W3P83-3270, Forwards Response to NRC 830826 Request for Addl Info.Argus Chemical Corp Will Be Contacted Re Effective Date of Ltr.New Gaxt Terminal Corp Ltr Will Be Submitted by 831231
| ML20078D144 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 09/29/1983 |
| From: | Drummond F LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | Knighton G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| W3P83-3270, NUDOCS 8310040372 | |
| Download: ML20078D144 (4) | |
Text
l l_DUISIANA P O W E R & L i G H T7 NEW OALEANS LOUIS?ANA
,42oemmo~oeermeer..aooxeme
/0174-6008
[504)366-234S UTILITIES SYSTEM Sep tember 29, 1983 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
~
-AO.08 Attention:
Mr. G. W. Knighton, Chief Licensing Branch No. 3 Division of Licenring U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555
SUBJECT:
Docket W. 50-382
REFERENCE:
Your letter dated August 26, 1983 to Mr. R. S. Leddick
Dear Sir:
Enclosed in response to your request for additional information is LP&L's reply.
As this response indicates, action will be taken to resolve those items brought to our attention by the NRC staff. Additionally, the NRC will be kept informed of progress made on the items covered in the response through contact with Region IV and jieadquarters staff.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Yours very truly, me n F. J. Drummond Nuclear Services Manager FJD/RJP/sm cc:
E. L. Blake, W. M. Stevenson, J. Wilson, J. T. Collins, G. L. Constable, G. Groesch t
l l
8310040372 830929 PDR ADOCK 05000382 A
LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY RESPONSE TO NRC LETTER DATED AUGUST 26, 1983 Answers to those items requiring response contained in your letter of August 26, 1983 are as follows:
2.
Ten of 12 agreement letters with major industries have been submitted; howcVer, LP&L did not identify the remaining two industries. Additional information is needed, as follows:
1)
Identify the two remaining industries for whom agreement letters are to be established and the date by which the letters will be submitted to NRC.
Incorporate the letters into the Waterford 3 Emergency Plan.
LP&L Response:
LP&L received and transmitted to the NRC letters of agreement for eleven of the twelve industries within 5 miles of Waterford 3 which may have toxic chemical inventories.
(Please note that the letter from H. J. Bettencourt, Manager of the Shell Norco Manufacturing Complex, served as a letter of agreenent for both the Shell Oil Company and the Shell Chemical Company.)
It was recognized at the time that the response to the staff's June 27, 1983 letter was prepared that the letter from the GATX Terminals Corporation was deficient in that provisions were not contained for providing information on significant changes on the inventory of hazardous materials. We considered the GATX letter to be deficient, and we anticipated a revised submittal of this letter to the NRC staff at the earliest possible time. This letter was, therefore, not counted as one of the ten acceptable letters of agreement.
The other letter which we have not received is from Beker Industries.
Both the revised letter from CATX and the letter from Beker Industries will be submitteu by December 31, 1983, and all the letters of agreement will be incorporated into the Waterford 3 Emergency Plan at that time.
- 2) The letter with Argus Chemical Co. (WITCO) has no effective date.
LP&L Response:
It is recognized that the Argus Chemical Corporation (Witco) letter does not have an effective date. Argus /Witco will be recontacted witi.in the next month, and a dated letter of agreement will be submitted when it becomes available.
e
. 3) The letter with GATX, dated 3/19/82, has no provision for informing LP&L of changes in toxic material inventory.
LP&L Response:
As indicated in the response to question 2.1), the letter with the GATX Terminals Corporation was recognized as deficient, and a new submittal will be made by December 31, 1983.
- 4) The letter with Good Hope Refinery has no effective date.
LP&L Response:
It has been reported to us that the GHR Energy Corporation is presently reorganizing under Chapter 11 of the Federal Bankruptcy Code, and that the GHR is not conducting refining operations at its Good Hope, Louisiana facility at the present time. An attempt will be made within the next month to contact officials of the GHR Energy Corporation to correct the deficiency cited by the NRC staff.
If made available, a revised letter of agreement will be submitted.
- 5) The letter with Union Carbide Co., dated 1/20/82, is unsigned.
LP&L Response:
It is recognized that the Union Carbide Corporation letter dated 9/8/81 is unsigned.
(Please note that there are two Union Carbide Corporation letters representing two separate divisions. The i
letter dated 1/20/82 was signed by J. M. Cockrell: Plant Manager.
The letter of 9/8/81 is the letter for which a signature should be obtained.) Union Carbide will be recontacted within the next month, and a signed letter of agreement will be submitted when it becomes available.
- 6) Confirm that the following major industries within 5 miles of Waterford 3 (as identified in EP-2-110, Attachment 7.1) do not have toxic chemicals, other than small quantities, onsite:
Big Three Industries Bonnet Carre Oil & Gas Field Good Hope Oil & Gas Field Hahnv111e Oil & Gas Field Lucy 011 & Gas Field Norco Oil & Gas Field South Lucy 011 & Gas Field Taft Gas Field
c
. LP6L Response:
Big Three Industries is an air reduction (separation) facility located adjacent to tl.e northern boundary of Norco, Louisiana. The materials produced are air components which serve industries in the surrounding area. The materials produced by Big Three Industries do not have toxic characteristics and pose no danger to the surrounding area.
This information will be confirmed with Big Three Industries within the next month and will be reported to the NRC when it becomes available.
The oil and gas fields indicated in the NRC question are those referenced in Section 2.2.2.3 of the Waterford 3 FSAR and described in Table 2.2-7 of that same document. Previous analysis has indicated that other than in small quantities, no toxic chemicals are present at these sites.
This information will be confirmed at the time that the update of the FSAR toxic chemical inventory is made.
1