ML20053D617
| ML20053D617 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinch River |
| Issue date: | 06/03/1982 |
| From: | Mizuno G NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | National Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20053D614 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8206070129 | |
| Download: ML20053D617 (16) | |
Text
.
6/3/82 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
. Docket No.' 50-537 PROJECT flA'1AGEMENT C09PORATI0it-TLhhELifE VAI.l.EY AliTliORITY
)
(Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant)
NRC STAFF'S SECOND ROUND OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS TO INTERVENORS Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 6 2.742, the NRC Staff requests admissions by NRDC et al., separately and fully, by June 18, 1982, to make the following admissions as to the truth of the specified matters of fact for the pur-poses of the captioned proceeding. For each of the following admissions which you deny, or state that you are unable to admit or deny, provide the following information:
a.) The portion of the statement which is not admitted.
If the request involves a table, state what portions of the table is not admitted, b.) The basis of your disagreement with the statement.
c.) The expert witnesses, if any, you are relying on in disagreeing with the statement.
d.) The document, if any, you are relying on 'n disagreeing with'
~
the statement.
e.) The articles, if any, you are relying on in disagreeing with the statement.
8206070129 820603 PDR ADOCK 05000537 O
. Admissions Generally Related to All Contentions G-1.
The CRBR site consists of 1,364 land acres on a peninsula formed by a meander of the Clinch River.
G-2.
The CRBR plant structures will be located at a grade elevation of 815 feet above MSL, or about 75 feet abova +ha normal Clinch River level of 711 feet above MSL.
G-3.
The CRBR proposed exclusion area will include the site property and portions of the Clinch River which are adjacent to the site, less 112 acres along the northern boundary which have been set aside for an industrial park.
G-4.
The mininun exclusion crea boundary distance is approximately 670 meters (2,200 feet), as measured from the containment building southwest to the nearest point on the exclusion area bounda ry.
G-5.
No public highways or railroads tr,erse the proposed exclusion area.
AdmissionsonContention7(c) 7(c)-1.
Other than wind speed, inversion conditions, population density, and co-location of CRBR with nuclear fuel cycle, and weapons processing facilities, there are no other environmental and safety characteristics which constitute " site selection criteria", and therefore be used in identifying and evaluating alternate sites.
7(c)-2.
Other than the sites specifically identified by Intervenors in Contention 7(c), and TVA sites where LWR units have been can-celled or deferred, there are no other alternative sites which Intervenors contend must be evaluated.
7(c)-3.
TVA has not cancelled, but rather has deferred construction of LWR units at its Hartsville and Yellow Creek sites.
7(c)-4.
The Nevada Test Site is less favorable than the CRBR site, with regard to the following environmental and safety criteria:
(1) Estimated.75g design requirement for seismic ground motion at the Nevada Test Site, compared with a.25g design requirement for CRBR.
(2) Limited groundwater in Nevada (3) Close proximity to the U.S. Air Force Nellis Bonbing and Currery Range.
(4) Close proximity to current facilities and sites for research, development, and testing of nuclear weapo,ns.
7(c)-5.
To date, no Federally recognized endangered or threatened species are known to be on the CRBR site, or in the site vicinity.
7(c)-6.
CRBR operation at full-power will "2 quire 8 c.f.s. of water, which will be supplied by the Clinch river.
7(c)-7.
The annual average flow of Clinch River is 5380 c.f.s. of the CRBR site.
l 7(c)-8.
8 c.f.s. of water represents.2 percent of the annual average flow for Clinch River.
7(c)-9.
Nearly all monthly discharges from the Melton Hill Dam exceed 1000 c.f.s., except for periods of no flow.
7(c)-10.
Periods of no flow have not exceeded 24 days.
7(c)-11. The Clinch River has experienced approximately 17 days per year of no flow in the vicinity of the CRBR site.
7(c)-12. The CRBR intake structure will not be located in a stretch of Clinch river that is uniquely important for the spawning or early life history of any fist..
.. ~.
4 5-7(c)-13. There will be minor and largely undetectable impacts to Clinch River and Watts Bar Lake fisheries due to impingement or entrainment.
7(c)-14. The-vegetationai assoc ~iation present at the CRBR site does not represent a unique type relative to the associations occuring on land in the vicinity of the site.
e 9
t-e
^
>9--
gt w-~-y
- y-1r7 T
e3w '
7 ee vvvf-rw ve yvt -w
-eew-*
we * *
- vwP' 7
-tC rw 7
w W
,a-
'F--"
. Admissions on Contention 5 5(a)-1.
Other,than wind speed and inversion conditions, there are no other meteorological factors or parameters that Intervenors believe must be. utilized in evaluating site meteorology.
5(a)-2.
Other than Section 9.2 of the CRBR FES, and an October 31, 1974 letter from Richard P. Denise to Peter S. Van Nort, the Intervenors do not have any basis for their contention that sites other than Clinch River have more favorable wind speed and inversion characteristics.
5(a)-3.
Other than wind speed and inversion conditions, there are no other meteorological disadvantages of the Clinch River site.
5(a)-4.
Other than population density, there are no disadvantageous population characteristics associated with the CRBR site.
5(a)-5.
In 1980, the 10 mile radial population from CRBR was 52,040.
5(a)-6.
In 1980, the 50 mile radial population from CRBR was 830,840.
5(a)-7.
The wind speed and wind direction information presented in Figures 2.3-7 and 8 of Amendment 65 of the CRBR PSAR are representative of the Clinch River site.
i
. 5(a)-8.
The information presented in Table 5 of NRC's Updated Answers to Intervenors' Ninth Set of Interrogatories to the NRC Staff, which' includes the Design Basis X/Q values for LWR sites, is correct.
5(a)-9.
The information presented in Table 1 of NRC's Updated Answers to Intervenors' Ninth Set of Interrogatories to the NRC Staff, which includes Design Basis X/Q values for the CRBR site, is correct and conservative.
5(a)-10. The Design Basis X/Q value at the FFTF exclusion distance of 2400 meters is 1.4 x 10-4 seconds per cubic meter, as stated in NRC's Answer to Interrogatory 2 of the Intervenors' Ninth Set of Interrogatories.
5(a)-11. The Design Basis X/Q values at the FFTF low population zone distance of 7200 meters are (a) 2.7 x 10-5 at 0-8 hours; (b) 1.4 x 10-5 at 8-24 hours: (c) 6.9 x 10-6 et 1-4 days; and j
(d) 3.0 x 10-0 at 4-30 days, in seconds per cubic meter, as stated in NRC's Answer to Interrogatory 2 of the Intervenors' Ninth Set of Interrogatories.
l 5(a)-12. Design Basis X/Q values at a 670 meter exclusion zone boundary for the Summer, Hartsville, and Watts Bar reactor plants (which were deemed to be licensable by the NRC), are approximately the same as that for the CRBR 670 meter exclusion zone boundary.1 1
. 5(a)-13. Design Basis X/Q values at CRBR are at the same order of magnitude, and often are approximately the same as the Design Basis *X/Q values for the following LWR sites in the general region which were deemed to be licensable bj the liPC: Yellow Creek, Phipps Bend, Catawba, and-Sequoyah.
5(a)-14. The Applicants' onsite meteorological measurements program meets or exceeds the Staff's requirements set forth in Regulatory Guide 1.23, "0nsite Meteorological Programs",
(February,1972).
5(a)-15. The nearest population center, as that term is defined in 10 C.F.R. Part 100, is Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
5(a)-16. The population center distance, based on the actual population distribution of 27,552 in 1980, is 7 miles north-northeast of the CRBR. This is greater than the minimum population center distance, as that term is defined in 10 C.F.R. Part 100.
5(a)-17. Regulatory Guide 1.1a5, " Atmospheric Dispersier Models for Potential Accident Consequence Assessments at Nuclear Power i
~
Plant," (August 1979) sets forth the NRC Staff's criteria for calculating appropriate meteorological atmospheric dilution l
factors (X/Q) for use in determining the consequences of I
l potential accidental releases.
l 1
i
. 5(a)-18. X/Q values for the CRBR were calculated by the Staff in accordance with the criteria and methodologies set forth in Regulatory Guide 1.145.
5(a)-19. The Staff. performed two probabilistic analyses of CRBR site meteorological data for the period 2-17-1977 to 2-17-1978, with wind speed and direction data collected at the 33 foot level and temperature difference data collected et the 33 and 200 foot levels on the permanent CRBR tower.
5(a)-20. The first probabilistic analysis performed by the Staff for CRBR developed short term (up to 30 days) X/Q values for each of the 16 cardinal point sectors that is not exceeded more than
.5% of the total time. The hichest X/Q value for the 16 sectors is defined by the Staff as the " maximum sector X/Q value".
5(a)-21. The second probabilistic analysis performed by the Staff developed a short term (up to 30 days) X/Q value for the overall CRBR site that 1: ot exceeded more than 5% of the total tine. This X/Q value is defined by the Staff as the "overall site X/Q value".
5(a)-22.
In the analysis referred to in Admission 5(a)-21, the Staff used a direction dependent atmospheric dispersion model with enhanced lateral dispersion during neutral and stable atmos,
S pheric conditions accompanied by low wind speeds.
J
' l 5(a)-23. The lateral dispersion factors used in the Staff's analyses were based on diffusion studies performed at several locat' ions including the CRBR site.
~
5(a)-24. The. Staff's evaluation'of the consequences of design basis l
accidental releases were based on the more conservative maximum sector X/Q value.
l l
5(a)-25. The Staff's methodology for determining design basis meteorology, as described in Adraissions 5(a)-17 through E4 is site-specific for the CRBR and is conservative.
i
!/
1 s
b i
t 9
11 -
5(b)-1.
The radial distance between the CRBR reactor core and the furthest point on the Y-12 site is approximately 9 miles.
e e
e
\\
9
1 12 -
Admissions on Contention 8 8-1.
Applicants have discussed decommissioning and dismantling in Amendment X of the Environme.ntal Report ("ER".) for CRBR, dated December,1981.
8-2.
At the end of the CRBR operating life, Ni-59 will be present in quantities equal to one (1) percent of the quantities of Ni-63.
8-3.
The Staff's position with regard to compliance with 10 C.F.R. Parts 20. and 50, Appendix I in the decommissioning of nuclear reactors'is. contained in IKC Pagulatory cuide 1.EE.
8-4.
Tablejl of' Applicants' Second Updated Response to Intervenors' Ninth Set of Interrogatories, April 30,1982,(" Applicants' Updates to.Intervenors' Ninth Set of Interrogatories"),
accurately presents the components, material types and RDT standards for the current CRBR design.
8-5.
Table 2 of the Applicants' Updates to Intervenors' Ninth Set of Interrogatories accurately presents the chemical composition.
of permanent steel components for the current CRBR design.
l 8-6.
Table 3 of the Applicants' Updates to Intervenors' Ninth Set of Interrogatories accurately presents the chemcial ccmposition,of the prirzry shield for the current CRBR design.
4 g j
-w-
13 -
8-7.
Table 4 of the Applicants' Updates to Intervenors' Ninth Set of Interroc: tories accurately presents the principal activation products in permanent steel ccmponents.
~
8-8.
Table 5 of the~^pplicants' Updates to Intervenors' Ninth Set of Interrogatories accurately presents the principal activation products in the CRBR primary shield.
8-9.
Table 6 of the Applicants' Updates to Intervenors' Ninth Set of Interrogatories ~ accurately presents the neutron flux and fluence at the CRBR reactor vessel inner surface at core mid-plane elevation.
8-10.
Table 7 of the Applicants' Updates to Intervenors' Ninth Set of Interrogatori,es accurately presents the neutron flux and fluence at.the CRBR primary concrete shield at core midplane elevation.,-
r t
a s
~
'l 8-11.
The half-lives for the following radionuclides are correctly stated:
a.
Nickel - 59 80,000 years b.
Nickel - 63 100. years
... 'ci
. Niobium - 94~ ~'
~
20,000 years d.
Cobalt - 60 5.2 years Respectfully submitted, G ry S.
izuno Counsel for NRC Staff l
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 3rd day of June,1982 i
f 0
9
_y
-.-,.._y
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY'
,-)
Docket N'o. 50-537 PROJECT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION'
~
)
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORI1Y 4
(Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF'S SECOND ROUND OF INTERR0GATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS TO INTERVENORS" and "NRC STAFF'S THIRD SET OF INTERR0GATORIES AND REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO THE CITY OF OAK RIDGE" in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class, or, as indicated by an asterisk, through deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Comission's internal mail system, this 3rd day of June, 1982:
Marshall Miller, Esq., Chairman William M. Leech, Jr., Attorney General Administrative Judge William B. Hubbard, Chief Deputy l
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Attorney General U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Lee Breckenridge, Assistant Attorney Washington, D.C.
20555
- General 450 James Robertson Parkway Mr. Gustave A. Linenberger Nashville, Tennessee 37219 i
Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 1
I Dr. Cadet H. Hand, Jr., Director William E. Lantrip, Esq.
l Administrative Judge City Attorney l
Bodega Marine Laboratory Municipal Building l
. University of California P.O. Box 1 l
P.O. Box 247 Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Bodega Bay, California 94923 Lawson McGhee Public Library Alan Rosenthal, Esq., Chairman 500 West Church Street Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 l
Bcard Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Warren E. Bergholz, Jr.
Leon Silverstrom Washington, D.C.
20555 U.S. Department of Energy ;;
1000 Independence Ave., S.W.
Dr. John H. Buck l
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Room 6-B-256 l
Board Panel Washington, D.C.
20585 DESIGNATED ORIGIKAT, l
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission AC
,..% %.m l
Washington, D.C.
20555 C6YhtfIc5EyJJ J (0 $8]/ -
. George L. Edgar Esq.
Mr. Joe H. Walker Frank K. Peterson, Esq.
401 Roane Street Gregg A. Day, Esq.
Harriman, Tennessee 37830 Thomas A. Schmuti, Esq.
Irvin A. Shapell, Esq.
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius 1800 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C..'.20036
~
Project Management Corporation P.O. Box U Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Barbara A. Finamore Ellyn R. Weiss Dr. Thomas.B. Cochran lSt Jacob Scherr Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
1725 Eye Street, N.W., Suite 600 Washington, D.C.
20006 Manager of Power Tennessee Valley Authority 819 Power Building Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401 Director Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Project U.S. Department of Energy Washington, D.C.
20585 Atomic Safety and Licensing ~ Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission W,
Washingten: D.C.
20555 Gepry Sg/MifUno CoQnsel for NRC Staff