ML20154A211
| ML20154A211 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs  |
| Issue date: | 08/18/1998 |
| From: | Jocelyn Craig NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES) |
| To: | Margulies T AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20154A162 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9810020230 | |
| Download: ML20154A211 (3) | |
Text
. _..
,f-.%
y k
UNITED STATES s
}
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
\\..... /e WASHINGTON, D.C. aoseMoot August 18, 1998 Dr. Timothy S. Margulies 1213 River Bay Road Annapolis, Maryland 21401
Dear Dr. Margulies:
Yourletter to the Chairman conceming radiological risks and cost benefit considerations fo nuclear power reactors, Yucca Mountain, and the Waste isolation Pilot Plant was forwarded to me. As you may know, the NRC is continuing to upgrade its re and is using the kinds ofinformation presented in your papers. gulations to be more risk-inform I have forwarded your information to other appropriate offices.
Thank you for your interest in these matters.
Sincerely, John W. Craig, Director Division of Regulatory Applications Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
.o i
9810020230 980922 PDR ADOCK 05000317 H
=
.y. -
ACTION EDO Principal Correspondence Control FROM:
DUE: 09/09/98 EDO CONTROL: G980511 DOC DT: 08/12/98 S2nator Paul Sarbanes FINAL REPLY:
TO:
Rathbun, OCA FOR SIGNATURE OF :
! DESC:
ROUTING:
ADDRESSING SEVERE ACCIDENT CONSEQUENCES --
Callan CALVERT CLIFFS (Timothy S. Margulies)
Travers Thompson Norry Blaha i
Burns DATE: 08/25/98 Thadani, RES Paperiello,NMSS ASSIGNED TO:
CONTACT:
Martin, AEOD
_NRR Collins
-SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS:
NRR ACTION:
DRPE:Zwolinski NRR RECEIVED: August 26, 1998 NRR ROUTING:
Collins /tiiraglia 1
Boger Sheron Roe zi merman NRR Mailroom ACTION DUE TO NRR DI ECTOR'S OFFICE BY --
k 3 f/
i I
//
l-
\\
l OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL TICKET I
PAPER NUMBER:
CRC-98-0775 LOGGING DATE: Aug 21 98 ACTION OFFICE:
EDO AUTHOR:
SEN. PAUL SARBANES AFFILIATION:
U.S.
SENATE l'
ADDRESSEE:
RATHBUN, OCA LETTER DATE:
Aug 12 98 FILE CODE: ID&R 5 CALVERT CLIFFS
SUBJECT:
CALVERT CLIFFS NUCLEAR PLANT ACTION:
Signature of EDO DISTRIBUTION:
CHAIRMAN, COMRS, SECY/ RAS SPECIAL HANDLING: OCA TO ACK CONSTITUENT:
TIMOTHY MARGULIES l
NOTES:
l DATE DUE:
Sep 7 98 4
SIGNATURE:
DATE SIGNED:
AFFILIATION:
I l
l l
l
?
EDO -- G980511
PAUL 5.SARBANES 309 HART SEN!.TE OFFCE BUILDING MARYt!.NO
=
WJ.SH T
20510 Enited States Etnatt WASHINGTON, DC 20510-2002 August 12, 1998 Mr. Dennis K. Rathbun Director Office of Congrepejonal Affairs U.S. Ndelcar Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear Mr. Rathbun:
.7EC'D M stcy Enclosed is a copy of correspondence I received from Mr.
Timothy Margulies.
The letter raises some serious concerns about the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant in Maryland.
I would certainly 21 M e412j Shpreciate it if you would carefully review this matter and provide me with an appropriate response.
Your attention to this matter is greatly appreciated.
With best regards, Sincerely, Al'
~
Paul Sarbanes United States Senator PSS/lsb l
enclosure M4
/ /
tbE '
1213 River Bay Road Annapolis, Maryland 21401 August 6,1998 Senator Paul S. Sarbanes SH-309 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510-2002
Dear Senator Sarbanes:
I have completed an independent set of radiological risk and cost-benefit calculations for the Calvert Cliffs site considering as low as reasonably achievable policy and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's design back-fit approach for regulatory analysis decision-making. These results which are suminarized in the enclosed paper address severe accident consequences. I offer these to your staff to further support that safety improvements can be justified from both engineering and cost-benefit perceptual viewpoints to help ensure public health and safety. Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.
i Very truly yours,
)
' /
r Timothy S.
argulies, Ph.D I
Enclosure O
A 44f
Sovere Accidcnt Rasources For Calvert Cliffs Nucbar Plants T. Margulies Probabilistic risk calculations with cost estimates were made to evaluate potential cost-beneficial justifications for safety improvements to engineering systems at the Calvert Cliffs site. The approach is consistent with an "as low as reasonably achievable" radiation protection policy endorsed by the International Commission on Radiological Protection '.
The two power generating units reside approximately 35 miles south of Annapolis, Maryland each supplying 845 mega-watts. Unit I began operating in 1975 and Unit ll l
in 1977; hence, their licenses given by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission permitting them to operate expire in the years 2014 and 2016, respectively.
The dominant safety issues addressed concern severe accident scenarios such as a station black-out or containment bypass (Event V), each with approximately a one chance per one-hundred thousand likelihood of occurrence. Station black-out refers to the conditions that the alternating electrical supply onsite and offsite are unavailable for running cooling pumps and safety systems. Event V pertains to an " Achilles heel" of the containment where check valve failures would release coolant and radioactivity directly to the environment outside containment.
The transport calculations sample meteorological conditions, and include wind direction probabilities while simulating radiological exposures to over three million people within fifty miles of the plants and extending to people within 350 miles. Refer to the first bar chart showing the population distributed at various distances surrounding the site. An approach of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to evaluate whether to augment existing designs for light water reactors to reduce population dose (Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50: Appendix 1, FR Vol. 40, No. 87,19439, May 1975) is applied. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's value for a cost-benefit analysis initially set radiation costs as S 1000 per person-rem. Recent proposals have been made to increase this by a factor of two to five. The annual levelized cost results for various interest rates for the units are provided in the attached figures. These calculations corroborate previous analyses which neglect wind direction frequency, supported'by the Chernobyl and Three Mile Island accidents during which the wind direction continually shifted and did not generally persist uni-directionally 2 The costs in the following figures represent potential expenditures to improve the safe operation over the remaining lives of the plants and to prevent the severe consequences from reactor accidents. Improvements such as instrumentation and monitoring to minimize a bypass scenario, and supplemental filtering and scrubbing to the present containments are considered viable based on these analyses. Alternative allocations of resources to emergency preparedness measures such as stockpiling potassium iodide for thyroid protection would not have the additional protection benefits of reducing substantial non-inhalation pathway contributions of severe accident radioactivity releases to offsite whole body doses, as well as, protecting land from
-,,,yp,
,, 3
-r.,
,;g w-
"*w r"
[
contamination.
l
References:
- 1. ICRP, " Cost-Benefit Analysis in the Optimization of Radiation Protection," Annals of the ICRP. No. 37, Vol.10, No. 2/3,1983, Pergamon Press.
- 2. " Cost-Benefit Risk Analyses: Radioactive Waste Systems for Light Water Reactors,"
T. Margulies, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Manuscript,1998.
l J
i l
l l
1 l
I M
_._~
Population Versus Distance Interval i
7
- 2. 10 ife r.
7
',k?.
@i..
1.5 10
- ar
'l.. e 7
f *'
g.,
- 1. 10 7
i e s, t.,
6
.b.
- 5. 10 N
.?!
n u.,
a a
\\
6 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
./
o 4
5 t
,s-
1 i
'p er on av r e 88.6519 80 77.08 72.1238 60.2608 52.3949 I
40 20 1
3%
4%
5%
6%
4
,l
- l 4
i
)
~
i Calvert gliffs I Costs ( $ 10^6 )
$ 2000 per person-rem averted 35 33.0263 30 28.8495 M*E 25 22.4496 3%
4%
5%
6%
.s a
l W - " '
-"v
-w 2
-w m-r w--
m
- rz
-w T
F T
'N "
____;_...7_,-_._.
i Calvert cliffs II costs ( $ 10^6 )
$ 5000 per person-rem averted 110.809 102.389 100 94.8849 80.1788 80 75.3219 69.5984 64.4977 59.9392 60 1
40 i'
g
')s 030
, 432 8
735 20
.J 4
( -
3-3 S*-
j
- i
' 1 t
0
- d 1
5 3%
4%
5%
6%
f s
i i
a
,y
,,vm,
' ' ~ ~ ~ ~~~
Calvert Cliffs II costs ( $ 10^6 )
$ 2 00'per person-rem averted 40.9555
.i 40 37.9539 35.2715 30 27.8394 23.9757 20 10 121 291 0325 41 0
3%
4%
5%
6%
s I
e ll 9
0
"