ML20237F167
| ML20237F167 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 02/19/1993 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20237F129 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-98-175 NUDOCS 9809020105 | |
| Download: ML20237F167 (26) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _-
d' 8%
L
/
o UNITED STATES AG NUCt. EAR REGUt.ATORY CDMMISSION
[
g t
W A SHINoToN. D. C. 20665 -
l 3
\\.....f 1
L l
$_AJJiY EVALVATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SyEP.QAUG AM[@tjENT NO.147 TO POSSESSION ONLY LICENSE NO. DPR-3
)
1]W;U ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY Y AN K E E NV C L [ AR, P,QW[JL1TAl.lQfL{RQWQ 00CKET NO.50-029 j
1 1.O l.SiRODUCJ19h By letter dated September 16, 1992, Yankee Atomic Electric Company (YAEC or the 1tcensee) proposed to amend the facility Possession Only License No. OPR-3 l
with icchnical Specification (TS) changes at the Yankee Nuclear Power Station (tNPS or the plant) that would permit the licensee to delete:
(1) the Main colant System water chemistry limits and surveillance, (2) the secondary wat.ar themistry monitoring program, and (3) the requirements for oxygen nor t' aring of the Waste Gas Holdup System.
in order to implement the deletion of
- cm (2) above, License Condition 2.C.(5) Secondary Water Chemistry Munitoring Prograe would be removed from the license.
l 2.0 RJ St.yS_5LQN AND_EYELLARQB 1he plant is presently in a shutdown and defueled condition.
All of the j
h Ii,o r eo tar coro components namely; fuel, control rods, shim rods and l
neutron,ource vanes have been removed to the spent fuel storage pool.
By letter dat e.1 f ebruary 27 1992, the licensee infonned the NRC of its decision t o ;-.
.o c o t l y s m e &.., operation at the YNPS.
However, the reactor was
,not A n av Cituber I, 1991.
Reactor defueling was completed on february 14, 1997.
The NR(. by letter dated August 5, 1992, issued an amendment modifying t.. cense No. OPR-3 to a Possession Only License.
The license contains a I
condition that states:
"The licensee is not authori2ed to operate the reactor.
fuel may not be placed in the reactor vessel." The proposed license amer.d ent reflects the " possession only" status of the plant.
The main coolant svstem and steam generators have been placed in dry layup.
The reactor vessel contains water up to the level of the coolant pipes but it is not under any pressure or torperature.
15 3.4.6. MLN.JQ0LAt[},_515][M - CHEMISTRY, provided for corrosion protection of t he reactor, primary piping and primary components such es pumps and valves during operatton.
Now that the reactor is permanently shut down and in layup, tnere is no longer any need for this TS.
Based on these considerations, we conclude that deletion of TS 3.4.6 is appropriate.
l tconse Condtilon 2.C. (5) requires a secondary water chemistry monitoring
- program, lhe purpose of the program was to inhibit steam generator tube 9009020105 980827 PDR FOIA BLOCK 98-175 PDR 980kNI)/ d I pp
2-l degradation during operation. wit.i the reactor permanently thut down and the steam generators in dry layup there is no longer any need for the program.
Based on these considerations, we conclude that deletion of License Condition 2.C.(5) is appropriate.
TS 3.11.2.5, RAD.10hl. lye _LEf. LUSTS - EXpl0SIVE GAS Mf XTURES, provided for protection against explosions in the Wasta Gas Holdup System.
The Waste Gas Holdup System served to hold hydrogen bearing primary system offgas mixtures while the reactor was in operation. Now that the plant has been shut down, this system has been taken out of service and purged of all potentially explosive gasses and vented to the atmosphere, Based on these considerations, I
we conclude that deletion of TS 3.11.2,$ is appropriate.
3.0 1] AT C30ffSVI.IA1108 In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts State official was notifled of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no comments.
4.0
[NVIRONM(NT A',
(ON51DERA1108 ihe amon eent changes requirements with respect to installation or use of facility components located within the restricted area as defined in l
The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no signi f icant inc rease in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that Fay be released offsite, and that there is no
,ignilicant increa<.c in individual or cumulative occupational radiation m posure.
1hc Co.iuton has previously issued a proposed finding that the i
c.. v t e.. n t involvo. no stynt(icant harards consideration, and there has been no publi a vent on suc5 finding (57 FR 47142). Accordingly, the amendment maet s the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 Cf R 51.??(r)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(o) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be, prepared in connection with the issuance of
'~
the amendment.
5.0 CONCL 'SION The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above.
Inat (1) t ern l '. reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public wil' not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such atti.itins will be conducted i-compliance with the Comission's regulat f or.s, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
Morton B. Fairtile Cate:
February 19. 1993
{
l f
Ig-13.% iiid id:
P 0I N
3a ut ihuna
- m. L i m *id3 bol- $$dd loo f/
y
~
o m
meses t
/
Podland General Electric Conmny I'
/
~
(C
/
~
I J
~
i-i TROJAN NUCLEAR POWER PLANT D K rE:
d
.,bD NUMBER OF PAGES:
.)>
(INCLUDING COVER)
TO: _MICIIAEI, MASNIK FROM:.IBROT.D CHIMOFF - I..ICENSING del'ABT5, TENT
! _. hO [#P)_ _ _
TlME SENT:
l MESSAGE: Ecadeliyer to.Maihipp 11190 l
l IF THERE IS ANY DIFFICULTY IN RECEIVING THIS TELECOPY, PLEASE cal.L; KATY TOFTEMARK (503) 556 5598.
l MAY-13-93.ihu 15 33 i ur. ;r.o M 4 r n). 'tu ib0xr A 10b P.02
~
Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee Trojan Emergency Planning May 14,1993 1
Good morning Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. I am Tom Walt, General i
- Manager of Technical Functions for Portland General Electric. I am pleased to have the opportunity to discuss emergency planning activities at Trojan.
Beforo I get too far into my presentation I want to be sure i describe an important torm l
that I will use, that term is "We."
"We" means not only PGE. but the stata and county l
agencies that have important roles in planning for and responding to an emergency at Trojan. These state agencies include the Oregon Department of Energy, the State Health i
Division, the Emergency Management Agency, Department of Agriculture, State Police and several others. County agencies include Columbia County Emergency Management
)
l and other important county agencies. It is this team that has provided the excellent l
emergency response capability for Trojan.
Let me begin by describing the emergency plan that was designed for Trojan as an operating plant, before the plant was shut down and defueled.
The operating plant emergency plan was prepared assuming, (1) the reactor coolant system leaks, (2) the emergency core cooling system does not work which results in major fuel damage, and (3) the containment fails allowing radioactivity to bo released into the atmosphere. These assumptions resulted in detailed emergency planning out to a 10 mile radius from the plant. These plans included, in part, the following:
i 1.
An annual public education brochure to inform the public of the plans and
)
what actions they should take if an accident occurs, 2.
Sirens to notify promptly the public if a sorious accident occurs, Page 1
(
i I
t
MY 13-93 THU 12:3d PGETRod Fn.s h0. I h 66d Ob P.03 o-L 3.
Preplanned radio messages for promptly advising the public of the actions i
they should take, l
4.
Pre-planned evacuation routes incluoing maps and necessary road blocks.
Very dotalled planning is provided out to in miles from the plant.
In addition, planning is provided for the prevention of radiation exposure from foods that may have become contaminated. This planning is called " ingestion" planning. It covers 50 miles in all directions around the plant and includes plans for sampling potentially L
contaminated food supplies, quarantining potentially contaminated food, safely releasing
.non-contaminated food, and preventing cows from ingesting contaminated grass that l-L could result in contaminated milk. The ingestion plans developed for Trojan by_ Oregon, t
Washington and PGE have been recognized nationally.
i l
Trojan ~ now has been permanently shut down and defueled.- At PGE's request, the NRC has revised the' Operating License for Trojan prohibiting plant operation in the future, Thus, the accident on which the operat:ng plant emergency plan was based cannot occur.
!~
l The potential accidents that can occur now with the plant chut down and defueled have beon examined by PGE. In all over 20 different potential accident scenarios have been evaluated including fires in radioactive material areas and releases of radioactivity from plant systems. The results of these evaluations, which have been provided to the Oregon Department of Energy and the State Health Department, show that there are no credible I
accidents that can cause radiation releases requiring evacuation of the public beyond the Lplant site boundary. Some accident scenarios may requiro monitoring of radioactivity around the site boundary to confirm that any radioactive materials released are below levels that could adversely affect the public. This monitoring and resulting response
' actions are comparable in scope to those that would be required at an industrial facility Page 2 hn
MAYl3-s3T11012:34 fGE.'IROMN 4 hu, bMS@S EN i
l-L
. having hazardous materials. In summary, there are no credible accidents that require the detaile'd planning re' quired for an operating plant.
There is one potential accident scenario that PGE is still discussing with the NRC to determine if it needs to be considered for emergency planning purposesi This potential accident presumes tho instantaneous loss of all water from the fuel pool caused by a giant earthquake or other catastrophic event. According to the postulated accident scenario, the fuel thet was removed most recently from the reactor and placed in the pool may become too hot without the cooling water causing fuel damage and the potential release of radioactive rnaterial to the environment. PGE does not believe this accident is credible for Trojan. The fuel pool is constructed of reinforced concrete. The floor is over 8 feet thick, the walls are between 41/2 and 6 feet thick, and the poolis lined with 1/4 inch thick stainless steel, PGE has determined that the fuel pool can withstand an earthquako much larger than even the Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake that is the L
. largest earthquake predicted to occur in the Northwest. In addition, the Trojan fuel pool
. is not completely filled with fuel as was assumed for the NRC postulated accident. The -
- Trojan fuel pool is less than 60 percent filled with fuel. The remaining free space allows -
additional air cooling of the fuel We will resolve with the NRC whether this accident needs to be considered and if necessary, adjust the emergency plan. It is important to note this condition ex!sts only until November 1994 when the heat generation in the fuel has decreased to.a low enough level to allow air cooling even in the NRC postulated l
scenario.
PGE has prepared a new defueled emergency plan for Trojan which reflects the reduced c isk of serious accidents. This plan specifies an on-site response organization. In r
addition;it provides for notification of state and local emergency response agencies,
. updating of state and county agencies as the accident progresses and coordination of public information. We have worked hard to ensure this plan is appropriate for the public health and safety, as well as the safety of on site workers This plan has been submittod for approval to the Oregon Department of Energy and the NRC.
Page 3
MY-13-93 TilU 12:35 PGE IROJM fit: NO.1503b%5405 P.05 4
, Until this new plan is approved, we will keep the fundamental portions of the e in place, both on-site and off-site.
I want to close by again recognizing the fine work of the state and county agencies ensuring an excellent emergency plan is provided for Trojan.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to describe emergency planning at Trojan 7
prepared to answer any questions you may have.
l l
l l
l i
Pago 4
c__
hut-P OJ rMS 13:40
- r. ui l
'y
,e f
k,
+
v Portland General ElectricConpany TROJAN NUCLEAR POWER PLANT l
DATE:
h b
NUMBER OF PAGES; (INCLUDING COVER)
TO:
A11C11AEL AfASNIX 0 01) 504-2260 FROM:
[16 BOLD C11ERNOFF - LICENSING TIME SENT:
[.'
MESSAGE:
Please deliver to Alaihton 11B20 L
~ 'O A'
//DL t fl D_ O 11 O X E d )
[
~
, WOf4 1
1 IF THERE IS ANY DIFFICULTY IN RECEIVING THIS TELECOPY, PLEASE CALL: KATY TOFTEMARK (503) 5566598 OS\\
\\
i 5 12: S W Sainvi S!wt con:fo o,egan 9/204 u_
Huu: d-o NUN 13:40 y, gy
.=
susms sei:2 a
i i
July 28,1993 DIiPARTMENT OF PEMA Region X E N iiR G Y Federal Regional Center 130 228th St. SW
- Bothell, shington 98021-9796 Dear Mr.)(O
/
i His Icteer confirms your discussion with Rose Bennett of my staff regarding the Oregon Department of Energy (ODOB) review of the proposed Trojan emergency plan and security plan.
At a July 20 meeting with Nancy Ervin and Bob Pate of the Nuclear Regulatory Cmumkabn (NRC), we learned that the scenario on which the security plan is based is in a document which requires a "Q" dearance to see. Mary Lou Blazek of my staff has a j "O" dearanea, but she is out on medical leave. I understand you also have a "Q" clearance. I would apprecinto it if you muld:
1.
Review the dassified document on ODOE's behalf.
}
i
}
2.
Recommend to ODOE whether the proposed security plan, as it relates to oEsite emergency preparerinmt, meets the requirements of the scenario.
)
We hope to include your nadings in ODOE's report at the Oregon Energy Factlity Sit Councirs exemtive smainn in Hermiston August 13. Ho Councilis ved to vote on approval of the security plan at this meeting. We realize this is short nodoe. If your schedule dou not permit you to review the document by then, we will present our t
recommendation to the Council contingent on the results of your review.
%ank you for your help I believe the pubile is well served by the teamwork between our agencies,
- ely, 4
1 l
=
fis p*-
g s
pfl a u.
~
+
David A. Stewart-Smith, Admunstrator Facility Regulation Division l
cc: Tbm Walt, PGE Bob Pate NRC Re5 on V f
623 Marhm Aarret N[
Seks OM V7310 (NU) 37N040 PAX (.W) 373-71m6 Tall-4% 1800 221-fKns J
AUG-II-Ud IUt Uso
- r. 01
/. -
Js' 4..#
Portland Gi:N)eral Electric Corryxiny TROJAN NUCLEAR POWER PLANT f
DATE:
J NUMBER OF PAGES:
(INCLUDING COVER)
TO:
MICIIAEL MASNIK (301) 504-2260 FROM:
IIAROLD CHERNOFF - LICENSING TIME SENT:
MESSAGE:
Please de]iver to Mailstoo 11B20 l
)
I i
)
i IF THERE IS ANY DIFFICULTY IN RECEIVING THIS TELECOPY, PLEASE l
CALL: KATY TOFTEMARK (503) 556-7529 12i sw sawn sweet PMand.Orep 97204
l AUG-1(- W IUt la y, v3 f;
samm 2.,ei
! I August 16,1993 DEPAltTM11NT 01:
uni:RGY Tom Walt Trojan Nuclear Plant 71760 Columbia River Highway Rainier, Oregon 07048
Dear Mr. Walt:
l -
According to our records, PGE's Trojan plant closure schedule shows August 19 as the
.l expected date for ODOR Director approval of the new Trojan emergency plan.
I Although we are close to completing our review, we will not be able to meet the date PGB suggested. Here is the status of our review.
We have not yet received PGB's new calculation of the Radwasic Building j
fire offsite dose effects. The calculation will, when received, need to be verified and confirmed by the Oregon Health Division.
I We just received the Permanently Defueled Emergency Action Level Bases Document" we requested and subsequent changes to the emergency j
plan. We have not yet had a chance to review these with affected local i
and state agencies.
}
l During our meeting with NRC representatives July 20, the NRC nade a
)
conunitment to get back to us with answers to three questions of mutual interest. We have not yet received the information.
As soon as all documents have been received we will distribute them to the appropriate parties and schedule a meeting to receive comments. We hope to get this done by the end of next week. If you have any questions please let me know.
Sincerely, l}
Rosemary Matson Bennett l
Nuclear Emergency Coordinator l
om-Facility Regulation Division i
I cc: Mike Masnik, USNRC 625 Muion Sind NU m s o x v7310 (503) 378 4fM0 i
FAX (Sul) 373-7806
- thil.li c 1.RU 221235 n
l l..
SEP-28-93lUE I:45
~
E' sgg) CN@
/
Portland General Electric Company f
! (W p<
TROJAN NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DATE:
)
NUMBER OF PAGES:
!f (INCLUDING COVER)
,10L.m. -,.__ MICHAEL MASNIL (30D 504 2260 FROM:
HAROLD CIIERNOFF - LICENSING i
TIME SENT:
I 4
MESSAGE:
Please deliver to Afailstop 11B20 i
l l
i l
IF THERE IS ANY DIFFICULTY IN RECEIVING THIS TELECOPY, PLEASE CALL: KATY TOFTEMARK (503) 556-7529 3
'21 S W Sa. mon Svet. Stan O'e@n 97204 Q__
_.,m______-------
SEP-?8-91TUE i!n P.02-m 4
[
~ September 1,1993 ENERGY II James E. Cross Vice President and Chief Nuclear Of5cer s
Portland General Electric Co.
/
I 121 SW Salmon St.
Portland, OR 97204 Dent Mr. Cross:
We have reviewed PGE's neu security and emergency response plans. Representatives from the Health Division and Columbia County have been given an opportunity to review ~and provide 'nput as well.
t We have provided written comments and informal review on all of the sections of the new plans. Your staff have been responsive, and have made the changes we required.
Tne plans do not provide detail for all of the steps that must be made to put the plans into effect. Because of the nature of these plans, this is appropriate. PGE has assured this department that we will be informed of the f!nal implementation of the security and
)
I emergency respacse programs. If we have concerns about any of these details, my staff will work with yours to resolve any additional issues.
As provided for in OAR 345-26190 and ORS 469.530, this letter constitutes approval of the Trojan's Permanently Defueled Security cnd E:nergency Response Plans, dated July
'29, 1993 and August 18,1993 respec:ively.
Sincerely,
./.)
(A.)
. Christine A. Ervin Director CAE. dss 5*'a *'"
covemor 625 Manon St vet NE 5,ilem. OR 97310
]
(N3) Jr6-40#1
>AX (s03) 373JS06 Toll F:n 1 rec.221.un-
..J L
ISEtl 28-93 IUT i:46 P.03
(
L p ol1 D
j
{
del'A R T.\\ t E N T 01-Date:
September 1,1993 EWC j
l To:
All parties interested in Trojan Decommissioning Rules i
From:
Adam Bless i
i I
j
Subject:
Corrected package for Trojan Decommissioning Rules Workshop i
Earlier this week, this Department sent a mailing, announcing a workshop to discuss
>d Trojan decommissioning rules. We included a copy of new proposed rules. Apparently,
\\ the copies went out with several pages missing. Therefore, we are enclosing a new co
{
l of the ODOE staff's " Proposed revisions to OAR 345 Division 26".
There should be seven pages.
I apologize for any confusion this may have caused. Please feel free to call Adam Bless at 556-0005 or Dave Stewart-Smith at 378 4169 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
,/f
]
y,.
';-E.-
) Adam Bless Trojan Resident Engineer Nuclear Safety & Energy Facilities Division A.B:ab B ARR AR A RO!3ERTs
'I I
Gos emor Opi l
02 Manon street \\E Salem OR 973h' l
i % 3r,*--hi p FA\\ f.% Tri rstw Toli Free 1 sat::1-sn33 L
__~
TW
- - ~ --
hM a
)
A ODOE Staff Revision OAR 345 Div. 26 s
1 page 1
)A
}
jThe following are ODOE staff's recommended changes to OAR 345 Division 26, to reflect the shutdown of Trojan.
The changes I
L include some wording changes in existing rules, one new definition for the term "bac). ground", and a new rule, OAR 345 l (97o which contains a standard for the Trojan decommissioning plan.
f
}
l only rules which are changed are on this document. If a division 26 rule does not appear in this document, then we suggest no change to it.
Text in italics is to be deleted.
New text appears in bold.
The existing rules are shown in normal text.
_ODOE Staff recommendations for chances to OAR 345 Division 26:
)
d Scope and Construction 345-26-015 (1) These rules apply to all thermal power plants
- constructed, or under construction at the time of adoption of these rules, and operated pursuant to a site certification agreement.
(2) To the extent that any of these rules conflict or are inconsistent with administrative rules lawfully adopted by other Otate agencies, these rules shall be deemed controlling.
(3) To the extent that any of these rules conflict or are inconsistent with a condition contained in a site certification I
cgreement (or amendment thereto), the latter shall be deemed controlling.
fl (4) Site certificate holders shall comply with all lawful
- rules, regulations, and requirements of federal agencies,
$ncluding, but not limited to, all design, quality assurance, ersonnel qualification and training, and technical specification t
environmental and safety) requirements for the plant in question (f the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. [ In the event of a conflict resulting in inability to comply with both state and federal requirements, the requirements of state rules shall take precedence except where this would require the site certificate
(
holder to use any equipment or procedures that would cause it to lose any federal license required for operation of the plant.)
NOTE:* OAR 345-26-005 through 345-26-200 were developed for t hermal power plants as described in ORS 469.300(21).
I urthermore, rules applicable to nuclear-fueled thermal power plants were developed considering the light water reactor as the cnergy supply system. The use of other types of reactors may require additional rules or modifications to existing rules.
Stat. Auth: ORS CH. 183 & 469 Hist.: NTEC 9,
- f. 2-13-75, ef. 3-11-75; EFSC 1-1985, f.
of.
1-7-85 1
g ga put I;qd I'TOb
)
I
- ODOE Staff Revision i OAR 345 Div. 26 I
page 2 Definitions 345-26-020 (1) " Site" means all land upon which is located a thermal l
l but not power plant and major associated facilit4.es including, limited to, transmission line rights-of-way road and rail access, pumping plant, makeup or effluent water pipelines, dewatering flow easement, barge unloading facilities, cooling reservoirs, or discharge structures as defined in the site r
certificate.
(2) "Special nuclear m ta erial" means plutonium, uranium-233, or uranium enriched in the isotope 233 or in the isotope 235.
Stat. Auth: ORS CH.
Hist.: NTEC 9, f.
2-13-75, ef. 3-11-75 s
l (3)
" Background" means the average of off-site, within a ten mile radius of the plant, gamma radiation levels from the environmental monitoring program required by OAR 345-26-60.
The fyears data. average shall be calculated from the previous two full calendar i
Regulations Applicable During Both construction and operation 345-26-025 Rules 345-26-030 through 345-26-115 apply to a I site certificate holder during construction,and operation, and retirement or decommissioning of a thermal power plant.
Stat. Auth: ORS Ch.
Hist.: NTEC 9, f.
2-13-75, ef. 3-11-75 Environmental and Effluent Monitoring i
345-26-060(3) The results of the monitoring programs shall j be used to determine what areas require further study, corrective action, or special reports by the site certificate holder and
'shall describe these actions.
Unless otherwise specified by the Council the monitoring programs will include the following:
(
(g) Radiological Environmental Monitoring for Nuclear Power Plants.
A radiological environmental monitoring program shall be established by the site certificate holder and submitted to the Dregon Department of Energy for concurrence.
(h) Radioactive Effluent Monitoring.for Nuclear Power Plants.
A radiological effluent monitoring program shall be established and submitted to the Oregon Department of Energy for concurrence.[ Provisions shall be included in design for continuous read-out of selected emission monitoring equipment at an off-site location as specified by the Oregon Department of Energy.)
Planning and Funding for Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Plants 345-26-096 (1) The site certificate holder and any co-owners or successors in ownership (Holder) shall develop and follow a plan for the decommissioning of a nuclear power plant.
The plan shall be in accord with rules set by the Nuclear Regulatory r
n._
Q_________
P. 06 1
)
ODOE Staff Revision OAR 345 Div. 26 21 page 3 Commission (NRC).
The Plan shall be filed with the Oregon l
Department of Energy on the schedule required by the NRC.
(Holder shall file a preliminary version of the plan for (2) approval by the Oregon Department of Energy.
It shall be
)f
.\\
submitted within 90 days of the date this rule takes effect. The plan shall be brought up to date every five years by Holder.
Updated plans shall be filed with the Oregon Department of Energy I
for approval by the Council.
(3)) Holder chall assure the Oregon Department of Energy in writing each year that Holder is collecting, accruing, and protecting funds to pay for plant decommissioning.
This report p
j shall state any changes in the amount of money on hand. This report shall also state any change in the way Holder collects, 4
accrues, or protects the money.
Stat. Auth: ORS Ch. 469 Hist.: EFSC 1-1986, f.
& cf. 1-22-86 Schedule Modification i
345-26-100 The Council shall be promptly notified of any changes in major milestones for construction, or operation, or decommissioning schedules.
Stat. Auth: ORS Ch.
Hist.: NTEC 9, f.
2-13-75, ef. 3-11-75 Security Plans for Nuclear Power Plants and Nuclear Materials 345-26-110 (1)
Upon assurance satisfactory to the Council and the site certificate holder that confidentiality can be maintained, a security plan for nuclear power plants and for radioactive and special nuclear materials, along with a program p(
for continual review and improvement of the plan, shall be made available to authorized Council representatives for inspection and approval.
(2) The Council Department shall be advised of modifications I to the plan which are under consideration.
(3) An annual report on the resulta of the review program m(
shall be made available to Council representatives.
(4) The Council may order changes in the Security Program so j
long as such modifications do not cause the site certificate holder to lose any federal license required for operation of the 4
plant. violate regulations of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Stat. Auth: ORS Ch.
1 Hist.: NTEC 9, f.
2-13-75, ef. 3-11-75 Fire Protection 345-26-141 (The operator of a nuclear fueled thermal power plagt shall provide fire protection measures such that for rooms vity both of two redundant safety systems present, a postulated fire will be extinguished by a deluge system, or equivalent, or otherwise provide assurance that an unmitigated fire will not i
y, fj ODOE Staff Revision OAR 345 Div. 26 page 4 prevent safo plant shutdown.
For the Trojan Nuclear Power Plant, this rule will become effective at the and of the second refueling outage and prior to roturn to opcration for fuel cycle 3.
For all other nuclear fueled thermal power plants, this rule vill become effective upon adoption. )
(1)The site certificate holder shall submit a fire protection program for review by the Department.
The plan shall provide assurance that an unmitigated fire will not result in offsite release of radioactive or hazardous material in excess of Environmental Protection Agency guidelines for offsite protective actions.
The plan shall conform to applicable National Fire Protection Association codes.
Exceptions to the code shall be noted and jusitified in the plan.
The plan shall ensure the availability of offsite assistance as appropriate.
The fire protection plan shall be provided to the Department for review i
l prior to implementation.
(2) The Departy.ent shall be notified of changes to the Fire Trotection Plan prior to implementation.
I Stat. Auth: ORS Ch. 469 Hist.: EFSC 3-1980, f.
& ef. 3-4-80 Trojan Power Production Prohibition (the Michael Grainey rule) 345-26-150 [ Power production above the nominal net electric 9apaci ty as defined in the site certificate is prohibited. For L
the Trojan Nuclear Plant the nominal net electric capacity is 1130 plus or minus 50 MWe.}
E lacement of nuclear fuel in the reactor vessel at the Trojan site is prohibited.
i Stat. Auth: ORS Ch.
Hist.: NTEC 9, f.
2-13-75, ef. 3-11-75 I
l
(>
\\
l
?
\\
l t
I j
i
(
ODOE Staff Revision OAlt 345 Div. 26 1
Pahe 5 NEW RULE 345-26-097, Standards for Council Approval of the Decommissioning Plan for a Nuclear Power Plant (1)
The site certificate holder shall submit the plan for I
decommissioning a nuclear power plant to the Oregon f
l Department of Energy for Council approval prior to t
implementation.
(2)
The Council will review the proposed plan to verify that the proposed activities will not adversely affect the health and safety of the public or the environment.
The council will ensure the following when evaluating acceptability of a proposed plan (a)
The plan contains criteria for the free release of materials and the area as specified in the table below:
I TABLE 1 ACCEPTABLE SURFACE CONTAMINATION LEVELS l
NUCLIDE AVERAGE MAXIMUM REMOVABLE Natural Uranium, U-325, U-238, 5000 15000 1000 dpm and associated decay products dpm dpm alpha alpha alpha Transuranic, Ra-226, Ra-228, 100 dpm 300 dpm 20 dpm Th-230, Th-228, Pa-231, Ac-227, I-125, I-129 Natural Thorium, Th-232, Br-90, 1000 3000 200 dpm Ra-223, Ra-224, U-232, I-126, I-dpm dpm 131, _I-133 Beta-gamma emitters other than 5000 15000 1000 dpm I
except Br-90 and others noted dpm dpm beta /
above beta /
beta /
gamma gamma gamma NOTES:
1.
Contamination levels given in the Table are in disintegrations per minute (dpm) per 100 square centimeters.
-- 7g -------- ---
P.09 p
ODOE Staff Revision OAR 345 Div. 26 page 6 j
2.
Where surface contamination by both alpha and beta-gamma emitting nuclides exists, the limit established for alpha and beta-gamra apply independently.
NOTE: This table was excerpted from heg Guide 1.86, Termination of operating Licenses for Nuclear Reactors (b)
After decommissioning, the exposure rate at one meter from all surfaces in the facility buildings and outdoor areas shall be 5 uR or less above the background level defined in OAR 345-26-020(3),
as measured using procedures approved by the department.
I (c)
The plan must contain provisions that require all radioactive waste as defined in OAR 345-50-025, be removed from the site.
(d)
The plan must contain an acceptable program for monitoring and controlling effluents to ensure compliance with applicable federal limits.
This program may be incorporated by reference.
(e)
The plan must contain provisions for a program for radiological monitoring to ensure the environment is not being adversely affected.
This program may be incorporated by reference.
The Annual Radiological Environmental Report required by OAR 345-26-075 will be submitted to the Director, This report shall cover the summaries, Oregon DeparLment of Energy.
interpretations, and analyses of trends of the results of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program.
(f)
The plan must contain provisions for hazardous waste removal that is consistent with other federal and state regulations, (3)
The council will determine if the level of funding as reported under OAR 345-26-096, is available and is adequate to implement the plan.
(4)
Significant revisions to the decommissioning plan must be reviewed and approved by the Council prior to implementation by the site certificate holder.
significant.if it involves one ofA revision shall be deemed the following items:
(a)
The potential to prevent the release of the site for unrestricted use, (b)
A significant increase in decommissioning costs or,
(>20%);
i
~
ESF-26-83 IUt (;oa
~
~
F.10 o.
ODOE Staff Revision OAR 345 Div. 26 page 7 (c)
A significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite.
(d)
A significant increase in radiological or hazardous
/ q material arposure to site workers or to members of the public, including exposure due to transport of radioactive or hazardous material.
i (5)
Revisions to the decommissioning plan shall be evaluated for significance as defined in OAR 345-26-97(4).
Records of all changes and associated evaluations shall be maintained for audit by the Department.
Revisions to the decommissioning plan are not significant changes as defined in (4) above shall be included with the annual report on i
q decommissioning funds required by OAR 345-26-96.
l o
L'-
1 S 'i f < *
's.
. $).
5,'
/.. 4*'
I.
4 4
i
1 L
ga Omgon September 22,1993 Ron Wiscarson DE PA R T M ENT Ol' State Fire Marshall
)
4760 Portland Rd NE, Salem OR.
3" i
6
Dear Ron:
IIere is a copy of PGE's DRAFT Fire Protection Program for the Trojan plant. As you can see, this is revision 15 of the plan. This would be the first major revision NOT approved in advance by the Federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission. In view of this fact, members of the Energy Facilities Siting Council and the public have asked that seek your review. This request, of course is subject to your own availability and resources.
\\
As we discussed on the phone, PGE is keeping most of the fire protection " hardware"in place. The three hour rated fire doors, dampers, sprinklers, hoses, smoke and heat f
detectors, and penetration barriers for cables and pipes will remain in place and will I
continue to be maintained and inspected as they were during operating days. I am confident that these features provide high safety, because they were NRC approved.
PGE will continue to administrative!y control " hot work" such as welding. ODOE pf 1
I inspectors regularly walk through the plant and verify that transient combustibles are a minimum.
'Be major change in this plan is the fire brigade. PGE will change from a " structural"
'l fire brigade (5 trained staff equipped with SCBA and full turnout gear) to an "
brigade (3 people, no SCBA or turnout gear). ODOE is concerned that SCBA will no be provided. Any fire would oe contained by the barriers and dampers. Ilowever, w are doncerned about the ability to rescue any individuals who might be trapped at th 4
scene of a fire. The Rainier Fire Department can be on the scene in 15 minutes.
PGE has hired consultants to help draft their plan. The consultants seem wel that your time is limited, but we would greatly appr much for your help.
I Sincerely, t
l
//
A f,/,'7h,yc, nea..., w.,.
i me,si, Adam Bless
)
cQ%
Trojan Resident Engineer h,[..[
3 v
,, s,
H3 \\ l is toir? Gltt i f \\l Ntltui,(IR C lO (503) T,3 1d 1.1 l A,\\ (5dh T,* L*Nin Mi f,tv i MO 2 hon
-.74y g g 13'5s---
h 01 A
l g
- J
~
\\
{}/,
/
l
-3 j
Portland General Electric Company r
p N
ROJAN NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DATE:
3 /9 /T'f NUMBER OF PAGES:
9 (INCLUDING COVER)
TO:
MICHAEL NfASNIK (301) 504-2260 FROM:
HAROLD CIIERNOIT LICENSING TIME SENT:
I 3 o o H4.T l
I I
MESSAGE:
Please deliver to Afailstoo 11B20 l
l l
l j.
IF THERE IS ANY DIFFICULTY IN RECEIVING THIS TELECOPY, PLEASE CALL: KATY TOFTEMARK (503) 556-7529 i
l 121 S W Sahun Sveet Poniard Oregon 9/204 L
FEB-7-94 M W 13:59 P.02 Idd7-94h
~
0 XL DIO 0.
O "a
i-uu-4 non ce44 erw.c oav we ousy ses=2426rw e.et PRESS RELGASE
- PRCSG RELEASE
- press RELEASE
- PREGO MELEASE ' PR FOR INFORMATION:
DON'T WASTE OREGON COMMITTEE P.O. Box 40720 Portland, Oregon 97240 Gregory Kuroury 224-2047 Lloyd Marbet 6374549
'\\
637-3549 phone & fax or 224-2673 fax Danlet Meek 281 2201 "BACKROOM DEAL" BETWEEN STATE REGULATORS AND PGE REGARDING DECOMMISSIONING OF TROJAN Don 1 Wasto Crugon has discovered a memorandum from Adam Bless, of the Oregon Departmqnt of Energy, to Mike Masnick, of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office of Nuclear Reactor Research, which shews that Portland General Electrio is not only writing 11e Orenen Department of Energy's proposed rufsa for decomraissioning the Trojan Nuclear Plant but fs also directly involvedTn Mating (fie Energy t-acmty Siting Councirs public hearing process. In add; tio along with disposal of decommissioned wasto and/or compo The decommissioning of the Trofen Nuclear Pfant is the final chapter in tho impact of Trojan upon the people and the environrnent of tho Pacific Northwest.
proposed rules shoukt be drafled by the Oregon Departmont Of Energy and subjectedj to rigorous analysis.11 should not be done in a process, such as thls rulemakin i
proceeding, where its cutcomo is so blatantly mardpulated by tho very utility EFSC is k
statutorRy required to regulate. Hearings on these rules should be beyond utility
{
manipulation. Not only is the conduct of this rulemaking an affront to the integrity o the regulatory process, it denies a!! Oregonfuns the checks and balances which were
)
created to protoci their health and safety.
Opuncil and the Oregon Department of Energy. Wo have g has become an attempt to bypaca procedural protec responsibility. Rather than deliberately weighing decisions, the focus is upon the work load, managing public objections and reaching predetermined results. The f Is guarding the chicken coop. This can only open the door to tragedy Siting Counci! can even perecive the damage they have i
process.
i 1
cf the Multnomah County Courthouse to take pubile to om 602 D: W(
Wb fM W l ^} t-l C 3 f
to Mus grt%
{
L
~
FEB-7-94 t10N 14:01 P 03 f,
' TEB-7-94 t10N 11:55 CONTRACT RESOURCES FAX NO. 5034642605 P.03 ENCWSURE $
^*
Dato:
November 30, 1993 DEPARTMENT OI ENERGY To:.
Mike Mannick
~
Prom:
Adam Dless
Subject:
oDOE comments on upcoming public meeting and Schedule for State Decommissioning Rulcu I read the tranceript from the public meeting in Massachusetts.
I agree that it Went badly, and I'm sure we can do better hero.
Unre are some Ahoughts on the subject:
1.
You asked for a " local" official to act as chair.
My
, suggestion would be one of the Columbia County commissioners.
They have a lot a name recognition, and they are on a first name basis with many of the people who live here.
They are accustomed to moetings among peoplo with strong differences of opinion.
2.
We ought to anticipate what some of the cbjections might be, starting with the objections raised in Massachusetts.
These issues como to mind right aways Early component removal is a way of starting a.
decommissioning before the decommissioning plan is approved.
That is the kind of comment that Lloyd Marbet might make.
b.
There has been no EIS on early component removal.
c.
There is concern that the site will not be restored to a "groenfield" status after decommissioning is done, d.
Information was difficult to get from the Public Document Room.
e.
Transportation is always an issue.
Ken Niles of ODOE is expert at handling transportation questions from the public,
- f. Folks who object to activitics at Hanford DAEBARA RoSERTS may object to "more' nuclear waste" being Covemo stored there.
ODOE has a full time staff devoted exclusively to Hanford.
g.
Be prepared to talk about fuel storage, MRS, Yucca Mountain, and IsrsI's, if the 62s Marion stmt M audience raises those topics.
Salern. oR 97.H 0 (503) 378 4040 FAX (503) 373 7806 To!]-Fm 1-800 22160 I
l(
a
FEB-7-94 HON 14:02-P,04
- 9 * 'FEB-7-94 MON 11
- 56 CONTRACT RESOURCES FAX NO, 5034642605 P.04
' Mike Mannick November 30, 1993 Page 2 a
The Public Document Room issue is easy to colve.
copics of the pertinent information in ceveral casy to findWe can put locations.
I suggest the County Commissioners' office in St.
Helens, and the ODOE office in salom.
Someone should pose as a member of the public and try to get information from the PDR in Portland.
1 EFSC could participate in one of two ways.
sit in the audience and ask questions as interested members of EFSC members could the public.
Subcommittee m6Ebing", with EFSC members sitting on a pa suggest vc ask Terry Edvalson or Bob Weil what they prefer.
I Let's arrange a conference call betwoon you, Tom Walt, Stewart-Smith.
and Dave the new year.pating public quantions. Dave is very skilled at =anagi and at antici The call can wait until For your information, 1
decommissioning rules.here is our current working draf t of ODOE You will cec that we are still grappling with aMost of the language by PGE.
definition of " background".
this rulomaking ist The fastest schedule that I see for Notico thoce rules out in the 1/1/94 State Bulletin.
have to submit them for publication by We would 12/15/93.
Schedule workshops for mid January.
I think we would need at
'lcast two workshops.
Workshops are not as formal as hearings.
Try for a hearing dato in mid February.
March.
.That is an optimistic date.
Ask for EFSC approval in comments on our draft would be helpful.I don't know how nuch w Written attend the hearing, or the EFSC meeting. Perhaps someone vould rules is to give EFSC guidance in approving the decommissioning The intent of the ODOE plan.
Any " standard review plans a deccomissioning plans vould be helpful.used by the RRC for review of the NUREG's and the SER'c for Shoreham and Rancho SecoWe already have m Thanks for your help in the past year.
{
on Trojan in December, so have a good holiday coacon.We probably won't do much i
i i
"