ML20237H314

Responds to Constituent H Stainbrook Concerns Re Reactor Shielding,High Core Damage Probability & Operation of Facility in Low Population Area,Per Request.Health & Safety of Public Not Endangered by Plant Operation

ML20237H314
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:	Levin C SENATE
Shared Package
ML20237H317	List: ML20237H314 ML20237H330
References
NUDOCS 8708170146
Download: ML20237H314 (8)

Text

- .

)

. . t

> l o

je %9 8

g

'k n UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION h - W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 k....+/ AUG f 01987 I

.i j

The Honorable Carl Levin  ;

United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 '

Dear Senator Levin:

1 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 i nuclear plant. Specifically, Ms. Stainbrook asked, "Is it true that:

1

1. Big Rock nuclear plant has taken only a ' philosophical position' to l reactor shielding?

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 j or Chicago?"

! These concerns appear to be based on statements contained in a March 1981 Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) study for Big Rock Doint performed by Consumers Power Company (CPC). In this study, CPC estimated core damage i 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 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 for and benefits of potential improvements to plant radiation shielding.

Contrary to the implication that Big Rock Point has inadequate reactor shielding, detailed analyses were performed which indicated that potential shielding modifications would not result in significant benefit to plant safety.

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 the containment structure would not improve the degree of protection provided to the public.

8708170146 870810 PDR H ADOCK 05000155 PDR

m Senator Levin 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 been completed or are underway. The NRC staff has endorsed these plant improvements, which will I

reduce the core damage probability for Big Rock Point to a level comparable to j the industry average. '

Big Rock Point has never been allowed to operate by the NRC solely on the 4 basis of the low population density of the area surrounding the plant. Because l its electrical generating capacity is roughly one tenth of the electrical j output of recently built nuclear plants, the off-site radiological impact of an 1 accident at Big Rock Point would be correspondingly small. However, Big Rock l Point is subject to the same NRC regulations as all other nuclear plants, I 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 i to identify potential plant improvements. While the technical jargon and i 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. l Sincerely, l

Dimmd) t A Rehm Victor Stello, Jr. l Executive Director for Operations DISTRIBUTION Docket File D. Crutchfield NRC & Local PORs G. Holahan ED0 No. 003036 OGC-Beth EDR Reading SECY (#87-0862) (3)

T. Murley/J. Sniezek V. Stello R. Starostecki D. Mossburg (EDO #003036) w/cy incoming F. Miralgia P. Shea J. Funches J.R. Hall J. Blaha R. Ingram l PD31 Green Ticket File GPA/CA (3) *SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE l ABDavis, RIII LA/PD31: DRSP* PM/PD31:DRSP* D/PD31: DRSP* Tech Ed* AD:DRSP*

RIngram JRHall:lt MVirgilio AThomas GHolahan 7/31/87 7/31/87 7/31/87 8/3/87 8/3/87 1

/0 0:DRSP* ADP* DD:0NRR* D:0NRR* GPA/CA EDO ,P '

DCrutchfield FMiralgia JSniezek TMurley l VST WI 8/3/87 8/4/87 8/6/87 8/6/87 ///87 11/o /87

- - - - - . . - - - - - - - - ---~&

O

• l 9enator Levin Alt ugh the estimated probability for core damage at Big Rock Point is low, -

the A study did identify it as.a relatively high core damage probability, at that t e, in comparison to the estimated probabilities for.other nuclear plants.

As a re it of the study, areas where plant safety could be improved were identifie and several modifications at Big Rock Point have been completed or are underw j

. The NRC staff has endorsed these plant improvements, which will l reduce the re damage probability for Big Rock Point to a level comparable to the industry verage.

Big Rock. Point h s never been allowed to operate by the NRC solely on the basis of the low pulation density of the area surrounding the plant. Because its electrical gene ating capacity is roughly one tenth of the electrical .

output of recently b ilt nuclear plants, the off-site radiological impact of an accident at Big Rock int would be correspondingly small. However, Big Rock Point is subject to the same NRC regulations as'all other nuclear plants, including those limiting outine and accidental releases of' radioactivity.

In summary, the NRC staff capsiders Big Rock Point's operating performance to be good, and recent plant modiffqations 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 imp vements. While the technical jargon and terminology often appear threate ' g, I can assure you that the health and safety of the public are not enda red by the operation of Big Rock Point. I hope that this information is respo sive to your constituent's concerns.

incerely,

! Vict c Stello, Jr.

I Execut\veDirector for Opqrations DISTRIBUTION o Docket File D. Crutchfield NRC & Local PDRs l G. Holahan ED0 No. 003036 OGC-Beth i

EDR Reading SECY (#87-0862) (3)

T. Murley/J. Sniezek V. Stello R. Starostecki D. Mossburg (E00 #003036) w y incoming. 'I F. Miralgia P. Shea J. Funches J.R. Hall J. Blaha R. Ingram

, PD31 Green Ticket File GPA/CA (3) *SEE PREVIOUS CONC RENCE LA/PD31:DRSP* PM/PD31:DRSP* D/PD31: DRSP* Tech Ed* A:DRSk RIngram JRHall:lt MVirgilio AThomas- GH ahan ,

7/31/87 7/31/87 7(31/ 8/3/87, V/d 87 )

p

%/ ;fMRR l

'):ANRR GPA/CA D chfield ,a S ezek / 'rley G/

87 / /S! l/ /87 / ^/87

_j

I -

Senator Levin  !

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 been 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 i its electrical generating capacity is roughly one tenth of the electrical output of recently built nuclear plan!s, the off-site radiological impact of an j 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, 1 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 I 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, Victor Stello, Jr.

Executive Director for Operations DISTRIBUTION Docket File D. Crutchfield NRC & Local PDRs G. Holahan ED0 No. 003036 OGC-Beth EDR Reading SECY (#87-0862) (3)

T. Murley/J. Sniczek V. Stello R. Starostecki D. Mossburg (ED0 #003036) w/cy incoming F. Miralgia P. Shea J. Funches J.R. Hall J. Blaha R. Ingram PD31 Green Ticket File GPA/CA (3) *SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE LA/PD31:DRSP* PM/PD31:DRSP* D/PD31:DRSP* Tech Ed*

RIngram JRHall:lt MVirgilio AThomas GHolahan 7/31/87 7/31/87 7/31/87 8/3/87 8-/7/87 D:DRSP ADP DD:0NRR D:0NRR GPA/CA l DCrutchfield FMiralgia JSniezek TMurley

/ /87 / /87 / /87 / /87 / /87

f.

. 4 1

^ Senator. Levin  !

Altho'ogh the estimated probability for core damage at Big Rock Point is low, i the PRAN udy did identify it as a relatively high core' damage probability, at that tim in comparison to the estimated probabilities for other nuclear plants. .

As a result of the study, areas where plant safety could be improved were I identified anbsseveral modifications at Big Rock Point have~been-completed or are underway. The NRC staff has endorsed these plant improvements, which will reduce the core dhmage 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 its surrounding lbv population density. Because of.its smaller size (roughly one tenth of the elhctrical output of recently built nuclear plants),

the off-site radiological impact of an accident at Big Rock Point would be correspondingly small. However,sBig Rock Point is subject to the same NRC regulations, including those limiting routine and accidental releases of radioactivity as all other nuclear p1hqts.

In summary, the NRC staff considers' Big ek Point's operating performance to be i good, and recent plant modifications have im' toved safety. The NRC and the nuclear industry will continue to use state of\ het art techniques such as PRAs  !

to identify potential plant improvements. While'the technical-jargon and terminology often appear threatening, I assure you'that the health and safety . 4 of the public are not endangered by the operation of' Big Rock Point. I hope that this information is responsive to your constituenlRs concerns.

N Sincerely, \

\

Victor Stello, Jr.

Executive Director

\N for Operations N l DISTRIBUTION Docket File D. Crutchfield NRC & Local PDRs G. Holahan EDO No. 003036 OGC-Beth EDR Reading SECY (#87-0862) (3)

T. Murley/J. Sniezek V. Stello i

R. Starostecki D. Mossburg (ED0 #003036) w/cy incoming F. Miralgia P. Shea J. Funches J.R. Hall J. Blaha R. Ingram PD31 Green Ticket File .GPA/CA (3) *SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE LA/PD31: DRSP* PM/PD31:DRSP* D/PD31: DRSP Tech Ed AD:DRSP RIngram JRHall:It MVirgilio 4tb GHolahan-7/31/87 7/31/87 1 /M /87 1/) /87 / /87  ;

D:DRSP ADP DD:0NRR D:0NRR GPA/CA DCrutchfield FMiralgia JSniezek TMurley

/ /87 / /87 / /87 / /87 / /87

_ . _ _.____._________.___.__._____._____1______

Senator Levin though the estimated probability'for core damage at Big Rock Point is low, th 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. 1 As a sult of the study, areas where plant safety could be improved were l identi ed and several modifications at Big Rock Point have been completed or are unde ay. The NRC staff has endorsed these plant improvements, which will reduce th core damage probability for Big Rock Point to a level comparable to the industr average. ,

Big Rock Po'nt as never been allowed to operate by the NRC solely on the j basis of its su ounding low population density. Because of its smaller size (roughly one tent of the electrical output of recently built nuclear plants),

the off-site radic gical impact of an accident at Big Rock Point would be i correspondingly smal However, Big Rock Point is subject to the same NRC l regulations, includin those limiting routine and accidental releases of I radioactivity as all ot er nuclear plants.

In summary, the NRC staff onsidurs Big Rock Point's operating performance to be j good, and recent plant modi " cations have improved safety. The NRC and the nuclear industry will continu to use state of the art techniques 'such as PRAs to identify potential plant im ovements. While the technical jargon and l terminology often appear threate ing, I assure you that protecting the health and safety of the public is our p 'ncipal mission. I hope that this information j is responsive to your constituent's conctrns.

l j incerely, Vict Stello, Jr.

Execut've Director for 0 rations I

DISTRIBUTION j Docket File D. Crutchfield i NRC & Local PDRs G. Holahan EDO No. 003036 OGC-Beth i EDR Reading SECY (#87-0862) (3)

T. Murley/J. Sniezek V. Stello R. Starostecki D. Mossburg (ED0 #003036) w y incoming F. Miralgia P. Shea J. Funches J.R. Hall J. Blaha R. Ingram PD31 Green Ticket File GPA/CA (3)

Odd l LA/PD31:DRSP PM/PD31:DRSP D/PD31: DRSP Tech Ed A DRSP l RIngramJS JRHall:It MVirgilio GHo ahan

?

'\ /y /87 1 /31/87 / /87 / /87 / 7 1

D:DRSP ADP DD:0NRR D:0NRR GPA/CA DCrutchfield FMiralgia JSniezek TMurley

/ /87 / /87 / /87 / /87 / /87

?

l 4 i

< a. Q

1. % UNITED STATES ,

[ I ,g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION gg h fj*j W

7. (' :E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 b l

%,...../

i FDO PRINCIPAL CnRRFSPONDFNr.F CONTROL d

.------------------------------------ k l

FROM: Di lF : 08/04/87 EDO CONTROL: OcGO36 DOC DT: 07/10/87 l SEN. CARL LEVIN FINAL RFPLY:

l l TO: l l

CA FOR SIGNATURE OF: ** GRFEN ** SFCY NO: 87-0862 EXECUTIVF DIRECTOR i

DESC: ROUTTNG:

l l

l ENCL LTR FROM HELEN STAINBROOK RF ALLEGATIONS DAVIS, RIII I AGAINST BIG ROCK POINT l

DATE: 07/20/87 j ASSIONED TO: NRR CONTACT: MilRI EY

\

i SPECIAL INfiT(UCTIONS OR RFMARKS:

REF: EDn 3)27 NRR RECEIVED: JULY 21, 1987 ACTION: ;DRSP:CRUTCHFIELD1 NRR ROUTING: MURLEY/SNIEZEK STAROSTECKI MIRAGLIA FUNCHES BLAHA ,

MOSSBURG w-l

3-

.. e OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL TICKET PAPER NUMBER: CRC-87-0862 LOGGING DATE: Jul 17 87 l

ACTION OFFICE: EDO l

l AUTHOR: C. Levin--Const Ref AFFILIATION: U.S. SENATE LETTER DATE: Jul 10 87 FILE CODE: ID&R-5

SUBJECT:

Allegations against the Consumer Power'Companys' Big Rock plant ACTION: Direct Reply I '

l DISTRIBUTION: OCA to Ack, Docket SPECIAL HANDLING: None NOTES: Helen Steinbrooke DATE DUE: Jul 31 87 SIGNATURE: . DATE SIGNED:

AFFILIATION:

1

. Rec'd Dit. E00 Date J - p - g y

~

Time .?v w . _ ,

l EDO ---

003036  !

4 l