ML20054M970
| ML20054M970 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 07/02/1982 |
| From: | Glass S Federal Emergency Management Agency |
| To: | Repka D NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20054M968 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8207150208 | |
| Download: ML20054M970 (5) | |
Text
v.
,r
- +
! 4 fjf 4 Federal Emergency Management Agency t
Region II 26 Federal Plaza New York, New York 10278 July 2, 1982 Mr. david A. Repka Counsel for IEC Staff 11uclear Regulatory Comission OELD Mail Stop 9604ttBB Washington, D.C. 20555 Re: Long Island Lighting Company Shoreham tbclear Power Station, Unit 1.
Docket lio. 50-322
Dear !!r. Repka:
As you requested our office forwarded material on the status of compliance of the layout of the Alerting and Notification System of the Shoreham Ibclear Power Station with the criteria of NUREG 0654/FDR REP 1, Revision 1, Appendix 3. directly to the Administrative Licensing Board.
Enclosed please find a full set of the material that was provided to the Administrative Judges in the above captioned matter.
If you have any additional questions or need further clarification please do not hesitate to contact my office. If I am not available Mr. Roger Kowieski will be able to provide assistance in this program area.
Very truly yours, k
94.' M.
Stewart [1. Glass Regional Counsel 8207150208 E20709 PDR ADOCK 05000322 G
s F
+
1[
Region 11 26 Federal Plaza New York, New York 10278 July 1, 1982 Re: Acceptance Testing Shoreham Nuclear Power Station m % has not conducted acceptance testing for the Shorehan Nuclear Power Station Notification and Alerting System. Acceptance testing involves a full scale operational test of the entire alert and notification system as well as sampling of public response. It includes the mailing to and receipt from the public in the 10 mile plune exposure pathway energency planning zone of an approved questionnaire and subsequent evaluation. The types of tests are described below:
- 1. growl test-In this type of test, the siren is sounded for so short a time that it never produces significant sound output, yet long enough so that it can be detemined that it is working. Its purpose is to test the electromechanical functions at the individual siren site. The suggested testing frequency is quarterly and when preventive maintenance is performed.
- 2. silent test-In this test, the controls are activated at the control center and its purpose is to test the tone encoder at the control transmitter and the receiver decoder at each siren location. The suggested testing frequency is every two weeks.
- 3. complete cycle test-In this test, the entire syst s is activated from the control center and the systen is allowed to full cycle.Its purpose is to test all systs components. The suggested testing frequency is at least annually and as required for formal I
exercises.
m n is to receive an annual statement from the State that silent and growl test have been perform d. In addition, Iran is to observe or receive a statment of the annual statistical sample of population in the pitne exposure pathway EPZ.
FEMA COMMENTS ON THE FINAL DESIGN OF THE PROMPT NOTIFICATION SYSTEM FOR THE SHORERAM NUCLEAR POWER GENERATING STATION AS PREPARED BY WYLE LABORATORIES The criteria on which the evaluation is based is that contained in NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Appendix 3 and FEMA CPG l-17.
The area within the 10-mile radius of the Shoreham Station is comprised of portions of three towns:
Brookhaven, Riverhead, and Southampton.
All three towns are in Suffolk County. Half of the total area of the 10-mile EPZ is formed by Long Island Sound.
The land area within the 10-mile EPZ contains heavily populated urban and sparsely populated farm properties. Of special concern is the coastal area of the Town of Brookhaven immediately adjacent to Long Island Sound. Due to its recreational facilities, this area contains a significant transient population during the summer vacation season. This has been considered by sirans being located along the Long Island Sound coastline to alert people at these beaches and recreational facilities.
In addition, it has been recommended that signs be posted at all locations where transient populations are likely to exist (typically, Long Island Sound beach areas). Of additional concern are the facilities of Gru= man Aerospace Corporation and Brookhaven Laboratory, each of which employ several hundred people, as well as industrial, institutional, and educational facilities. This issue has been considered by the recom-mendation that tone alert receivers be distributed to all facilities.
Meterological information was compiled in order to determine which factors might influence the design of the siren system.
It was concluded that the weather is not expected to impede the performance of the alerting system.
l The topography ranges from beach areas along Long Island Sound to steep cliffs rising from the edge of the beach; rolling hills and coastal in-lets immediately beyond the cliffs; and plain regions and farmland beyond the hilly coastal region.
In order to establish the maximum ambient noise level in densely populated areas, a limited noise survey was conducted at nine locations including j
commercial and residential locations.
The ambient noise level, which l
was observed in the absence of identifiable single event sources, was generally below 46 db (A) in rural and urban areas and below 55 db (A) l in dense urban and commercial areas.
It was, therefore, concluded that a minimum warning signal level of 70 db (C) be used to design the siren system at all locations throughout the 10-mile EPZ.
This meets the l
requirement to provide a dissonant signal level 10 db above average day-time ambient as stipulated in Appendix 3 of NUREG-0654.
1
o The final system design identified a total requirement for 89 warning sirens and.approximately 150 tone alert receivers to be located in industrial, educational and institutional buildings.
i It is c~alled to the designer's attention that when the alert and notifi-cation' system is tested under actual field conditions, the design objective of 100% coverage may not be met in all cases. Additional sirens or tone alert receivers may well be required to cover areas found to be inadequately covered during tests.
We have reviewed the data provided and conclude that:
(1) The system, as proposed, supplemented by tone alert receivers, should provide direct coverage of essentially 100% of the populated areas within the 10-mile EPZ.
(2) Design criteria used in the layout of the siren distribution pattern theoretically will provide signals of at least 10 db over the ambient noise levels.
(3) Sound levels will not exceed 123 db and, therefore, will meet safety hearing requirements.
(4) Sound propagation contours have been provided for three sirens.
The contours of the remaining sirens should be furnished for review.
(5)
In regard to the siren system control, only general recommendations are provided.
It is requested that the following information relative to the siren control system be furnished -- mode of operation; equipment; line of sight characteristics, if radio; telephone reliability, if land lines; control equipment; methods; and procedures.
(6)
It is stated that the activation of the tone alerts will be accomplished through WALK-FM, an EBS station. However, a copy of the letter of agreement with the radio station has not been furnished.
l (7) There is no indication as to how the requirement of providing an l
informational or instructional message to the population through-out the 10-mile EPZ, as stated in NUREG-0654, will be implemented.
This evaluation, therefore, covers only a plan for distribution of alerting i
sirens and tone alert receivers.
It does not cover a warning system.
In summary, the information which we have becn furnished is inadequate to I
do a complete evaluation.
It covers only a plan for the distribution of sirens and tone alert receivers.
Information relative to the control system and the Emergency Broadcast System is also required to do a system evaluation.
/G? i Federal Emergency Management Agency
(('
!r Region II 26 Federal Plaza New York, New York 10278 9
a
~
July 6, 1982 Mr. Donald B. Davidoff, Director Radiological Emergency Preparedness Group New York State Department of Health Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12237 RE:
Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Alert and Notification System
Dear Mr. Davidoff:
Our office has reviewed the Final Design of the Prompt Notifcation Systen for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Generating Station, as prepared by Wyle Laboratories.
Attached you will find our cornents which have identified several areas of deficiencies.
It is requested that you furnish us with the additional information as soon as possible.
Your prompt attention is appreciated.
Sincerely, W h.
0 0 GS' 4 Roge
. Kowieski, P.E.
Chairman Regional Assistance Co=mittee Attachment e
i