ML20088A065

Statement of Significance of NRC Severe Accident Mitigation Sys Contract Documents.Sufficient Info Available Re Mitigative Design Alternatives to Require Consideration in NEPA Analysis of Licensing.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20088A065
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	04/03/1984
From:	Elliott C LIMERICK ECOLOGY ACTION, INC.
To:
References
NUDOCS 8404100499
Download: ML20088A065 (8)

Text

' '

Lf9d ym, .m.. . . -

'84 APR-9 P12:28 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ,,

u ,6 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 'g"_

In the Matter of )

)

PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-352

) 50-353 (Limerick Generating Station, ) ,:

Units 1 and 2) )

LEA STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE OF NRC SEVERE ACCIDENT MITIGATION SYSTEMS CONTRACT DOCUMENTS TO LEA CONTENTION DES-5 Pursuant to the Order of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board at the Pre-hearing conference on March 20, 1984, (Tr.

8778), LEA herewith submits its statement concerning the above referenced documents, which LEA understands have been provided to the Board and parties.

The submitted documents furtitor support LEA's view that the Staff's investigation into mitiga.tive alternatives to Limerick has identified particular mitigative design alter-natives to Limerick and that sufficient information is avail-able concerning these alternatives to require their considera-tion in the NEPA. analysis of the licensing of the Limerick facility.

The Board should particularly note the March 15, 1984 Monthly Project Status Report, p. 3:

8404100499 840403 PDR 9 ADOCK 05000352 PDR

, 3 k

3 -. ,

i

c. Summary to date: For Mark II containment mitigation, the necessary requirements have been established and a choice of systems de-signed and costed ready for final considera-tion. These systems include capabilities for steam venting during an ATWS, filtered venting of excess hydrogen formation; redundant high capacity heat removal from the containment suppression pool, drywell water sprays, core retention, and vacuum breaking, Several 4

versions have been designed for some components, especially core retention...the entire cost analysis has been prepared in three versions, for the cases of a plant already in operation, a plant still under construction, and for a new plant at inception.

1 i

The report.also states (p.4):

Task 4: Value/ Impact Analysis. This task will provide a quantitative assessment of the relative 4

risk that can be averted by mitigating particular aspects of containment failure, in comparison with the cost. It will determine whether a proposed mitigation system-is cost effective, and which components are most important.

~

a. Efforts completed: Collection of source documents for Value/ Impact ~ovaluation is completc and analysis is proceeding in detail for Mark II' '-

l containments under Task'3 .

i t

l c. Summary to date: Methodology for Value/

Impact analysis of mitigation conceptual designs have been formulated...

With respect to this Task 4 the February 15, 1984 Monthly Project Status Report (p. 4) stated:

c. Summary to date: Methodology-for Value/

- Impact analysis of mitigation conceptual designs  ;

1

( - l

! I v- r -, , w , ,

l l

has been formulated...the procedures have been tested by completing a preliminary design assessment for Task 3 of the Mark II type of containment.

It is apparent th'at the mitigation systems, identified, analyzed, designed and costed are aimed at the dominant risk sequencesidentifiedfortheMarkIIdbntainment:

Task 1: Survey of Containment Systems. This task comprises data gathering, categorization of dominant accident sequences, and evaluation of mitigation opportunities for the major types of reactor containment.

Task 3: Design and Feasibility. This task comprises selection of up to three major types of reactor containment...establiehing for each type the requirements for a mitigation system in view of the dominant risks established in Task 1.

LEA will not repeat here its carlier arguments regarding the necessity, under the National Env'ironmental Policy Act, for an analysis of alternatives to a proposed licensing action.

Ilowever , it is clear that for Limerick, the NRC Staff 1 has identified major dominant risk contributors, has identified design alternatives which would mitigate the risk identified, and has at least preliminarily analyzed the alternatives from a cost / benefit viewpoint.

l l

i

}

The cost / benefit ratio will change as construction is completed, and if the plant is permitted to load fuel, and if the plant enters full power and commercial operation.

The Commission's ' staff, by precluding consideration of alternatives in the context of licensing for Limerick, and effectivelykeepingitsrighthandfrobknowingwhat itslef t is doing, may irrevocably shift tne cost / benefit balance against some types of mitigation systems, thus circumventing the purpose of NEPA. This Board has recognized precisely this problem earlier in this proceeding:

The courts have emphasized that Congress in-tended that agencies give serious consideration to environmental costs and that this requires agencies to consider actions to avoid these costs. Ucnce, the courts have stated they will not permit h2PA to become a " paper tiger" and compliance with it "a pro forma ritual." See Calvert Cliffs' Coordinating Committee, Inc. v.

AEC, 449 P.2d 1]O9, 1114, 1128 (D.C. Cir. 1971).

It is commonly recognized that as construction continuos, the cost of correctivo action to mini-mize environmental harm may increase, even to the point where such action is not reasonably possible. Id. at 1128;'Public Service Company of New Hampshire (Seabrook Station, . Units 1 and 2), CLI-78-14, 7 NRC 952, 959-60 (1978); Con-sumers Power Company (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2), ALAB-395, 5 NRC 772, 779 (1977). In an effort to comply with Congress's intent in enacting NEPA,

the Board intends to consider these contentions before construction has advanced so far that there l

is no realistic opportunity for it to order actions l

which it may determine are nocessary to minimize harm to the environment.

i

! 1 i

Memorandum and Order, July 14, 1982, slip. og. p. 3-4.

1 3

. i e,

The obligation to consider alternatives imposed both by NEPA.and by Commission regulations does not depend upon any finding of any particular level of " significance" of the particular impact sought to be mitigated.

A "significant impact" finding is only the threshold

< triggering the obligation to prepare as environmental impact statement. Once an EIS is required, mitigative alternatives which are not " remote and speculative" must be considered prior to federal approval of the proposed action.

This is so particularly where the Commission's own staff has identified'both the need for mitigative design features and the specific alternatives available for cost effective mitigation.

For these reasons, LEA urges the Board to admit Contention DES-5.

Respectfully submitted, l

Dated: April 3, 1984 ( .[- [ ^6 -

Charles W. Elliott, Esquire 1101 Building Easton, Pennsylvania 18042 (215) 258-2374 i

f i

l. i l- .

S

[ .

't ..

, )

.EU UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

_ AR? ~g Pp,.g

.G.^.

" E*-t% ;,; i ... .

8 4 f

• l In the Matter of )

)

Philadelphia Electric Company ) Docket Nos. 50-352

) 50-353 (Limerick Generating Station, )

Units 1 and 2) )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copics of " LEA Statement of Signifi- +

cance of NRC Severe Accident Mitigation Systems Contract Docu-ments to LEA Contention DES-5" dated April 3, 1984, in the captioned matter have boon served upon the following by dodosit in the United States mail this 4th day of April, 1984:

• Lawrence Brenner, Esq. (2) Atomic Safety anct Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panol Board U.S. Nuclear Rogulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Docketing and Service section o Dr. Richard.P. Cole Office of the Secretary Atomic Safety and U.S. Nuc l ea.r Royulatory Licensing Board comminnion U.S. Nucluar ReguIatory Wa c h .i n y Lon , . D . C . 20555 Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Ann P. Ilodgdon, Esq.

Counsel for NRC Staff Office o Dr. Peter A. Morris of the Executive Atomic Safety and Legal-Director Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 h

}

q J

CExpress Mail

• l l

l -

_ .- ._ = _ _ .

Atomic Safety and Licensing Steven P. Hershey, Esq.

Board Panel Community Legal Services, Inc.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Law Center West North Commission 5219 Chestnut Street Washington, D.C. 20555 Philadelphia, PA 19139 Philadelphia Electric Company Angus Love, Esq.

ATTN: Edward G. Bauer, Jr. 107 East Main Street Vice President & Norristown, PA 19401 General Counsel 2301 Market Street Mr. Joseph H. White, III Philadelphia, PA 19101 15-Ardmore Avenue Ardmore, PA 19003 Mr. Frank R. Romano r Cl Forest Avenue Robert J. Sugarman, Esq.

Ambler, Pennsylvania 19002 Sugarman, Denworth & Hellegers 16th Floor, Center Plaza Mr. Robert L. Anthony 101 North Broad Street Friends of the Earth of Philadelphia, PA 19107 the Delaware Valley 106 Vernon Lane, Box 186 Director, Pennsylvania Moylan, Pennsylvania .19065 Emergency Management Agency Basement, Transportation-Mr. Marvin I. Lewis and Safety Building 6504 Bradford Terrace Harrisburg,-PA 17120 Philadelphia, PA 19149 Martha W. Bush, Esq.

Phyllis Zitzer, Esq. .Kathryn S. Lcwis,.Esq.

Limerick Ecology Action City of Philadelphia P.O. Box 761 Municipal Sorvices Bldg.

762 Queen Street 15th and JFK Blvd.

Pottstown, PA 19464 Philadelphia, PA 19107 Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esq. Spence W. Porry, Esq.

Counsel for l'hil tidelpliiti Assueliite Genertit Counuel Electric Company Federal. Emergency 1747 Pennsylvania Avo., N.W. Management Agency Washington,' D.C. 20006 500 C Street, S.W., Rm. 840 Washington, D.C. 20472 Zori G. Ferkin, Esq.

Assistant Counsel . Thomas Gerusky, Director

, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Bureau of Radiation Protection

, Governor's Energy Council Department of Environmental

1625 N. Front Street Resources Harrisburg, PA 17102 Sth Floor, Fulton Bank Bldg.

l Third and Locust Streets Harrisburg, PA 17120 L

.~

2' 7 14 J

= __ i

a;4

{

.i3I i Tf '

==

1;%

CU Jay M. Gutierrez, Esq.

7:=

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 55 Commission Region I

@@ 631 Park-Avenue

))

. King of Prussia, PA 19406

..= " " ' James Wiggins is:j Senior Resident Inspector a.,.

f5 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

= Commission ~

y. '

3:3 P.O. Box 47

[j Sanatoga, PA 19464

@ Timothy R.S. Campbell ji

=

Director Department of Emergency i.5 Services ji-?

3 14 East Biddle Street j,,

West Chestor, PA 19380 I~m 51

=.

2:

b 7

= V Charles W. Elliott, Esq.

=

'.7 .

a O

e E