ML20237H189
| ML20237H189 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 08/10/1987 |
| From: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Riegle D SENATE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20237H191 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8708170097 | |
| Download: ML20237H189 (8) | |
Text
-_ _ _ _ - _ - - _ _
THE 8
f pa arc
- E('
'g o
UNITED STATES a
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
o h
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\ *...+ #
AUS 10 N -
The Honorable Donald W. Riegle, Jr.
United States Senate Washington, D,C.
20510
Dear Senator Riegie:
I i
l This letter is in response to the concerns raised by one of your constituents, Ms. Helen Stainbrook of Charlevoix, Michigan, regarding the Big Rock Point nuclear plant.
Specifically, Ms. Stainbrook asked, "Is it true that:
1.
Big Rock nuclear plant has taken only a ' philosophical position' to reactor shielding?
l 2.
Big Rock has a high core damage probability?
3.
The facility is only allowed to operate because we are a ' low population area?'
Does this mean that the lives of my children and myself are worth less than the lives of people in Detroit or Chicago?"
These cuncerns appear to be based on statements contained in a March 1981 Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) study for Big Rock Point performed by Consumers Power Company (CPC).
In this study, CPC estimated core damage l
probabilities for Big Rock Point, evaluated potential risks to the surrounding population, and developed positions on possible plant modifications.
In nuclear safety analysis, PRA techniques involve estimating failure probabil-ities for individual plant components or personnel actions and then calculating j
a combined probability associated with a specific postulated accident sequence.
Although there are uncertainties in the estimates of individual probabilities, PRA can be useful in determining relative risks posed by failures of plant systems or components.
This information is then used to identify those plant modifications that will result in the greatest improvement to overall plant safety and those modifications that are of little benefit.
The PRA study for Big Rock Point was used in that manner and has been reviewed and approved by the NRC staff.
The phrase " philosophical position" on reactor shielding was used in the Big Rock Point PRA study to describe the criteria used by CPC to evaluate the need i
for and benefits of potential improvements to plant radiation shielding.
I Contrary to the implication that Big Rock Point has inadequate reactor shielding, detailed analyses were performed which indicated that potential l
shielding modifications would not result in significant benefit to plant safety.
l CPC determined that the shielding currently provided by the steel containment
(
and other structures at Big Rock Point is sufficient to protect plant personnel responding to a worst case accident.
The NRC staff reconfirmed the adequacy of the current shielding systems.
It should be noted that this issue of plant shielding relates to protection of plant workers.
Additional shielding around L
the containment structure would not improve the degree of protection provided to the public.
8709170097 870010 PDR ADOCK 05000155 P
.___ _ _____ a
Senator Riegle Although the estimated probability for core damage at Big Rock Point is low, the PRA study did identify it as a relatively high core damage probability, at that time, in comparison to the estimated probabilities for other nuclear plants.
j As a result of the study, areas where plant safety could be improved were identified and several modifications at Big Rock Point have been completed or j
are underway.
The NRC staff has endorsed these plant improvements, which will reduce the core damage probability for Big Rock Point to a level comparable to the industry average.
Big Rock Point has never been allowed to operate by the NRC solely on the basis of the low population density of the area surrounding the plant.
Because t
its electrical generating capacity is roughly one tenth of the electrical output of recently built nuclear plants, the off-site radiological iupact of an accident at Big Rock Point would be correspondingly small.
However, Big Rock Point is subject to the same NRC regulations as all other nuclear plants, including those limiting routine and accidental releases of radioactivity.
In suinmary, the NRC staff considers Big Rock Point's operating performance to be l
good, and recent plant modifications have improved safety. The NRC and the nuclear industry will continue to use state-of-the-art techniques such as PRAs to identify potential plant improvements.
While the technical jargon and terminology often appear threatening, I can assure you that the health and safety of the public are not endangered by the operation of Big Rock Point.
I hope that this information is responsive to your constituent's concerns.
Sincerely, i
(signM) T. A. nehm Victor Stello, Jr.
Executive Director for Operations DISTRIBUTION Docket File D. Crutchfield NRC PDR G. Holaban Local PDR OGC-Beth ED0 No. 003027 SECY (#87-0850) (3)
EDO Reading V. Stello T. Murley/J. Sniezek D. Mossburg (EDO #003027) w/cy incoming R. Starostecki P. Shea F. Miralgia J.R. Hall J. Funches R. Ingram J. Blaha GPA/CA (3) l PD31 Green Ticket File
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE LA/PD31:DRSP*
PM/PD31:DRSP*
D/PD31:DRSP*
Tech Ed*
AD:DRSP*
j RIngram JRHall:1t MVirgilio AThomas GHolahan 7/31/87 7/31/87 7/31/87 8/3/87 8/3/87 D:DRSP*
ADP*
DD:0NRR*
D: 0NRP,*
GPA/CA EDO DCrutchfield FMiralgia JSniezek TMurley t
VSTELLO b
P /* /87 8/3/87 8/4/87 8/6/87 8/6/87
,j 87 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY t
l l
Senator Riegle !
Although the estimated probability for core damage at Big Rock Point is low, the PRA study did identify it as a relatively high core damage probability, at that time, in comparison to the estimated probabilities for other nuclear plants.
As a result of the study, areas where plant safety could be improved were idqntified and several modifications at Big Rock Point have been completed or i
l are\\ underway.
The NRC staff has endorsed these plant improvements, which l
willyeducethecoredamageprobabilityforBigRockPointtoalevel comparable to the industry average.
Big Rock int has never been allowed to operate by the NRC solely on the basis of t low population density of the area surrounding the plant.
Because its electric 1 generating capacity is roughly one tenth of the electrical output of rec tly built nuclear plants, the off site radiological impact of an i
accident at Bi Rock Point would t,e correspondingly small.
However, Big Rock Point is subject o the same NRC regulations as all other nuclear plants, including those 11 iting routine and accidental releases of radioactivity.
In summary, the NRC s aff considers Big Rock Point's operating performance to be good, and recent plant modifications have improved safety. The NRC and the nuclear industry will co tinue to use state-of-the-art techniques such as PRAs to identify potential pla improvements.
While the technical jargon and terminology often appear t eatening, I can assure you that the health and safety of the public are not ndangered by the operation of Big Rock Point.
I hope that this information is esporaive to your constituent's concerns.
Sincerely, l
ictor Stello, Jr.
ecutive Director r Operations DISTRIBUTION Docket File D. Crutchfield NRC PDR G. Holahan Local POR OGC-Beth EDO No. 003027 SECY (#87-0850) (3)
ED0 Reading V. Stello
\\
T. Murley/J. Sniezek D. Mossburg (ED0 #003027) w'/ y incoming R. Starostecki P. Shea F. Miralgia J.R. Hall J. Funches R. Ingram J. Blaha GPA/CA (3)
PD31 Green Ticket File
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCU. ENCE LA/PD31:DRSP*
PM/PD31: DRSP*
D/PD31: DRSP*
Tech Ed*
AD:DRS I RIngram JRHall:1t MVirgilio AThomas
'pHolahan 7/31/87 7/31/87
,7/3W87 8/3/87 O W /87
, kt A
0NRR Op0 v GPA/CA field FM' ia
.$hiezek If ey f/
87
/ /7
/(p/87
/ > 87
/ /87 0FFIC L PICORD COPY
Senator Riegle Although the estimated probability for core damage at Big Rock Point is low, the PRA study did identify it as a relatively high core damage probability, at that time, in comparison to the estimated probabilities for other nuclear plants.
As a result of the study, areas where plant safety could be improved were identified and several modifications at Big Rock Point have t'een completed or are underway.
The NRC staff has endorsed these plant improvements, which will reduce the core damage probability for Big Rock Point to a level comparable to the industry average.
Big Rock Point has never been allowed to operate by the NRC solely on the basis of the low population density of the area surrounding the plant.
Because its electrical generating capacity is roughly one tenth of the electrical output of recently built nuclear plants, the off-site radiological impact of an accident at Big Rock Point would be correspondingly small.
However, Big Rock Point is subject to the same NRC regulations as all other nuclear plants, including those limiting routine and accidental releases of radioactivity.
In summary, the NRC staff considers Big Rock Point's operating performance to be good, and recent plant modifications have improved safety. The NRC and the nuclear industry will continue to use state of the art techniques such as PRAs to identify potential plant improvements.
While the technical jargon and terminology often appear threatening, I can assure you that the health and safety of the public are not endangered by the operation of Big Rock Point.
I hope that this information is responsive to your constituent's concerns.
Sincerely, I
1 l
Victor Stello, Jr.
I Executive Director j
for Operations DISTRIBUTION Docket File D. Crutchfield NRC PDR G. Holahan Local PDR OGC-Beth EDO No. 003027 SECY (#87-0850) (3)
EDO Reading V. Stello T. Murley/J. Sniezek D. Mossburg (ED0 #003027) w/cy incoming j
R. Starostecki P. Shea j
F. Miralgia J.P. Hall j
J. Funches R. Ingram 2
J. Blaha GPA/CA (3) l PD31 Green Ticket File
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE i
LA/PD31:DRSP*
PM/PD31: DRSP*
D/PD31:DRSP*
Tech Ed*
P RIngram JRHall:lt MVirgilio AThomas GHolahan 7/31/87 7/31/87 7/31/87 8/3/87 eP// /87 I
D:DRSP ADP DD:0NRR D:0NRR GPA/CA DCrutchfield FMiralgia JSniezek TMurley l
/ /87
/ /87
/ /87
/ /87
/ /87 1
0FFICIAL RECORD COPY
]
Senator Riegle i l
Although the, estimated probability for core damage at Big Rock Point is low, s
the PRA study'did idectify it as a relatively high core damage probability, at that time, in comparison to the estimated probabilities for other nuclear plants.
As a result uf they tudy, areas where plant safety could be improv6d were identified and sevefa) modifications at Big Rock Point have been completed or are underway.
The NRCNstaff has endorsed these plant improvements, which will reduce the core damage probability for Big Rock Point to & level comparable to the industry g verage.
Big Rock Point has never bee \\n ellowed to operate by the NRC solely on the basis of its surrounding low po'pulation density.
Because of its smaller size (mughly one tenth of the clectrical output of recently built nuclear plants),
the off-site radiological froact of an accident at Big Rock Point would be correspondingly small.
Howe'ver, Big \\
regulations,includingthoselimiting(lockPointissubjecttothesateNRC Toutine and accidental releases of x
radioactivity, as all other nuclear plants,
\\
i In summary, the NRC staff considers Big Ro $ Point's operating performance to be good, and recent plant modifications have imp' roved safety. The NRC and the nuclear industry will continue to use state of the art techniques such as PRAs to identify potential plant improvements.
Whilethetechnicaljargonand l
terminology often appear threatening, I assure peu that the health and safety of the public are not endangered by the operation \\of Big Rock Point.
I hope i
l that this information is responsive to your constilpent's concerns.
N i
Sincerely, N
]
f
\\
l l
l Victor Stello, Jr.
Executive Director for Operations s
DISTRIBUTION Docket File D. Crutchfield NRC PDR G. Holahan Local PDR OGC-Beth E00 No. 003027 SECY (#87-0850) (3)
EDO Reading V. Stella T. Murley/J. Sniezek D. Mossburg (ED0 #003027) w/cy incoming R. Starostecki P. Shea F. Miralgia J.R. Hall J. Funches R. Ingram J. Blaha GPA/CA (3) l PD31 Green Ticket File
- SEE PPEVIOUS CONCURRENCE LA/PD31: DRSP*
PM/PD31:DRSP*
D/PD31:DN Tech Ed AD:DRSP RIrgram JRHall:lt MVirgilio e th GHolahan l
7/31/87 7/31/87 1/$/87 t/$/87
/ /87 D:DRSP ADP DD:0NRR D:0NRR GPA/CA DCrutchfield FMiralgia JSniezek TMurley
/ /87
/ /87
/ /87
/ /87
/ /87 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY i
I l
Senator Riegle lthough the estimated probability for Nre damage at Big Rock Point is low,-
t e PRA study did identify it as a relatively high core damage probability, at th time, in comparison to the estimated probabilities for other nuclear plants.
I As a result of the study, areas where plant safety could be improved were ident fied and several modifications at Big Rock Point have been completed or i
are un rway.
The NRC staff has endorsed these plant improvements, which
)
will re ce the core damage probability for Big Rock Point to a level l
comparabi. to the industry average.
l l
Big Rock Poi t has never been allowed to operate by the NAC solely on the basis of its rrounding low population density.
Because of its smaller size (roughly one te th of the electrical output of recently built nuclear plants),.
the off-site rad logical impact of an acciderst at Big Rock Point would be correspondingly s 11.
However, Big Rock Dgjgt js subject to the same NRC regulations, inclu g those limiting routine and accidental releases of radioactivity, as al other nuclear plants.
In summary, the NRC sta # considers Big Rock Point's operating performance to be good, and recent plant mo ifications have improved safety. The NRC and the nuclear industry will cont' ue to use state of the art techniques such as PRAs i
to identify potential plant improvements.
While the technical jargon and terminology often appear thre tening, I assure you that protecting the health and safety of the public is ou principal mission.
I hope that this information is responsive to your constitue.
's concerns.
Sincerely,
'ctor Stello, Jr.
Ex cutive Director f
Operations DISTRIBUTION Docket File D. Crutchfield NRC PDR G. Holahan Local PDR OGC-Beth ED0 No. 003027 SECY (#87-0850) (3)
ED0 Reading V. Stello T. Murley/J. Sniezek D. Mossburg (ED0 #003027) w/cy 'ncoming R. Starostecki P. Shea F. Miralgia J.R. Hall J. Funches R. Ingram J. Blaha GPA/CA (3)
PD31 Green Ticket File LA/PD31:DRSP PM/PD31 DRSP D/PD31:DRSP Tech Ed
- DRSP RIrigram/U JRHaW: t MVirgilio G lahan 1/;l/87 7 / 34/87
/ /87
/ /87
/
87 D:DRSP ADP DD:0NRR D:0NRR GPA/CA DCrutchfield FMiralgia JSniezek TMurley
/ /87
/ /87
/ /87
/ /87
/ /87 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY
I SQ Cf C 8
'o UNITED STATES 85-I,,e NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION r,,
pE WASHINGTOrd, D. C. 20555 g
e ca9[;
I EDO PRINCIPAL. CORR:SPONDENCF CONTROL
]
l FROM:
DliF : 08/04/87 FDO CONTROL: 003o27 l
DOC DT: 07/01/87 SEN. DONALD W.
RIEGLE, JR.
FINAL REPLY:
TO:
l t
CA
{
FOR SIGNATURE OF:
GRFFN SFCY NO: 87-0950 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR I
DESC:
ROI..lT I NG:
ENCL LTR FROM HELEN STAINBROOK RF ALLEGATIONS DAVIS, RIII AGAINST BIG ROCK Pt. TINT
~
DATE: 07/20/87 I
ASSIGNED TO: NRR CONTACT: t11 tRI EY
)
l SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS:
j 1
REF:
EliO-3036
{
Y' J...
NRR RECEIVED: JULY 21, 1987 T'
ACTION.:
DRSP:CRUTCHFIELD' NRR ROUTING:
MURLEY/SNIEZEK STAROSTECKI MIRAGLIA FUNCHES BLAHA MOSSBURG Dw 3 3 )
_/
- m
_ OFFICE-OF'THE: SECRETARY-CORRESPONDENCE-CONTROL-TICKET tH 2 b
' PAPER NUMBER:
CRC-87-0850 LOGGING.DATE: Jul 16 87 ACTION ~ OFFICE:
EDO AUTHOR:-
D.'W.
Reigle--Const Ref.
' AFFILIATION:
U.S.-SENATE-LETTER DATE:
Jul ll 87.
FILE CODE: ID&R-5 Big: Rock
SUBJECT:
' Consumers Power Company's, Big Rock plant's shielding requirements ACTION:
Direct Reply DISTRIBUTION:
_OCA to Ack SPECIAL HANDLING: None I
NOTES:
Helen Stainbrook DATE DUE:
Jul 30 87 SIGNATURE:
DATE SIGNED:
AFFILIATION:
Rec'd 0ff. ED0 1~ O A ~
Date
' DP O Dme V
- t. D0 --- 003027