JPN-99-032, Forwards Info Re Potential Environ Effects of Alternatives to Proposed Expansion of FitzPatrick Spent Fuel Pool,In Response to NRC Project Manager Request

Forwards Info Re Potential Environ Effects of Alternatives to Proposed Expansion of FitzPatrick Spent Fuel Pool,In Response to NRC Project Manager Request

ML20216J424
Person / Time
Site:	FitzPatrick
Issue date:	09/29/1999
From:	James Knubel POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
JPN-99-032, NUDOCS 9910050124
Download: ML20216J424 (5)

Text

r e ,

, 123 Main Street Vhute Plains, New York 1c601 914 681 6950 914 2873309 (Fax)

E I- James Knubst

& Authority ce "Ne;e,"lge",*

September 29 '1999 JPN 032 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Mail Station P1-137 Washington, DC 20555-0001

SUBJECT:

James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Docket No. 50-333 Information on Potential Environmental Effects of Alternatives to Spent Fuel Pool Expansion

REFERENCE:

1. NYPA letter, J. Knubel to USNRC (JPN-97-033) dated October 14,1999 regarding proposed changes to the technical specifications regarding design change features (JPTS-96-012).

Dear Sir:

At the request of the NRC Project Manager for FitzPatrick, the Authority has prepared the attached information regarding the potential environmental effects of alternatives to the proposed expansion of FitzPatrick's spent fuel pool (Reference 1, including supplements).

This letter does not contain any new commitments. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact the Director - Nuclear Licensing, Ms. C. D. Faison.

[

Very truly rs, ,

Jim 'rhubel Senior Vice President and i Chief Nuclear Officer 00 cc: Next page 1

9910050124 990929 PDR ADOCK 05000333 P PDR l 77 .

1' cc: Regional Administrator-U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

'475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406

', Office of the Resident inspector U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant P.O. Box 136 Lycoming, NY 13093 Mr. Guy Vissing, Project Manager Project Directorate i Division' of t.icensing, Project Management  !

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop 8C2 Washington, DC 20555

^

l Attachments:

1

1. Information on Potential Environmental Effects of Alternatives to Spent Fuel Pool l Expansion

-l i

1 i

2 a

i Attachment 1 to JPN-99-032 New York Power Authority James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Information on Potential Environmental Effects of Altematives to SDent Fuel Pool Expansion introduction At the request of the NRC Project Wlanager for FitzPatrick, the Authority has prepared this information regarding the potential environmental effects of alternatives to expanding FitzPatrick's spent fuel pool. It was, in part, based on an April 23,1999 environmental assessment for increasing the capacity of the spent fuel pool at Florida Power & Light's St. Lucie, Unit 2.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action Shiocina Fuel to a Permanent Federal Fuel Storaae/ Disposal Facility Shipment of spent fuel to the permanent repository or a centralized high-level radioactive waste storage facility is an alternative to increasing onsite spent fuel storage capacity. However, the US Department of Energy is not expected to open the permanent repository until 2010 and is currently prohibited from selecting a site for centralized storage until after a determination is made on permanent repository site suitability. Congress, with the urging of some affected utilities and states, has recently taken up proposed changes to the federal program that would integrate storage and disposal at one site and require DOE to construct an interim storage facility. No decision has yet been made on centralized federal storage that would provide a basis for evaluating it as a viable alternative to the Power Authority's proposed action.

Shiopina Fuel to a Reorocessino Facility Reprocessing of spent fuel from the FitzPatrick plant, is not a viable alternative since there are no operating commercial reprocessing facilities in the United States. Spent fuel would have to be shipped to an overseas facility for reprocessing. This approach has never been used and it would require approval by the U.S. Department of State as well as other entities. Additionally, the cost of spent fuel reprocessing is not offset by the salvage value of the residual uranium and reprocessing represents an added cost. Therefore, this alternative is considered unacceptable.

Shiopino Fuel to Another Utility or Site or to Indian Point 3 for Storace Shipment of irradiated fuel from FitzPatrick for storage at the Indian Point 3 fuel pool would provide short-term relief from the storage problem at FitzPatrick. However, this transfer of fuel between units would create no additional storage locations for irradiated fuel, nor would it eliminate the need to develop additional spent fuel storage capability at FitzPatrick in the future.

As a result, any fuel transfer would accelerate the loss of fuel pool storage at the Indian Point 3 l and give no benefit to FitzPatrick.

I i 1

4- .

Attachment 1 to JPN-99-032

- New York Power Authority ~

James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Currently, the indian Point 3 site has installed fuel pool storage capacity sufficient to handle site requirements for irradiated fuel storage, while maintaining full core discharge capability until approximately the year 200g.

< The design of the Indian Point 3 fuel pool dt: rage racks has been optimized for storage of pressurized water reactor (PWR) fuel with a different physical and nuclear design than the boiling water reactor (BWR) fuel used at FitzPatrick. Thur, storage of FitzPatrick fuel at Indian Point 3 would both limit storage of future discharged Ir1,an Point 3 fuel and represent a less i

. then optimal use of the existing Indian Point 3 storage capability. 1 NYPA knows of no other utility that is prepared to accept shipments of irradiated fuel from FitzPatrick for long-term storage at its site. ,

1 For these reasons, and considering the increased fuel handling and additional occupational radiation exposure incurred during the shipment of irradiated fuel, the alternative of shipping FitzPatrick fuel to Indian Point 3 or other site for storage is not an acceptable alternative to the proposed action.

Alternatives to Creatina Additional Storace Capacity A variety of alternatives to increase the storage capacity of the FitzPatrick spent fuel pool were considered. Fuel rod consolidation was considered as a putential attemative and was eliminated because of the limited industry experience in disassembling irradiated fuel and because of the potential for fission product release due to rod breakage during disassembly.

Additionally, because the Department of Energy (DOE) considers consolidated fuel to be a non-standard waste form, the licensee could be concerned that the presence of fuel in this form would cause the DOE to delay its acceptance of waste from FitzPatrick.

The early implementation of dry cask storage for irradiated fuel at the FitzPatrick was also considered. Dry cask storage involves transferring irradiated fuel, after several years of storage in the FitzPatrick spent fuel pool, to high capacity casks with passive heat dissipation features.

After loading, these casks would be placed on a concrete pad at an outdoor location on the  !

FitzPatrick site. The licensee rejected early implementation of dry cask storage because it is more cost effective to increase the capacity of the pool. Pool expansion also has less environmentalimpact.

As a result, the licensee concluded that none of the alternative technologies that could create additional spent fuel storage capacity at FitzPatrick could do so with less environmental impact <

. than the impacts associated with the chosen option.

l I

l 2

1 a

.s Attachment 1 to JPN-99-032 New York Power Authority James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Reduction of Sr>ent Fuel Generation To minimize the quantities of irradiated fuel generated during full power operation at FitzPatrick, the licensee has developed efficient fuelloading patterns that seek to maximize the utilization of each assembly consistent with limits on the integrated fuel rod exposure. Batch discharge burnups for FitzPatrick fuel currently exceed 40 GWD/MT with peak assembly burnups reaching 46 GWD/MT by the time of discharge. The licensee expects batch average discharge exposure to exceed 43 GWD/MT after the current cycle and to increase to 45 GWD/MT thereafter.

FitzPatrick depletes fuel assemblies to these burnups with minimal cladding perforations so that the fission product inventory present in the spent fuel pool water remains low. The high values of batch average and peak assembly discharge burnup ensure that the electricity generated by FitzPatrick yields the minimum possible amount of spent fuel.

The fuel assembly design used at FitzPatrick is not compatible with the Indian Point 3 core. As a result partially irradiated fuel from other NYPA nuclear units can not be used at FitzPatrick (or vice versa) to reduce the rate of spent fuel discharge.

Operation of FitzPatrick at a reduced power level for long periods of time would extend the existing spent fuel pool storage capacity However, to compensate for the reduced generation by FitzPatrick another power generation facility would be required to increase its power output, possibly resulting in an increase in airborne pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. The adverse environmentalimpact of increased airborne pollution and greenhouse gas omissions resulting from a long-term derate of FitzPatrick generating capacity is significantly greater than the environmental impact associated with increasing the storage capacity of the existing ,

FitzPatrick spent fuel pool. j l

l Alternative Use of Resources l

l This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in the Final ,

l Environmental Statement for FitzPatrick. 1 I I r

l l

3