NUREG-1285, Responds to Expressing Concerns About Family Safety Due to Nearby Location of Nuclear Plant.Nrc Does Not Consider BWR W/Mark I Containments to Be Unsafe & Will Strive to Ensure That All Plants Made Even More Safe: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot change)
(StriderTol Bot change)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Adams
#REDIRECT [[NUREG-1285, Responds to to Chairman Zech Expressing Concern About Family Safety Due to Residence Near Nuclear Plant.Nrc Does Not Consider BWR Reactors W/Mark I Containments to Be Unsafe.W/O Stated NUREG-1285]]
| number = ML20245J013
| issue date = 02/27/1989
| title = Responds to Expressing Concerns About Family Safety Due to Nearby Location of Nuclear Plant.Nrc Does Not Consider BWR W/Mark I Containments to Be Unsafe & Will Strive to Ensure That All Plants Made Even More Safe
| author name = Lainas G
| author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION (NRR)
| addressee name = Jay C
| addressee affiliation = AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
| docket = 05000321, 05000366
| license number =
| contact person =
| case reference number = RTR-NUREG-1285
| document report number = NUDOCS 8903060129
| title reference date = 02-02-1989
| package number = ML20245J017
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, NRC TO PUBLIC ENTITY/CITIZEN/ORGANIZATION/MEDIA, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
| page count = 3
}}
 
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:..]
J p S"4 7
y
;[
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION '
r, '
8 wasmuorow. o. c. 20ssa
/
g g7 l.
Ms. Cheryl D. Jay 9 Rose Avenue Savannah, Georgia 31406
 
==Dear Ms. Jay:==
I am responding to your letter of February 2,1989,~ to Chairman Zech.
In your letter, you expressed concerns about your family's safety because you live near -
the. nuclear plant located near Baxley, Georgia.'The plant referred to is the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, operated by the Georgia Power Company on behalf of itself and several other part owners. The plant consists of two boiling-water reactors (BWRs). located on the south bank of the Altamaha River, approximately 11 miles north of Baxley. Each reactor is'of the BWR-4 product line designed by the General Electric Company (GE), and each uses a Mark I containment structure.
Unit l' at the plant has been in operation for nearly 15 years, and Unit 2 has been operating for nearly 11 years. During this period, neither unit-has experienced any significant safety problems.
You specifically mentioned the 1987 Reed Report as having been produced by the NRC and as having identified safety problems with the Mark I containment design.
I assume that you are referring to NUREG-1285, "NRC Staff Evaluation of the General Electric Company Nuclear Reactor Study (" Reed Report")," issued in July.
+
1987. The actual " Reed Report" was an internal product-improvement study T
performed by GE personnel in 1975, and NUREG-1285 is a report of an evaluation perfomed by NRC personnel of the various issues raised by the original GE study.
I am enclosing a copy of NUREG-1285 for your information. NUREG-1285 did not identify Mark I containments as being unsafe; rather, the report concluded that:
"(1) The Reed Report does not identify any matters that would support a need to curtail the operation of any GE boiling water reactor plants now licensed.
(2) The Reed Report does not identify any new safety issues of which the staff was unaware.
I (3) While certain issues addressed by the Reed Report are still being studied by the NRC and the industry, there is a basis for permitting continued plant operations while those issues are being resolved."
i Over the past several years, the NRC staf# has performed studies of potential severe accidents of extremely low probability at light water reactors similar 4
to the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant. All the studies have shown that the Mark I Boiling Water Reactor (BWRs) are safe and do not pose an undue risk.
However,' to further improve the capability of Mark I containments, the staff has undertaken a program to study the benefits of additional Mark I contain-ments improvements which would further enhance their ability to mitigate the consequences of severe accidents, should they occur. If the staff studies indicate that the additional improvements are justified, the NRC will propose such improvements for all plants similar to the Edwin I. Hatch.
0@
f
(
8903060129 890227 9
R ADOCK 0500 1
 
~.
4.
i
. Ms. Chery) Jay. '.
~ The NRC continually strives to ensure that all nuclear plants are operated safely.- Each plant is subjected to multiple inspections'each year to ensure that operations ~are conducted in accordance with approved procedures and in-
-compliance with the terms of the license authorizing operation.
Resident inspectors are assigned to each nuclear site'to maintain day-to-day cognizance of operations. Safety systems'and equipment are tested routinely to ensure that they will perform their safety functions if called upon to do so.. Both the. plant operators and the NRC. search for. cost-effective measures that can be
:taken to further improve plant safety. We believe that our inspection program, the. required plant systems.cesting, and the improvements to plant design that result from our continuing. review, combine to ensure that future
. plant operations are conducted safely.
In summary, the' NRC does 'not consider boiling water reactors with Mark I containments to be unsafe. To the contrary, tve consider that this class of nuclear plant is capable of safe operation without posing a significant risk to the public health and safety. Nonetheless, we continually strive to ensure that-all nuclear plants are made even more safe.
I trust that this information is responsive to your concerns.
Sincerely, Original Signed By:
Gus C. Lainas, Acting Director Division of Reactor Projects - I/II.
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
 
==Enclosure:==
NUREG-1285-
*SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE
[GREENTICKET 004250]
*PDII-3:
*PDII-3
*PDII-3 Tech Ed
*(AD):DRP (A)
:DRP MRood LCrocker: sw DMatthews EAdensam
~a as 2/16/89 2/16/89 2/17/89 2A6:/89 2/17/89 2/2 89 1
w_
 
' R. y l
?
g ;.,,-
u m
n~
c
[
: R *, '
;Ms. Cheryl day, l
: 4' DISTRIBUTION-(ED0-004250).
s J,
:- M w/ incoming.ltr oniy._
NRC PDR & Local PDR-1 EDO, Reading' File f
ED0'_#004250 '.
L Y
.T. Murley/J. Snf ezek 12-G -
F. Miraglia: ' G-18.
- D.tcrutchfield-12-G >'
G. Gillespie' G-18' S. Varga- '
12-G-18 G. Lainas' 14-E-4 E. Adensam 14-H-4' D. 'Natthews 14-H 'M.
Rood 14-H-25 L. CrockerLw/cy of-incoming 14-H-25 D.;Mossburg,PMAS w/cy30f incoming ED0-004250 G-18 PDII-3 Reading (w/cy of incoming)
~MErnst, RII
~
4 Beverly Clayton #0004250 14-E-4 PDII-3 Reading #0004250 Green Ticket File SECY-CRC-89-0105 y
.r 4
h l
b,
,}}

Revision as of 03:24, 3 December 2024

Redirect to:

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=NUREG-1285,_Responds_to_Expressing_Concerns_About_Family_Safety_Due_to_Nearby_Location_of_Nuclear_Plant.Nrc_Does_Not_Consider_BWR_W/Mark_I_Containments_to_Be_Unsafe_%26_Will_Strive_to_Ensure_That_All_Plants_Made_Even_More_Safe&oldid=3944094"