|
|
Line 18: |
Line 18: |
| =Text= | | =Text= |
| {{#Wiki_filter:: 1 \ | | {{#Wiki_filter:: 1 \ |
| * STATE OF NEW JERSEY COUNTY OF ESSEX ) ) SS. ) e AFFIDAVIT OF ROBERT P. DOUGLAS ROBERT P. DOUGLAS, being first duly sworn accord-ing to law, deposes and states: l. I am employed by Public Service Electric & Gas Company as Licensing Manager* and Acting Environment Manager. My professional qualifications which I incorporate by reference herein are contained in the transcript of this proceeding following Tr. 402. v* 2. I have supervised the calculation of the es-timated dose associated with moving and storing spent fuel from the unenlarged (264 spaces) Salem Unit 1 to the enlarged (1170 spaces) spent fuel pool of Salem.Unit | | * STATE OF NEW JERSEY COUNTY OF ESSEX ) ) SS. ) e AFFIDAVIT OF ROBERT P. DOUGLAS ROBERT P. DOUGLAS, being first duly sworn accord-ing to law, deposes and states: l. I am employed by Public Service Electric & Gas Company as Licensing Manager* and Acting Environment Manager. My professional qualifications which I incorporate by reference herein are contained in the transcript of this proceeding following Tr. 402. v* 2. I have supervised the calculation of the es-timated dose associated with moving and storing spent fuel from the unenlarged (264 spaces) Salem Unit 1 to the enlarged (1170 spaces) spent fuel pool of Salem.Unit |
| : 2. As shown in Attachment 1, hereto which is also incorporated herein, the dose resulting from moving one cask containing two fuel assemblies is approximately 0.4 man This dose does not include the additional .dose associated with the transfer of fuel from Unit 2 to Unit l if disposal is not available offsite and the Unit l pool must then be enlarged. | | : 2. As shown in Attachment 1, hereto which is also incorporated herein, the dose resulting from moving one cask containing two fuel assemblies is approximately 0.4 man This dose does not include the additional .dose associated with the transfer of fuel from Unit 2 to Unit l if disposal is not available offsite and the Unit l pool must then be enlarged. |
| : 3. I have also established the nu.'llber of spent fuel elements which will have to be transferred from Unit 1 to Unit 2 if the above described scheme is to be carried out in accordance with the latest information concerning schedule and number of spent fuel elements to be discharged after -Z.. '191000*0 I r. | | : 3. I have also established the nu.'llber of spent fuel elements which will have to be transferred from Unit 1 to Unit 2 if the above described scheme is to be carried out in accordance with the latest information concerning schedule and number of spent fuel elements to be discharged after -Z.. '191000*0 I r. |
| ,. | | ,. |
Revision as of 18:18, 25 April 2019
Similar Documents at Salem |
---|
Category:AFFIDAVITS
MONTHYEARML18087A8341983-04-11011 April 1983 Affidavit of DG Bridenbaugh Re Delay of Facility Restart. Full Review of safety-related Equipment Must Be Completed & Appropriate Changes Implemented.Prof Qualifications Encl ML18086A9691981-10-14014 October 1981 Affidavit Confirming Validity of Util 811009 Response to IE Insp Repts 50-272/81-15 & 50-311/81-14 ML18081A9301980-01-14014 January 1980 Affidavit Re Impact of Facility on Shortnose Sturgeon in DE River Estuary ML18081A8891980-01-10010 January 1980 Unsigned Affidavit Re Effect of Facility on Endangered Population of Shortnose Sturgeon.Generating Stations Not Expected to Impact Shortnose Sturgeon Population in DE River Estuary ML18081A8901980-01-0808 January 1980 Affidavit Re Effect of Facility on Endangered Population of Shortnose Sturgeon.Describes Circulating Water Intake Structure & Mods Effected to Ensure trouble-free Operation ML18081A7711979-11-0202 November 1979 Affidavit of RP Douglas on 791102 Re Relative Toxicity Index Resulting from Replacement of Present Spent Fuel Pool Racks W/Proposed Racks ML18079B0911979-08-30030 August 1979 Affidavit of RP Douglas Re Calculation of Estimated Dose Associated W/Moving & Storing Spent Fuel ML18079B0551979-08-21021 August 1979 Affidavit of RP Douglas Re Calculation of Estimated Dose Associated W/Moving & Storing Spent Fuel from Unit 1 ML19208C3661979-08-0202 August 1979 Affidavit of Intervenors Coleman Re Issuance of Order to Show Cause & Stay Licensing.Claim Standing as Consumers of Electricity from Licensee & from Proximity of Facility. Forwards Petition Seeking Issuance of Order 1983-04-11
[Table view] Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARLR-N980595, Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50,52 & 72 Re Changes,Tests & Experiments.Pse&G Supports Comments Submitted by NEI in Their Ltr1998-12-21021 December 1998 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50,52 & 72 Re Changes,Tests & Experiments.Pse&G Supports Comments Submitted by NEI in Their Ltr LR-N980588, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50.65 Re Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Npps.Util Agrees with General Principle Behind Proposed Rulemaking,But However,Concerned That Proposed Rule Contain Language Open to Interpretation1998-12-14014 December 1998 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50.65 Re Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Npps.Util Agrees with General Principle Behind Proposed Rulemaking,But However,Concerned That Proposed Rule Contain Language Open to Interpretation ML18106A8811998-09-15015 September 1998 Comment Opposing Draft NUREG-1633, Assessment of Use of Potassium Iodide as Protective Action During Severe Reactor Accidents. Believes That Discussion Contained in SECY-98-061 Should Be Included in Draft NUREG ML18106A8731998-09-15015 September 1998 Comment on Draft NUREG-1633 Re Assessment of Use of Potassium Iodide (Ki) as Protetive Action During Severe Reactor Accidents. Believes That NUREG Should Provide Balanced Discussion on Benefits & Risks of Use of Ki LR-N980284, Comment on PR-50 Re IEEE Std 603-1991 for Salem & Hope Creek Generating Stations.Lack of Adverse Comments to Draft RG Should Not Have Been Construed as Endorsement to IEEE 603-19911998-06-12012 June 1998 Comment on PR-50 Re IEEE Std 603-1991 for Salem & Hope Creek Generating Stations.Lack of Adverse Comments to Draft RG Should Not Have Been Construed as Endorsement to IEEE 603-1991 LR-N980149, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Industry Codes & Stds. Comments Address Use of Engineering Judgment,Limitations on Use of Later ASME III Code Editions for Weld Leg Dimensions & Seismic Analysis1998-03-30030 March 1998 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Industry Codes & Stds. Comments Address Use of Engineering Judgment,Limitations on Use of Later ASME III Code Editions for Weld Leg Dimensions & Seismic Analysis ML18102B4361997-07-0707 July 1997 Comment Opposing NUREG-1606, Proposed Regulatory Guidance Re Implementation of 10CFR50.59 (Changes,Tests or Experiments). Util Endorses Comments Submitted by Nuclear Energy Inst ML20132A8961996-12-0606 December 1996 Comment Supporting Pr 10CFR50, NRC Draft Ps on Restructuring & Economic Deregulation of Electric Utility Industry ML20084H9251995-06-0202 June 1995 Comment Opposing Proposed Change in State Cooperative Agreements Program Concerning NRC Intention to Reduce Scope of Work.Believes That NRC Should Maintain Environ Monitoring Program & Find Other Ways to Reduce Duplicative Svcs ML20134K5021995-02-24024 February 1995 Transcript of 950224 Enforcement Conference in King of Prussia,Pa Re C Vondra.Pp 1-136 ML20134K4971995-02-0808 February 1995 Transcript of 950208 Enforcement Conference in King of Prussia,Pa Re L Reiter.Pp 1-64 ML20134K4791995-02-0808 February 1995 Transcript of 950208 Enforcement Conference in King of Prussia,Pa Re V Polizzi.Pp 1-115 ML20134K4511995-02-0808 February 1995 Transcript of 950208 Enforcement Conference in King of Prussia,Pa Re Plant.Pp 1-93 ML20080G8321995-02-0606 February 1995 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Shutdown & low-power Operations for Npp.Encourages NRC to Reevaluate Regulatory Analyses in Light of Higher Costs.Concludes That Addl Rules on Shutdown & Low Power Operations Not Necessary ML20077L8631995-01-0303 January 1995 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR2,51 & 54 Re NPP License Renewal.Util of Belief That Proposed Rev Reflect Positive Effort Towards Establishing Regulatory Process Requirements for Continued Operation of Nuclear Facilities ML20132B2281994-08-0202 August 1994 Transcript of 940802 Enforcement Conference in Salem,Nj W/Salem Senior Nuclear Shift Supervisor Involved in 940407 Event ML20067C1591994-02-17017 February 1994 Comments on NUREG/CR-5884 Re Analyses of Decommissioning for Ref PWR Power Station ML18100A5591993-08-26026 August 1993 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule Re Whistleblower Protection ML20126F2721992-12-21021 December 1992 Comment Endorsing Positions & Comments of NUMARC & BWROG Re Draft GL, Augmented Inservice Insp Requirments for Mark I & Mark II Steel Containments,Refueling Cavities & Associated Drainage Sys ML20091Q8661992-01-31031 January 1992 Comment Opposing Draft NUREG-1022,Rev 1, Event Reporting Sys,10CFR50.72 & 50.73,Clarification of NRC Sys & Guidelines for Reporting ML20072T2421991-04-11011 April 1991 Comment Re Proposed Change to 10CFR50.55A Re Inservice Testing of Containment Isolation Valves.Proposed Rule Should Be Revised to Allow Plants within Last 12 Months of Current Interval to Substitute Deferred Rv Shell Exams ML20235T1861989-02-24024 February 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants, Extension of NRC Authority to BOP Portion of Plant & Misapplication of Adequate Protection Std of Backfit Rule ML20195H0331988-11-21021 November 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program Which Includes Random Drug Testing.Util Strongly Favors 180- Day Period for Implementation of Rule & 360-day Implementation Period for Random Drug Testing ML20153F9681988-08-17017 August 1988 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Licensee Flexibility During Natl Crisis.Deferral of Issuance of Final Rule Until Proper Implementation Guidance Formulated Encouraged ML20154G1421988-04-20020 April 1988 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 73 Re Policy Statement on Nuclear Power Plant Access Authorization Program.Nrc Should Establish Program Mutually Agreed Upon Between Union & Util,Per Hope Creek & Salem Programs ML20154G4601988-04-18018 April 1988 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Notification of Inspector Visits to Facility ML18093A6331988-02-0101 February 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Proposed Policy Statement on Integrated Schedules for Implementation of Plant Mods ML20151B3641987-02-24024 February 1987 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Licensing of Nuclear Power Plants Where State &/Or Local Govts Decline to Cooperate in Offsite Emergency Planning ML20079N4271984-01-25025 January 1984 Response to State of DE 840120 Motion to Withdraw Petition for Leave to Intervene.Licensee Concurs in Motion.Dismissal of Proceeding Requested.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20079K9311984-01-20020 January 1984 Motion to Withdraw Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing Re Extension of Time for Type a Test.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20078P6771983-11-0404 November 1983 Answer to State of DE Atty General 831021 Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing on License Amend Re Inservice Integrated Leak Tests.Notices of Appearance & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20078M1551983-10-21021 October 1983 Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing on Proposed Issuance of Amend to License DPR-70 Re Inservice Integrated Leak Tests.Affidavit of Mailing Encl ML18087A8331983-04-12012 April 1983 Petition for Order to Show Cause Why Util Should Not Be Restrained from Restarting Facility Until Qualifications for Operation Demonstrated at Public Hearing ML18087A8341983-04-11011 April 1983 Affidavit of DG Bridenbaugh Re Delay of Facility Restart. Full Review of safety-related Equipment Must Be Completed & Appropriate Changes Implemented.Prof Qualifications Encl ML20213E3601983-03-0808 March 1983 Testimony Before Subcommittee on Energy & Environ Re Plant Licensing Concerns ML18086A9691981-10-14014 October 1981 Affidavit Confirming Validity of Util 811009 Response to IE Insp Repts 50-272/81-15 & 50-311/81-14 ML20005B6831981-08-20020 August 1981 Petition for Review of Aslab 810717 Order,Permitting OL Amend,Allowing Installation of New Storage Racks & Increasing Pool Capacity.Notice of Appearance & Affidavit of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20010C1481981-08-14014 August 1981 Response in Opposition to Lower Alloways Creek Township 810803 Petition for Review of ALAB-650.Petitioner Has Raised No Issue Which Warrants Commission Consideration.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20009H2221981-08-0303 August 1981 Petition Supporting Review of Aslab Decision.Case Involves Matter That Could Significantly Affect Environ,Public Health & Safety & Involves,Important Procedural Issues & Public Policy Questions.Certificate of Svc Encl ML18086A5181981-05-15015 May 1981 Answer Opposing AC Coleman 810504 Request for Stay of Initial decision,LBP-80-27,pending Appeal.Request Untimely & Fails to Meet Requirements for Issuance of Stay. Certificate of Svc Encl ML18085A8401981-02-17017 February 1981 Brief Supporting ASLB 801027 Decision Authorizing OL Amend to Permit Storage of 1,170 Spent Fuel Elements in Facility Spent Fuel Pool.All Exceptions Should Be Denied.Aslb Has Adequately Weighed Evidence.Certificate of Svc Encl ML18085A5231981-01-13013 January 1981 Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law in Support of 801111 Exceptions to ASLB 801027 Initial Decision Re Applicant Proposed Expansion of Fuel Storage.Certificate of Svc Encl ML18085A4091980-12-0808 December 1980 Response to Intervenors Eg & a Coleman Motion for Extension Until 810131 to File Brief in Support of Exceptions.Opposes Motion But Would Not Object to 2-wk Extension.Certificate of Svc Encl ML18085A4081980-12-0404 December 1980 Appeal from ASLB Initial Decision Granting Util Right to Increase Spent Fuel Pool Storage Capacity.Nepa Requires Detailed Analysis of Safety & Health Problems Posed by Reracking.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19340D3431980-11-30030 November 1980 Request for Extension to 810131 to File Brief in Support of Exceptions to ASLB 801027 Initial Decision Re Spent Fuel Pool Proceeding.Certification of Svc Encl ML18085A2791980-11-20020 November 1980 Notice of Withdrawal of Appearance as Counsel for Intervenors Coleman.Intervenors Coleman to Remain Parties to Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML18085A2501980-11-11011 November 1980 Appeal from ASLB 801027 Initial Decision.Alleges Erroneous Finding of Facts Re Contentions 2 & 6,evaluation of Eia, Acceptance of Pasedag Testimony & Rejection of Benjamin Testimony.Counsel Withdrawal & Certificate of Svc Encl ML18085A2161980-11-0404 November 1980 Exceptions & Appeal from ASLB 801027 Initial Decision. Exclusion of as Benjamin of Sandia Labs Testimony Is Arbitrary Due to Relevant Evidence Re Oxidation That Could Propagate to Older Fuel.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20062J4921980-10-21021 October 1980 Addl Testimony Presented Before ASLB to Correct & Clarify 800710 Testimony Re Loss of Water from Spent Fuel Storage Pool ML18082A7101980-07-11011 July 1980 Reply Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law in Form of Partial Initial Decision Substituting for Licensee 800613 Findings,In Response to ASLB 800509 Order & ASLB 800626 Question 5 on away-from-reactor Issues.W/Certificate of Svc 1998-09-15
[Table view] |
Text
- 1 \
- STATE OF NEW JERSEY COUNTY OF ESSEX ) ) SS. ) e AFFIDAVIT OF ROBERT P. DOUGLAS ROBERT P. DOUGLAS, being first duly sworn accord-ing to law, deposes and states: l. I am employed by Public Service Electric & Gas Company as Licensing Manager* and Acting Environment Manager. My professional qualifications which I incorporate by reference herein are contained in the transcript of this proceeding following Tr. 402. v* 2. I have supervised the calculation of the es-timated dose associated with moving and storing spent fuel from the unenlarged (264 spaces) Salem Unit 1 to the enlarged (1170 spaces) spent fuel pool of Salem.Unit
- 2. As shown in Attachment 1, hereto which is also incorporated herein, the dose resulting from moving one cask containing two fuel assemblies is approximately 0.4 man This dose does not include the additional .dose associated with the transfer of fuel from Unit 2 to Unit l if disposal is not available offsite and the Unit l pool must then be enlarged.
- 3. I have also established the nu.'llber of spent fuel elements which will have to be transferred from Unit 1 to Unit 2 if the above described scheme is to be carried out in accordance with the latest information concerning schedule and number of spent fuel elements to be discharged after -Z.. '191000*0 I r.
,.
- each cycle. As shown in Attachment 2, which is incorporated by reference herein, the number of spent fuel elements to be transferred is 500. Thus the total man rem exposure as-sociated with such a transfer is 0.4 x 250 = 100, considerably greater than the 2-5 man rem associated with changing the racks in Unit I with sp.ent fuel elements in the pool. 4. I thus conclude that, among other reasons, it is preferable to expand the*tJnit 1 spent fuel pool rather than shipping the spent fuel to an enlarged Unit 2 spent fuel pool. Sworn. and subscribed to before me this day of. t 1979 NOTARY PUBLIC J __ / V*RONICA I.. ADAMS My Commission exp*ires . A Hotary Public ot Hew Jersey
- 111, e.imnisslan Up"es Oct. 23, 198 z I I ** I . I
"""' '-'-""'\...1..U.LLCJ.J.
I.. ..I. SALEM NO. 1 UNIT Estimated dose from moving and storing spent fuel from Unit No. 1 in the Unit No. 2 spent fuel pool. STEP* l.) 6 operators to unload spent fuel cask, place in decon pit and wash down, place in transfer pool and remove head. 6 people x 3 hrs. x 3.5 mr/hr. 2) 6 operators to load 2 fuel assemblies in a (one to operate bridge, one to operate crane, one to operate fuel handling tools, 1 health physics and 2 to record assemblies moved. 6: people x 10 minutes/assembly x 2 assemblies.
x mr/hr. 3) 6 people for 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> to set cask head. 6 people x l hr. x 3.5 mr/hr. 4) 6 operators for 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> (1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> to decon cask, 1. hour to load cask on truck) on average 10 mr/hr field. 6 people x 2 hrs *. x 10 mr/hr. 5) Truck driver and assistant approximately 15 minutes to drive from Unit l to Unit 2 fuel handling building (approx. 5 mr/hr. in cab. 2 people x 15 hrs. x 5.0 mr/hr. E>O 6) 6 operators to unload, rinse down, and place cask irr fuel transfer pool ( 2 hrs)
- 6 people x 2 hrs. x 10 mr/hr. 7) 6 people to remove cask head at transfer pool. (approx. 1 hr.). 6 people x 1 hr. x 3.5 mr/hr. 8) 6 operators to move 2 fuel assemblies from cask to racks (approx. 10 minutes/ assembly).
6 people x 20 hrs. x 3.5 mr/hr. E>O DOSE (man-mrem/yr)
= 63 = 7 .. o . = 21 = 120 = 2.s = 120 = 21 = 7.0
.. . STEP* 9) . 6 operators for l hour to set cask head. DOSE (man-mrem/hr) 6 people x 3.5 mr/hr. x l hr. = 21 10) 6 operators for 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> to decon cask and load on truck to return to Unit No. l (cask empty, approx. l mr/hr.). 6 people _x 2 hrs. x l mr/hr. = 12 11) Truck driver and assistant for approxi-* mately 15 minutes to return to Unit No. l at .s mr/hr. 2 people x 15 hrs. x .5 mr/hr. = . 15 ""GO Total man-rem for moving one cask (2 fuel assemblies) from Unit No. l spent fuel tool to Unit No. 2 spent fuel pool. 395 man-mrem or approx. O. 4 man-rem
--.
- l) The 3.5 mrem/hr dose rate used in several steps of the estimate is based on the dose rate at the fuel pool and transfer pool water surface due to one spent fuel assembly being moved and the dose rate contribution from radionuclides expected to be in the water. 2) The fuel shipping cask dose rates are based on 49 CFR 173 limits of 10 mrem/hr at six feet from shipping cask. It is feet that this is tive of average radiation field operators will be exposed to. RAZ :cm 8/21/79 5Ll 50-A Year 1979 1980 1981 1982 1903 1984 1985 1906 1987 1908 1909 1990 1991 1992 .. ,. _!_I FUEL ELEMENTS SHIPPED FROM SALEM UNI'f l 'l'O SAJJEM UNIT 2 IF ONLY 'l'HE UNIT 2 SPENT FUEL POOL IS EXPl\NDED
_!_I Discharged From Unit 1 40 52 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 Stored In Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool 40 52 56 56 56 4 264 Shipped to Unit 2 Spent Fuel Pool 52 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 500 + Discharged From Unit 2 52 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 660 = 1168 in Unit 2 spent fuel pool 'l'he purpose of this table is only to calculate the total number of spent fuel semblies to be transferred and does not represent any final specific scheme for .f: ** 1 ,_ v -.r-*-