ML17193A061
| ML17193A061 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 09/26/1980 |
| From: | Goddard R NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-SP, NUDOCS 8009300045 | |
| Download: ML17193A061 (5) | |
Text
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of 9/26/80 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY
)
)
)
)
)
Docket Nos. 50-237,,..,
50-249 (Dresden Station, Units 2 and 3)
(Spent Fuel Pool Modification)
NRC STAFF'S RESPONSE TO LICENSING BOARD INQUIRY REGARDING APPLICABILITY OF COMMISSION POLICY STATEMENT I NTRODU CT ION
- During a conference call between the Licensing Board and parties on Septem-ber 9, 1980, which call confirmed.the time and established the location of the impending evidentiary hearing in this proceeding, the Licensing Board requested that the NRC Staff advise the Board as to the applicability in the instant proceeding of the five factors which governed deferral of spent fuel storage licensing actions pending issuance of the final generic en-vironmental impact statement on handling and storage of spent light water 1/
power reactor fuel.- As discussed below, the NRC Staff is of the opinion 1J Those factors were whether:
(1) It is likely that each individual licensing action of this type would have a utility that is independent of the utility of other 1 icensing action's of this type; *
(2) It is not,likely that the taking of any particular licensing action of this type during the time frame under consideration would constitute a commitment of resources that would tend to significantly fore~lose the alternatives available with respect to any other individual licensin9 action of this type; (3) It is likely that any environmental impacts associated with any individual licensing action of this type would be such that they could adequately be addressed within the context of the individual license application without overlooking any cumulative environ-mental impacts; 80098DO 045 (Continued)
- that the five factors for deferral of licensing actions are not applicable in the instant proceeding.
DISCUSSION On September 16, 1975, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued a policy statement entitled "Intent to Prepare Generic Environmental Impact State-ment on Handling and Storage of Spent Light Water Power Reactor Fuel."
In that policy statement, the Commission declined to impose across-the-board deferral of licensing actions related to the storage of spent fuel. Allowing individual licensing actions to proceed during the period required for preparation of the generic statement, the Commission set forth five factors to be considered by the Staff within the context of environmental impact statements or environmental impact appraisals which would be tailored to *the facts of each case.*
1J (Cont.)
(4) It is likely that any technical issues that may arise in the course of a review of an individual license application can be*
resolved within that context; and (5) A deferral or severe restriction on licensing actions of this type would result in substantial harm to the public interest.
As indicated, such a restriction or deferral could result in reactor shutdowns as existing spent fuel pools become filled.
It now appears that the spent fuel pools of as many as ten re-actors could be filled by mid-1978.
These ten reactors represent a total of about 6 million kilowatts of electrical energy generating capacity. The removal of these reactors from service could re-duce the utilities' service margins to a point where reliable service would be in jeopardy, or force the utilities to rely more heavily on less economical or more polluting forms of generation that would impose economic penalties on consumers and increase environmental impacts.
- In August 1979, the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, United States Nuclear Regulatory Corrunission, prepared a final generic environmental impact statement (GEIS) on the handling and storage of spent light water power_ reactor fuel, NUREG-0575.
That final environmental statement prepared by the Staff has been submitted to the Commission for its consideration.
NUREG-0575, Vol. 1, p. ii. To date, the Commission has taken no action subsequent to the issuance of the GEIS by the Office of Nuclea.r Material Safety and Safeguards.
On June 5, 1980, the Environmental Impact Appraisal for the Dresden Station, Units 2 and 3, Spent Fuel Pool Modification, was issued, referencing NUREG-0575.
Dresden Environmental Impact Appraisal, p. 9, para. 4.0.
It-is the position of the Staff that, having prepared a final GEIS on spent fuel storage, the five factors set forth in the referenced NRC policy*statement are of no further significance.
The stated function of those five factor~
was to assist the Staff to determine whether individual lfrensing actions should be deferred pending the preparation of the GEIS.. In this case, the Staff made the determination that the proposed licensing action, mooification of the Dresden spent fuel storage pools, falis within the bounding limits of actions which were evaluated in the GEIS.
CONCLUSION As set forth above, the Staff's position is that the five factors set forth in the Corrunission's Policy Statement, announcing its intent to prepare a
- GEIS on spent fuel storage, have no applicability subsequent to the date of preparation of that statement, August 1979.
Respectfully submitted, Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 26th day of September, 1980
-*.)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (Dresden Station, Units 2 and 3)
)
)
)
)
)
Docket Nos. 50-237 50-249 (Spent Fuel Pool Modification)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of 11NRC STAFF'S RESPONSE TO LICENSING BOARD INQUIRY REGARDING APPLICABILITY OF COMMISSION POLICY STATEMENT" in the above-captioned proceeding have been -served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class or, as indicated by an asterisk, through deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system this 26th day of September, 1980:
John F. Wolf, Esq., Chairman 3409 Shepherd Street Chevy Chase, Maryland 20015 Dr. Linda W. Little 5000 Hermitage Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27612 Dr. Forrest J. Remick 305 E. Hamilton Avenue State College, Pa. 16801 Philip P. Steptoe, Esq.
Isham, Lincoln and Beale One First National Plaza Chi ca go, I 11. 60603 Susan N. Sekuler, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General Environmental Control Division 188 West Randolph Street, Suite 2315 Chicago, Ill.. 60601 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Pane.l U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Docketing and Service Section U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555