ML20148M632

Suppl Testimony of NRC Staff in Response to Intervenor Columbia County Survival Comm'S & a Reuter'S Stipulated Contention 5A Re Aircraft Impact Hazard at Site of Proposed Facil

ML20148M632
Person / Time
Site:	Green County
Issue date:	11/07/1978
From:	Read J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20148M544	List: ML20148M541 ML20148M546 ML20148M551 ML20148M557 ML20148M564 ML20148M577 ML20148M595 ML20148M611 ML20148M622 ML20148M632 ML20148M639 ML20148M649
References
NUDOCS 7811220088
Download: ML20148M632 (11)

Text

.- _ _-

O.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD i

In the Matter of )

POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE Occket No. 50-549

! 0F NEW YORK (Greene County Nuclear Power )

4 Plant) )

i 1

4

SUPPLEMENTAL TESTIMONY ON COLUMUIA COUNTY SURVIVAL COMMITTEE AND ARTHUR L. REUTER STIPULATED. CONTENTION SA CONCERNING AIRCRAFT IMPACT HAZARD AT THE GREENE COUNTY SITE W

' by __

Jacques B. J. Read 4

781122 008f/

1 Jacques B. J. Read I

I Intervenor contends that the site of the proposed Greene County Nuclear 2 Plant is unsuitable for the following reasons:

3 The site is unsuitable by reason of its lying in an air corridor for 4 international air traEel. The Hudson River is a regular corridor for 5

international air traEel. Moreover, the Cementon site is in the flight 6 patternforpracticerunsfromWesto0er(Mass.)AirForceBase. It is obviously exposed to particular hazard. l 7

8 Thestaffrehiewofproposedsitesincludesaninquiryintoaircraft f

9 activityinthesitehicinity. This inquiry consists of verification from 10 FederalAhiationAdministration(FAA)andDepartmentofDefense(000)sourcesof (

(a) airport proximity, (b) military ahiation actihity, (c) Federal Airway and j 11 d 12 holding pattern locations, and (c') other possible aviation uses. The staff 13 in its review of aircraft activity determines whether or not the risk of an l l

14 aircraft crash on safety related structures is sufficiently low so that it need not be considered in the design of the facility. A description of air-15 4 16 craftacti0itywaspresentedintheSERinSection2.2. The following testimony is offered in supplementatio~n of the SER. The revievr as sumarized 77 18 does not indicate a "particular hazard" at the site.

, 19 (a)AirportProximity. (

Reference:

FAA New York Section Aeronautical 20 Chart). There are no airports or airstrips within 5 miles of the site. The 21 air strip mentioned in the SER is now c.losed. Thenearestunpahedairstrip l

22 is the priYate Green Acres field, 2200-foot length, located 13 kms (8 miles) 23 due east of the site near Li0ingston, New York. This airstrip is privately l

Jacques B. J. Read l

1 owned and not open to public aviation. The nearest public airport, and the 2 next nearest air facility of any description, is the Kingston Ulster Airport, 3 located 18 kms (11 miles) south of the site. This airport consists of one 4 lighted and paved runway 3,300 feet long. Neither these, nor other more dis-5 tant air facilities are situated in close enough proximity to constitute an 6

identifiable hazard to the site, applying the criteria in Standard Revf'ew 7 Plan 3.5.1.6. (See SER Sec. 2.2).

8 (b) Military Aviation. A Letter of Agreement exists between the FAA and 9

000 concerning use of U.S. airspace by military aircraft, which provides for 10 the separation of civilian and military traffic by restricting the latter to j) designated volumes of airspace. A search of the provisions of the Letter of Agreement revealed that the nearest military practice activity to the Greene l 12 County site is the entrance point to Training Route 990, which is located 13 95 kms (53 miles) to the northeast of the site. Other types of military 14 aviation training are even further removed, and, in general, the Hudson River 15 l

Valley from Schenectady to New York City is devoid of airspace assigned to g

the 000.

7 18 Attached are copies of correspondence between the NRC staff and Westover 19 Air Force Base confirining ihat their aircraft do not overfly the site, 20 (AttachmentA-1). )

A Memorandum of Understanding exists between 'the 000 and NRC to prevent 21 training missions frem approaching nuclear production and utilization facil- l 22 2,

ities. At the time of application for an Operating License, the NRC staff l l

I

l l

Jacques 8. J. Read i

1 informs the 000 of the location of the site. Within 90 days, this location 2

is added to the list of Avoidance Locations in Chapter 6, 000 Flight Informa- l l

tion Publication, AP/18, and any military training routes in the site vicinity j 3

4 are moved elsewhere.

5 I have concluded that there is no military practice activity in the site j s vicinity at present, and, should a nuclear power plant be built there, there 7' certainly will be none in the future.

8 (c) Federal Airways and Holding Patterns. (

Reference:

FAA New York Section Aeronautical Chart). The nearest Federal Airway, V489, passes 9 kms 9

10 (6 miles)totheeastofthesite,andconsistsofthegeodesicbetweenelec-11 tronic navigation aids located at Albany and J. F. Kennedy Airport. Federal 12 Airway V270 passes 11 kms (7 miles) to the north, on the geodesic between i 13 Binghamton, New York, and Northhampton, Massachusetts. These airways inter-14 sect over Athens, New York, 15 kms (9 miles) from the site, which is also j 15 the terminus of V91, which lies to the east of V489, in the general direction 16 of Danbury, Connecticut, and which passes 13 kms (8 miles) from the site.

1 J

17 As specified by regulations (14 CFR Part 91), Federal Airways range from 18 about 3,000 feet altitude, depending upon local terrain, up to 18,000 feet.

19 The lower flight levels are assigned to Visual Flight Rule (VFR) general 20 aviation (predominantly recreational). Only oxygen-supplied aircraft are 21 allowed above 14,000 feet.

22 Electronic navigation aids are accurate within one-degree bearing (an 23 accuracyofseheralhundredmetersonV489nearthesite). By the criteria l l

l

]

' l l

1 l

Jacques B. J. Read a

I in the Standard Review Plan 3.5.1.6, Federal Airways further than four 2 nautical miles (7.5 kms) away do not constitute an identifiable hazard.

3 An aircraft in distress within V489 would be expected to attempt either 4 Old Rhinebeck or Greene County Airports, which are about 20 kms from the 5 site on routes not leading towards the site, and which are the closest l

. . )

6 airports having services attractive to such aircraft.

7 An area of the country, in order to be considered " exposed to particu- )

8 lar hazard," would have to have experienced past crashes or be under very i

9 heavy traffic. Between 1956 and 1977 there were 23 commercial aircraft 10 crashes within New York State which did not occur at airports. Of these, 11 14 crashed within New York City. The closest crash to the site occurred 12 onDecember4,1965,nearCarmel,NewYork,about80kEssoutheastofthe 13 site.

14 The State of New York ranks twelfth amongst the st'ates in registered 15 aircraft per unit area, and forty-ninth amongst the state in registered 16 aircraf t per inhabitant. General aviation aircraft, therefore, are not ,

i more dense in the Greene County area than in most similar areas of the U.S. l 17 l 18 Above the Federal Airway System, at altitudes in excess of 18,000 feet, jg lies the Jet Route System. 'Above V489, J37 shares the same electric nagiva-l tional aid at J. F. Kennedy Airport. Since J37 approximates the geodesic 20 between Montreal, Canada, and J. F. kennedy Airport, New York City, it 27 22 could be termed a " corridor for international air travel." The Jet Route System, however, is part of the U.S. domestic air traffic control structure, 23 Jacques 8. J. Read 1 and is regulated by the FAA without regard for the nationality of the aircraft 2 being controlled.

3 There are many Jet Routes radiating from New York City. The normal air 4

routesbetweenNewYorkCityandEuropepass00ertheLongIslandSound, 5

about 160 kms (100 miles) southeast of the site. There are, however, cir-6 cumstances when high-altitude air traffic from Europe to New York might 7

approach from the north along J37. This would occur when the circumpolar 8 circulation of the atmosphere descends to lower latitudes during the winter, g During such periods there is an advantage for westbound flights to fly polar 10 routes rather than approximate geodesic trajectories. Polar flights using 11 electronic navigational aids in the Montreal Oicinity would be expected to 12 proceed south on J37.

13 The exact route of each flight depends upon a large variety of weather 14 factorswhichwouldEaryfromday-to-dayduringthewinter,thefractionof 15 seats sold, pilot preference, and air traffic control decisions in the U.S.,

16 Canada, and Greenland.

17 Several sites reviewed in the past ha0e been under or near elements of 18 the Jet Route System. From information compiled during these re0iews, the 19 staff concluded that crashes of aircraft below Jet Routes were sufficiently 20 rare that they need not be considered a credible risk to nuclear power plants underlying route elements. Information to support this conclusion was 21 obtained from National Transportation Safety Board accident records and FAA 22 traffic statistics covering the years since the Department of Transportation l 23 l

t

Jacques B. J. Read I Act of 1966.

2 Brieflysummarized,thestaff'sinhestigationoftraNicandaccidents per 3 in U.S. Jet Routes lead to an accidental crash rate of about 5 x 10 4 plane-mile. Including acts of sabotage and impacts of questionable appli-5 cability to accidents occuring in Jet Routes, a rate of 3 x 10-10 per plane-6 mile can be obtained. Consistent with the staff's treatment of improbable 7 natural events, such as earthquakes, this rate was arbitrarily assumed to be 8 5 x 10-10 per plane-mile in order conservatiYely to encompass statistical 9 fluctuations due to small numbers of observations. When combined with the 10 plant area and assumed crash angle distribution contained in the Standard 11 Review Plan, the above rate requires of the order of a million overflights per year to reach the Standard Rehiew Plan 2.2.3 criterion of 10~I events T2 13 per year to be considered a design basis accident. Since the entire U.S.

air carrier fleet numbers fewer than 2,500 aircraft, it is extremely 14 difficult to project such traffic density oUer one giveri segment of the 15 16 Jet Route System.

17 The Jet Route is ehen less of a ccncern because the U.S. Jet Route 18 System is to be abandoned in the near future, to be replaced by a world-19 wide nahigational satellite system. Many newer jet airliners already are equipped with onboard computers to make efficient use of these new nagiva-20 '

tional aids, some elements of which are already in place. By the mid-21 1980's,highaltitudeairtrafficcontrolwillinUolheindihidualaircraft 22 trajectories which are optimum for that specific airfraft under the weather 23

Jacques B. J. Read I conditions applying to that particular route.

2 (d) Other Possible Aviation Uses. There is no evidence of crop l l

3 dusting, air frame manufacture, nor experimental aviation activity near )

4 the site.

5 On the basis of the information outlined 'above we have concluded 6 that: (1) the site is not rendered unsuitable due to air traffic, 7

(2) the risk to the safe operation of a nuclear power plant at the g proposed site due to aircraft impact is sufficiently remote that it need 9

not be considered explicitly in the design of the plant.

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

1 l

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE ,

.,4 p'4*j(

HEADOUARTER$ 429TH couBAT SUFPCRT C v00P (APRE$) .[*N' , . .

WEST 3VER AIR FCRCE SASE, mat $ACHU5ETT5 01022 y

16 February lo77 Dr. Jacques 3. J. Read Section A -

Accident Analysis Branch 1 Division cf Si e Safety and .

l Environmental Analysis J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l Washington, DC 20555 '

l

Dear Dr. Read:

In answer to your inquiry, there ars,no present or proposed flying activities originating at Westover Air Force Base which would involve flights over or within ten miles of the proposed nuclear power plant site near Cementon, New York. ,,

.s -. ,- .

~...

Sincerely yours, f ,

ARTHUR F. MU PIIY '

Cy to: Mr. William F. Nischan,.

Airspace Manager s . Senior Site Analyst 1

, . u.

~

- 1 4 e

u

- r ,

'~ '- ~~ ' ~ -~

ATTACHMENT A-1

~

. Y.,-.;.y .

a _ ,. ., .:.: r ; . ... ., u, .q. .; o , . ..v.u.:.-.,

..,.....x..- . . . . . . . _ . . .

._.u.w m -- v_: x~ . y. 2.. e ,.n(.m- m.:a ' .,. , . . v ; :. ., : ~. .; ,  ::

..c~~

.~ - : --

.- _ - , . _ . _ _ . , y

~

. ._.____._~ _ . . . _ . _ _ _ . .

I STATEMENT OF PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS JACQUES B. J. READ ACCIDENT ANALYSIS BRANCH l l

DIVISION OF SITE SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS '

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION I am a member of the Accident Analysis Branch of the Office of Nuclear Reacto*

Regulation of the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission. My duties include tha identification and evaluation of hazards to the safe operation of nuclear power plants due to accidents external to those plants, and aspects of other risk evaluations susceptable te <tochastic methods. Risks from such external hazards for which I have perfonned or participated in analyses include munitions rail traffic near Braidwood, Illinois, tanker traffic near Waterford, Mississippi and Salem, New Jersey, and military aviation near Seabrook, Massachusetts, Boardman, Oregon, Douglas Point, Maryland and Palo Verde, Arizona. I am respon-sible for assessing the risks to proposed nuclear power plants from explosives, flamable gases, aircraft, and other missile impacts. I have represented the Nuclear Regulatory Comission in discussions of flammable gas hazards amongst member nations of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development.

I was born in Maywood, New Jersey, in 1935, and received an A.B. from Princeton in 1957 (physical chemistry), an M.S. from Yale in 1958 (statistical mechanics),

and a Ph.D. from Yale in 1962 (chemistry and physics). I was employed at Oak Ridge National Laboratory during the sumers of 1956 and 1957, and held post-doctoral appointments at Columbia University and the Nevis Synchrocyclotron Laboratory between 1961 and early 1964 I taught several courses in chemistry at Fairleigh Dickinson University, part-time during 1962 and 1963 and full-time during 1964 From late 1964 to 1974, I was employed by the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, in the Radiochemistry Division prior to 1971 and in Special Projects Division thereafter. From 1966 to 1974 I held an appointment as Lecturer in the Department of Applied Science, Graduate School of Engineering, University of California. During 1973 and 1974 I was on detached assignment to the U. S.

Atomic Energy Comission headquarters, under a contract between the Comission and the Regents. I resigned from the Laboratory and the Department on November 4, 1974, to assume my present position.

My baccalaureate thesis was a study of high temperature electrochemistry. At Yale I studied optical rotation of polarized light by molecules. My eventual doctoral thesis was a study of the mechanisms of the nuclear reactions of heavy ions, and my post-doctoral studies concerned proton-induced nuclear spallation reactions, and the creation of computer programs to calculate the probabilities of' rare nuclear interactions. While at the University of California's Lawrence Livennore Laboratory I studied deuteron-induced nuclear reactions, and was involved in research in nuclear fission and fusion devices. My duties included supervision of radiochemical analysis and responsibility for the radiochemical diagnostics of certain prototype weapons. I wrote the Monte Carlo code used to reduce the data. from-the Gnome " neutron wheel" experiment, and performed the search for neutron-rith silicon isotopes on the Hutch Event. I was, for several years, a participant in the U. S. - U. K. Joint Working Group in Radiochemistry.

1

. 2 -

I am a member of the American Chemical Society and Sigma Xi. I have served on the Board of Abstractors, in French and English, of the American Chemical Society, and have in the past held memberships in the American Physical Society and the American Association of University Professors, r have authored or co-authored articles in Physical Review and Journal of Inorganic and Nuclear Chemistry, papers presented before the American Nuclear Society, the American )

Chemical Society, and the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry, and numerous technical reports.

1 4 4

_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .- ;