.; ., Tho=pson, Nielsen,- Elaverkar.p y

!. Lowenstein, Newman, Reit,: and James

.Q Axelrad"and Toll! 4444 IDS Center ~ T 1025" Connecticut. Avenue, N.*i. 80 South Eighth Street: N.

• 'ashington, D.C. ;20036:

Minneapolis, Minnesota- 55402 F%

jj 4; y' Myron M Eherry.cEsq. .

Michael C.'h'arrar Esq., Chairman s.;.f,j.1

,  ;0ne-I3'i Plasa; . Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal E.g?

Ql

~ '

.'ChicagoDI111noisH60611: Board .

~

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory. Commission Mc.H

-_, ' I. Lo. ; Oavis , J Esc. - . Washington, D.C. 20555- P9 LegalLDepartment; . .

F~

e, Ihe:Dov Che=ical Company ,

Richsrd C. Sal ==an, Esq.. .

'98

~ .

iltj

C;Euildingt .

\. ' .

.Atenic Safety and Licensing Appeal' [" ,

. a!idland, }!ichigan': 48640 - '

. Board , -s.,

fb

~

pg<' ,' U.S.DNuclear::Rei;ulatory Com=ission . $

yty y v - Washington, D.C. 21555 i

+l

~ .~

^ l ~f - ;

,t y z

• , w ^

),

-T S

g

,  ;. 0e " '

~p _ ' /

, \

+

3 y 7. . ,,

e

'; $ '. ' ' Q >,! ,3 ,. , - ,

-- (. U y_:$ ' ~ $ $ hO- uq y,.#

-u mc

_h:v

~.

' SbY *-$Y

.g

~~q

{

_a..-.,.

~'~

'"'T

4l ' '

• 1

~.s-

'~

A

.,  ;.Y '

S'" N .' N a +

r

-r- -

j e. .- + ; <.t.- ,n

,_n;, :aa s

. . _ .t

.>; . 3 s ,

' .; y ,

' ,r >

s: 7. '

s

. -9 .

.) ,

.- f

, m, Q _sl %. '

~ r .,

r, g p.

- ,. . ;i

~

s ~ .

.s t

+< s s ., - , - '. - - .

'*l, - -

sa s, 30 erd and partissc- continued! '

50- 329. . -330 <' -

el-

~

.(Remand Proceeding)- -'f .

e ..' -

u: . , ,

f

,L .

y . . -I

. Dr. '-V. : Reed Joh. ason' 1 m

.K

. - Ator.iejSafsty and Licansing Appeal .

-1

, . < Board. ~

i .,

'U.S. Tuclear Regu1atory Commission. - -

1 Washington,' D.C.-- 120555l -

1 Gerald Chtrnoff, Esq'. .

j Shaw,: Pitsaan.L Potts in Trowbridge.

, '1800 M Street, N.W.. - ,

4

.Washinaton, D.C. 20)36. d i

William C. Totter, Jr. , Esq. - l

' Fischer, Franklin, Tord,- Sinon, .

~

l and'Hogg- .

- 1700 Guardian Ec11 ding Detroit,. Michigan :43225. .., o s

w .

1 9

g 1 t

9

.1 i

h I

L

'i

~

/ .

M

-l e

Y

$ Y .

.IA

~

r

- g .

• :T ,

, i

' ~

., c

\

r-1 ~

a p $ l i

p -w, i

' . 7, s

'- - - t.  !

,4

-, }7g "~ ; 4 . _ ,

\

,.u ,

, I- *

• 4 g ,,,_.. 3

- ) _-;,  :

c .. ,, . c .,

xw -- -- =

a

^.-lf.. f. :.-a C.a v<. .~. ~.,,.ml . e M-* . ..'

. , 7 ,1

.. ~..,_m,. . e...s , & , . <, p x

.+  :. . y ., a ,.

s. ge.3.g,,

.w . c_. c,. n .. ;g.;m m% .m7.

3 .72;.,., < w,.

-- .w . ..w .g.

p p u:s. P..?y. e.

c , .n ;.3 . . wa.

y g. 9.,.:m~; r ,;p.~..:~ m. ,.

f'.ela sg4G,f; cw!.

*l g, Q ;.;

^

c:.:5}

~: . -:. . .

l;y,=_ w = -: n F. 2.".

_. .. + g , ..;.,;g.jg,; .

,.g iT 4 & .. l, 'JUN 2 01979 - .

.'. . f' .

4~,

t. , , , ..

,.. . m .

,:n n -

3 , .. .

y. _

t.

, ~a. ,

~, + .

c  !

.~ ,

u - .

g . .A- -,

. .w

. ,. _ . , a .

c . ~

a: . .

.. . . .wa .

x. '

, .. , s

,, .a

,.~ , ,

~ 7;

.y ,

~ ._,. v ' ,  :; _..

. .q .

1 -

The ~ Honorable' Donald Albosta ;3,/ ~ f

- ". * [ ' ' (

3

~"

]M}Wf' ,'

. n.,

l .

United States Mouse of Representatives- J o .c ^ 2.. ' '

[

'.m

~

l .. ,

Washington, D.- C.; 20515 -

L', . .' . .,

.- e. ,

v

, a y ,: 2 . .. u , ~> ~;

]y . .

Dear Congressman Albosta:

J. l, - -

.- t 1 -

- ~

I. In your letter of !?ay 23,~ 1979 you requested answers to questions raised- " ':

I on yourfinspection of.the flidland. plant on May 5,1979. Each of these  ;-~ R

1 questions ~1s listed on the enclosed ~" Staff Cannents" along with its  :

^-

corresponding answer'fram the NRC' staff.. ' ' '

J.. .- ' -

.l

. ~ '

~C I hope-this information is ' responsive-to'your needs. < .

o y

1

, x. . ,.

9 m

1; .. - Sincerely. . -

7  % .. .~

4-l

.'r , ,

-~ t (Signed) Lee V. Gossick', ,

'~

7 .,

^ ~

. ; Lee V.'G e .

d t ,c m.xecuuve D .

-D. ,

i .for operau% ca, s, I , . . m 4 -

.. ?

Enclosure:

U C . Staff, Ccannents: '

H Qf

~

i ., .

d; i -

DISTRIBUTION' . .

~. . . .

^

n b8 Etral Files,. HRDenton- 'MRBeebe .Notie:. Coordinated response with' t fiPA Reading T JG0 avis '.'JJRizzp - c K.'Goller (SD), R. Ireland-

! ,, # E MPA:DTS-Readingf RBMinogue: , JFlynn' _ (NRR),J.Tourtellotte'(ELD).~

f  : MPA:LOEB ~ Reading . WJDircks . - . ~KRGoller- andR.Rvan/(SP)..  %

, I ,- EDO #06358

LVGossick ' ~ 'iRGRyant

RMattson' Alsocoordinatedwits

.i ~HKShapar .'.- JRTourtellotte. .- J.'Keppler; IEf y EKCornell' m ;JCook :0CA(3)- .' ' 7 31

. ?.

1 + - 5m . RAHartfield ' ' SECY (2) 1 v 4

. ; Oer W b ' '~7, :RGMuranaka - -

~"

g -

af 1

f . D oA?L0EB: ' :005 . J MP 'ED07 41.2 gj I

o--

-~.-~ ~~~hdEB. ,.

-~~ ~~~~

MP g f~ ~.-~.~.~ ~~ ~~

. - ~ ,

&.7 s -

+ an ~. ~~y4,qr,9.9.k;~' ~ >~~~-Wig lgm~N ,q ~~ ~~~~~~m -

~

f; ~:, . x. 1ygg w .~~ghps~" r r

x, ; ~

.~. r ,, . .

wy. (. gILg. g.. gAV/.79. < .. . ....sg./.l.){~7.9....~7 d.

%, g g . . . . . 7.9.~. .....L/4 ~g .79...... ,.. .g/f.. .. .).7.9_ ,

ex (( '- <s gh ' y ' k edB. L -

85WWW8 68 8998

• 888 *,998 '

s t O , f3' h

' l0-[

[ W[fN,; s e acS3

. 4 W p K._. 0 4 G .. w M .; W c; R c h :S ; r. w : ..,'u a" f :%f.hra. 6*d

T"W@g , p "

p y y. m . z.y a  %.  ; m -

37 ,,a

% #fQ ' M.e. w:n M; e '

N 'f-.

M., ~ .

• 1 ? s ;-

. ::;%.;G GG '

' ~

t i<

s m.. T a Qg; , < g . 9?;.7 , . $,' _ _' -

'J$

~~

yppi,_ ,

s .. ,

7 43 -

. STAFF 'COMENTS d,V%y6, <t

_[:

s p-  :: ~. 3 m . . . . . .

.c 2 De t . (Question' 1. .. The accident"at Three Mile: Island has ~ caused concern Vabout nuclear power. - What steps.have.been taken in ,J, 4 4

A;E 5-w- -

u- design.~ training, operation and oversight to prevent ,,

~

, i a similar accident?

' ?.. J

^ ~

~

v- . .

i .

N , 7 Answer N t- _

' ~

m,

.. As at resu'lt'of the. accident ~at Three Mile Island-Unit 2 (TMI-2),;;the '

" Comission's Office of Inspection and Enforcement (IE) issued a series  ? .'

'of: Bulletins to:all; power reactor facilities. . These Bulletins identified. ,

, 'six potential human.: design and mechanical failures which resulted in .the'. ~ v

y~ core damage'and radiation

releases;at the Three Mile Island-Unit 2 Nuclear:

' Plant. ' Among other things theseLBulletins required. review of specific ~. <

, design features, review and revision of operating procedures and modifi . .

' cations.to safety. systems. g" y .

Concurrent with'this ithe NRC has required additional training of ,

. .operstors in the sequence.of events at Three Mile Island and how a ~  !

> similar incident would manifest itself at that operator's plant. Training E- must be.provided which addresses modifteations and procedural revisions .

F

- " made in response to the Bulletins. .

'In addition, $the BW ' simulator in Ly'pchburg Virginia, has been reprogrammed r to duplicate the events at Three Mile Is1'and. .All B W plant operators

. 'have. received retraining on the simulator in recognizing those symptoms .

D and in'the manipulations. of controls necessary to restore the' plant to stable conditions.

other nuclear power plant simulators have:been or. are being reproqrammed as '

, well. Operator retraining will take place as they become.ayailab' e.

~

'BW facilities were shut:oown by Comission ~ order as_ a result of Three:

- ."M11ellsland.- The:NRC .is conducting. audit examinations of a percentage

' . :"of the operators, the successful completion of which is a condition '

a for. restart of-the, facilities.

'a- -- - --- .

L7

' Tk+rators at plants' now under. construction Midand ,for exceple.: the

3. 'i. '-les' sons learned-' a t Three Mile Island will'be factored into tfw initial .

1, training program. ' Questions relatingLto the.Three Mile. Island accident l C s. will 4ecome anointegral.part of the examination of an operator's ."

licenseA

.- ~~J.., . . .

, T Mis af condition-for. authorization to , resume operations, the' BW shutdown .

L;e -

orders also required several. design and operational; changes to be made..

Dl LWhile1 details vary slightly from plant to plant.these changes generally 'i

~;

G; i ; Einsolve:)

v .

...7 ~

p1 a;;;1)l ^ Jdpgrading the timeliness ~and reliability ofl delivery from the

'.,M 6 HC 1/ Auxiliary,Feedwater System;~ -

a f . l. 'LJQ y!C.f-y

@ p>"y Sk ' ,' u y y

^2

• ~

. Ik '7 ;, s a

1. 4

p; . -- ;f  ;.L , , .

r L;4 .e , , ,

Djf%" ), M', -h[ ' t s

As :H s m y f, , ,

' '. 'I. 3 !1* M^

'f s L 4 _

3h/ -

). -;, .h , ' g '['

• s-  ; ,

~

, .' a y --- -

~, . - -

w%:

,_.:,, e, 'u q , c: I '

}

~,.c njy,s;

.n .

d' . Q -L2~-:

8?

~

2)' ;ImplementingproceduresforLinitia$1ngandcontrollingauxiliary

feedwaterindependentofthe1IntegratedControlSystem; V I Implementation.of a control-grade hard-wired reactor trip- 'I

'3)'

. . actuated on loss of main feedwater and/or turbine trip; '

^

'4): Completion of analyses for small breaks and implementation of instructions defining operator action; and q , .

~ - ,

~

5)- Provision'of operators .in the' control room who have had Three '

. Mile Island Unit-2 training on the B&W simulator.

r i? The order also specifies certain follow-up upgrading actions which are to a be submitted for NRC review.

As a result of the TMI-2 accident, _the Commission is engaged in a number of studies related to identifying changes that will be' needed to prevent

- accidents like TMI-2. : A focal point for these studies .is the Lessons

<- Learned Task Force, recently appointed.. Attached is a copy of a " Staff Report on the Generic Assessment of Feedwater Transients in Pressurized -

. Water Reactors Designed by the Babcock and Wilcox Company" - NUREG-0560.

This report indicates the range of topics that will be considered by the Task Force; however, reactors designed by all NS35 vendors as.well as the

-NRC review procedures will fall within its scope.

We expect that, for plants under construction, such as Midland .certain .

-requirements resulting from things learned from the TMI-2 accident may be necessary before operating licenses will be issued. These actions j

will be defined in.the near future.

" Question 2. Has the communication with the NRC and control of operations  !

in emergencies been improved since the accident at Three {

g Mile Island?- ,

Answer  ;

. Direct and essentially continuous telephone connunications between the O TMI plant. Headquarters and the NRC Regional Office (King of Prussia, Pennsylvania) were initiated promptly after the accident was reported '

j% and were continued throughout the NRC response to the ~ accident. These

,2 connunications1 consisted essentially. of open, telephone lines between ,

t the Headquarters Operations Center, the Regional 0ffice, the site command

. Post and the Control Room. At- our current stage of understanding the TMI accident 'we believe there may have Been some confusion concerning the

ability to communicate promptly with accurate information. As we inquire r Wfurther. into the TMI accident, we will be evaluating our connunication needs in greater detail.. .However, as an innediate effort toward improved

early connunications .the NRC has requested licensees.to notify NRC

.  : Regional:0ffices within an hour if a transient occurs which is not being b controlled. The' telephone used for this notification would then be left

& topen. ,

c s '

k ' ' ,; , -

.^,r. l u

x

.g . .. s 4 v

lf \ -

$U$_ _l$ l Sdw' w *~. -

w -y+ . ,. -

- ; w- ,- ,

p ,

hi: ;j $ 'R

'. G ,

O

x. ,.,g- z

" giy g

?

.f .;,

, ~ .

Q ,

-;3 - ,

~

L: -

. . a .. .. . .

6To facilitate the requested improvements, we' have 'h'a d: direct and dedicated

. telephone lines; installed in the Control Room,~ reactor supervisor's office 6 J and other locations at a11' operating nuclear. power plants. These telephones ~ d 0.1 will automatically ring at the NRC Operations Center when..the receiver is. 5 L ' , lifted off theitelephonieradle. This. system became operational on June 1 K , '< .1979,Landais being testqd to identify areas where additional features.will fe ( be. helpful f and improvements can' be made.: ,

?

.. . , Y '

The' question' of control l of licensee o>erations in emergencies raises t

.significant concerns regarding'NRC's >asic relationship to licensees.

'As sucht the NRC believesithat any change in that relationship'should be considered in-depth before modifications are made. -In that respect, more. '

,, stime is needed for open' discussion on the merits ~and disadvantages.of.

,having'.NRC take a more direct role.in operating licensee facilities. ,

. .. ..~ .

rD ' . .

' As one'of its~ tasks, the.Lessorislearned Task Force will coordinate with

^

IE and other graups within NRC whicfL are studying ways to improve

. cousuunications with NRC.and control of operations in emergencies. The tob{ective will be to' assure that (a);all aspects of improved communications, (bg. data: sources needed for emergencies..'and (c). organizational responsibilities for emergency response support by technical support teams within NRC and its _

outside resources are constdered and put in place as.necessary: to assure rapid.and effective NRC and industry response to ame.rgenctes.

Question 3. ' Babcock and Wilcox reactors have received a lo't of criticism r ., since the accident. . Safety andinanageability of the controls, cooling ability, and complete. independence of the Back up systems must Be assured. 'What have you done to guarantee these concerns will be taken care off ,

s i- Answer i

_ In addition to the short-term changes required by Bulletins and B&W plant *

. Shut Down Orders discussed in res~ponse ty Question 1. B&W operating >1 ants haye been required to realign primary pressure scram set points so t ut

. reactor scram will occur at a lower pressure than the set point of the y Telief valves on tha pressurizer. This cha.nge will reduce the t' . ~

frequency cf relief valve openings during transients (and the potential y failure to reclose.that comp 1tcated the transient at .TMI-2h -

, p-- ..

F In the long' term,!we willitake' steps to reduce the sensitivity of the j W response of B&W plants to transients By design changes or substantial.-

. Upgrading of.the. instrumentation and controls availaBle to the plant

. operator. One 'of the objectives of the Lessons Learned Task Force ist to identify those changes that wt11 be necessary alo.ng with schedules i for implementation.1 Such changes.would be' app 1tcable to plants such as Midland which' are not yet;11 tensed to operate. .

e

, ~, y t

g y

. -', . - c '

.l Y a w .

_ A _

['

~ ' '

J ;; . [ Q -

'y

, L .

s

M 'I .my e 1 #,, m

g. - g . j ,

U" f 'j.'

"y ,}  ; 's l -

-'p/  :. ,) L ' c .

((f[

i

- n ;, .i ~. .,-

g' y.

u ,a, W .y.,- j-m.

3 . , .

v, ,

yv '

.4 .:

2." ..

> +

Question'4.. There have-been questions raised about problems specific to the Midland plants as well. What has.been done about the settling of buildings, the fog and ice which might come -

LJ from cooling' ponds and affect-driving in the area of the '

L ' "t . plant?. Wil the fog be radioactive?

i- IAnswer-  ;

s.

a '

't With respect to tihe. problems related to settlement of liuildings, the applicant d

• , the staff'Lresponded:by s request for information letter dated April 24,1979 regarding plant fill.. (copy This attached) request to 1 was made. pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f). . The reply acvised that remedial "I R

actions for structures. in addition to the diesel gewrator building will H be perfomed.. The details-and schedule for the-remedial . actions have not 'j

r. yet been specified.- :Information with respect to the diesel generator

. building and-foundations was submitted by the applicant's letter dated April. 30,!1979. (copy attached);

The metter of fogging and icing rstulting from the cooling' pond .is being ' b, investigated and the results will be reported in the Draft Environmental H I. Statement when'it is. issued. The staff expects oporation of the Midland I cooling lake to produce frequent periods of fog over and. south of Gordonville. Road. Some of these foggy periods could reduce' visibility

'sufficiently.to cause hazards to f traffic. -Very light snow may fall from .

the. plume' Lthick layers of easily' crumbled rime ice will form on trees, telephone

- poles Land lines,. and other structures within 50 to 150 meters of the edge of k the lake tiut no' icing of clear road surfaces should occur. However. <

l deposition of water or light. snow on snowpacked or icy roads may decrease g traction'further. If lake-produced fog doesccreate . safety problems, . W the applicant will be required to take measures to reduce or eliminate W l

the hazards. ^

9 Since there'are no discharges #of radioactive' materials into the Midland

- plant cooling pond, fog that may arise over the pond will not be radimetive n due to evaporation of pond water. l 7

Question 5. Many persons are concerned that NRC's inspection of

- nuclear plants has not.been' adequate and that quality controlfin general must be~ strengthened? Could you -

describe the direct. inspection of construction and 1 (peration that the NRC will provide? q

Answer:

- :The10ffice:.of ? Inspection and Enforcement'.s program of inspection of .

1 . nuclearJpowerlplants! consists of a planned inspection effort and a ~

% ., , l reactive inspection effort. both of..which are based on the premise ..

that.theilicensee is responsible for proper design', construction, Jtesting.and.~ safe. operation c.f the facility.

1. / Oa# , I

[  :+

~,

1 Di ,

s,

f. qgg_ s-3 ,

4 M ,< . * -

t, . g 4gS-

'W~ ybfy.) ,g,Q y !.C1  ;!g;.uf  ; l: ..

^'

i i

,.y [:{ ,

y( ' , J

\

[_ -f .

R. s'

}' , f.i - .

The olannhd NRC inshection effort ~ is conducted in accordance with a

'; defined prograr expressed in detailed inspection procedures and is-accomplished at prescribed intervals by NRC inspectors. The principal

~

. . objective & Wrinspection effort is to provide reasonable assurance lh that NRC: licensed' activities are being conducted safely and in compliance with NRC requirements. The defined program is based on the' premise that

-its: principal; objective can be achieved through selective examination of ' m systems.and functions, both physical and administrative, which have an i impact on-the adequacy of the design, construction, testing and safe  !

operation of nuclear facilities.  ; l The reactive NRC inspection affort is conducted in response to information received by NRC regarding corditions or events which have occurred during 7 design, construction -testing or operation of nuclear facilities and.

' which may impact on public health and safety. Information on such - -

conditions or events may be obtained through the planned NRC inspection effort, may be received as a result of notification by an applicant,

-licensee, contractor or supplier, or as a result of allegations by a member of the public. ' The resultant NRC inspection effort depends upon the significance of. the particular condition, event or allegation. The -

principal ~ objective'of:this effort is to obtain sufficient information

. ithrough independent in' depth examination to establish the significance of' ~ l the particular condition, event or allegation and to effect corrective l action; commensurate with the established significance.

i.- NRC inspectors evaluate . licensed operations.via implementation of the .!

. existing inspection program and provide necessary feedback.which identifies safety issues whose resolution may result in changes to regulatory.

requirements,. regulatory guides or license conditions. Th'a elements used i in developing the detailed inspection procedures used by NRC inspectors e include: regulatory requirements,. regulatory guides, industry standards, p IE interpretations and positions deemed sufficiently significant for <

inclusion in the inspection program and experience, i.e., the findings

- from both the ~ nuclear industry and the NRC quality verification and inspection programs, and the technical ju.dgment of scientists, both in industry and the NRC.- The IE in(nDineers andspector is no ~

1 to inspecting.only thuse activitias related-to current regulatory i

rEjuirements or spectfic licensee cuanitments, but, in addition, he shoulders responsibility for identifying. areas wherein the licensee is -

not meeting its responsibility.to construct and operate the facility

-safely. It.is thro' ugh' this aspect of inspection activity:that IE i '

n ~ discharges its organizational responsibility for evaluation of licensed a'ctivities 'asca basis for recoseendi_ng changes to NRC regulaticns,

{ regula?.ory guides and license conditions. -j 7- 3 j

~

s ,

]

e -

1

~

- [ ,

mle .k:

't _

a

- x , .,

7 Qfp. g ~ y .; ' y. c - 3; n '

y A,x g - - ,

gf ,' , .m ,, y

));;p t7

' ~

'C s g' g.5-M va f ,

l j" 9 , .

. .

7 ..

t 1

lThe couplexity of!n~uclear. technology requires' that good management.

systems be in affect:during;the design, constructioni and: operation of 7+ nuclear l power-plants'. 'EffectiveJq'uality assurance programs are:a key '  ;

in redient in good management systems. They encompass al.1 actions, h% . re ated to nuclear safety.. That is, quality ' assurance includes the

system-of people, procedures.'and matarials. necessary to properly l-L' design a'n d construct the; nuclear. power plant and operate it safely. j To this end,. quality assurance involves. people,actually. doing the work- q c :and those responsible for verifying, through inspection or audit, that  ;

. .the work has been. properly accomplished. J '

The.NRC has ~ defined:18 criteria for a good quality assurance program.

-These criteria are described in Appendix B'to Part 50 of the regulations

governing nuclear power plants (U..S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Rules 1 and Regulations,1 Title 110, Chapter 1. Code of Federal Regulations-Energy). J

At the present time', ~we are implementing a Revised Inspection Program

-which. places. an inspector full. time at' the reactor facility. This program is will be fully implemented in Fiscal-Year.1981. The use of a Resident -

Inspector will provide for direct. observation of licensed activities .

~ by NRC.' We are also proposing the implementation of the Unit Resident HI Inspector. . A Unit Resident-Inspector would be assigned to every reactor unit at a site. The primary duties of the. Unit Resident will be d independent verifications.. measurements and observations of licensee .l tests, procedures ~ and systems involved with safety at that single reactor h unit at the' site. With these programs,- more ' attention 'is being- devoted .

' to direct' observation of the licensee activities over that involving-  :

[

record review of. activities.  :

The'GA0 recently audited the NRC program for inspection of power reactors 4 0

. under construction. The GAO report recognized that'the NRC inspection philosopity and general program are reasonable and;appro>riate, but pointed out certain areas where it believes improvements could >e'made. One -

1 j

specific recommendation was that NRC should promptly implement its plan to assign resident inspectors to reactors under construction. NRC is

~

accelerating its previous schedule for this and has already; assigned a ~

resident inspector to the Aidland site. -

[ 10ther recommendations by GAO, in addition to that:of, increasing surveillance

~

. efforts 'at construction. sites,-were to perform a greater. number of evaluations of: tests'and analysis ~ performed by licensees and their

contractors. and tnerease the number of. direct product quality inspections n  ; performed by NRC inspectors.. f All: these reconnendations are addressed in the; revised resident inspection: program. The inspection program is-significantly expanded-over.the trasic program through the: resident g linspectors.OThrough this. increased surveillance of licensee ' activities.

z .strenghthening of; Quality control;mayfbe expected.,

, _ lr~l' +

Q h 4 ..

+ . .

, . . !. ' s x I a . g h g e ,

4

>? ,

%, ~

Ww;,',,. . . - . .

u u:s .

,s , w A a i m'aw n w&

^ -

j

'- g * ~i

. }'[0 ' yf }.g a l l _

fa; _

9: 7, ' _

2

~. .

a

, , s'

..7.._

g. -

m x - ' '

._u:

N ' Question 6; <

'RecentiinfoCion.about the effects of radiation has , h

~

y - added additionai' concerns'. How much will escape in the 0 ..

' course:of nonnal operation? '. How can this'be. minimized? '

g.

u. ',> .

's . Answer-

y

'7 -

% . , j C. :Your question regarding how much radioactive materia 1> will bel released .l w

from the Midland Plant and how such releases will' be niinimized might be '!

answered!best bylthe Nidland Safety Evaluation Report (SER), which will I

-be published.'in.about a month. Meanwhile. let me answer briefly with. ,

n

.information provided by our Effluent Treatment. Systems Branch, an author- .i

~ of the SER.: & , y a- j

~

Technical analyses of. Midland radioactive effluents have Used elaborate' W mathematical models ~ and actual effluent data from operating plants. These  :!

u analyses:have considered appropriate waste flows, radioactivity: levels,  ;,

and equipment performance for both normal. and-abnormal operation during thirty. years of operation.

. These analyses predict annual. liquid releases of.about 0.2 curies (.C.1)_ - 'N excluding tritium and dissolved noble gases' and about 400.Ci of tritium.  !

Annual- gaseous releases are predicted to be about 900 Ci of noble gases.

0.09 Ci of iodine-131,1600 Ci of tritium, 8 Ci of carbon-14, and 0.002

=

C1 of other particulate material.

i Based on the-SER evaluation, NRC has concluded that the tidland li H 0 and' gaseous radwaste treatment systems are capable of maintaining quid' ..

radioactive effluents and resulting population exposure "As Low As ,

Reasonably Achievable" as. required by Appendix.I of .10 CFR Part 50 f

" Licensing of Production and Utili2ation Facilities", copy of which is' attached. i

^

When issued . the Midland Technical Specifications will contain operating limits to ensure that the population doses discussed in" Appendix I are 1 not exceeded. 1

' +

The purpose:of Appendix I and the-operating limits which result from it is to minimize-exposure to the population. Como11ance with Ap

.I and related limits means that such exposure has been minimized.pendix

' Question 7.:

'How will;wastestbe handled in the short term and the d long term?.

• Answer -

u,

a. ,

~

R$dioactive. liquid wastes will be collected in tanks and processed by the' ,

N , ~

liquid radwaste; treatment' system,:which includes domineralizers, filters a s

Sand evaporators for treatment prior to release. Radioactive gaseous- . ' y' b wastesiwill.be processed z byrtheigaseous radwaste treatment system and the , ~

. normal ventilation, system',~which includes'high efficiency-particulate air y;~ - - ^

'j y{ , , M *

~ .

YW- 3.z; ; 3,; .

~

, .  ?? '

t&s m 2 4& ~' L. .

2

e em xm#- ' ~

n=

.-,&,-  ! + - - , , .

w?

^

dh . - !E .

.< ~ -

~.. , - . y n..

.e o .M .m my ,~+

- +,

l.

^'

,4Y : ;

y; .r f..M, . &,~~%a

~(.5+,9' m Fe x 7, .

-88', +

-' . . .'- 2 - . m, m:7 n . .

, p[j f; f, %.,4  ; R,  ;  ;; ,

.g w. g *

.g ..'~ .

-4 ,wly .-; s - <- .. _

/. ,. . ,.

.Wfilters;and charcoal.~ absorption. units for treatment of rajor! streams: prior. -

~0 A ' Stof release'.1 ?Radioactivaisolid waste, resulting from liquid andigaseous -

WR ftreatment,rwil.13be processed byJcompactment for: dry waste, or} solidification 1 P W,

. : e < %for: wet waste,cin packages,thetiare acceptable for transportation 1to and

'.;burialfat;allicensediburialsite. The Midland Plant design provides:a shielded' ,i  %

u<' - 1areatinithelsolid radwestalbuilding for short-tem storage ofi ~~~ packaged ,J j~ Y ~

L: a. Jsolid maste. -

a .  ;,.

s s , . . . . . . . . ,

.y t3  : Question C.-  : .What:are'the emergency, plans and evacuation procedures-b W i

.c ,

? ' cforathe~ Midland-~ area-in case of:aiserious ~ accident or leak?3

~

.. . . 7 -% .

, 3 .', ?Answ,er: y gr m

' e ,yfw - 2; .

> *;a w [There were severallquestions asked of Consumers Power. Company 1by-the NRC: "

^~!& ;relativestoremergency planningafter.the Final Safety Analysis Report was

,N fiTed Y

Tabove.for 'EThereview. question . .One.in asked Consumers particular Power dealt with to furnish the;same: question 'as more information vA

,' ~

.as follows ' ~

H A description of-theievacuation plans-for the low-population -

9 izone (L?Z), includingCsurvey maps for.the facility environs showing evacuation routes'as well.as relocation and' shelter-Jareas.' hThe plansAnny ' extend to areas:beyond'the LPZ and should- '

- . Sinclude.theifollowing:-  !

v ,, .

a; 9

9 . . a.; qPcpulation(and their ' distribution around theinuclear.

w, e Lfacility;'

<< 'm -

g * . bl i Means for . noti fication iodhe .. potentially .affected (g ]1 P < population;1 -

5,>._ , Jc. -Disabilities.finst.itutional_ confinement, or other factors j

!whichlmaypimpair_ mobility of parts:of the population; j K'.

~..e

~

1..

sM id.s ,Means?of ceffecting r, elocation;;  ;

> s -C c .. - _ _ ,

@ .1 4 Le.t : Potential: ' egress L routes and .their: traffic capacities;

. L,

^

?W  : . . -. -

% if.s : Potentia 1Limpedi.ments3touseoffegressroutes..

.. , , . ~

i' m s 4In Ravision c16 tortheiFSARdated De: ember 1978, Consumers Power M '~

E Istatedithatithe writing ~ofathe: Michigan State plan for' -

Erespondingito; fixed nuclear facility emergencies would. commence -

J1 LiniNovember>1978(andLtake:about 6: months:to complete. - The writing 3

e. Iof. theiState! plan'willf alskinclude the-local support plan for S?@ 'mMidlandoThe!NRC has= not yet receivedithis' plan but;itgis our W Junderstanding.nas: of1une14,{1979T thatethe. State plan will -be :

4 gi J isubmitteditojthe"NRCifor review.iniapproximately,2-4 weeks. a y

EMR:iOThereforehwesdo'not as4yet~ havelanlanswer;to the question. 4

.m ~ . -

3

~ ,;

< ~

W"%#4_Lw

<. v ~g, ' ' -

-p ,

c ,

Y

[ + g-; _jN" ^ ~

, .M7 5 ~ h; - ,

WJ.g 1; ?$$./g;- "

s4x m; < W L .

\ ~ .

p g 4 i g h :. n ; :c y , ', ;l-

• f g; W- '

Y, N iWsk @{@ @jg M gq D QlO 7 . '_ u . ,

lf ._

'i

.PW '*WE W.. -; yW* '

y#2%;y:mm*

% Lm . % *: ww :m m sw M -

m ~- w '

~. 7. W W6

- y:JQx hi :u M~;zlg*

-V '

~, '

=- . , ' 3)

%*}Mp&  %"'% n -

y .' , ' ' '2 y

7. - ,yQ Q 'l ' ;

; _- wp- ,

'< w y

, , g:

n , * ;;Q %.,.; : O.- ,-'

[ }l r k lv:,W' D , .

~

?

w ~L ,

w .. .

~

3: 3 C0uestion 9. iDojoulexpect .any. delay orz costlyichanges-which might .

significantly

alter:the cos.ts and4benefitsiof the' Midland -  :

a

V .

m <-  : ' '

>. freactorstforothe x - -

customers!of. Consumers Power?

- . j/

u ,, .

c .

, x -

4 g

l(:

m w 4:;Answerg .'

[ - i.

[Atipresenthwefdknotlan.ticipite; changes ioridelays [thanwould ' be; costly ~ J

'e

'A lc.yg 4 enoughito1significantly;changeithe costs and benefits!ofitheLHidland

reactors for#the; customers of Consumer: Power. Thelpotentialifor?' changes .

ni ~

i f oridelays exists.'as.atresult'of the ifollowing:P 2.f me ~ - .. ^x -

-, g [, w I .. . , ,

7 w-h JImproper,backfillvaroundlandunder.severallplantistructures.whichJ

~..

~

e

7. i;s i Th

$as tf caussd Lexcessive: ~ 3: ' nshttlement:..and other foundation problems.

~

y -

, s /21 [Resslutionloflthe?genedc/ safety)itemsEdescribedint..the NRCL

publication 4" Identification of. Unresolved! Safety Issues Relating- n

+ "

~

7 .

?t6)lucl. ear P#owerPlants"} _

9 L ~%.

~ ' - ~

'd "3.1 Resolution of openlissuesfidentified in our letter. to;thel applicant,

dated March 30,i1979.1. a p . . , . . . . .

^

' ~

t4L . Requirements: based on>1essonsflearned from the; accident at Three~ '~

~

y . Mile 1Islandy H n RemediAliw'ork'.willlbe required to' stabilize 1the improperly-backfilled

-. foundations.. Preliminary estimates of the cost:and -scope of work.suggest i that this will cause minimal construction delays- and will cost less than ' s 0 '? i$100imillion.ODelay -if any,twould add:abouti$10 million'per month.z We do_not-know at- this time.who will bear this: cost;-however, it' would.notL be likely to

~

y shift:the cost-benefit balance :inianyfcase.. j m . -r. . .

]y a With-respect to both.ofithe; generic itemsLand the influence of the Thrr.p .

~

L M11e Island accidenthit..is' difficult to estimate the ultimate impact on

~

m

~

the Midlandifacility.;.While precise, estimates'~of the cost of' work and "

H delay cannot be made'at thisitime, jitiseens;very unlikel

would Beigreat:enough toEalter the: cost-benefit balance of a facility ~ y that such costs 1 that zis nowilessithan'505 short of completion.1 H

^. , m E.- ~0uestionT10.

Are there any other unresolved safety issues which the' 59 l, ,- ' Congress orsthe' public^should know' abo'ut?; i J'

eAnswer- -

n r iThose: issues l raised by theiTMI accident' are still being defined. As "y inotedhin the response tolquestionti, theTaskForceeffortnowongoing.

~

w11.1:fsystematicallyidefine.the tssues;and related regul.atory requirements

^

gthat are; involved.4The Congress andsthe public will._be kept fully- ~

cinformed a'sithe} effort (progresses.-

' ~

f .

c'

, m &

r s p,,. .

}

_"i -l .

-;o .y- l' * -

+ R,. g

3,j ,; t .'F*

. , . . r ,

}

@E;I s.

f"'- .~

. h:Q, *J

. A, . , -

~1

7y g;yy- -% ;g , ,

n

.4 '

.JN M , : ( ; J+i n y ;,  ;

MMy yyn n y g;&'; ' 2 y ,p' . ,L_

$5%:@ LE M'.T W M YMcgCETi , 1 _- ,

,; $_ .[ ,  ?

i .aw .w,s mm__; m. .,

x. a.;<my y 4

W e g4 /n92 qw %m x , g n m.m y y~.pgn ,

s .. .

% w p- ma . , w . .

n

- y f jf. y J^.4 f %;c%, U^ ' 'yA ? ' ' %:; _.

~

< , $? ?T;W W V gEQU g w-QRRQ

< ,2 o

u 3" %'

M w &( ). 4HW : a n - .. .

ggx e

}l gjj w w~~.* r v ?N7 j:QQC [%Q ' ~fb'e s NN- M -

- n-1101' '

~

t *s

^

n a ,' n . - a '

.- +

'7v-

.f , ,., ' % .

n. g ex ;... -...-,.? >

, .. c<.. .a mm- . =~ -,

yALReportto1 Congress;(concerning;" Identification [of.Onresolved: Safety ~'c'La

@ML > % ; Issues: Relating {to; Nuclear; Power Plants"p NUREG-0510, wasLissuedLin.

~

^'D-f- Nanuaryi1979Rcopy; attached)~.MThis: report Lidentifies 17Jgeneric isdes

~

s N

iwhich are' the ' objectiofj systematic: NRC : study to 1 reach resol ution. The; '

A;1-e~ istatus;ofTeach Janticipate1thatLeachfof of2these studies'will!be these? issues weported willtbe addressediin i periodically. We , .

the Midland  : '

- _ i SafetyJ. valuation Reports. . For thoseTwhich may not~ have been resolved y; , ;onia-_ generic;basisnthere will'be: disclosure of whyfit is accep. table' ,'

- ifrom a safety: standpoint to allow plant operations to~ comence.- - -

M O;~  ! Question 11. : .How' can citizens,"whatever their: views orjquestions:might.

f _

>be,7become involvedAin the resolution of;these questions? .

t

..i, c LAnswer- .

y 1 - ,.

,. ~

U'. (Qu'estionjl1should.beidivided"intotwoparts::(11'~howmaycitizens ibecome: involved;in:the: resolution of the generic; implications'of the J

• - first; ten questions';%nd (2) how say. citizens-become involved in the' Ci

?.  ; resolution of the first ten questions.as;they;might Be specifically H

>appliedito Midland.< - R

= -

v ~

. .. . n a  : Generically citizens may express /their views:and pose'their questions 1

- :bysmail. :Such views::and questions may,be; directed to the Secretary, y

.: NucleariRegulatory Commission, Washington,-D. C, 20555. The Nuclear 9

. .  ; Regulatory Commission welecues.theLviews'of the. general ublic on'all M r:W@ ;mattersiconcerning;the safety of nuclear power ' plants:an :will make- 1 p' leveryf effort toianswer; legitimate inquiries made by the general citizenry. '

- 1' Insofar ss the firstiten questions ~. relate to the 14tdland plant specifically,

%y l citizens viewsiin question may also'be posed to the Secretary of the.

~

Comission as outlined above. In addition,! citizens may be: afforded 1

- - Jthe opportunity 2to: participate in. adjudicatory hearings pu"suant to the' iR l Atomic EnergyfActs Under the provisions of Lthe Act.Lany citizen whose

interesticould be affected by the operationsof a facility such as' Midland ?j Lcanbecomelafparty;tothe.operatinglicensehearingupona: showing:thathis a ior--her;; interests ~ may)beiaffected. -In the.Mitiland operating' license- ~1 iW L proceeding,itwo. citizens, Mary B.r.Sinclairf and Wendell Marshall, have .been" '

fM . admitted :as; par. ties.:

--n O. 4. & - - ~

,>_ . . ,. - v

+ +

sin addition toifull-pa status, the Nuclear Regu1atory Commission's . Rules 3

T.^~ Jof- Practice,;specifica11 310 CFR Part 2.715, . permit participation in .

o m 1 ?1icensing: proceedings?by; persons-who are not parties. ~Specifically, that ~

t -

provisioniaffords}an;opportunityforstatestoparticipate:inlicense a Gf , dproceedingsfasi" interested"lstates'whichipermits a representativeLof. such GF 'an;" interested"istate a reasonable: opportunity:to' participate.and to

- ?introduceLevidencehinterrogate' witnesses and. advise'the Commission 9

<":without requiring 1thetrepresentative to take a position with respect to

..[ltheissues.fJInfthe"presen.toperatinglicenseiproceeding,theStateof Ea.e ~ -

iMichigan has?been granted < status'as an " interested" state.

,, - me . -

4, g

f

, ;4

'M ,l' r . .] , _ N M[M " ; % y t ' ' j ,'

N., '

I ]

ggggygpqW~73,.

> y . mm&e?a~.:

W -

NQ-

. O'm% g ;

,U ,j.O {

aer

g y , ax ;.x WW

~

- ' " '~ m$"

~

g

~ Q:

S

~

. . . .qq ' _ _, ~

~1 1

S&J MfM@D@A ?f' ME$f 7 wva%:' /g[y - ,  :

F"% l sw:

j@;

M,M.~ gw s m@.7 ~y . v;; -

~

~ w - , "

w% -

z m ' .. . _

' ;1 . $c ~

M-b c.4114.' m ~ "

~

x '

4- :.i n >3 f( '- , j .'s m-

"v['; ,.

7_ . , . ~ ^ x' .( .Tv. -

> ~ . _4 .; ,

j Y .; ~ [ '

.- ^ '

' -~ ~

'3 (

2;g.  ;~ , >s '

" r.). . :

/ y

]

P 4 > f Also' Mitizensland groups.whoiarejnot partiesito alproceeding' .may be ~m

< permitted,to make!1imited, appearance statements 7either orally orJin- ..

w twritten fors,tofLthe'viewsloflthat individual;or. group on:the issues:in.

the; proceeding. ulimited appearance: statements are transcribed land become

~y

~~

.-4 a part of the record'of NRC license proceedings .although such statements ,

V O , y. i- carefnot takenlunder oath and:are not entitled to;.the full weight'of: '

J~ -

. Eevidence; JNonethelesstsuch statements.serveias a vehicle for giving; i w' iinformation:on the viewsLof the-local citizenry to the Atomic Safety: M 2

and Licensing Board membersfwholare presiding at-the. hearing.

" W NRC staff _is:l presently engased dn'an extensive' evaluation.of the~ ,

' ~

Ahree Mile ~ Island accident.1This:evaluationiwill. cover all aspects of' a 1

T ' the.designi andioperatio~ns of that plant ~ withcthe .objecti.ve of identifying ' ~

-U

improvements which;should

Be applied tor nuclear power plants now under h .

i 2

' . construction or' operating;i Untillthat evaluation is completed, or;until'

~'F iotherwise' directed by tha Comnission,1the; staff does;not intend to issue .

anylnew' licenses;for nuclear; power reactors,.even if authorized by.a 1 Licensing l Board such as that presiding over the Mtdland proceeding. -

If, Las a result of.the: evaluation.- it is determined that changes 41n the ~g

,. m idesign of?the'Mtdland plant. are required 'and those changes.warrantLac reopeninraf the record, the NRC staff will,take the Linittstive-to ~do so. -

1 :Iffit51s'detarminedthatafhearinglisrequireditoiconsidertheeffects

' of the Three Mile. Island ' accident on the operation of the Midland'

' [ ,.

~ TfacilityEthe public..wil.1,be notifiedfand, given .a'n opportun_ tty to . .

participate.in.those hearings.-

~

L <

t -

'4 Attachments:. . -

d

~1 i l. iNUREG-0560' . ^4

~

12W LLtrW from Applicant Dtd 4/24/79 - O

/ :3;. -Ltr. from Applicant.Dtdi4/30/79 -

s 74-. AppenditI

~ of 10 LCFR Part 50

5. - NUREG-0510 -

e

-"A', j S ..

> , f< e v y l _

e

.Q,#

7 .<

~

+ .

- /,,

y 'E- +

I '- (f i:- '

~ '

p[ '5" .e

~~

, o.s '? ~

u A _

~

. 7-au g+ r3x i

,h 9I I, .' *

'[^.,; .

- - .n + .  ;, ;

f.,y n :rz y; y .:

_ j

.t a s -

3- ,

' b h5, ' ~ #.  ; m;- - (; 3 pq s

' ~~

[*

MMi%M  ! j $ J_

3

' - , H

. s W W' W2 um mN< -' , .

_ , y _ .

a