ML18030A295

From kanterella
Revision as of 04:34, 29 June 2018 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Provides Comments on Suppl to Des Re Operation of Facilities.Fes Should Include All Risks from Moderate Frequency Accidents,Infrequent Accidents,Limiting Faults & Severe Core Melt Accidents
ML18030A295
Person / Time
Site: Susquehanna  Talen Energy icon.png
Issue date: 05/28/1981
From: POMPONIO J R
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
To: YOUNGBLOOD B J
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8106020488
Download: ML18030A295 (3)


Text

~qq(2Sdy'~CFqqoq<UNITEDSTATESENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYREGiONIII6THANDWALNUTSTRS=TSPHlLADELPHIA.

PENNSYLVANlA 19306MAY28l981Zr.B.J.Youngblood, ChiefLicensing BranchNo.1DivisionofLicensing U.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission Vashington, D.C.20555Mgh&auaueruran23fOA(2425$goN

DearMr.Youngblood:

Wehavecompleted ourreviewoftheSupplement totheDraftEnvironmental ImpactStatement relatedtotheoperation oftheSusquehanna SteamElectricStationUnits1and2;Weof'ferthefollowing commentsforyourconsideration.

TheCo~s~sonisto"becommended for'itsdecisiontopreparethisSuppleme'nt discussing theenvironmental andsocietalimpactsofacoremeltdownaccident.

EPAhasemphasized theneedtoreviewanevaluation oftheenvironmental impactsresulting fromdifferent LWRaccidentscenarios including Class9accidents.

Theassessment ofenvironmental impactsrelatingtosevereaccidents attheplantemploysmethodsoriginally developed intheReactorSafetyStudy(WASE-)400).Thesetwostudieswillbethebasisforsimilarenvironmental assess"mentsofothernuclearpowerplantssothatwerecommend thatNRCrefertoEPA'soriginaltechnical commentsonthesestudies.Thecommentsareincludedinthepublication "ReactorSafetyStudy(VASE-1400):

AReviewoftheFinalReportigandaletterfromEPA'sOfficeofFederalActivities toNRCdatedFebruary8p1977.TheTable6.1.4-4(p.6-26)shouldcorrespond onaone-to-one basiswiththeaccidentsequenceorsequencegroupsofTable6.1.4-2(p.6-23).Thenotations PN()relatingtothisTable(6.1.4-2) anddescribed inAppendix8needsclarification.

Theuninitiated readingthis,webelievewouldbeveryconfused.

Thediscussion ofimpactsofinfrequent accidents andlimitingfaults,inboththeoriginalDESandtheSupplement, addresses probabilities ofoccurrence qualitatively.

Znthediscussion, however,ofthemoreseverecoremeltacci-dents,theprobabilities ofoccurrence arequantified (Table6.1.4-2).

For6Pltuniformity inthepresentation ofallenvironmental risks,theprobabilities ofoccurrence ofinfrequent accidents andlimitingfaultsDesignBasisAccidents shouldbeprovided.

ZtisnotclearwhethertheriskslistedinTable6.1.4-3,Annual~AyerseValuesofEnvironmental RisksDuetoAccidents, includethosefrominfrequent accidents gy060-O 0Isklh sandlimitingfaults(Table6.1.4-1),

postulated accidents (Table6.2oftheoriginalDraftEnvironmental ImpactStatement),

andaccidents leadingtothesequencegroupslistedinTable6.1.4-2.TheFinalEnvironmental ImpactState-mentshouldincludeallrisksfrommoderatefrequency accidents, infrequent accidents, ignitingfaultsaadseoerecoremeltaccidents.

Theriskodthe~pp(~)infrequent accidents, andlimitingfaultsis"fudgedtobeextremely small"butshouldbefullypresented andnotovershadowed bytherisksfrom'coremeltaccidents.

Therisksfromthemoreprobableyetlowerconsequence accidents mayindeedbesignificant totheindividual riskandshouldbelisted.Itwouldalsobeinformative toextendFigures6.1.4-3and6.1.4-5toincludehigherprobability accidents.

Itwouldalsobehelpfultodevelopasummarytableoftheannualaveragevalueoftheenvironmental risksfromoperation ofallthereactorsattheSusque-hannasitaTh.erisksshouldincludethosefromnormaloperations, moderatePPP(Q)frequency accidents, infrequent accidents, limitingfaultsandseverecoremeltaccidents; societalandindividual risksshouldalsobeaddressed.

TheThree?file.Islan&2accilentdemonstrated

'afactorthatsho'uldbeaddressed.

Thecostofreactorbuildingdecontamination andthereplacement powereconomics haveprovedtobeverysizeableitems.'hesefactorsaiesignificant andimportant tothebenefit-cast analysis.

Thesefacesunderscore theneedtoSPAdevelopstandardmethodsforestimating thecontribution ofthesecoststoeconomicrisks.ImpactStatements orSupplements shouldincludetheseeconomics intheirbenefit-cost balance.C~+WewouldclassifythisdocumentinEPA'sReporting CategoryER-2.Thismeanswehavere'servations concerning themannerinwhichtheaccidents aretreatedandwealsobelieveadditional clarification isrequired.

~~We'hankyouEortheopportunity toreviewthedocumentandawaittheissuanceofthefinal.Sincerely yours,eP=ohnR.PomponioChiefEIS&WetlandsReviewSection