ML20206U741
| ML20206U741 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 05/18/1999 |
| From: | Dudley R NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Redeker S SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT |
| References | |
| TAC-M98432, NUDOCS 9905250321 | |
| Download: ML20206U741 (6) | |
Text
>
- fN 9
t UNITED STATES f
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20065 0001 l
May 18, 1999 Mr. Steve J. Redeker, Manager Plant Closure & Decommissioning Sacramento Municipal Utility District 14440 Twin Cities Road Herald, CA 95638-9799
SUBJECT:
REVIEW OF REVISED RANCHO SECO EMERGENCY PLAN (TAC NO.
M98432)
On February 17 and 18,1999, members of the NRC staff toured the Rancho Seco facility and met with representatives of the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD). The purpose of the site visit was to become familiar with the Rancho Seco facility, including the onsite Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI), and to discuss issues related to the revised Rancho Seco Emergency Plan (RSEP) submitted to the NRC on April 29,1996. The revised RSEP includes changes to the 10 CFR Part 50 non-exempted emergency planning requirements and also incorporates 10 CFR Part 72 emergency planning requirements for the ISFSI and related activities; i.e., spent fuel removal from the Spent Fuel Building, spent fuel cask transport to the ISFSI, and spent fuel canister storage at the ISFSI.
The Rancho Seco plant was shut down in June 1989 and all the spent fuel is currently stored in the spent fuel poolin the Spent Fuel Building. An exemption was issued in February 1991 which eliminated offsite emergency planning and allowed a reduction in the scope of onsite planning. The onsite plan, which was approved in February 1991, has been revised several times by SMUD under 50.54(q). Construction of the ISFSI pad and horizontal storage modules is completed. The ISFSI is located within the Industrial Area (the area of Rancho Seco enclosed by security fences). Transfer of spent fuel to the ISFSIis expected to begin sometime in late 1999.
During the meeting, we discussed both Part 50 and Part 72 issues that were raised during the NRC review of the revised RSEP. As a result of this meeting and a previous telephone conference, you committed to submit to the NRC a revision of the RSEP along with the corresponding 50.54(q) analysis. You indicated that the revised RSEP is expected to become effective in October or November 1999, prior to transferring spent fuel from the spent fuel pool I
to the ISFSI. The RSEP will remain in effect until the Part 50 license is terminated. After
/
termination of the Part 50 license, an emergency plan covering only the Part 72 activities will be submitted. The commitments made during the meeting are summarized in the enclosure. The EP"iB8n8;88;g,,
6 M @E PDR
" C ).} d 7
\\
S. J. Redecker 2
May 18, 1999 l
l purpose of this letter is to document these commitments and to inform you that the NRC is terminating its review of your April 29,1996, submittal. We will resume our review when we receive your revised emergency plan.
Please contact me at 301-4151116 if you have any comments or questions about this letter.
Sincerely, ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:
Richard Dudley, Senior Project Manager j
Decommissioning Section Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket 50-312
Enclosure:
Commitments Related to 10 CFR Part 50 Emergency Planning issues cc w/ encl: See next page DISTRIBUTION:
]
Docket No. 50-312 PUBLIC j
PDIV-D R/F I
SRichards RHall, NMSS OGC ACRS/ACNW DBSpitzberg, RIV DOCUMENT NAME: A:\\ RSEPLTR.WPD To RECEIVE A COPY OF THis DOCUMENT, INDICATE IN THE box: C" = COPY WITHouT ENCLOSURES "E" = COPY WITH ENCLOSURES "N" OFFICE PDIV/LA E
PDIV-D/PM E
PDIV-D/SC n
NAME CJamerson (ph RDudleyhN MMasnik h[N DATE 5/ 17.
/99 [
5/ tO
/99 5/ l 2 /99 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY l
S. J. Redecker. purpose of this letter is to document these commitments and to inform you that the NRC is terminating its review of your April 29,1996, submittal. We will resume our review when we receive your revised emergency plan.
Please contact me at 301-415-1116 if'you have any comments or questions about this letter.
Sincerely, Richard Dudley, Senior Projec anager Decommissioning Section Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket 50-312
Enclosure:
Commitments Related to 10 CFR Part 50 Emergency Planning issues cc w/ encl: See next page l
l Rbncho Szco Nucicer Gsn: rating Station cc:
Mr. Richard Ferreira Mr. Steve Hsu Assistant General Manager - Energy Radiologic Health Branch Supply & Chief Engineer State Department of Health Services Sacramento Municipal P. O. Box 942732 Utility District Sacramento, CA 94234 6201 S. Street P.O. Box 15830 - Mail Stop 41 Cindy Buchanan, Site Document Sacramento, CA 95813 Control Supervisor Sacramento Municipal Utility District Thomas A. Baxter, Esq.
Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 14440 Twin Cities Road 2300 N. Street, N.W.
Herald, CA 95638-9799 Washington, D.C. 20037 Mr. Jerry Delezenski Quality & Compliance Superintendent Sacramento Municipal Utility District Rancho Seco Nuclear Station 14440 Twin Cities Road Herald, CA 95638-9799 Regional Administrator, Region IV U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 Arlington, TX 76011-8064 Sacramento County Board of Supervisors 700 H. Street, Suite 2450 Sacramento, CA 95814 Ms. Helen Hubbard P. O. Box 63 Sunol, CA 94586 Ms. Dana Appling, General Counsel Sacramento Municipal Utility District 6201 S. Street P. O. Box 15830 Sacramento, CA 95813
a I. Commitments Related to 10 CFR Part 50 Emergency Planning issues During the meeting, the licensee committed to:
Reflect in the revised Rancho Seco Emergency Plan (RSEP) the fact that a Chem / Rad Decommissioning Technician will be on shift when any evolution is being conducted, including fuel or cask handling, that has the potential to involve a change in radiological conditions.
Clarify in the plan how the 2-hour augmentation responders (a total of four people) would fill the positions (a total of six positions) falling under the responsibility of the Emergency Coordinator in the Technical Support Center (TSC).
Include in the plan a map of the facility and its surroundings that is easier to read
+
than the current site map and that clearly shows the location of the ISFSI in relation to the Industrial Area Boundary.
Determine whether reference to the Western Regional Radiological Emergency Mutual Assistance Agreement should be deleted from the plan.
s Include in the 50.54(q) evaluation that will be submitted with the revised emergency plan the evaluation pertaining to the removal of flashing amber lights used to alert workers in high noise areas.
Include in the Emergency Action Level (EAL) scheme an ' emergency director judgement' condition for both the Unusual Event and Alert classifications.
4 Clarify in the EAL scheme the conditions relative to Security Compromise. The difference between the following two conditions is not clear: (1) 'An ongoing severe security event which involves a physical attack on the facility occurs,' and, (2) 'The industrial Area Boundary has been penetrated by hostile forces.'
- 11. Commitments Related to 10 CFR Part 72 Emergency Planning Issues i
During the meeting, the NRC made the point that the staff needs sufficient information in the RSEP to address each of the items listed in 10 CFR 72.32(a). The licensee committed to:
Include in the plan a short narrative describing the area near the site and a site map similar to the Ranch Seco Nuclear Plant Site Map viewed during the meeting.
Include in the plan postulated accidents, and for which accidents actions may be needed to prevent or minimize exposure from radiation and/or radioactive materials to onsite personnel.
Enclosure
. include in the plan a short narrative of the means of detecting each type of a
accident identified in the plan and of notifying the operating staff of any abnormal operating condition or of any other danger to safe operations.
Revise the onsite exposure guidelines mentioned in Section 6.3.2.2.3 of the plan to make them consistent with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Manual of Protective Action Guides (EPA 400-R-92-001).
Include in the plan a brief description of the criteria used for ordering a dismissal of the plant workers and for issuing respiratory equipment.
Describe in the plan the annualindependent review of the emergency preparedness program including such elements as the emergency plan and associated procedures; emergency response training activities; emergency facilities, equipment, and supplies; and records associated with offsite response agencies interface (such as training and letters of agreement).
Indicate in the plan who has the responsibility to develop the exercise accident scenario and that deficiencies found in exercises will be corrected.
Indicate in the submittal of the revised RSEP which offsite agencies have been
+
requested to provide comments on the plan, and provide any comments received to the NRC.
I y
-