ML20002A286
| ML20002A286 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/30/1980 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20002A285 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8011050588 | |
| Download: ML20002A286 (18) | |
Text
--
r IEAR-SITE EDF e OurSIm SECURITY BOUNIARY e GENERALLY WITHIN 10 MIES OF PLANT e EDF ibST PROVIDE SPACE FOR 10 NRC E w LOYEES e EOFS NEED [h1BE DESIGNED TO SEISMIC CRITERIA ALTERNATIVE 1
[h31TANFE0F ALTERNATIVE 2 PRIMARY NON-lhBITAW F EDF Wim SECONDARY M.
- 1. LOCATION WImIN AB0ur 10 MILES.
A. PRIMARY NON-lhBITABLE EDF
- 2. PROTECTION FACTms (PF).
- 1. LOCATim WITHIN AB0ur 10 MILES.
EE DISTANCE FROM FACILI n
- 2. PROTECTION FACTORS FOR NEAR-SITE EOF 0F AB 50 1/2 MILE OR CLOSER 5 WIm NO REDUCTION WITH DISTANCE.
NId
- 3. VENTILATION SYSTEM WIm IDA FILTERS W4D 15 5 MIES ABILITY TO CUT OFF VENTILATION BASED ON 10 10 MILES ExrERNAL RADIATION lEASUREMENTS.
(Ib
- 3. VENTILATION SYSTEM WITH CHARCOAL AND IEPA CHARCOAL NEEDED).
FILTRATION AND ISOLATION CAPABILITY.
B. SECONDARY B)F
- 1. SECONIMRY (BACKUP) F0F BENEEN 10 AND 20 MILES.$
STRONGLY REC 0ftiEND WITH OFFSITE AUTHORITY'SI DIERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER.
5!
- 2. [10 SEPARATE, DEDICATED FACILITY REQUIRED.
- 3. itANS FOR ASS'EING CONTINUITY OF DOSE PROJECTION NID DECISION MAKING CAPABILITY DURING ANY RELOCATION TO BACKIF FACILITY ttJST BE ESTABLISHED.,
O
1 TIME FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH RELEASE TIME FROM THE INITIATING 0.5 TO SEVERAL HOURS EVENT TO START OF ATMOSPHERIC RELEASE TIME PERIOD OVER WHICH 0.5 HOURS TO SEVERAL DAYS RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL MAY BE CONTINUOUSLY RELEASED TIME AT WHICH MAJOR 0.5 HOURS TO 1 DAY AFTER PORTION OF RELEASE MAY START OF RELEASE OCCUR TRAVEL TIME FOR RELEASE SITE TO EXPOSURE POINT (TIME BOUNDARY MINUTES AFTER INITIATION) 5 MILES 0.5 TO 2 HOURS
~
10 MILES 1 TO 4 HOURS
-m
I i
TABLE 1 Transfer of Emergency Response Functions from the Control Room to the Technical Support Center and the Emergency Operations Facility Emergency Class Notification of Unusual Site Area General Event Alert Emergency Emergency Supervision of CR CR CR CR Reactor Operations and Manipulation of Controls Management of CR(TSC)
TSC TSC TSC Plarit Operations Technical Support CR(TSC)
TSC TSC TSC to Reactor Operations Management of Corporate CR(TSC, EOF)
E0F E0F Emergency Response Resources Radiological Effluent CR(TSC, EOF)
EOF E0F and Environs Monitor-ing, Assessment and Dose Projections
.+
t (CR), (TSC), (EOF), or (TSC,E0F) indicates that. activation of this facility is optional for that class of Emer'gency Action Level.
- 0ne NRC individual also may be stationed in the control room.
4 9
- - r i,-----n w
e-
i f-TABLE 1 (continued)
Inform State, local and CR(TSC, EOF)
TSC(E0F)
EOF E0F Federal Emergency Response Organizations and make Recommendations for PUblic Protective Actions Event Monitoring by NRC (CR)
TSC(EOF) TSC& EOF TSC&E0F Regional Emergency Response Team
- Management of Recovery CR(TSC,E0F)
EOF E0F Operations Technical Support of CR(TSC, EOF)
TSC TSC TSC Recovery Operations e
l DOSE RATE FRm GROUND IPOSITION AFTER CORE WLT ACCIENT NOTE: AT 2 x 10-2 PER CORE MELT, THE DOSE RATE AT 2.5 MILES IS ALWAYS LESS THAN 1. REM /HR FROM GROUND DEPOSITION D -i >
SOURCE: ExHistT A, SECT 6, PART IV, NECACCIDENTRISKANALYSIS (NUCLEARENERGYCENTERSTUDY) 30 _
REM /HR "
20 _i r 5 Mi a 2 x 10-3 PER CORE MELr 2.5Mia2x10-3 PER CORE MELT
/
.5 Mi a 10-2 pga cogg get7 10 _
A k
U-N 1
0 10 20 30 60 DAYSAFTERACCIDENT
TIMES TO EXCEED GIVEN DOSES FOR VARIOUS LIKELIHOOD CONSEQUENCES, GIVEN A CORE MELT ACCIDENT
't Time to Receive Assumed Percent of Dose in E0F Core' Melt Habitable Cases (Assuming per Alt. 1 Alt. 2 - PF = 5 E0F in Cloud Assumed Track)
Dose (1/2 to 10 miles) at 1 mile at 5 miles at 10 miles 10%
10 rem 30 days
- cloud passage 1 hr 4 hrs only 50 rem
>60 days 30 days 60 days
>60 days 1%
50 rem 3 days exceeded by cloud 1 5r cloud passage passage only only 100 rem 60 days 1 hr 2 hr 3 days worst case 250 rem 3 days 8 hrs 1 day 2 days
- All times are for 100% habitability Related Notes:
a.
EPA PAGs (1 to 5 rem total body exposure) are exceeded outside 10 miles for about 30% of core melt accidents.
b.
Life threatening doses to public, assuming house shelter and relocation after 1 to 3 days, are exceeded outside 10 miles for less than 1% of core melt accidents.
=
4
19>
.g) ~,v$$
e g~& *$' q,f i.,
& /;,p{fgk b
4 gy ?* +ff,
/////p e
IMAGE EVALUATION NNNN i
TEST TARGET (MT-3) t i
l.0 l.? m !!M a m ru d' :=
<+ e3 3 l
I.I c
. = =
I l_I.8__
I l.25 1.4 1.6 4
6" MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART 4
- m si/
<$ 4
~ w,, n> %N
<>+:fKr
" v.,
7/,
<g.w:.ca,
6e>'<6 o
b w,
i.
v:e G#
4 %.
////
l? Y
////,
I'
?!
k IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) i ff 9;; L23 1.0 El t?
,_ m 1 $$
ll
- t. _
L=
[ l.8 1.25 Il I.4 1.6 11 6"
MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART A?
w, >>,y,/////
/$
<>+4%
_l O
1 q,
e i
RADIONUCLIDES WITH SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTION TO DOMINANT EXPOSURE MODES Radionudidas With Signdicant Contribunon To lung Exposure * (Lung only Controlling When Thyroid Dose is Reduced By lodine Radionudides With Sguficant Radionuclides With Significant Blodung Or lhee is A Long Deley Prior To Contnbunon To Thyroid Exposure Contributxv. To Whole Body Exposure Reiseses)
Radionuclide Half Life (Days)
Radionudide Half Ufe (Days)
Radionudide Half Ufe (Days) 1-131 8.05 l-131 8.05 l-131 8.05 l-132 0.0858 Te-132 3.25 l-132 0.0858 l-133 0.875 Xe-133 5.28 l-133 0.875 l-134 0.0366 l-133 0.875 l-134 0.0366 l
l-135
.028 Xe-135 0.384 1-135
.028 Te-132 3.25 l-135
.028 Cs-134 750 Kr-88 0.117 Cs-134 750 Kr-88 0.117
'l
[
Kr-88 0.117 Cs-137 11,000
,l Cs-137 11,000 Ru-106 366 l)
Te-132 3.2:5 Ce-144 284
.l
- Derived from the more probable Reactor Safety Study fuel melt categories and from postulated l
design basis accident releases.
i
I i
POSSIBLE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE ON E0F LOCATION I
For those sites at which. construction to meet Alternative 1 or Alternative 2 is not underway, the Comission will require a specific showing why the EOF location should not be at least 5 miles from the facility.
2 4
I i
I 1
1 7
s W
G 1
i i
t e
i
-mei----r>
er e-y-----
m--+%
ye, ie9
,+m.
.r-.
y-ppa; Tq-c-u
1 BROWNS FERRY 3 FAILURE TO COMPLETE SCRAM TSC 0 Could have been used as operating station for STA 0 Permanent cata system with data trending and recording would help analyze plant systems f
9 Reactor parameter displays would have provided assurance of status of plant 0 Would have provided post-accident location for licensee /NRC personnel for accident analysis E0F 0 Not required in this incident (see Table 1) e Could have been used for post-accident briefings for State / local officials i
I
sp I
CRYSTAL RIVER 3-INSTRUMENTATION POWER SUPPLY FAILURE TSC 0 Would have alleviated control room overcrowding 0 Would have provided instrumentation for effective technical analysis S Would have provided focal point outside CR for outside communications by NRC and licensee e Plant computer overloaded in 14 minutes; permanent TSC.ystem would have remained operational and alleviated this loss of data e Some lost sensor data to CR would have still been available in TSC i
EOF G Not reauired for this accident (see Table 1) 8 Would have been useful for management of radiological monitoring and dose assessment 0 Would have provided offsite workspace for some of the 27 NRC personnel to avoid crowaing CR and interim TSC s
l l L.
EfEFIT OF SHIELED EKRENCY OPERATIONS FACILITY I
REMS 5
50 200 ALTERNATIVE 1 (PF = 50)
DAYS IDNTHS YEARS VERYL0wPROBABILITY HOURS DAYS MONTHS A.TERNATIVE 2 (PF = 5)
HOURS DAYS MONTHS VERY Lcw PROBABILITY IttEDIATE HOURS DAY EPA PAGS (1 TO 5 REM TOTAL BODY EXPOSURE) ARE EXCEEDED OUTSIDE 10 MILES FOR AB0ur 30% OF CORE tELT ACCIDENTS.
LIFE THREATENING DOSES TO PUBLIC, ASSUMING HOUSE SHELTER AND RELCCATION AFTER 1 TO 3 DAYS, ARE EXCEEDED OUTSIDE 10 MILES FOR LES3THAN1%OFCOREMELTACCIDENTS, J
~
k EOF f
RESULTS OF TELEPl10NE SURVEY CONDUCTED ON 10/29/80 BUILDING SillELUING BUILDING BUILDING FACILITY LOCATION DESIGN COMPLETE PROTECTION EST. COMPL.
(Si te) 0F E0F (YES or NO)
FACTOR COMPLETE DATE (PERM / BACK )
RADIAL DISTANCE Arkansas
.65 ml Yes 5 inch 85%
4/81 Beaver Valley 1200 ft.
Yes 50 5%
1982 Big Rock 12 mi Yes Unk 100%
Complete Browns Ferry Unk No Unk 0%
Unk Brunswick Unk No Unk 0%
Unk Calvert Clif fs Unk No Unk 0%
Unk D. C. Cook
.5 mi No 3 Ft 0
1/1/82 Cooper
.25 mi/2.5 mi Yes Unk 100%
Complete Crystal River Unknown No Unk o
Unk Davis.Besse 700 yds /10 mi Yes 14 inch 25%
1/1/81 Dresden Unk No "k
0%
Unk Duane Arnold 10 Mi Yes Unk 100%
Complete Farley 0.5 Mi No - 80%
9.6 30%
4/82 ft. Calhoun
.1 mi/15 mi Yes 1
100%
Complete
~
~
EOF RESULTS OF TELEPil0NE SURVEY CONDUCTED ON 10/29/80 DUILDING SillELDING BUILDING BUILDING FACILITY LOCATION DESIGN COMPLETE PROTECTION f
EST. COMPL.
(Site) 0F E0F (YES or NO)
FACTOR COMPLETF DATE (PERM / BACK )
RADIAL DISTANCE Fitzpatrick
.75 Mi Yes 8 inch 100%
Complete Ginna 4 Mi No 8 inch 0%
4/82 fladdam Neck
.5 Mi Yes 2 ft.
80%
2/1/81 llatch
.5 Mi No 50 0%
4/82 Indian Point 2 & 3
.5 Mi No 8 Inch 90%
12/81 Kewaunee 0.25 Mi Yes Unk 100%
Conplete La Crosse
.25 Mi Yes 12 Inch 80%
2/1/81 Maine Yankee
.1 Mi/1Mi Yes 2-5 100%
Complete Millstone 1.5 ml Yes 2 ft.
80%
2/1/81 Monticello
.9 Mi No-90%
3 Inch 0%
Fall 81 Nine Mile Point Unk No Unk 0%
Unk North Anna Unk No Unk 0%
Unk Oconee
.25 Mi Yes 6 Inch 100%
Complete
~
E0F RESULTS OF TELEPil0NE SURVEY CONDUCTED ON 10/29/80 UUILDING SillELDING BUILDING BUILDING FACILITY LOCATION DESIGN COMPLETE-PROTECTION EST. COMPL.
(Site) 0F EOF (YES or NO)
FACTOR COMPLETE DATE (PERM / BACK )
RADIAL DISTANCE
, Oyster Creek 1 Mi or 91/2 Hi No Unk 100%
1/1/82 Pallisades t0 Mi Yes Unk 100%
Compiete P2ach Botton
.3 Hi Yes 50 80%
1/1/81 Pilgrim Unk No Unk 0%
Unk Point Beach 1 Hi No Unk 0%
1/82 Prairie Island 0.1 Mi No Unk 0%
Unk Quad Cities Unk No Unk 0%
Unk Rincho Seco 10 mi/7 ml Yes Unk Metal 100%
Complete 81dg.
Robinson Unk No Unk 0%
Unk Salem / Hope Creek 9 Mi No-80%
13 0%
Early '82 St. Lucie
.5 Mi No 50 0%
4/82 Surry Unk No Unk 0%
Unk
^
EOF RESULTS OF TELEPil0NE SURVEY CONDUCTED ON 10/29/80 BUILDING SilIELDING BUILDING BUILDING FACILITY LOCATION DESIGN COMPLETE PROTECTION EST. COMPL.
(Site) 0F EOF (YES or NO)
FACTOR COMPLETE DATE (PERM / BACK )
RADIAL DISTANCE TMI
.5 Mi/3 Mi Yes Unk 100%
Complete Cement Block Trojan
.5 Mi/14 Mi Yes Unk 100%
Cortplete Turkey Point
.5 M1 Ne 50 0%
4/1/82 Vermont Yankee
.25 Mi/.75 Mi Yes 2
100%
Coriplete Yankee Rowe
.5 Mi/12 Mi Yes 1
100%
Complete Zion Unk No Unk 0
Unk n
4 A
\\
EOF RESULTS OF TELEPil0NE SultVEY CONDtlCTED ON 10/29/80 LOCATION OF BUILDING EST. CONST.
FACILITY PERMANENT EOF DESIGil COMPLETE PROTECTION DATE (Site)
(Radial Dist. in Miles)
(YES or NO)
FACTOR COMPLETE STAttT COMP.
Bailly(PCP)
Not finalized flo Not known yet 0
?
12/87 Beaver Valley 2
-1200 feet ( 0.25 miles)
Yes
>50 (2' walls 15 9/80 Spring 82 l
and ceilings)
Ballefonte Not finalized No Not yet known 0
?
?
Braidwood Not finalized No Not known yet 0
4/85 Byron Not finalized No Not known yet 0
4/83 Callaway
~1 mile Conceptual design Not known yet 0
6/82 complete - Final design not complete Catawba 1 & 2 Not finalized No Not known yet 0
?
?
Clinton 1 & 2 Not fie.ilized flo Not known yet 0
12/81 Comanche Peak 1 & 2 1.8 miles flo Not known yet 0
1st Qtr.
12/81 1981 Diablo Canyon 1 & 2 11.3 miles Yes Not known yet 90 1/1/81 (metal trailer)
Fcrmi 2 0.75 miles tio
-10 0
5/81 11/82
-1 feet concrete)
Grand Gulf I & 2
- 0.5 mile No 50 0
3/81 4/82 liarris 1 - 4 Not finalized No Not known yet 0
?
6/84
' EOF RESULTS OF TELEPil0NE SURVEY C0flDUCTED ON 10/29/80 LOCATION OF BUILDING EST CONST.
FACILITY PERMANENT EOF I)ESIGN COMPLETE PROTECTION DATE (Site)
(Radial Olst. in Miles)
(YES or NO)
FACTOR COMPLETE START COMP.
La Salle 1 & 2 Not finalized No Not known yet 0
?
?
Limerick 1 & 2 Not finalized No Not known yet 0
?
?
Marble flills (PCP)
Not ffnalized No Not known yet 0
?
?
McGuire 1 & 2 0'.S mile Yes Not known 100 Midland 1 & 2 Hot finalized Conceptual design Not known yet 0
Mid 81 Mid 83 Not closer than 1.2 miles complete to the plant Palo Verde 1 - 3
'0.25 miles (Unit 2) tio (layout '90 Not known (below 0
10/81 11/82 complete) grade 12" walls)
Perry 1 & 2 Not finalized No Not known yet 0
?
7/83 Riverbend 1
'l mile (part of multi-No (preliminary 5
Mid 81 Mid 83 purpose facility) layout'90%)
San Onofre 2 & 3
-0.6 miles No Not known yet 0
4/81 4/82
('1 ft concrete)
Seabrook (PCP) 12 miles No Not.known yet 0
?
.?
S 1 mile Yes Not known yet 0
3/81 7/82 e o Shoreham Not finalized No Not known yet 0
i S/82 South Texas 1 & 2 Not finalized No Not known yet 0
?
?
~.
EOF RESULTS OF TELEPil0NE SURVEY CONDtlCTED ON 10/29/80 LOCATION OF BUILDING EST. CONST.'
FACILITY PERMANENT EOF DESIGN COMPLETE PROTECT 10ft DATE (Site)
(Radial Dist. in Miles)
(YES or NO)
FACTOR COMPtETE START COMP.
Susquehanna 0.5 mile No Not known yet
'5 4/82 Virgil C. Sunner 1 2.5 miles No 20 0
?
?
hgtle 1 & 2 1.1 miles No Not known yet 0
7/81 1/83 W2terford 3 8 miles Yes 1
100 Watts 8ar 1 & 2 1 mile No Not known yet 0
10/81 7/82 WNP 1, 2, & 4 0.75 miles (Unit 2)
No 1-5 0
?
1/83 1.25 miles (Units 1 & 4)
WNP 3 & 5 0.8 miles No 1-5 0
?
11/82 Wolf Creek 2.8 miles No
-15 0
8/82 Zimmer i Not finalized No Not known yet 0
Interim Fac. 11/81 Final Fac.-Unknown Ft. St. Vrain 12 miles Yes 1
100 l