ML20247C413

Responds to 890418 Request for Clarification of Scope of Required Evacuation & Supporting Traffic Mgt for Serious Emergency at Facility.During Evacuation,Traffic Will Be Directed to Follow Predetermined Routes in Evacuation Plan

ML20247C413
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	05/18/1989
From:	Murley T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Damico L AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
References
NUDOCS 8905240462
Download: ML20247C413 (3)

Text

- _ _ - _

d' pa nec

.g g

(g UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

, r, j WASHINGTON, D, C. 20655

\ /

MAY 181989 As. Lisa D'Amico 15-32 Steinway Street M tarir., wew York 11103

Dear Ms. D'Amico:

This is in response to yoer letter of April 18, 1989, that requested clarifi-cation of the scope of the required evacuation and the supporting traffic management for a serious emergency at the Shoreham facility.

NRC has determired that there is reasonable assurance that protective measures, including evacuation, will be taken in response to an emergency at the Shoreham facility. Our regulations specify plume exposure pathway emergency planning zones (EPZs) around all nuclear reactor sites. The size of the EPZ is based on the amour.t of detailed planning judged necessary to ensure prompt and effective measures to protect the public in the event of a nuclear power plant accident.

In a particular emergency, protective measures might be needed in only a limited part of the established EPZ. On the other hand, the detailed planning required for the EPZ provides a substantial base for expansion of emergency response actions outside the zone if such actions became necessary. The NRC staff has determined that for a typical reactor facility site an area about 10 miles in radius is sufficient for emergency planning purposes.

The Shoreham EPZ is also approximately 10 miles in radius. The development of the Shoreham EPZ included consideration of factors such as demography, transportation network, land use, and special facilities such as schools, daycare centers, hospitals, and nursing homes. The NRC staff has reviewed the information on the Shoreham EPZ in the onsite and offsite emergency plans, has i been cognizant of the issues raised during the course of the Shoreham proceedings, and has visited the site and toured the plume exposure pathway EPZ on numerous occasions. The NRC staff has also relied upon its col?ective experience acouired through the review of emergency planning for other nuclear power plant sites across the country to evaluate the Shoreham plan. The staff has determined that the Shoreham site compares favorably with other nuciear power plant sites in the United States. For example, the Shoreham EPZ is located on a flat coastal plain as opposed to the complex terrain in which many other nuclear power plants are located. The road system around Shoreham compares favorably with other nuclear power plant sites, and the population density in the Shoreham EPZ is less than that for several other sites. In summary, the ,

staff is not aware of any special circumstances or unique features involving 1 the Shoreham EPZ that were not envisioned in the development of the 16-mile EPZ. Thus, plans to evacuate all of Long Island are not considered reasonable or necessary, and are therefore not required by the NRC.

8905240462 890518 '

l PDR ADOCK 05000322 O N PDC

MAY 181989 Ms. Lisa D'Amico With respect to your concern ateut traffic management, peak traffic conditions are not analogous to evacuation traffic conditions. An evacuation for the Shoreham EPZ has been designed to expedite traffic leaving the EPZ. The plan considers road capacities, residential areas, special facilities such as schools, and the locations of the reception centers. During an evacuation, traffic will be directed to follow predetermined routes specified in the evacuation plan. In addition, the plan identifies key intersections that will be controlled by traffic guides and designates certain two-way roads that will be converted to one-way roads. The evacuation plan and the evacuation time estimates were reviewed by the NRC staff as part of the review of the offsite emergency plan for Shoreham and were determined to be adequate to protect the health and safety of the public.

I hope that this information answers your questions about the emergency plans for the Shoreham facility.

Sincerely, b "

CA.-

omas E. u If,(Dire or Office of Nuclear React Re slation

-_----__-__-_-_______-____________-.___-_________________________________________________._______-.__________.-___________.________-__-._---_-a

Ms. Lisa D'Amico With respect to your concern about traffic management, peak traffic conditions are not analogous to evacuation traffic conditions. An evacuation for the Shoreham EPZ has been designed to expedite traffic leaving the EPZ. The plan considers road capacities, residential areas, special facilities such as-schools, and the locations of the reception centers. During an evacuation,

, traffic will be directed to follow predetermined routes specified in the evacuation plan. In addition, the plan identifies key intersections that will be controlled by traffic guides and designates certain two-way roads that will be converted to one-way roads. The evacuation plan and the evacuation time estimates were reviewed by the NRC staff as part of the review of the offsite emergency plan for Shoreham and were determined to be adequate to protect the health and safety of the public.

I hope that this information answers your questions about the emergency plans for the Shoreham facility.

Sincerely,

[0riginal signed by Steve Varga]

(for) Thomas E. Murley, Director Office of Nuclee- Reactor Regulation DISTRIBUTION i '; Docket F1,lej

.SVarga BBoger WButler SBrown M0'Brien l DMossburg,PMAS(TicketNo.#899096)

NRC PDR/LPDR FCongel WTravers EReis(0GC)

FCongel JPartlow JSniezek TMurley GEA/CA Previously concurred * 'Jfh [DAMIC0 LETTER]

TECH ED* PDI-2/PM* PDI-2/D* OGC* DRP/ADRI* DREP/D BCalure SBrown:tr WButler EReis BBoger FCongel V 0

05/11/89 05/11/89 05/11/89 05/11/89 05/12/89 E//C/89 DRP/D* 0 G CA 4 SYarga y 05/12/89 /1 8 / 9 L

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