ML20154M734
| ML20154M734 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 05/26/1988 |
| From: | Andrews R OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| References | |
| LIC-88-066, LIC-88-66, NUDOCS 8806020056 | |
| Download: ML20154M734 (2) | |
Text
.
{l-]:W,i.l I'
\\ I
.\\
y[
t t
Omaha Public Power District 1623 Harney Omaha. Nebraska 68102 2247 402/536-4000 May 26, 1988 LIC-88-066 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555
References:
1.
Docket No. 50-285 2.
Letter NRC (J. E. Gagliardo) to 0 PPD (R. L. Andrews) dated December 22, 1986. (Inspection Report 50-285/86-20) 3.
Letter from 0 PPD (R. L. Andrews) to NRC (J. E. Gagliardo) dated January 28, 1987 (LIC-87-059) 4.
Letter from OPPD (R. L. Andrews) to NRC (Document Control Desk) dated September 10, 1987 (LIC-87-609)
Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
Inspection Report Items 8620-13 & 8620 Revised Schedule to Correct Deficiencies Omaha Public Power District (0 PPD) forwarded a schedule in Reference 3 to correct deficiencies in the area of Emergency Preparedness.
Items 8620-13 &
8620-15 concerned deficiencies relative to the Emergency Assessment of Gaseous and Liquid Effluents (EAGLE) computer program. A schedule to manually perform dose assessments was addressed in Reference 4.
OPPD proposed to complete the necessary changes to the EAGLE computer program to correct the deficiencies by June 1,1988. After investigation of the required changes and resources available, OPPD has determined that the June 1, 1988 date cannot be met.
The plume-follow model contained within the EAGLE con. cuter program will require at least five roodifications (e.g., eminent release, daughter-in-growth) with an estimate of 30-35 weeks necessary to complete these changes.
Prior to implementation, the plume-follow model must be verified and validated (V&V) which will require an additional 25 weeks to accomplish, with a projected complation date of June 1,1989.
Therefore, OPPD wishes to info., you that the revised completion date to correct deficiencies is June i, 1989.
fhi; delay was discussed in a telephone conversation on January 15, 1988, between Mr.
James Efsicaro of my staff and Mr. Nemen Terc of Region IV.
8806020o56 880526 PDR ADOCK 05000285 O
\\
-_= 7,-
4 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission LIC-88-066 Page 2 During the interim, a Straight-Line Gaussian calculation method will be used.
Offsite monitor team d.ita for discrete locations will be compared to pro-jections for Protective Action Recommendations (PAR) upgrade if necessary.
The offsite monitor team data is not used programatically for PAR downgrade when'a release is in progress.
This is a proven method for calculating dose assessment.
There is no safety significance associated with the delay of implementing the plume follow method.
The straight line method has been verified and valida+,ed and is more conservative than the plume follow method. The plume follow method is designed to provide more accurate information about discrete locations for the longer term of recovery rather than the initial response.
The straight line provides dose projection to 10 miles in less than 15 minutes versus the 30 minutes to 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> required for the plume follow.
This allows for a more timely notification of the public.
If you have any questions pertaining to this matter, please contact us.
Sincerely, 61.. L & n f^
R. L. Andrews Division Manager Nuclear Production RLA/me c:
LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby a MacRae 1333 New Hampshire Ave., N.W.
Washington, DC 20036 R. D. Mart'n, NRC Regional Administrator A. Bournia, NRC Project Manager P. H. Harrell, NRC Senior Resident inspector g
..,,_e_.,
-