ML20079F079
| ML20079F079 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 10/07/1981 |
| From: | Thadani A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Houston R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20079F081 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-83-388 NUDOCS 8110200050 | |
| Download: ML20079F079 (1) | |
Text
-
r
..J 1 '
.u
!!E::3rs"?.T F'IR:
R. !!ayne Houston, Chief i
1 Accident Evaluation Branch Division of Systens Integration FP.')!!:
Ashok C. Thadani, Chief Reliabiljty & Risk Assessment. Branch Division of Safoty Technology S "'.! TCT :
SEA 3RJ0!; ET!IRO*;:*2!:TAL REP 0'1T
':: 'ava SricGy r vie.ted Section 7.1, 7.2, and 7. 3 of the :;plict's environ intal report and have formulated the folicwing co-2nts:
O 1.
There is insufficient detail to r.ahe an infor eh judgnant abo the validity of the sequence probabilities presented.
2.
The C ta:.:ry 2 f 3 pi obabilities are different than "f.S.':-i.:.003cause of rM:ction in Event V likelihood and presumably t' e absentof a r
vulnsrable contain at drain systen that tras noted in rry at 50; ayah.
Their treat:2nt of station blachout is of co.cern hause
": ir:ok c..ly has 2 AP.! pumps.
They relied on pisnt spacific ta far ;u:ntification which is not presor,ted in the r:rort.
3.
The tet:1 core malt piobability is lower than !lAS!!-1400 presu aly b.'. sed en plant specific quantification.
This can not be verifid from the in forration presented.
4.
A rcasonable assessnent of their analy.1suculd take G to 12 r.an-mnths as uning a nore detailed report is available.
/,chok C. Thadani, Chief Reliability a Risk Assessment Branch Division of Safety Technology cc: !!. Ernst XA Copy Has Been Sent to PDR
~
DISTRIBUTION:
DOCKET FILE RRAB RDG T. MURLEY R T S ME',
R. MATTSON c
IS.~AEL C!MWT W. KREGER
- ~*
A. THADANI
' '
- 3 ; OS T( '*f -.:." 2 : 0S T.... l.
~
gp' l
- c '
.,.g e.. ]...;.f.. ;.. * -t. s A q j
,..f A.
O.
-}
.l.. V.
l
..t.'
!. _/: 7 51
. 1.
.i-1
..l 1
./b 1
v.
1_
2 :*.?
3
/ * 'f.'gg%\\,'
I j
l
/ J$rmf STATE OF.NEW HAMPSHIRE r
5 1
h
[ O C. t M(
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR STATE HOUSE CONCORD. NEW HAMPSHIRE 03301 HUGH J. GALLEN covEnNoM October 15, 1981
'denorable Nun:io Palladino Chair =an Nuclear Regulatory Co=ission 1717 E Street, N.W.
k'ashington, D.C.
20555
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I recently signed legislation that establishes a procedure for the
'~
initiation, for=ulation, and i=ple=entation of a nuclear pir.nning and re-spense program for nuclear generating facilities located tu the State of New Ha:pshire.
2.is statute gives the state Civil Defense Agency respen-sibility for developing radiological emergency response plans for Seabrock Statien Unit 1, located in Seabrook, New Ea=pshire, currently under cc:r ~
struction by Public Service Co=pany of New Ea=pshire.
In accordance with this' legislation, the New Ea pshire Civil Defense Agency issued a request for propesals to develop such plans.* *A reco==e:i-dation for a specific centractor vill be presented, and =ust be approved, by the C:vernor and Executive Council pric: to initial plan:1=g.
As we bcb n the task of designing radiological e:erge cy response plans, i
I would be =est grateful for your response to certa 1: questicas which have crira: regarding aspects of evact.ation and shc1:er ;1cesing. I c= aware of the studies perfc =ed regarding evacuation ti=e esticates, and understand ti=e esti=ates vary and are dependent upon such conditices as ti=e of day, time of year, str.tus of existing local e=ergency preparedness plans, and weather conditions.
Eased upon your best infer =atien, what does the Nuclear Regulatory C =ission or the Federal E=ergency Manage:ent Agency ec: sider as the ti=e eeded to safely evacuate the rssident and transient p:pulatic:s of the te:-
- lle radius ef Seabreak Statics Unit 1 during a so-called "su==er Sunday" s:enario? In addition, can the Nuclear Regulatcry Cc--4ssion or the Federal E ergency Manage =ent Agency, describe exactly what sheltering facilities should be available in a "su:=ar Sunday" accident scenario, given the nu=ber of pe:ple c: the beaches?
~
I have read Director Haro1d Denton's recent decision regarding the re-quest of the Seacost Anti-Pellution League, Docket Nos. 50-443 and' 50-444 (10 C.F.R. 21206). In that decision, the director s ates, "The NRC recognizes l
it will be i=possible to assure that everyone within the plu=e exposure E=er-gency Planning Zone (EPZ) vill actually be notified within 15._inutes.
The require =ent is to create a notification syste= that is capable of reaching i
\\
ft.
'sonorabis Nus:io Palladino
, tober 15, 1981 oc
(
essentially 100" of the population, not a syste: that guarantees actual =oti-
~
fication." Will the Nuclear Regulatory Co =1ssion or the Federal I=ergency P =ge=ent Agency set standards outlining the '"' u= percentage of the pop-ulation that =ust be notified in order to assure acceptance of the notifica-tien syste=?
t
. Finally; Director Denton states in the sa=a opinion, "This does not i= ply
]
that in the case of the = cst serious low probability events that all serious health effects vill be absolutely prevented.
I: deed, for the very lowest likelihood events, se=e serious health effects could be expected at = cst
.i operating reactor sites even with e=ergency preparedness progra=s which fully =eet the regulations." Will the Nuclear Regulatory Co-*ssion or the Federal Energency P.anage: enc Age cy set standards that a plan =ust =eet to
- insure mini =u= health effects in the case of an aciident?
I have censist'ently supported the continued construction of Seabrook Statio: Unit 1.
It is my desire to see Seabrook Station ticit 1 safely builti safely operated, and safely =aintained. I ask for your careful consideration of this inquiry so that my support of the project is consistent with =y con-
~
cern for the health and welfare of the people of New '3=-pshire.
Sincerely.
f
,, !> e m
Eu[h
.d en F.JG:sd 6
..s...
e.
ENCLOSURE 1 *
.. ~ ' *..,,
UNITED STATES
[ ';*;,._.,{ *.i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3., %,em#,,j WASHINGTON D. C. 20$$5
% -YM/pl
~. -
NOV 3 1931 Dacket Nos :
50-443/444 ltD;CRANDU:: FCR:
F. J. Miraglia, Chief, Licensing Branch No. 3, OL FR0ri:
L. Wheeler, Project Manager, Licensing Branch No. 3, DL t
i
SUBJECT:
!DTICE OF ftEETING FOR PRELIMIN5RY DISCUSSION OF INFORMATION
}
FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND SITE TOUR - SEABROOK STATION UNIT 1 AND 2 DATE AND TIME:
Decem.ber 1, 1981 - 9: 00 a.m. to 4: 00 p.m.
December 2, 1981 - 9: 00 a.m. to 11: 30 a.m.
LOCATION:
December 1,1981 (Site Tour)
Seabrook Station Plant Site December 2,1981 (Discussion)
Seabrook Station Conference Roca PURPOSE:
DECEMBER 1: TO OBSERVE ENVIR0triENTAL CONDITIO :S AT SELECTED LOCATIONS DECEMBER 2:
TO DISCUSS PRELIMINARY INFCR'4ATION FOR ENVIR0t?4 ENTAL REVIEW OF THE SEA 3RC0K PLANT PARTICIPANTS:
NRC Staff F. Miraglia, L. Wheeler, R. Codell, G. Gears, C. Hickey, M. Xal tman, J. Lebr, L. O 'Reill y Public Service Company of New Hamoshire B. Beckley, J. DeVincentis, P. Littlefield, R. MacPherson, B. Smith, et al I. /b5
%0 L $e'4%
reject *fanager Licensing Branch No. 3 Division of Licensi.g
Enclosure:
Agenda cc:
See next page Ine meecing of December 2,1981 is open to interested members of the public, petitioners or other parties to attend as observers pursuant to t;RC staff policy on open meetings. Members of the public wishing to attend should contact Mr. L.
4 Wheeler at 301-492-77T by November 23, 1981, so that arrange.ents can be made for their attendance.
c s
o f
J
r e.
E!!CL'r..URE SEABROOK ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SITE VISIT AGENDA December 1, 1981 - 9:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.
A site tour will be made with the applicant and consultants.
General areas to be included in the tour are:
1.
Terrestrial Resources 2.
Aquatic Resources 3.
Consumptive Water Use 4.
Thermal Hydrology 5.
Water Quality 6.
Chemical and Biocide Wastes 7.
Environmental Radiological Assessment Specific areas to be highlighted during the tour are:
1.
The barge dock facility at Seabrook Harbor 2.
The intake pumphouse and traveling screen system 3.
Construction effluent points into the estuary 4.
On-site settling basins, sewage treatment lagoon, landfills, waste disposal
- areas, 5.
Site boundary at the estuary 6.
Education Center 7.
Transmission line alignment All persons to go on the tour are to meet inside the Seabrook Education Center at 9:00 a.m.
The specific route will be determined at that time (based on tide conditions at the estuary and any other relevant considerations). This meeting is expected to take no more than 10 minutes. The decision on when and how long to break for lunch will be made after the tour has started :nd will be based on how well the tour is progressing.
December 2, 1981 - 9:00 a.m. - 11:30 a.m.
Discussions will be held between the NRC staff and the applicant. The outline of the discussions will follow the topics identified during the ER-OL acceptance review that are cited in the questions in to the.NRC letter of accectance dated Septem.ber 30, 1981. Additicnal items r.ay be discussed if the site tour indicates such discussiens are required fcr a ccmplete review.
\\
... g p
~
a f
DISTRIBUTION CEriTiiAL FILE AEB R/F NOV 19 991
- MThadariiA 1
WPasedag RWHouston MEMORANDUM FOR: Addressees on Attached List FRO l1:
R. Wayne Houston, Chief Accident Evaluation Branch Division of Systens Integration
SUBJECT:
TECHNICAL ASSISTA!'CE TO AEB FOR EVALUATION OF IMPACTS OF PLNIT ACCDEtTS - INPUT TO DES (CL) FOR SEASROOK STATION, UNITS 1 MiD 2 The AEB input to Seabrook DES (OL) on 5:: pacts of Plant Accidents is scheduled fer March 1982 Fomat of the AEB input will be the sa.ne as in the previous DES inputs. Your technical assistance is requested in the following areas:
1.
AEB:
O Site's mt-Mata in CRAC forr.at 0
Section on Design Features 0
Section on Design Basis Accidents 2.
Siting Analysis Branch:
- O Projected Population Data for the plant's mid-life year in CRAC femat 0
Section on Site Features 3.
Emrgency Preparedness Licensing Branch O
A clean copy of the. cap of the 10-mile region around the site O
Section on Emrgency Preparedness 4.
Hydrologic and Gcotechnical Engineering Branch:
O Section on Possible Releases to Groun6<ater 5.
Antitrust & Econc=ic Analysis Branch:
O Section on Risk Considerctions
'cther costs" etc.
p'.
f
/./,A,/ /,6 S
Orr'Ct >
cu== r >
DATE)
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usa m m i =.
e scw m om wqyer.o
=.
~...'.
.9)
Addressees on Attached List The scheduled date for sthmittal of the See6 rook DES input is March 1,1982.
Therefore, iter., marked with an asterisk are needed by January 15, 1982, and other items by February'1, 1982.
Please forward all itecs to Mohan Thadani, mail stop P-802.
hpiginal siEned by:
R. Wayne Houston, Chief Accident Evaluation Branch Division of Systems Integration ec: W. Regan F. Pagano L. Wheeler F. iiiraglia R. Tedesco W. F. Pasedag M. Thadant I
l o ne:S #.S.p A..[.
.#.S.I.;A.E j,,,,,0,5,L g Q B su war)
.!.O.....a..c..a..n i..:.ye......W..P..a......d..(..:..
.........f. M,..s.'.tt...
..).va s.1...........).!ala.t.........].wp.8.1 -
em>
ce row sis tim sacu eno OFFICIAL RECORD COPY uwo:ius-x.s eno l
i i
- o Addressee List t
F. Akstulewicz, AEB 4
J. Fairobent AEB L. Soffer, SAB
]
G. Lear, HGEB F. Pagano, EPLB i
A. Toalston, AEA8 1
1 1
4 t
i a
a f
1 j
l
.[
t i
4 9
1 I
3 i
i l
i '
4 1
I i -
Ij' I
e A
9 3
. m.
e t
....7-.
e,._,_.....
.3
,-.5
_.,7
,,. ~..
....J.
_..,.,,,m.,
._..,_..,_,._~e,_
_.