ML20210T355

Forwards Recommended Response to Interior Comment on Environ Impact of Postulated Accidents. Staff Does Not Use Reactor Safety Study in Making Determination as to Potential Environ Impact of Accidents

ML20210T355
Person / Time
Site:	Satsop
Issue date:	05/16/1975
From:	Grimes B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Regan W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
CON-WNP-1777 NUDOCS 8605300081
Download: ML20210T355 (2)

Text

.. - -. - - . . . ..- . _ _ . . .-. . . . _ _ _ _ .

., i , -

yd'*} ,.

- ~: ' 4 /

~ . . ., .

, gg 16 $U '-

., 1 -

. . . , =

/

,' w .;<: ' 4

x. .

~

,, . ~ ;.

r . ._

,, , ' c y, .

s

,, q . q, .W. .-.

, -. . s

-- -.~* , :~

. . . , y~ .' . s . , . .

. :. . , ., $ l; . , ~ , _ ,t.s$, 4?'9 . .: ., n 4.,,, u^

• I

_ , ' ' . "'~- *: .

r "t ~

m

- '.s ,. . -

m , . . , , .

s,

, i- 3 E Engen, Gkief, EnvV .

^=4 Psojects Braneh 94, Mr._- '. r, '-i Y,N

. _ , .a .n. .p : r.. . ., c ,, . , y,%u.y., ;. .

r.

. . r q- . w. ,

p

, ;. m

- .. r. . -c, '~, .

";'-( ' ' 'ME80585SOIEEERIORcineerracmuppgs{s5

' ' ' . t. '

& w. m -. - 'e , . .. %.f _ :: ,3 ,

v l ^

~ .,. ,

s

( -

Plant Name 1 I . Licensing Stages- CF-Mmehingtess Publie power Sepply' System Nuclear Projects 3. a 5 * ..

,c,fN- .c .

M F

' Booket Neusbare 50 80e M _~ 7' ' ; $ C 1-

' ' ~ - .s #. : '

• Responalble aranah:1 Ima 1-3/ky-4 . ' N "'-: f*c, ['

Re9sested Completion Dater my 5,1975 - '-

! - Description of Aeopense Response to Interior can=martta l

i Review Statues AAB Input complete .

~ ,

l -

Enclosed is the ree - mamAmA gggggggg gg gg{e Interior Comment on

' , ' h=1 Impact of sostulated MAmate" gg epared by 2. Adensam ed the Aeoident Aamireis amenam.. . . u.

y ;/-=:.q y.y .~; . n p ; , g _-f. .- ,

,= 3 - _  ;. +

' c. ,. , , , , . :.e g , .,. . ., _

- .g .. .

.;- y , - ;. s-+ -

,[ '. -

• ' hriam' K. Grianes, Chief '

, j -

~

- 1-Asehsent Analysis Branch -

l  ;

_/g '

Divialen of Technical Review

.;v- ,

I effies of Nuclear anactor magt:1ation >

! haaelesere: ;c,, -

^ - ~ '..

?

1 O sta W ,

~C -

~, .

aus w/o eaaloente ,.  ;.' '; -- ~ ; '

, , ., . 2,.[ d [ ',? y.

,7  ; A., Glandsmeco

- . y

~

.- % MoDenald JL .x!L c . .@ ..; .; b Wn .' (

. . ' 'i, .

.: ~-  :.y. Benennolla 2.A '

Q ; :.; 5::

0 ~

c -? s.n  ; ; ;- _ ; i.. .

.- - s s .. n . . -

w/eaeSaenne ,:~

w, 3 .-

p' ~p,. , . .. ' a)., > v' ->~;.s .

.. ? . - . -- a.-

\

. , - S. haa=== . '

. ; - a; R. DeSieung -

,' F+ h 9.,[hO.Paar -

v '-' ' ,~ O ' P.'O'Reilly , '

' ~

' T R T M ' s_ D istribution:

1 TR A/D's - g,morrie

@ tral F Q

, SS BA's ~~

P.- Rantor '-

R. Boyd

, Nmymaumg File E. RAmmam .

AAB/ Reading File 8605300081 750516 .

PDR ADOCK 05000508 .

A PDR - _

OPPIC s > - B .% M -

g . TOMT/ -

~

iu===== ,. E.AdenN':iir . _ . . . . _ . .rNes 4"T h8 T -

, I' 'i v

• es m m s_g_2s

-- t -- DATE M. J..

-s g.->s .

' . 1

_ j

. Form AEC.318 (Rev. 9 53) AECM 0240 W v. s. sovsanwawf PenwTime orrican ts7a.eae.tse -

in -

.. . .. . -c . _ A. . - c__  : x .;_ .; . : -_. .. . . f

,. .L . - _.. ._ .. ,~,.

r.

e O'

,)

! ' O.

RESPONSE TO INTERIOR COmiENT O'N WPPSS 3 & 5 .

A comment was made that the consequences of a postulated Class 9 accident should be evaluated for the WPPSS Nuclear Projects 3 and 5 site. The current staff position on Class 9 accidents is stated in Section 7.1 of this environmental state.nent. The applicability of the draft Reactor Safety Study to any specific site is also discussed in Section 7.1. The Commission's interim general statement of policy on the draft Reactor Safety Study states, in part, that "... the contents of the draft study are not an appropriate basis for licensing decisions.";

therefore, the staff does not use the draft Reactor Safety Study in 1naking a detemination as 'to the potential environmental impact of postulated accidents at any site.

e l

t I

r l- .

l E ..

.a .

/

, . . /

. . t 1 - .

x

. :~ . . .? 5

. - .c n.

- . v. - .

. t L NIAY I 51975

.7 b

.;.:, n y .. %.

. y y - . y ,

, ,a,,, ..m.. . . .

s. .. ,. .,, . . . .. . ,.

.:. .r.:s. . . . _ . ~..n .e.

. :s

.e s .-

.. . nw  :-'..

m

.. . .e_v . . y :.a ,x. o. ,..

,  !  :..~.. e ,y ,a..

.:e , . .,

, . .:q;u . o. . . vw.&s;.u.. m :,v,;;+y,m;en ,:.:.n,,;w.;m. u.-e

. >  ;.n.u-cv. -~- w.: k . .

4. . . ;-

.+,,a

~

w

.. ' ygy, Aj ee.-a-.===f Direeter"V;.cz.y..,;W.Q Nir6 .; uM7.4.T~ : !',D. .M ,M, ., .F2 ' D E ' D,

.@~ aivastas~ef masator L14 M M 4 D f @' ' 'SM(',..1 C "' .. E'" . N ' f$

i

- J-Offle.e of Nw1 mar Resetor. Regulation

. . . . m, s

, s . J'^

A f # V

. < ; ;w .

,.,a.,au.. a.

~ . , ,

.; -II SERA 6&RY SEE STATEMENT - - . .

r,-

9i

- J~ 2 y ; naamTm0 TEM PUBLIC POWER SUFFLY SYSTEN (WNP-3&-5) , -

-3 u,~'. , _ .

2, ~i; BOCERE. , 505.56-508 & 50-509 . , -

1;M.-.. 5

~

? O. ,

s ** [ A Eselmeed is a statement prepared by the Office of Inspection and Enforcement for use in the Safety Evaluation Report regarding our , l-

' . assesemmat and eseclusions relati'ag to implementation of the QA Frogram for,this,yre.jeet.

~

(

m. m,....,.

-a m,.s ,3,w.,.r.pn r q w .y, . . ;,

2

, .;s: , . . ... ,

,.. ., , _ 1.,

o., a:. ..,, qm:y ; f, j ;, -

,Qng,real 886ned m, .y z- . - .- <.-- g

-J. G. Davis M - ' r. . m

%* ecm - > ..r, ;, g.g

.'v ^',M . . , '{J(i.;. *-  ;,,.....;.a.

.n.y.. .;,. r4. . ,gm.g,p.  ;. - s' . '.e.. ,

u> . . -

.g s-. .- x ' John C. Devis

..' t.'?.1

- v '

s

. vi ,

~

Deputy Director for

.- Field' Operations

" ^

. Office of Inspection W.. . f .r. g ,-f , ' . , , ,

and Enforcement .

a.n, .

,E

.,. ' hau.

es: 1. E. Bigelkan, IE:V

~' ' ,

D. J. Sovbolt. EL <

R. R. Yellmer, IL t

1. L. DeYoues, IL g 6. . ,

• s

, . , ' 5 0. 3. Parr, IL ' .

b:. y .,

. 'y ; a :pu ' .m..w....,n,, .a.Q.h.% f N

, , s . ,; .L.;. . , . ;; .;. ,,. . , .

.g

• b y, m. C . ,y.7 .

. .,e .,_. 1.:n. + x, ,, , 3. ,- n

. .c.u, .,wv. - mc%. ,- ,-....a

.. g . , w.-

A .c. .

. ;~

..,2

' L- ?,1g. .v.. , , ./ ,f j ; .v.;%;a$;n s .,. ' 1-

, ( ' . .a 'f.%, . .;w. .T.p  %. 9 4. ) .,: .o. .~. .yV.1,4,u.;

.-%. 4 $. v< . -?. f. " ,*

-.<s. . -

3 .

.__.,.3 .3

.,- J.,

,t- 5 m..

, . a. q, a .

7s.,. , yr. .r y. ' . 3;.;

.,~,.

-,eV :

- . . , -- a

n 3 y '...q J.~ ,s. . . . . -

.e # , >

., < .~,. ;  ;.g.; f.;.,. . .x.,

, , e. .w - cs.q,  ; ..r s p,a .

7 c. yv4

'; .p -  ;, x..  ;- -

c .,

~

/

/

0:l R bo.3d. MsMW -

orrice y ' -PSEB F C DDF0'

~

urg_

~

.v... .. w 1h . JGD s _,,,_

g

. . , , , . _ , ,5/g/75 f/f,/75 5 5/[/75 -

.' ) >

[ Form ABC 318 (Rev. 9 53) ABCM 0240 .. <. . . . W u. s. eovsn.asswr parwriwe opricas ser..eae.see .

L. ,

.J Jn. = et" w

.:,.~. , . .,

.e .,e * ,: . e.4. 'L a.. a.'.'.hte,.w ::; .e. -. , .'u..eA.haamti.

m.

'.s .-

'. , a.

h . ,8 4

. &. ..s . -r 1 .w

. .^ .. . ..

.b. .-.ena La m. .re, .s.

~ ^~~

s

}-

~

. IE

SUMMARY

SER POSITION STATEMENT -

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WNP UNITS 3 & 5 QA PROGRAM DOCKET NOS. 50-508 & 50-509 ASSESSMENT The Office of Inspection and Enforcement has conducted inspections to i examine the implementation of the WNP Units 3 and 5 QA Program to as-certain its conformance with related 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, PSAR connit-ments. Our examinations encompassed the organization of the applicant and the QA audit, review and approval functions of the applicant for those major contractors selected to date. These examinations focused on

quality assurance activities related to the design, procurement and construction of the nuclear power plants, and included a review of established procedures and instructions along with the execution of applicable provisions contained therein.

i Our assessment includes consideration of the results of the above in-spection activities and of the applicant / contractor actions leading to the resolution of identified deficiencies, or delays in timely establishment of procedures and instructions, as necessary, to arrive at effective implementation of PSAR QA cannitments. Based thereon, the Office of Inspection and Enforcement has determined that there are no substantive unresolved issues relating to the implementation .of the QA program which require further identification and followup at this time.

CONCLUSIONS Based on the above assessment, the Office of Inspection and Enforcement concludes that the implementation of WNP Units 3 and 5 QA program PSAR commitments is consistent with the status of the project.

h e- -a --a e ,,, e , .w , 9 . , . . . . , ,_ . , , ,

- - - - - - - - , m _,---.v --

y

=~ <. .s.-- --

_s -- ,.

_. 7 . . . . .

, 1

.'s

. t. _f

. %.3 *- ,

- =>g

.c y

~

r . .o '

v~

• DOC &,eC:\,e

. 4 - w._ .

l

. Docket Hos. 50-p 19 N '

/509 .

, s

-: .w  ;

. . . ,.. - . ./ ~ r 3. . .c _

4 ,

g; -'.....s.,...

-  ;> 7 ,

v. - _; . ,

.w - -. .

2

-\

u .1 R. C. DeYoung, Assistant Director. for LE-1,-RL. . # e s# ..

'; % %. '.%:c. .s c.- ' c y W ..:.v:.n G 6 : .; a . . .  ; . %_ ~ M, ' :L' - .

.5 l%

t P J.WRESPONSE.TO STAEARD REVIEW ASSIGMENT 'WPPSS WCLEAR PROJECT b ;: ,[

7"'f,.x.. -'.N05. 3 & 5. REVIEW

+, w:, . .

0F PSAR o y CHAPTERS

, m. 13.3

..w& 13.7 . :~

~  ; _ " P. V 'u-J .

,2 i, . f Applicant: Washington Public Power Supply System .

~ ~ n' fLicensing Stage: CP w.

- ..i S

c. ,. Branch & LPM: LWR l-3, P. D.~0'Reilly ~ .f".:c a- . ;

i w; e . . '

i ^.7 W

.q.,,

Review Branch: IS&EP - ~

! Requested Completion Date: ~6/16/75 J'

i Review Status: Draft SER Input  :

i 6

The attached report contains draft input for the Safety i Evaluation Report relative to our review of the subject  !

,:..t a SAR.

. . ~n

...wr,n w c:w:s x:. n. '

.)+ . .. . +x . n ,. . ...

~

. , :o : -

w, ,On.

m.1 u; . %>,mm: .e  ; - 8Wal..SPu:a b7 v.

w -. &.g V .m .

t.

' ~

. -# . T iW;,+,/ Donald J. Skovholt :  ;/ r u; '

~

- " * . Donald J. Skovholt Assistant Director for Quality j -

i l '

=

. Assurance and Operations l  !

' Division of Reactor Licensing i ,

Enclosure:

Draft Input for SER

~

'. ~ -

. 'm

!. cc: A. Giambusso ',. 77  ; N .

j .!

3 v.

v. . Mcdonald , , . v,.t.D: %.. J.W.r ; c..E.. .c* ~% w s.e.t 2 'S d

, g . .' -

.r c '  : w R.-Houston ' . .

ir -

g '.1. ' .e . .-

l '

• . *. ' . O. Parr 3 b' W /f Y...;.;c c.t'e*a . r .'ng; tJMRf *? T " '

A

. . c.~ P. D. O'Reilly j.fi Q A N s. M @ 1f ~O ':{ '.p.. ECY .. . , b /

. Myf

- R e' F. Priebe. . Q%@ hyy K. n, - *b. w. -

.i + y

~ .. .

~ ~.- .

-' L. J '

e ' .' DISTRIBUTION: Docke't(2) IS&EP. Rdg.l File, DJSkovholt -!!

4

. . .. . . ,y .

.7 7 .

~

I 3 -

]- A#MA '$

( f.orrie

' h. I RL:AjfA&O s ~

s

• RL:IS&EP[f RL:.IS&Eld( gs .

.u n . . > RFPriebe:LD RWFlousTon' DJSk% holt . ~#

f

. _ navs k 5/16/75 5/(/75 5/)]/75 .

g

( w< hamn >--.s~ABC.3.13

,c w (Rep. s:.n 9-33) ABCM 0240m . e; wis'::. %.u u #u. .

e.aovsanusur rasamme w , :., +.-

oarscs no?e.see.see m

. . , .e.,.m< .~

u. .wum u.. ,. ngM % A6.'s a. ..a.. su .C:

( , a. .I

! g:~

'] '

! Draft Input for Safety Evaluation Report i

j WPPSS Nuclear Project Nos. 3 & 5 1 .

} 13.3 The applicant has described his preliminary plans for coping with j emergencies. The onsite Shift Supervisor will have the authority to t

) initiate the Emergency Plan in accordance with detailed written procedures. Offsite emergency operations and support efforts will be under the control of an Emergency Coordinator. The applicant has indicated that backup or redundant comunication systems will be provided to ensure prompt and effective communications during emergencies.

For assistance in dealing with emergencies, the applicant will establish j agreements with the appropriate local, State and Federal agencies. A preliminary list of agencies furnished by the applicant is shown in l Table 12-1. The applicant has made initial contact with the Department i

l of Social' and Health Services which is preparing the overall radiological response plan for the State of Washington, and with the Department of Emergency Services which will assist the local county officials in the

,' development of an emergency response plan for the environs of the plant.

In-plant instrumentation will provide identification and assessment information for radiological emergencies. Such information together with precalculated data will be used for projecting onsite and'offsite dose consequences. Protective measures such as respiratory protection, taking cover, and evacuation will be taken as dictated by the accident consequences. Analyses have been performed by the staff

-+-

i , ,

C } -

j -

.I to confirm the practicability of evacuation as an emergency protective measure in the environs of the proposed plant and appropriate criteria

, have been identified for the design of an acceptable plan. Onsite j direction of the emergency effort will be assured from the control' i

room which is designed for continuous occupancy during the course of i

i an accident. In addition, emergency control centers will be established

{ both onsite and offsite. The applicant has described the means of notification and expected response by the local authorities in the event of an accident requiring evacuation of the population-at-risk from the environs of the plant.

I The plant emergency facilities will include decontamination and first aid facilities for the treatment of injured personnel. Ambulance j service will be provided for the transportation of seriously injured personnel to offsite medical facilities. The applicant has made preliminary contacts with the Grays Harbor Community Hospital, the St. Joseph Hospital, and the Mark E. Reed Memorial Hospital for

providing hospital facilities and services to individuals affected by radiological emergencies.

The applicant will conduct a training program to familiarize all plant personnel with the Emergency Plan. Training will also be provided to nonemployee personnel whose services may be required in emergency situations. In addition, periodic drills will be conducted.

pn . ..~. -- . . . - . . ~ . . . - ~ . . . . - - - - - - - . - - . . - -

L

- mW'.

4

)

i . 4 The various plant features to assure evacuation capability, in addition to design features to permit safe shutdown, include radiation emergency

. alarms,-site evacuation alarms, diverse communications systems, and

, adequate evacuation routes. T'he applicant's capability for facility 9

reentry will be supported by the establishment of two emergency control centers equipped with emergency supplies, radiation monitoring instruments, and communications equipment.

We conclude that the emergency. planning program as presented by the

, applicant meets the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Part II, and is consistent with facility design features, analyses of postulated j accidents, and characteristics of the proposed site location. Further-more, it provides ' reasonable assurance that appropriate protective i

measures can be taken within and beyond the site boundary in the event of a serious accident.

i 13.7 Industrial Security The applicant has provided a general description of plans for protecting the plant against potential acts of industrial sabotage. Provisions for the screening of employees at the plant, and for design phase review of plant layout and protection of vital equipment have been described and L

l conform to Regulatory Guide 1.17. We conclude that the applicant's l

arrangements for protection of the plant against acts of industrial sabotage are satisfactory for this stage of the licensing process.

l l

j , . . , /

l '

.~

l ..

~ "

1 -

Table 13-1 1

^

d PRELIMINARY LIST OF AGENCIES WHICH MAY BE -

NOTIFIED OR UTILIZED FOR PREPARATION AND COORDINATION OF WNP-3 & WNP-5 EMERGENCY PLAN d Thermal Power Plant Site Evaluation Council Washington State Department of Social and Health Services j Washington State Patrol -

Washington State Department of Ecology Washington State Fire Marshall

'j USNRC - Region V Compliance Office County Sheriffs, Southwestern Washington

~

Nearby County Emergency Services Units County Sheriffs, Northwestern Oregon Nearby City Health Departments and Hospitals i Nearby City Ambulance Services I

Local and Regional Irrigation District 0ffices

! Local Communications Media l

Supply System Participants l U. S. Department of Agriculture, Defense Mobilization Planning i

U. S. Forest Service U. S. Department of Commerce, National Weather Service

U. S. Office of Emer5ency Preparedness U. S. Environmental Protection Agency

U. S. Department of Interi.or, Bureau of Reclamation .

1 U. S. Department of Interior, Bonneville Power Administration U. S. Coast Guard

. U. S. Defense Supply' Agency I

I e

l l

w- . -*w. ===.g., h we me. .

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