ML20204J417
| ML20204J417 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 01/25/1988 |
| From: | Wessman R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Callahan M, Murley NRC OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRS (GPA), Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20204J386 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-88-198 NUDOCS 8810250127 | |
| Download: ML20204J417 (11) | |
Text
- _.
- - = _ _
f l
l
- onneg h,
UNITED STATES
,e<
p NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
V A5HING TON, D. C. 2055$
k '"
January ib.1988
(
.i I
4 NOTE TO:
Dr. Marley NRR M. Callahan. OCA i
t FROM:
R. Wessrnan. Acting Director. PDI-3
{
1
SUBJECT:
BOSTON EDISON STATEMENT TO THE SENATE COMMITTEE i
ON LABOR & HUMAN RESOURCES l
l Attached is a copy of Boston Edison's statement. *ransmitted to Senator
]
kennedy on January 21, 1988.
It provides the utility's view on certain i
l matters raised during the January 7.1988 hearing on the Pilgrim facility, i
i h
j Richard H. Wessman Acting Director I
Project Directorate I 3 Division of Reactor Projects I/I!
1 1
Enclosure:
As Stated cc w/ enclosure:
W. Olmstead W. Russell j
F. Miraglia S. Collins S. Varge R. Bellamy l
B. Boger R. Blough 4
F. Congel D. Matthers B. Clayton D. Mcdonald
)
l 0!$TRIBUT!0N : Docket File. W i '=!
PD% PDI-3 R/F, S. Yarga, D. Mcdonald, i
MRushbrook l
l I
,Cgnurrence:
3 AC DIR/PD! 3 R.Wessman j
01 At /88 I
I i
8810250127 800914 i
4 N
Y
------------------------------------------n --
-*W
4 i
e i
t 80570N SDiSON i..:..o, m 8% 6:, st. - $"ar A:s m.r/ m s:t setsC2'99 l
a I
j Ralph G. Bird
?
se v. ce on act
..e w l
j January 21, 1988 j
I 4
d l
1 i
I The Honorable Edward M.
Kennedy, Chairman Senate Committee on Labor & Human Resources 1
a i
senate Dirksen office Building
]
Washington, D. C.
20510-6300 i
j Re:
Pilgria Nuclear Power Station i
1 l
Dear Senator Kennedy:
I 1
i This letter and its attachments are intenued t.o provide additional Information to the SGnate Committee
'n Labor & Human t
Resources and to clarify the record of the test..sny presented at l
its hearing held on January 7, 1988, concerning the Pilgrin Nuclear 1
Power Station.
j Boston Edison Company appreciates the opportunity to prt. vide 1
thiJ statement for the record.
i f
I f
1 I
i i
R. G.
Bird l
'l
\\
I
{
Attachment i
I I
f k
i
)
i i
1
I l
CONTENit I
l 1
]
Tab No.
Item 01....................... Prepared Testimony 0?...................... 0uestions and Answers I
03....................... Briefing Book Tonies (by Recion !)
04....................... Facility Statistics A BEco Oreanization 05....................... CAL 46-10of4/12/86
^
Letter from Dr, Nucley to BECo of 8/27/A6 regardino Restart Assessment l
I 06....................... Mark I Containment Documents I
-5ECY 87-297-Mark ! Containment Perfornance l
Improvenent Plan l
-EDO Memo of 12/8/87 on BWR Mark I Containments 1
and Pilgrim Proposal i
-Comissioner Be 1 thal meno of 12/17/87 en l
BEco Proposal 4
07............,.......... Staff Evaluation of Safety Enhancenent Procram I
08....................... Emergency Preparedness Exercises at Pilgrim J
)
09....................... Congressional / State Correspondence Kennedy Invitation of 12/18/87
i Response to Kennedy /Studds of 11/20/87 (Sub.i.:
t Formal Hearines's
-l Response to Studds of 11/24/87 (Sub.i.:
Environmental Assessment and Direct Torus Vent)
Draft Response to Governor Dukakis (Subi.: Emergency Preparedness) 1 i
Draft Response to Senator Kerry (Subf.: Fornal 1
Hearings) i i
i
)
]
)
i
\\
i J
J i
1
)
t Boston Edison Company's statement for the Record of the senat6 Committee on Labor & Numan Resources Nearing Neld on January 7, itse i
Boston Edison Company is filing this statement to provide additional information to the Senate Committee on Labor & Human Resources and to clarify portions of the record of instimony presented at the January 7, 1988 hearing.
Boston Edison's firs.t priority is the health and safety of the public and its employees.
Boston Edison is committed to i
providing necessary c.onreras of power for the citizens of Massachusetts at a reasonable cost.
The restart and operation of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station is an important element in Boston Edison's ability to supply safe, reliable and sufficient I
r power.
l Boston Edison will act restart the Pilgrim Station until ite management and Board of Directors are satisfied that the outstand-ing issues have been addressed and the plant and its personnel i
are ready to support safe and reliable operation. Stephen Sweeney, i
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive officer, and Ralph Bird, Senior Vice President-Huclear, have repeatedly stated this l
policy.
l Several specific issue, were raised during the hearing that j
require correction or clarification.
These include the possible l
t health effects in communities near Pilgrim Station, elevated off-l site dosimeter readings, loss of off-sito power to Pilgrim on l
i November 12, 1987, stoppage of construction work on November 9, i
. _ _ ~ _ _ _ _.. _. _.. _
2 l
1987, of f-site Emergency planning for Pilgrim Station, and plans l
for eventual decommissioning of the plant.
Boston Edison strongly endorses Senator Kennedy's request l
that the National Institute of Health conduct a study of possible health ef fects in communities around nuclear power plants through-3 out the United States.
Boston Edison has supported, and is cur-rently supporting, localized studies which have boon undertaken l
by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
I In the interest of expediting a more complete understanding f
of leukemia incidence rates in five towns north of Pilgrim Station, Boston Edison commissioned Epidemiology Rewources Incorporated (ERI) to review the report published by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health on March 16, 1987.
The ERI analysis explains sono of the difficulties in interpreting data from a study of small groups of people exposed to low doses of ionizing radiation.
A copy of the results of this review is attached to this statement (Attachment A).
The teria "downwind" was used to describe the location of the communities which were the subject of the Massachusetts studies (Transcript p.
43).
However, the distribution of wind direction observations at the Pilgrim meteorological towers does not indicate that any direction is predominantly and consistently "downwind".
However, the most commonly observed wind directions are generally out to sea, not toward the local communities.
=___. _ -- _ _ _ _ _.. _
1 i
l 3
i The theory that the seabreeze effect is responsible for i
1 redirecting and concentrating airborne pollutants is not well j
I supported by the evailable evidence.
Investigation of this ef fect by knowledgeable meteorologists has determined that seabreeces j
4 l
rarely contain pollutants in a small radius and most never recircu-late over the same location.
In addition, schWeezes occur only seasonally and relatively infrequently.
]
The issue of elevated Thermoluminescent Dosimeter ("TLD")
)
readings off-site (Transcript pp.
10-14) should be clarified, j
l j
Radiation levels as measured by TLDs are measurably elevated at l
l
]
locations on the Pilgrim Station site during plant operation.
l some individuals have confused on-site and off-site TLD locations I
and measurements which has led to allegations of higher radiation I
i doses to the general public at off-site locations.
Historically, 1
)
within the standard fluctuation of background levels, there has l
}
4 been no detectabic increase in direct radiation levels at any location that is normally occupied by members of the general public beyond the property owned by Boston Edison.
The 1
l Massachusetts Department of Public Health has stated sinilar i
j conclusions.
Even after the incident in June of 1982 where slightly con-
}
taminated resin was discovered on the Pilgrim site, a curvey done just outside of the site fence using sensitive laboratory-type instruments was unable to detect elevated dose rates or evidence
)
of off-site radioactive contamination.
In fact, radiation levels on-site and within the Exclusion Area are much more strongly I
4 affected by the Station's power level and direct radiation from the main turbine than from any release of radioactive material from the station.
Several persons raised the issue of the loss off-site power on tiovember 12, 1987 (Transcript pp.25-28).
A line-to-line fault on off-site transmission lines during a severe winter storm re-sulted in loss of the 345KV line supplying power to pilgrim Station.
This has been fully investigated by a liuclear Regulatory l
Commission ( "liRC" ) Augmented Inspection Team ("AIT").
The AIT concluded that ".
the operational staff responded well to the event and adequately coped with the equipment failure and malfunc-
"ion."
(Docket lio. 50-293, Region I Inspection Report tio. 50-293/87-53, December 14, 1987, page 1.)
The AIT further found that reactor safety was never a factor as pilgrim Station was in an extended outage and there was very low decay heat.
In response l
to this incident, Boston Edison has committed to tako a number of actions designed to leprove the availability and reliability of on-site power prior to restart.
Boston Edison has committed to complete the installation of:
the new third Diesel Generator prior to restart; a backup instrument air compressor and additional instruments to analyze off-normal switchyard operation.
l The issue of Boston Edison having ordered construction work stopped following events on !iovember 9,1987 was raised (Transcript p.
34).
The specific errors were minor and are not safety or health concerns.
Work was suspended to get prompt answers to management questions about errors, or possible errors, which had lL--
_ _ = _ - - _...
i l
{
5 i
l occurred.
Ralph Bird, Senior Vice President-Nuclear, did not i
permit work to proceed until the potential for further errors was i
understood and appropriste corrective actions had been initiated.
j Information on the specific events, the underlying causes, and 1
l the corrective actions has been provided to officials in the l
t office of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Secretary of Public i
Safety, as well as to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
[
t j
With resptet to the status of Emergency Planning issues, a j
topic of discussion throughout the hearing, Boston Edison has i
j supported with funds, resources and pertonnel the efforts of the I
i Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the towns in and around the i
1
]
Pilgrim Emergency Planning Zone
("EPZ")
to revise and enhance I
j their off-site Emergency Preparedness Program.
Substantial pro-
)
gress has been achieved.
This spirit of cooperation has resulted in such significant achievements ast (1) completion of draft revisions of the emergency plans for all five towns in the Pilgrim l
EPZ, the two reception center communities, and the Massachusetts l
Civil Defense Agency Area II; and (1) numerous agreements for renovation of local emergency operations centers funding for I
full-time Civil Defense staf f positions; and provision of training j
compensation from Boston Edison.
The professional planning staff I
provided by Boston Edison is currently assisting the towns in developing specific implementation procedures and training lesson plans.
The planning ef forts underway encompass the actions neces-
}
sary to assure satisf actory resolution of the concerns raised by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
i a
1 i
6 The record needs to be corrected with respect to one par-ticular statement regarding the Pilgrim Emergency Planning ef fort.
In the testimony of Ms. Ann Waitkus-Arnold (haaring transcript potassium iodine will be 1
pp. 18-20), she states that ".
stockpiled (to provide thyroid protection) for those who will be I
in an evacuation, and that such a policy is left behind
. a very inhuman way to treat people, especially elders and
- i 1
)
disabled.
Those are the only people targeted out for this partic-ular type of treatment."
l To the best of our knowledge, it has never been the intention j
of any of the parties involved in the emergency planning process that KI be administered to elderly or disabled persons in lieu of l
evacuation.
On the contrary, the draft emergency plans to which i
Ms. Waitkus-Arnold referre; 4n her testimony include specific
)
j provisions for the prompt evacuation of nursing home and hospital I
residents as well as the rema!.nder of the special needs population.
J j
KI would be administered to elderly or disabled person only in those exceptional cases where medical authorities determine that, due to the condition of the particular individual involved, the j
evacuation itself could be life-threatening.
Finally, questions were raised about the planning for Pilgrim Station decommissioning (Transcript pp.55-56).
In fact, Boston Edison has planned for eventual decommissioning of Pilgrim Station.
]
A 1985 study done for Boston Edison by Nuclear Energy Services, l
Inc. describes three options for the decommissioning of Pilgrim I
j Station which range in cost from $121,694,000 to $140,175.000.
)
1
1 7
Subject to the regulatory approval of the Department of Public Utilities (DPU) and the Ftderal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the $121,694,000 option has been selected.
Currently, Boston' Edison is collecting from its customers about $5 million a year towards decommissioning which is being placed in a separate interest-bearing account with a current balance of approximately
$16 million.
The cost estimates and amount being collected are subject to continuing review by the DPU and the FERC.
ATTACHMENT A to Boston Edison Company's Statement for the Record of the Senate Committee on Labor & Human Resources Nearing Meld on j
January 7, 1988 1
i l
i i
s i
l i
l i
i l
)