ML20147C004
| ML20147C004 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Allens Creek File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/27/1978 |
| From: | Doherty J, Sohinki S AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED, NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20147B961 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-80-480, FOIA-80-553 NUDOCS 7810110250 | |
| Download: ML20147C004 (9) | |
Text
.
NRC PUILTC DGgs :Rg Oy@
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Y
BEFORE THE ATOM:C SAFET_ _AND LICENSING BOARD /
A h
// $f(bh$
In the Matter of
)
-5
[
HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY Docket No. 50-46
@#a (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating a
Station,-Unit 1)
-)
oe STIPULATION BETWEEN NRC STAFF AND JOHN F. DOHERTY, INDIVIDUALLY, AND ON BEHALF 0F THE ARMADILLO C0ALITION OF TEXAS, HOUSTON CHAPTER lhe Petitioner, John F. Doherty, who has petitioned as an individual and on behalf of the Armadillo Coalition of Texas, Houston Chapter (hereafter Petitioners), and the Staff of the Nuclear Regulatory Cormiission (NRC Staff) have reached the following agreements with respect to the legal standing of the Petitioners to intervene in this proceeding and the contentions they have advanced.
I.
INTEREST (STA'NDING)
The Petitioners have alleged that Mr. Doherty and three other named members of the Coalition live in the vicinity of the site of the proposed plant and that they will be adversely affected by radioactive emissions from the proposed plant.
Mr. John F. Doherty has clarified that, to his knowledge, the three members named in his petition are the only members of the Houston 181$J11SASP
.y
2_
Chapter of the Coalition, other than himself, and that.they have authorized him to represent their interest in this proceeding.
The NRC Staff agrees that allegations are sufficient to demonstrate that both Mr. Doherty and the Coalition have met the interest requirement set forth in the
. Commission's Rules of Practice,10 CFR 62.714.
II.
CONTENTIONS The following contentions are now advanced by the Petitioners and all other contentions previously advanced by the Petitioners are withdrawn.
Unless otherwise noted, the NRC Staff does not object to the admission of the contentions now advanced and believes that they should be admitted by the Board as issues in controversy. 3/
1.
The proposed Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station (ACNGS) will not keep liquid and gas radioactive effluents as low as reasonably achievable as required by the Code of Federal Regulations.
Technology exists which will reduce the amount of such substances which will be released by the plant.
1/ e agreement between the Petitioners and the NRC Staff goes only to the Thadmissibility of the contentions under 10 CFR 62.714(a). The NRC Staff reserves the right to oppose the contentions on the merits at the upcoming hearings.
"~'
w A.
. Changes in the gas effluent stack and liquid radwaste s" stem indicate that although Staff has considered this problem it is unfinished.
Compared to other Boiling Water Reactors (BWR's) liquid and gaseous effluent limits proposed for ACNGS represent a dangerous trend toward tolerance of radioactive effluents when recent genetic, medical and radiological literature pointing to the possibility that radioactive doses above background doses (that is very low doses) is more hazardous to the health of persons such as petitioners than was thought at the time applicable part of the Code of Federal Regulations were written, is
~ noted.
[The NRC Staff opposes the admission of this contention and will discuss the bases for its objection in a separate response.]
2.
Based on new information provided by the Final Environmental Impact Statements (FEIS) of other BWRs, radioactive ' effluents as listed in Tables 5-10 and 5-16 of the Final Supplement to the FEIS of ACNGS will not be as low as reasonably achievable as. required by the Code of Federal Regulations.
a.
Petitioners contend that the Commission has the power to require Applicant to limit the release of effluents to an amount lower than that' proposed.
Petitioner urges the Comnission to take note of the rapidly growing population east of the reactor cite and less than 35 miles from the said cite and impose stricter limits, by:
. (1) requiring the use of additional radwaste equipment and hold-up tanks to reduce emissions, or (2) permitting only pressurized water reactor (PWR) technology.
b.
There are medical findings since 1975 that show the risk of cancer (particularly to infants, children, elderly, asthmatics, and exuma victims) to be greater than was thought when the plant was originally considered by the Commission.
[The NRC Staff opposes the admission of this contention and will discuss:
the bases for its objection in a separate response.]
3.
The design safety limit of thermal energy for each fuel rod is too high for fuel rods which will be in a cluster such as that proposed for ACNGS.
Tests on two Gbneral Electric 9/16 in, outside diameter zircaloy rods, that had been irradiated approxinately one-third (1/3) of the time a fuel rod typically is irradiated indicate that the cladding will rupture at between 147 cal /gm of uranium oxide fuel to 175 cal /gm of
~ uranium oxide fuel if a power excursion (Reactivity Initiated Accident)
~
occurs.
The rupture of the rods means there is danger of:
O town 1<
~
e-
~.
p_-
.m
. a.
Fuel fragments escaping into the coolant from the rods due to the pressure of gases escaping through the rupture, b.
Pressure pulses from fuel in contact with the water after it escapes from the fuel rod.
c.
Serious weakening of the cladding strength of the rods after rupture.
Such rupturing means the rods would not have suf-ficient resistance to withstand normal pressure actions of the circulating coolant or disturbances due to the power excursion (RIA) itself. 'The weakened rods would be bent out of alignment resulting in excess fissioning leading to further excess reactivity at the location where the rods are distorted and cladding rupture with results s'uch as (a) and (b).
d.
Fuel from damaged' rods may prevent function of the control rods by jamming interstices between the control rods and the reactor bottom.
"Because'ACNGS has more compact rods in each fuel bundle and a higher power core density than any operating BWR in the United States, Petitioners request the design safety limit of the fuel rods he lowered, and various parameters in the' reactivity control sys' tem be altered in accordance with this change.
O m +
vat o m a n -e
' 4.
The ACNGS Applicant should be required to maintain flexibility such that design features required by the resolution of the ATWS generic issue can be incorporated in the design without modifications to main components of the nuclear steam supply system during construction (1) to avoid additional costs and (2) to assure full implementation of the generic resolution.
5.
In the event of blowdown, loss of coolant, reactivity initiated or other accident, the location of the Control Rod Drive Mechanism Hydraulic Unit as planned in ACNGS, as well as the Traversing in Core probe makes these two systems vulnerable to suppression pool uplift.
There are no Mark-III containment systems in operation today, and no full scale tests have been done to guard against this possibility.
Petitioners contend plant is endangered in the event such accidents destroy these systems when they are needed.
[The NRC Staff opposes the admission of this contention and will discuss the bases for its objection in a separate response.]
6.
Applicant has committed itself to provide a decoupler to prevent destructive overspeed of the recirculation pump motor.
However, a potential f6r pump impeller overspeed exists.
The Applicant states that impeller missiles will not penetrate the pump case and that ejection of
. ' npeller missiles through the open end of the broken pipe will be i~
prevented by additional pipe supports and restraints.
Petitioners request that an adequate basis be provide.d to assure that these measures will be effective.
7.
The design of obtaining Low Pressure Coolant Injection (LPCI) core spray water from the suppression pool following exhaustion of the condensate
. storage tank during Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA), Reactivity Insertion Accident (RIA), or Transient Without Scram (TWS) is an unnecessarily.
high risk to Petitioners' safety and environment interests because sup-pression pool water is colder than reactor coolant; hence when sprayed in the core it will increase core reactivity causing high temperature and increased possibility or actuality of fuel melt and formation of a critical mass.
[The NRC Staff opposes the admission of this contention and will discuss the bases for its objection in a separate response.]
Respectfully submitted, W f.
Stephen M. Sohinki Counsel for NRC Staff af Osk#,
ohn F. Doherty o
Representing himself and the Armadillo. Coalition of Texas, Houston Chapter September 27, 1978
[_
4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAP, REGULATORY C0" MISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING B0*RD In the Matter of
)
)
HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY
)
Docket No.
50-466 (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1)
.)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " STIPULATION BETWEEN THE NRC STAFF AND WAYNE E. RENTFR0", " STIPULATION BETWEEN NRC STAFF AND TEXAS PIRG", and
" STIPULATION BETWEEN NRC STAFF AND JOHN F. DOHEP,TY, INDIVIDUALLY, AND ON BEHALF 0F THE ARMADILLO C0ALITION OF TEXAS, HOUSTON CHAPTER" 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 Commission's internal mail system, this 29th day of September,1978:
Sheldon J. Wolfe, Esq., Chairman
- Robert Lowenstein, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Lowenstein, Reis, Newman & Axelrad Board Panel 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D. C.
20037 Washington, D. C.
20555 Richard Lowerre, Esq.
Dr. E. Leonard Cheatum-Asst. Attorney General for the Route 3, Box 350A State of Texas Watkinsville, Georgia 30677 P. O. Box 12548 Capitol Station Mr. Glenn 0. Bright
- Austin, Texas 78711 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Hon. Jerry Sliva, Mayor U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission City of Wallis, Texas 77485 Washington, D..C.
20555 Hon. John R. liikeska R. Gordon Gooch, Esq.
County Judge, Austin County Baker & Botts P.
O'. Box 310 1701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Bellville, Texas 77418 Washington, D. C.
20006 Atomic Safety and Licensing J. Gregory Copeland, Esq.
Appeal Board
- Baker & Botts U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission One Shell Plaza Washington, D. C.
20555 Houston, Texas 77002 s_
/
~
. Atomic Safety and Licensing Docketing and' Service Section*
Board Panel
- Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Washington, D. C.
20555 Mr. Wayne Rentfro James Scott, Jr., Esq.
P.O. Box 1335 Texas Public Interest Rosenberg, Texas 77471 Research Group, Inc.
Box 237 UC Mr. John F. Doherty University of Houston Armadillo Coalition of Texas, Houston, Texas 77004 Houston Chapter 4438 1/2 Leeland Avenue Houston, Texas 77023 T. Paul Robbins 600 W. 28th #102 Austin, Texas 78705 t
O Ytepheng. Schinki
~
Counsel for NRC Staff O
w O
........,... _..