Staff studies (NUREG-0427) have shown that the NRC standardization program is about at the breakeven point, that is, the staff resources spent on the review of standardization plants and design approval applications is about equivalent to the resources that would have been used if only custom plants had been involved. To the extent that utilities reference approved designs in the future, the balance will become more and more favorable for the standardization program. On the other hand, should the staff be requested to review additional PDA's and new applications that do not reference PDA's, FDA's, or ML's (Manufacturing Licenses), the use of standardization to reduce the use of staff resources would not be realized.

Staff studies also have revealed that use of the standardization options have not, to date, resulted in a reduction of schedules. These studies show that the potential exists for significant schedule reductions only when there is preapproval of the Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS), the Balance of Plant (BOP), and the site, the three review areas that separately can define the critical path. Thus, a strong incentive exists for pursuing site approvals via the Early Site Review Program, since approved PDAs now exist for the NSSS and BOP portions of the plant. Utility-related matters of the application, such as the quality assurance program or the financial qualifications, generally do not control the overall review schedule.

Program actions completed during fiscal year 1979 included: (a) extending Balance-of-Plant PDAs to a full 3-year term; (b) extending six PDAs to a full 5-year term based upon a completeness review; and (c) issuing a PDA for RESAR-414. Additional reviews and policy initiatives were temporarily suspended in April 1979 as a result of the TMI-2 accident. Staff resources were re-directed to high priority activities associated with the accident-related studies.

ADVANCED NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS

On April 7, 1977, President Carter issued a statement on Nuclear Power Policy which restated the role that nuclear energy was to have in the total energy prospects of the country. The President's policy would defer indefinitely the commercial reprocessing and recycling of plutonium produced in nuclear power reactors, restructure the U.S. breeder reactor program to give high priority to alternative designs, and defer the time when breeder reactors are to be commercialized.

During this reporting period, the NRC has continued its participation in the review and assessment of a variety of reactor types and fuel cycles being considered by the Department of Energy (DOE) as part of the Nonprolifereation Alternative Systems Assessment Program (NASAP); it also continued performing

reviews and providing comments on the studies and assessments being performed under the International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation (INFCE) program. In its reviews and comments, the staff focused on the potential licensability of these reactor types and associated fuel cycles, with respect to safety and safeguards concerns and environmental acceptability.

Based on advanced reactor licensing experience and preliminary safety documents supplied by DOE, the staff prepared its initial comments on alternative reactors and fuel cycles and forwarded them to DOE in June 1979. These initial findings are summarized in the first of a series of reports to Congress published in October 1979.

Clinch River Breeder Reactor

The status of the staff review of the Clinch River Breeder Reactor remained inactive throughout the year and will remain so pending enactment of legislation clarifying the status of the facility.

Fast Flux Test Facility

The Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) is a major LMFBR test facility which, with a power of 400 megawatts (thermal), will provide an intense field of fast neutrons for irradiating fuels and materials in connection with advanced reactor research and development. The facility, which is located about 10 miles north of Richland, Washington, is owned by the Department of Energy (DOE) and is not subject to licensing by the NRC. An NRC staff safety review was performed, however, under terms of an interagency agreement with DOE. The staff completed the major part of its review effort and, in August 1978, issued its Safety Evaluation Report (NUREG-0358). A supplement to the SER (NUREG-0358, Supplement No. 1) was issued in May 1979. Sodium filling of one secondary sodium loop took place in July 1978. Fuel loading was expected in October 1979. Prior to full power operation, now scheduled for early 1980, a series of tests was to be performed to determine whether natural circulation is a viable method of removing decay heat as predicted by analyses.

The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) was extensively involved in the review of FFTF and meetings addressing that review were held in July, August, September and November 1978. The ACRS concluded that the startup and operation of the FFTF is acceptable, provided that due regard is given to NRC consequences of certain low probability accidents, and other specified matters. DOE is presently evaluating the NRC staff recommendations regarding containment adequacy for low probability accidents.

Gas-Cooled Reactors

As a consequence of the withdrawal of the General Atomic Company from the commercial nuclear power market in late 1975, regulatory activities related to gas-cooled reactors have been confined primarily to the Fort St. Vrain reactor. Limited reviews of advanced high-temperature gas-cooled reactors and of a gas-cooled fast breeder reactor have been undertaken in conjunction with the NRC's participation in the NASAP study.

Fort St. Vrain. Fort St. Vrain, a 330-MWe hightemperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR), was designed by the General Atomic Company and is operated by the Public Service Company of Colorado near Platteville, Colorado. Transfer of ownership to Public Service was made in June 1979. Power level is restricted to 70 percent of initially rated power pending resolution of the fluctuation problem described on page 40 of the 1978 NRC Annual Report.

Advanced High-Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactors. In early 1978, a group of utilities formed an organization, Gas Cooled Reactor Associates (GCRA), for the purpose of developing a commercially viable advanced HTGR. GCRA manages the DOE funds supporting the project and is responsible for carrying out initial phases of the licensing review. In early 1979, a decision was made to terminate work on a standardized 900 MWe steam cycle plant in favor of working toward the demonstration of the gas turbine cycle in the mid-1990's. NRC review of this concept is being performed under NASAP auspices.

Gas-Cooled Fast Breeder Reactor. In late 1976, an organization of utilities, Helium Breeder Associates (HBA), was formed to work with both the General Atomic Company and DOE (then the Energy Research and Development Administration) toward the development and demonstration of the Gas-Cooled Fast Breeder Reactor (GCFR). The GCFR demonstration unit would produce 330 MWe. Both DOE and HBA have accented General Atomic's revised reactor design that would permit emergency core cooling by means of natural convection. This concept is now being reviewed under NASAP auspices.

Floating Nuclear Power Plants

Floating nuclear power plants (FNPs) are electrical generating stations of a standardized design which would be constructed at a shipyard facility using assembly line techniques. The proposed FNPs would utilize a conventional pressurized light water reactor system design mounted on floating platforms, similar to the hull of a barge, and can be sited at offshore or nearshore sites in the ocean or in estuaries and rivers. Offshore Power Systems (OPS), a subsidiary of Westinghouse Electric Corporation, filed an application with the NRC in 1973 for a license to manufacture

up to eight identical floating nuclear power plants at Blount Island near Jacksonville, Fla.

An NRC staff Safety Evaluation Report (NUREG-75/100) was issued in September 1975; Supplement No. 1 (NUREG-0054) was issued in March 1976 and Supplement No. 2 in October 1976. It was anticipated that Supplement No. 3 will be issued in early 1980.

The staff has also prepared a three-part Final Environmental Impact Statement (FES) to assess the potential impacts from the construction, siting and operation of FNPs. Part I, issued in October 1975, relates to the construction and nonnuclear testing of the FNPs at the manufacturing site in Florida. Part I concluded that foreseeable adverse impacts from manufacturing the FNPs would be acceptable in consideration of the benefits expected from the plants and therefore recommended that a manufacturing license be issued, subject to certain license conditions. Part II, issued in September 1976, relates to the potential impacts associated with siting, constructing, and operating FNPs at generalized unspecified locations offshore in the Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico and in certain rivers and estuaries. At the request of the Council of Environmental Quality, the NRC issued an Addendum to Part II of the Final Environmental Statement, in June 1978, which elaborated upon the data and analyses presented in Part II with respect to the estuarine and riverine siting of FNPs. The staff concluded there was reasonable assurance that eight FNPs could be sited, constructed and operated with acceptable environmental impact at offshore sites along the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico and at carefully selected shoreline locations, including estuarine waters. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, however, believes that it will be difficult to find environmentally acceptable sites in any of the estuarine or barrier island areas along the East and Gulf Coasts.

Part III of the FES, issued in December 1978, compared the total risk to the environment from accidental releases of radioactivity for both floating and landbased nuclear power plants. A wide spectrum of accidents were considered including, for the first time, low-probability, core-melt accidents (Class 9) in the liquid pathway. Part III also included an overall costbenefit analysis for all elements of the environmental statement and concluded that a manufacturing license should be issued subject to several license conditions, including a specific license condition to mitigate the potential environmental impacts from a core-melt accident at an FNP. This involves the use of a material such as magnesium oxide beneath the reactor vessel in order to retard the penetration by the melting core through the bottom of the FNP hull.

Part III also listed NRC generalized requirements for compliance by a utility/operator of an FNP when

an application is made to the NRC for locating an FNP at a specific site. These include modification of FNP sites in estuaries, rivers or near barrier islands so as to limit the release of radioactive materials into the surrounding water body following the unlikely event of a core-melt accident. A principal reference used in the preparation of the FES, Part III was the Liquid Pathway Generic Study (NUREG-0440), issued in February 1978.

Public hearings on safety and environmental issues were started in March 1975 and continued through 1979. Offshore Power Systems appealed the staff's precedent-setting decision to include Class 9 accidents in the comparative analyses of the FES. In December 1978, the Commissioners agreed to review whether Class 9 accidents were a proper subject for treatment in the environmental impact statement. On September 14, 1979, the Commission issued a Memorandum and Order in the Matter of Offshore Power Systems which stated the Commission's position that the staff's analysis of the Class 9 accident question is properly included in the environmental impact statement in this proceeding in order to meet NRC's NEPA responsibilities. Both the applicant and the staff have submitted partial proposed findings of fact to the licensing board and all safety and environmental contentions have been addressed during the hearing process. Additional hearings were held in late 1979 in order to discuss the licensing board's questions regarding the staff's Class 9 analysis.

The first application for a permit to construct and operate an offshore floating nuclear power station was filed in 1973 by the Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G) of New Jersey. The proposed Atlantic Generating Station (AGS) consisted of two floating units (1150 MWe each) located approximately three miles off the coast of New Jersey and about 11 miles northeast of Atlantic City. In December 1978, PSE&G cancelled its contract with OPS, citing among its reasons the lower than anticipated electricity growth rate in its generating area. The application has been withdrawn and the licensing proceeding dismissed.

PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT

Health Effects of the

Coal and Nuclear Fuel Cycles

As noted in the 1978 Annual Report, the NRC is actively involved in developing estimates of potential effects of the coal and nuclear fuel cycles to aid in the analysis of alternative energy sources for generating electricity. Final revision of the draft report, "Health Effects Attributable to the Coal and Nuclear Fuel Cycles" (NUREG-0332), is being held in abeyance

pending release of the latest National Academy of Sciences Report of the Committee on Nuclear and Alternative Energy Sources (CONAES). A contracted study with the Argonne National Laboratory on health effects models for the nuclear and coal fuel cycle alternatives is nearing completion.

In November 1979, the staff issued a report prepared under contract by Teknekron, Inc., entitled, "Activities, Effects and Impacts of the Coal Fuel Cycle" (NUREG-CR-1060). The report provides a current data base related to the health, ecological, economic and social impacts of the coal fuel cycle. The report considers the impacts resulting from the various phases of the coal fuel cycle: resource extraction, coal cleaning, transportation, storage, power production and waste disposal.

Assessment of Radiological Consequences Of Radionuclide Releases

By means of Federal Register notice of January 13, 1977 (42 FR 2858), the Environmental Protection Agency officially issued 40 CFR Part 190, Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Nuclear Power Operations. The standards require that operations covered by the subpart B, Environmental Standards for the Uranium Fuel Cycle, shall have no planned discharges that will result in an annual dose equivalent to any member of the public that will be in excess of 25 millirems to the whole body. Other requirements involve organ doses and releases of specific radioisotopes. The standards are effective as of December 1, 1979, except that for doses arising from operations associated with the milling of uranium ore, the effective date is December 1, 1980. For releases of iodine-129 and krypton-85, the standard will be effective January 1, 1983. The standards may be exceeded during a given year of operation only if the regulatory agency has granted an exemption based on a determination that a temporary and unusual operating condition exists and that continued operation is in the public interest.

The NRC has been developing provisions to be incorporated in license conditions requiring that NRC licensees meet the conditions of Part 190. Most nuclear power plants that meet the requirements on radioactive effluents promulgated by Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50 have been shown generically to meet Part 190. To assure full compliance, the model Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications (RETS), contained in NUREGS-0482 and -0473, have been modified to include Part 190 requirements as a limiting condition for operation. Staff documents (NUREGs) further describing acceptable methods for demonstrating compliance with Part 190 are in progress. The Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards is develop

ing license conditions for the uranium fuel cycle facilities under its cognizance. The Office of Standards Development is preparing modifications for Title 10 regulations and for regulatory guidance documents that will further identify the requirements that Part 190 places on NRC licenses.

Control of Effluents

Standard Technical Specifications. As a result of the staff's continuing review and discussions with the Atomic Industrial Forum and other parties of interest, substantive revisions were made to the NRC draft reports on "Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications" (NUREG-0472 for PWRS, and NUREG-0473 for BWRs). The revised reports still incorporate the fundamental requirements and concepts contained in the original, but equations for dose calculations, setpoint determination, and meteorological dispersion factors have been eliminated. These equations, among other items, are now required to be included in an Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) that is to be provided by each licensee to NRC for review and approval along with the proposed Technical Specifications. Regional seminars were held in late 1978 to provide guidance in the preparation of the Technical Specifications. All affected utilities were invited to send representatives to these seminars. Licensees are in the process of submitting their proposed Technical Specifications and review of these by the staff was in progress at the close of the report period. Licensee submissions and NRC reviews should be completed by mid-1980.

In-Plant Measurements Program. In order to assure that the best available data is employed in improving the calculational models used to appraise conformance of licensees with Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50, the NRC contracted with Idaho National Engineering Laboratory to perform in-plant measurements on pressurized water reactors (PWRS). The measurements will provide a data base for radidoisotope inventories in plant systems, radioactive waste management system performance, and source term for both liquid and gaseous systems. As of the end of the report period, measurements had been completed at four plants (Zion, Fort Calhoun, Turkey Point, and Rancho Seco).

Three Mile Island Accident Response. The performances of the effluent treatment systems following the onset of the TMI accident were evaluated and the amounts of released radioactivity have been assessed. Recommendations were made for operating procedures involving the use of existing equipment and the installation of new equipment needed to assure that releases of radioactivity during this emergency period

would be kept at levels as low as possible under the circumstances and to remain within established NRC effluent standards (see Chapter 2).

During the long-term recovery period for the TMI plant, the TMI-2 Support Task Force of the NRC will continue to review all matters related to maintenance of the reactor in a safe shutdown condition, decontamination of equipment and buildings, installation of new equipment and systems, the processing of liquids contaminated from the accident for removal of radioactivity, the storage and shipment of radioactive wastes, and releases of low levels of radioactivity to the environment. Safety evaluations and environmental assessments for the more significant recovery operations are being prepared. These activities are being coordinated with local, State, and other Federal officials.

Site-Related Problems

Rejection of Greene County Site Due to Esthetic Impacts. It was during 1979 that the NRC for the first time rejected a proposed nuclear site primarily because of adverse socioeconomic impacts. The staff concluded that the proposed Greene County plant at the Cementon, New York site would result in unacceptable esthetic impacts on certain local, regional, and national historic, scenic, and cultural resources. The major reason for that judgment was the visual intrusion of plant facilities-primarily the natural-draft cooling tower and its plume-into the central view from Olana, the home of 19th Century painter Frederick Church, which had been designated as a National Historic Landmark. Other visually sensitive areas that could be adversely affected were also identified. The staff analyzed the esthetic impacts from alternative cooling systems but determined that even the least visually obtrusive alternative would still be likely to have undesirable effects. The staff also identified severe (although generally mitigable) socioeconomic impacts arising from the potential loss of a local industry because of the facility's land needs and from the need to substantially change the local transportation network to serve the facility. The staff concluded that there are several alternative sites in New York State that, on the basis of environmental considerations, are obviously superior to the proposed

site.

Mass Mortality of Biota. NRC continues to monitor potential environmental problems arising from operating nuclear power plants. In the summers of 1978 and 1979, a sizeable number of weakfish (also known as sea trout) were drawn onto the intake screens at the Salem Nuclear Station. At the Oyster Creek Station in August 1979, unusually high temperatures resulted in the apparent loss of a small but still