ML20041F985
| ML20041F985 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 02/12/1982 |
| From: | Mattimoe J SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT |
| To: | Deyoung R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| References | |
| EA-82-037, EA-82-37, NUDOCS 8203170620 | |
| Download: ML20041F985 (2) | |
Text
,..
gp W37
$ SMUD SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT O 6201 s street, Box 15830. Sacramento, California 95813;(916) 452 3211 February 12, 1982 blR7IM00M
- ~
RICHARD C DE YOUNG DIRECTOR g
0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Q
U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
UASHINGTON D C 20555 ggrpfp0
~
oi yM 1G 1982* d DOCKET 50-312 u r.31 ** "#
RANCHO SECO NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION W
g UNIT NO 1 b
PROMPT NOTIFICATION SYSTEM g
REFERENCES:
10 CFR 50 Appendix E Section IV.D.3 District letter of June 30, 1981 District letter of July 24, 1981 Federal Register Vol. 46, No. 182 p46587 NRC Region V letter of October 20, 1981 District letter of December 31, 1981 NRC Region V letter of January 21, 1982 Notice of Violation, February 12, 1982 This letter is in response to the February 12, l' 82 Notice of Violation to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(S) (2) and 10 CFR 50, Appendix E, which requires the District to have demonstrated by February 1, 1982 that admini-strative and physical means have been established for alerting and providing prompt instructions to the public located within the 10 mile plume exposure emergency planning zone around Rancho Seco.
The 'ollowing is the current status of our system:
Materials Alerting Communicators of America (ACA)
ACA has no commitment other than our contract requirement for equipment delivery not later than March 25, 1982.
However, ACA has agreed to expedite shipment of the sirens. They are now planning to ship ten sirens on February 15th, ten on February 19th, ten on February 26th, and the remaining five on March 5th.
They have had some problems with delivery of control equipment. This may cause a delay in the shipment of some of the control panels for the first ten to twenty sirens. The District has authorized air freight for all shipments.
9203170620 820212
/,3 PDR ADOCK 05000312 F
PDR q l
DARREI;L G EISENHUT February 12, 1982 Design Acoustic Technology Inc. (ATI)
ATI is presently reviewing our siren layout. A meeting was held on February 9th 6 10th to discuss the layout and make changes necessary to 7
improve the siren coverage. They will be submitting a final report to us by the end of February.
Interfaces Amador County Amador County is in the process of purchasing and installing a low-band radio network from Motorola. Motorola is filing the application (for Amador County) for the FCC license necessary to operate the radio network The frequency will be in the 45 MHz band, and most likely will be 45.16 FHz.
This has yet to be confirmed by Motorola.
Sacramento County Sacramento County will be activating sirens in their county using their i
frequency, 453.300 MHz.
They will not have the console that the encoder will be installed in by the first part of April and thus the encoder will have to be temporarily installed.
San Joaquin County San Joaquin County will initially be activating sirens in their county using their frequency, 460.125 MHz.
Their encoder will also have to be temporarily installed. Once the rest of their radio equipment is delivered and installed, they will be switching siren activation to the new frequency, 460.350 MHz.
FEMA /NRC We will be scheduling a meeting near the end of February, with FEMA and the counties to discuss the final siren layout.
The District will utilize our own crews to install and drop service to the sirens.
Crews will begin installation upon delivery of sirens.
Some of the sirens will be located outside of the District service area. This will require the cooperation of the Pacific Gas and Electric Company to expedite service to those sirens.
The District has received verbal confirmation from the County of Sacramento for the availability of two Sheriff's Department helicopters equipped with loudspeakers, an additional helicopter through the California Highway Patrol, and a number of Sheriff's Department patrol cars equipped with loudspeakers. Sacramento County has agreed to provide the District with written confirmation of the above equipment.
The District will forward a copy to you upon receipt. The District will keep you informed as new information develops.
b4. *A
[
1 l John J. Mattimoe
/
Assistant General Manager and Chief Engineer Attachments
~
W
& f y S.. U..e.,
SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT O 6201 s street. som 15s30. secremento, cas6 forme 95s13; (916) 452 3211 ei December 31, 1981 l
DIRECTOR OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION ATTENTION DARRELL G EISENHUT DIRECTOR i
DIVISION OF LICENSING U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON D C 20555 DOCKET 50-312 RANCHO SECO NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION UNIT NO. 1 PROMPT NOTIFICATION SYSTEM REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION
References:
10 CFR 50 Appendix E Section IV.D 3 District letter of June 30, 1981 District letter of July 24, 1981 Federal Register Vol. 46, No. 182 p46587 The Di::trict is requesting.an exemption from the requirements of 10CFR 50 AppeMix E Section IV.D.3 and the Federal Register notice in Vol. 46, No.182 p46587 that requires the completion of a Prompt Notification System within the plume exposure pathway EPZ by February 1, 1982. The District has experienced unforeseen difficulties in the design and procurement of the system.
f The major unforeseen difficulty experienced was in the design of the system and our desire to work with the counties into which the syste:.1 would be installed.
Draft reports of the design of the Prompt Notification System were distributed to the Deputy Director, Office of Emergency Services in Amador County, the Coordinator, Emet gency Operations Division in Sacramento County, and the Coordi-nator, Office of Emergency Services in San Joaquin County for their review and consnents. Meetings were also conducted between the counties and our consultant to discuss the design. FEMA was also asked to provide consnents on the initial design. The consnents resulted in the scope of the contract with the consultant to change such that the contract r.eeded to be expanded twice before the com-pletion of the final design.
The following is a schedule of our system design, procurement and completion of the Prompt Notification System:
n TbVQ
(' %lO d 1. sM
.m
.s
.s.
m.i. n mm s e _ o u,, is r.
I DARRELL G EISENHUT December 31, 1981 November 1980 Initial contract with consultant to design the Prompt Notification System.
May 1981 Meeting with the counties 'and the consultant -
first contract change.
July 1981 Meeting with the counties and the consultant -
second contract change.
August 1981 Final Design of the Prompt Notification System.
September 9,1981 Issued a Request for Bid and Specificat.in for the purchase of Warning Sirens and Accessor1ts.
September 30, 1981 Issued a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for public and state review.
October 9,1981 Opened bids - two received.
October 20, 1981 Issued a Request for Proposals for consulting and testing of the siren system.
November 5,1981 Rejected siren bids because they did not meet the technical requiremerts.
November 11, 1981 Issued a Request for Bid and Specifications for the purchase of Warning Sirens and Accessories.
December 1, 1981 Opened bids on the sirens.
December 3, 1981 District Board of Directors approval of the Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact of the sirens.
December 17, 1981 District Board of Directors award of contract for the purchase of the sirens and accessories.
Tentative Schedule January 7, 1982 District Board of Directors award of contract for consulting and testing of the siren system.
March 25,1982 Final delivery date of the sirens and accessories.
February - April 1982 Installation April, May 1982 Testing May 1982 Siren system operational.
O DARRELL G EISENHUT December 31, 1981 Until the District is in compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix E.Section IV.D.3 and the Federal Register notice in Vol. 46, No. 182.
P46587, the County of Sacramento has informed us of the availability of two Sheriff's Department helicopters equipped with loud speakers that would be used in the alerting process. An additional helicopter is available through the California Highway Patrol. The County of Sacramento also has a number of Sheriff Department patrol cars equipped with loud speakers that may be utilized.
Please advise if the District needs to provide any additional information.
John J. Mattimoe Assistant General Manager and Chief Engineer WB/hl bc:
W. C. Walbridge J. J. Mattimoe D. G. Raasch R. J. Rodrigue2 R. A. Dieterich J. V. McColligan R. W. Colombo L. G. Schwieger (2)
Supervisors P. Goodman (Bechtel)
G. Deppe (Bechtel)
T. A. Baxter Third Floor Files Fourth Floor Files
.~
-?
DARRELL G EISENHUT December 31, 1981 Until the District is in compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50 Appendix E.Section IV.D.3 and the Federal Register notice in Vol. 46, No. 182.
P46587, the County of Sacramento has informed us of the availability of two Sheriff's Department helicopters equipped with loud speakers that would be used in the alerting process. An additional helicopter is available through the California Highway Patrol. The County of Sacramento also has a number of Sherif' Department patrol cars equipped with loud speakers that may be utilized.
Please advise if the District needs to provide any additional information.
' j.. ' )>iTC-.s John J. Mattimoe Assistant General Manager and Chief Engineer t
" ' nL cU L v
(
O p.,'.. z R.C-:t /
1S U
SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY OtSTRICT C 6201 S Street. Bos 15830. Sacramento. California 95813;(
July 24, 1981 R H ENCELKEN DIRECTOR REGION V 0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
VALNUT CREEK PLAZA
'1990 N CALIFORNIA BLVD SUITE 202 WALNUT CREEK CALIFORNIA 94596 DOCF.ET 50-312 RANCHO SECO NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION UNIT NO 1 TMI ACTION PLAN III.A.2, PUBLIC ALERT SYSTEM Your letter of, July 1,_l981, requested confirmation that the prompt notification system for Rancho Seco Unit I had been implemented by that date. Previously, on June 30, 1981, the District requested'an exemption from the requirements of Section IV.D.3 of Appendix E to 10 CFR 50, since this notification capability does not presently exist. A copy of that letter requesting the exemption is enclosed for your information. Additional information has developed cince that time.
In July, 1981 Wyle i.aboratories issued their final report, which incorporated comments from the counties and SMUD's Management Safety Review Committee.
Pending acceptance of the report by SMUD's manage-ment, detailed engineering of the prompt notification system will begin.
In anticipation that the system will consist of some mix of I
sirens and tone alerts, specifications have been prepared for both.
The siren specification has been completed and will be issued for procurement in August. Our schedule now calls for siren delivery in January of 1982, tone equipment delivery in February of 1982, equipment installation in February and March of 1982, equipment testing during April of 1982, and system activation in May of 1982.
1 Until we are in full compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50 Appendix E.Section IV.D.3, actions as described in the Rancho Seco FSAR, Section 12.4.5.7.5.3 and 12.4.5.4.4 are being taken.
In addition, i
e 4 s m,u m
s I
R H FNGELKEN Page 2 July 24, 1981 the County of Sacramento Sheriff's Department has a helicopter equipped with a public address system that is available for use in alerting the population at risk.' If we can provide any additional information, please advise.
1 I.
John J. Mattimoe Assistant Genera
- Manager and Chief Engineer
[
Attachment gJ.C. (c 30-[51" 4
RAD /ch bc:
Wm..C. Walbridge
[ J. Mattimoe
}
D. G. Raasch j
J. V. McColligan R. J. Rodriguez R. A. Dieterich R. W. Colombo L. G. Schwieger (2)
Tom Baxter G. Deppe P. Goodman 4th Floor Files 3rd Floor Files G. D. Hodges B. Grimes H. White l
l
' % 6 5 >.)
~
(Er.,p,
~
% $. As t
,c ?-
,j T... de <.
'k SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTIUTY DISTRICT D S201 S Street. Ses 15830. Secremesen. CoINoruse 95813; (915) 452 3211 Qt A -
June 30, 1981 DIRECTOR OF WUCLEAR REACTOR REGLU TION ATTENTION JOHN F STOLZ CHIEF OPERATING REACTORS BRANCH 4 a oho 'I-D
. V.. w )
U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
^s " '
~{
WASHINGTON DC 20555 DOCKET 50-312 RANCHO SECO NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION UNIT NO.
TMI ACTION PLAN ITEM III.A.2 On March 27, 1981, the Sacramento Municipal Utility District requested an exemption ftom Section (s) (2) of 10 CFR 50.54.
(We erroneously referred to Section (q) (2) in that submittal.) As discussed in that submittal, the District's Emergency Procedures are in effect, however, State and Local plans have not been implemented at this time. We also I
stated in this submittal that additional requirements above those in j
Appendix E of 10 CFR 50 had been imposed by the State of California and I
that the 1) cal emergency plans could not be implemented until submitted to the State Legislature and approved by statute. Since that time, wc l
have Atermined that the Emergency Planning Zones required by Federal i
regulation can be implemented by a local government without State legis-t lative approval. Therefore, that exemption is needed only until the implementation of local county plans now expected to occur by the end of this year.
In addition to the exemption requested in our March 27, 1981 letter, the District is hereby requesting an exemption from the requirements of Section IV.D.3 of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50. This requirement states that by July 1, 1981, we should have the capability for notification of the public within the plume exposure pathway within fifteen (15) minutes.
In June of 1980, District staff began soliciting proposals from qualified engineering firms for the design of the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station Early Warning System. By October, 1980, Wyle Laboratories of l
El Segundo, California, had been selected. Wyle initiated their work with the signing of a contract on November 11, 1980.
Their scope of work included:
- 1) Obtaining site specific data which could affect system design, I
- 2) Designing and siting a siren system for the 10-mile radius,
- 3) Conducting design meetings with the three affected counties and the District, and h
A v
7
.-:io e,i.
v...
i.e
,,36 9 Ik&a.
T'?
I' '
. k. '
~~
JOH:i F-STOLZ Pega 2 Juna 30, 1981
- 4) Preparing a final design report which would include the technical bid specifications for the system.
Wyle issued a draft report entitled, " Preliminary Design of Prompt Notification" -in January,1981. Based on comments from the Counties and SMUD's Management Safety Review Committee, the Wyle contract scope was modified to specify additional work on alternatives cost / benefit analysis, design and siting criteria, environmental impact assessment, system maintenance and system activation alternatzves.
A final system design was agreed to by all parties in late May, 1981.
Exact siting and purchase / installation specifications were completed in mid June. A siren equipment purchase request and a California Environ-mental Quality Act Initial Study with Negative Declaration will be issued in early August.
The tone alert equipment purchase request will be issued by August, 1981.
It is currently anticipated that both the tone alert and siren equipment will be received, installed, and activated by March 1, 1982.
John J. Mattimoe I
Assistant General Manager and Chief Engineer RAD /ch h)_ L bc: ycf.C.Walbridge DJ. J. Ma,ttimoe D. G. Raasch J. V. McColligan R. J. Rodriguez R. A. Dieterich R. W. Colombo L. G. Schwieger (2)
G. Deppe P. Goodman Tom Baxter 4th Floor Files 3rd Floor Files Supervisors
-.