ML19029A750

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Intervenor'S Response to Licensee'S Interrogatories
ML19029A750
Person / Time
Site: Salem  PSEG icon.png
Issue date: 07/20/1978
From: Potter R, Van Ness S
The Public Advocate
To:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
Download: ML19029A750 (34)
v • d • e


Text

  • ~.

jt;:.:'-,1**../**\:r UNITED STA'IES OF* AJ.'llJERICA

-:NCCLEAR.REGUIJITDRY :CQ."MISSION fe/:;g )

)

PUBLIC .SERVICE .ELECTRIC Af..1D ) r::ocket No. so-272

.GAS -COMPANY. ) Proposed Issuance of

) Arrendr!ent. to Facility

.(Sale.Ttl Nuclar :*Generating ) Q:erating 'License No. -DP~70

..*. Station, _Unit. lb... .1) )

I!'-.'TERVEL\OR Is RESPONSES TO LICENSEE'S INTERRCkA.TORIES I. Unless specifically .noted to the contrary, all res1x:mses have been

. . * :,:pµ;p.a_~;.i.by *.the .:+/-nte:r:'venDr ~:s: :counso-1.,,, . :Rex :Wi J ::H am-~;potter.i *:.:attorney -~for advisor; :Dale Bridenbaugh of. M.H.B. :Tecimical Associates., Palo -Alto,

  • California. J.'!r. Brideri.baugh .i~ an***engineer wit.11 twenty years *.experience

.;.II.. ~:F'"'..i::SPONSES 110 Tu~RIES-.As.:APPLIED *:m SPECIFIC

. CON'm.JTIONS Af:t-ll'rlED INTO CONTROVEPSY BY THE BOARD'S ORDER OF MA.Y 25, 1978.

Contention 2a and b and contention 6 (see p. 5 of the Board',s Order):

l. The contentions .are not based .o.ri specific calculations .*
  • . ., 2. -.The contentions :are .not.based~: upon ..any .si:;ecific studies ,:or :analysis..*

expertise, and review of i;:ertinent docurrents. These doCl.JF.ents are listed in.Ap.i;::endix B. .See, esi;:ecially, :Behavior of Si::ent Fuel in \\Yater Cooled

. f

.Storage _{September, .1976) , *_:nNNL 22-56, .which .describes :the .VBry l.imi ted

  • _experience (i.e., *.less -than .*ten*.years) .'with :storage **of spent**£uel ..in water ccoled envirorurent and discusses corrosion rates, leading to
deterioration.

(a) See above.

(b) .Dale .Bridenbaugh .

{c) 1lis ,work was :-per£cmned:at:his ':office in Palo Alto . and comnunicated 'with counsel in telephone caJ.J.:s *prior to submission

  • of
  • the intervenor's arrended t=etition to_ intervene.

(d) The licensee's application together with the docurrents listed in APf:Ildix A were studied by the intervenor's technical advisor.

(e) 'lli.e results of the studies are the intervenor's contentions.

(f) See resµ:mse to No. 2 (a).

-.:3:. . . -.!See '.:!ESpOilS8 ::to .2,; ~general1y. *

.* 4_

  • _ *::see:;reSponse ~to 2, general1Y-

.5. . . See*. response to 2 (c), and .2, *generaily.

6. * 'Ihe .i..'1'1tervenor
  • Ccs not expect, at this tirre, to call any ext:ert

- .position. changes.

,'* .,.. _ _..__nti..

~.L..C:::J..i. **on*: *(* =* ....... - .:.*9 :;0.J-:.*~

  • *9 ::*:S._~*'-t'- * """'-~e...-'Bo.*a.LU

~-.::i.r.*

-,s * :.ui.u *'T\arts

-r.-.:ier)- ., ..r *A *--throug'n

.. _ .D*

l. m.
2. N:J.
3. Yes (a) .:See Appendix.B., est:eciaily *NIJREG :040-4., ~-section 3~*0 (ES-.-5. to "ES-7).*

(b) These docurrents derronstrate that there are alternatives to the licensing. of .increased compaction- of SFflt .nuclear fuel at reactor sites.

  • . (c) See . (b) above .*

, *

  • _ .,. . *:=:0A,. * * :?Ihe *only *"research"";involved :was *that derived fran "'analysis *of *the al:ove documents by M:ssrs. Bridenbaugh and Potter.

{a) . :See :,2..

-(b) **At our. :respecti-ve **offices *

. (c) -See 4.

'fd) *:See 3 (b) ..

5.. Yes..

. (a) See 2 . :(b) *...

(b) See Appendix A.

(c) All canrnunications were by telephone and letter during late April and May,_ 1978.

  • {d) .. .:me :info:nnation:.:received.:..resulted *in the **.admitted. contention.

Respectfully submitted,

.-::sTANIEY ~C. :JAN"NESS

. PUBLIC :ADVOCATE .OF .NU.V JERSEY

  • . ., \-;:~ wii;\; . ~

By:.

-R-.-~-IT-I~J-.12-AM~P-0~1-'l=E~R~~~~--~--~

DEPUTY DIRECTOR Counsel for Intervenor

    • - AppendiX:A
  • .Dal.e ,G. B-:ridenbaugh

_ .- 36-6 ~Ca1i*fo.r'nia Avenue.,

--* _ .Palo _ Al.t:o, * .CA _94306

( L~TS) * . 329-04 7 4

_EXPERIENCE /

'197.6 - :Pres.ent Partner, HHB Technical Associates, Palo Alto, California. Founder and p-artner 0£ technical cons.ul ting .firm. Specialists in :energy

... cons:U:l:ting *.to governmental and _other groups .interested .:i.n :evaluation

'of- nuclear .p.lant *sa*fety- and Ticen.s:i.ng. Consultant in this capacity

. :to S_ta:te 0£ California., Suffolk County, New. York, New York -Attorn_ey General, Norwegian Nuclear Power Committee, Public Advocates Offi.ce, New Jersey, and various other orsanizations and environmental groups.

  • P.:rfo~mt:d ex~2nsiye safety analysis for Swedish_ Energy Corrnnission and_

contributed to Un~_on of Concerned Scientists' Review of WASH-1400, and I served as consultant to U.S. Nl,lclear Regµlatory Cornmi~sion.

1976 - (February - August)

Consultant, Project Survival, Palo Alto, California. Volunteer work

_on Nuclear Saf.eguar.ds Initiative campaigns in California, .Oregon, J\Tashin,g:t:on., _:Arizona~ .and:Col.orado.. * -__ N:umero.us* p.res:e-ntati:ons 'On _nucle:ar

p:ow.:e'r *'.arrrl -: al*::ten:ia:t+/-v.e .~ner.gy ;o;p~ti:qns -_:to: ~ci-vi.~c-, - 'g0v_e"J:nme-rrt ,, _,and -~c:o:lle:ge

-u.o-uPis :. -.-A1.s"o _:r-eso_uZ":Ce. --pe.:rson .. £or,;:p:ubli:c .-*s.erv.i-:c*e -*:pre:s.<.e.nta.ti:ons -;on

.radio _-_ai.-rd ..:tel:etls+/-:o:n.. '

. - -_ __ 197 .1:976

_Nan.:?.ger, -.P-erfor::J.ance Evaluation and Improvement, General Electric _

. O.upc."-~f -- .._

  • cm-~--- . .,,~,- 1-----~ 7-----~-~.,. n* . .

.!.* uC_.eoe:.-'- . _.u-:~ !:::. -1 . lVlS10n, .S.an . J-OS .e 1 -

Ca *11*.c J:lanao J..0 mi*- a~ ..lo-' _0 e d

- seventeen tech-r.:.ical ar::d *seven cle-rical personnel with* respans-ihility for establishme-:i.t and management of systems to.- monitor and measure

_ B.oil:in:g :w.a:t-er .r2..a.c.:to.:= __cq~uipIDent and :sy.s:tem.:.op.er.ati.onal_ pe.r£ormance.

  • __ --~-Tp-:tcgr.a:ced *:Gen:eral _Tlectr.i:c res*Dur;ces :in -:cus*tomer *plant modi'fi:ca:tions, coordin.ated :.*co:rrecti*on --0£ causes* *-c)f forced outage's and. of e'ff_orts. to ,

.i-mpi-ove re liability and p.erformance of BWR sys terns .

. Respons.i-ble .for *development of ,Division, 'Master .:Pe-rfonnan*ce Improvement Plan as :i.:ell as for numerous Staff -s-pecial assign!Llents on .long-range studies. -

  • Was on special assignme.nt ~for the management of bvo differe-nt ad hoc p.roje*cts formed to .resolve -unique te;chni:eal-:p.roblems.

1-972 "°"'. - .l9 73 Mnna3er, Product Service, General Electric Company - Nuclear Energy_

Division, San Jose, California. Managed group of twenty-one technical and tour clerical personnel. -* Prime responsibility i;-;as to direct inter-face- and liason personnel *involved in corrective actions required under contract warranties. Also in ~harge of refueling and service planning, pcrformm1cc c:malysis, and service communication functions supporting all completed co~mcrcial nuclear power reactors supplied by General Electric, both dou:cs_tic .:!nd ovcr;;cas (Spa.in, Gerl!~any, Italy, - Jap_an, India, CJ.nd Switzerland) .

.196'8 *- _197*2

. }ianag*er, Product Service., General E1.ectri-c Compan * - Nuclear Ener(T-v

  • D.ivision, San Jose, Cali ornia.

Managed sixteen technical and six clerical personnel *with the

r-esp.onsib:ili:ty.* ,£or all ...customer .contact, :.planning .:and :exe.cution
    • 0£ *;wor.k* :r:equi.'Ie<l *:after*:the . :custumer *.acc:eptance
  • of Depar.tment * *-

supplied plants .and/o*r equipment. This .included quotati*on, .:sale

.and* *delivery of .spare and renewal parts. S.ales volume of parts

.increased .£r.om $1, 000, 00.0 in 1968 to over $3, 000 .. 000 in 1972 .

.. T966 -- .1968 Manager, Complaint and Warranty* Service.** General Electric Companv. -

Nuclear* Energy Division, San Jose, California.

Managed group of-six persons with the responsibility for. customer contacts, planning and execution of work required after customer acceptance of Department - supplied plants and/or equipment --

both domestic and overseas.

1963 - 1966

. *.Field **Engineering Supervisor, General Electric Company, Installation

and S:er.;vi:,:c:e ..µrgi:neering Department. -Los .Angel:es*, Ga.l;L£ornia.
    • .:.superv+/-s:e'd .*ap_p+/-:'ox+/-rna:teTy: :eight *'f:i:el.d "Ie-p:r-.es.en:t*atives -~,:ii!:h:.:resp.ons:i

.... b.i]:i.tv ;f~or G-e.n-eral ..El:e::c:tri.c .steam :and ~0 J . . 0-as :turbine installation* and

'-.ma:1.ntenance 1:m.rk in -S.outhern Calif*ornia, Arizona, and $outhern Nevada .

. D:ur::ing. this.* 1'er:iO:d was* r:esponsihle for the .insta'llation of .eight dif£erent :c*entr.::.l .station steam turbine generator units, plus much

..maintenanc.e -.a.cti:-v~ty.. Work .included *customer. contact, preparation

---04= ...,.,.,,...,~- ~~ ' . --~'ri "* . - *t"*. ' . t'" t** "

... - . "'1'._ .........:a.1-..1...ons .., --~.'-! ,.con~~-ac_ .. nego :ia 1.0.ns ...

1956 - 196J

  • .. * .-~F1-e1:a Eng'ineer ,* G~n~era-:1 -.:El*ectr.i'c *cmmrany; InstaTl-a:tion *and Se-rVice Engineering Deoartment, Chicago, Illinois.

Supervised .ins.tallatio.ri '.and :maintenance of .steam turbine.s of all .sizes.

Supervise.cl *crews of from ten to mo.re than .one hundred men, depending on the job. 1\Tork prirr:arily *with large utilities but had signi.ficant work. with steel, petrole.lllll and other process indus.tries. Had four years .of e.xperience a.t construction, startup, trouble-.shoo.ting and

.refueling oaf. the . fir.st *.large- s:c.aLe .commer.cial nucl:e*ar .,power .unit.

i. .__. 1955 - .195 6 Engineering Training Program, General Electric Company, Erie, Penns:/I~m1a, and Scheneccady, Ne*w York.

Training cissignments in plant facilities design and in steam turbine te~ting at two General Electric Factory locations.

T.953* - T955 Unit;:ed States Army ~ Ordnance School, Aberdeen, Maryland.

=  :*:En:strU'ct:'or;*.-~. :~ea-;i,,,-y .Arti.L1.'ery Rep'a+/-r.. , .~'Taught *;cl-a*ssr.oDm ,and :;shop

  • d1*sassembly o.f *arti1l:ery .p.i:.e*ce=s. *

.1953

. _EngirieE!ring *Training* Program, General Electric .Company, Evendale,
    • _Ohio; ~craining assignment with Aircraft Gas Turbine Department .

.. EDUCATION BSME - 1953 South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, Rapid City.

South Dakota, Upper ~ of class.

  • Er6£,essional Nuclear Engine.er/. California. Certificate No. 09 73 .

. Var:;Lpu::s :compml'y .Tra*in'ing .;Gour.se:s ::dur.ing :;car.e:er . in.clud:ing .Pr,0£-e s:s.ional 0

/Bus"i;ness *. :MaI,ta.:g:e!rren*t, =~Kejm:er_ ~Tr:,e:go,e: *:D.e:ci:s1*on =Naki:~g.  ::Eff..e]::ti-v:e .J?:r:esen-

. * ... tat1un , .*.and *:nu:mero1.rs *::::t:::ec:bni:c:al -,s:eni+/-n:a:r:s .

PERSO:*~AL .. PAT.~

.J3*orn '1\o~"'ce~b:e= :2:D., ... 1.9.31.,*: 'l'li.ller". *. south .Dakota_

~"Harr'i.=e:d, thr.e: .:chil*.d:ren_

  • 6 1 2'T, 190 lbs .*
  • health._,. excellent.

'.Rono.rzbl:e idiscnarg.e* _£r.om _.United. :Stat.es .Army.*

  • * :*Hobbi:.e*s*:,: * **. .f~ski'.in~g~, . . 11+/-1,*.iD:*g ., *. *:t47o~r.k-.:* :w.i:tb ._ ,Ctib .~and. *):B.o:y.:.: ~'S,cD.ut *.~group.s .

PUBLTCJ\.TIONS & TESTIMONY

.~Operating and Maintenance 'Ex!>.erience,

  • pres*ented ~at ~*w*elfth
  • Ann:ual . Se..lilinar Lor Electric Utility *Exe;cutives., .Pebble Be~ach,,

.*

  • Ca1.ilo.rriia., .October* T972.~ .-p:µblished*:in *Gene.ra1 Electric NEDC-10697, December 1972.

.. *2*

' ~ ,** :Ma+/-n+/-encm-c*e -:ana **I11'-:S.e.rv:ice

  • Ir:rs:o.ec+/-i::on,, **:p:re'S:en*ted.. :at .:IA'E;A

-~symp.osium on .Experience From qper.c;l.ting :arid. '?Fueling ::6£ ~Nucl*.ear "Power Plants, Bri.denba-U:gh,* Lloyd~ & Turner~* Vienna, Aus.tria,

.Octoher 1973 .

.. 3 .. Op*e::rating and Maintenance *'EJ..=perience, presented *at Thirteenth Annual Seminar for Electric Utility Executives,. Pebole Beach,

  • Cali£ornia, November 1973, published *.in .G.eneral. .Ele,ctric. NED0-2 0222, .January. 197 4 .

. <Improving Plant Availahili tv, presented :at 'Thirteenth Annual Seminar for Electric Utility Executi_ves, Pebble Beach, *california, .

.. November 1973, published in General Electric NED0-20222, January, 1974 ..

5. Application of Plant Ou ta e Experience to Improve Plant Per-

.**. ormance, Bridenbaugh and Burdsall, American Power Con erence,

.Chi*cago, Illinois, April 14, .1974.. *

  • ,:6.. . :Nucle*a.r :-valv. :'+/-e:s*:t'ing *.:Qut:s *:Dos:t; .Tiµie,, .Elec:tr.i'-cal \117:or1P.., .:D:c:tt>'b-.er
l5 ... .T974.*

J._ . .The 'Risks qf 11"iclear Power *ReactDrs: A .Revie*w Of 'the .NRC 'Reactor

  • Sa2:ety Stuci.v W.'-\SH-1400, Kendall,. Hubbard, Minor, & Bridenbaugh,
    • -et al . , ,f._or b.~a Union . of . C.on_c'.errie":d* S:cien.tiS-:ts., :Augus.t *.19*77.
  • 3. *s~.:-=tlish 1<-.er:."Ctr:r= '. *s a:rety :Study:.: . *£-arscebac1~ Risk :A:s's':ess:m-en:t, ~~NHB Technical Associates, January 1978 ...{PUblished by .Swedish.Depar:t-
  • Een-1: ::of .Indzs~y ..as..:TID.:c.mner1:t:.::Ds:r*.T97B.;'.l)

'9~::. ;'Tes.'tillio.ny *oT~n.-.:G.*. ".Br:iderihaugh., "R. ::B .. 1lub:bard.,. /G_ .~*c.* ~-Min*o.r .*to <<:the

.Ga.l'iforni.a S:tate As-s.emhly Con:nlittee o.n .:Res.ources.~ Land .Use, and
Energy, Narch B,. 19.76.

TO. Tes*timony of D. G. Bridenbaugh, *R .. B... Hubbard, and G. C.. Minor be.fore .the* United *States Congress, Joint Gommitte.e on Atomic

.En:ergy, Fenruary 18, .1976,-*wa-shington, DC. '(Published by.the

  • * ,Uni.on of ;Conc.e-rned<S:cien~i*s-ts , :Gambridge., .:Massachusetts .. )

1-1; . Testimony by D. *c. Bridenbaugh before the Cali~orni.a_Errergy ComTl!ission, entitler1, InitiRtion of CatRstron1:.ic Accidents at Diahlo Canvon, Hearings on Emergency.Planning, Avila Beach, Califc;-rnia, November 4, 1976.

  • ::12 *...:Tes:timony hy ,D. :G_* "Bridenbaugh .hefore .'.the ~U.;S ..*. :N.ucle.:ar Regul.ato.ry
Go:rmrii'S:S:i'.on..,. :s:ubje*ct_, * .Diab1o Canvon Nuclea:r Plant *Performance.,

Atomic Safety and .LLcensing Board Hearings, December 1976.

. . .13... T.e:s:t:iEony ..by JJ.. G..

  • 13ri:1;}cnhaugh *?b:e:£:o:re :+/-he *:cal:i':f:o.r.n:ia .:En*:ergy
  • Conmif.s:si:on.,_ s_ubj*ect, -;Interim ;spent Fuel :Storage Considerati.ons,
  • ."March 10, J.977.. .
  • 14.. Testiino'ny by D. ~G. Bridenbaugh '*before New York State Public Service Commission.Siting Board Hearings concerning _the Jamesport

. Nuc-lear .Pow.er Station, subje:ct: Effect of Technical and Safetv

Deficiencies on Nuclear Plant Cost ~md Reliabili tv ,.April 1977 ..
15.
  • Testimor:y by ',D . .<;;:.'Bridenbaugh .before - the California State Energy Commission~ subject, Decommissioning of Pre:ssurized Water Reactors, Sundesert Nuclear Plant Hearings *. June 9, 1977.
16. Testimony by D. G. Bridenbaugh before the California State Energy Commission~ subject, Economic Relationships of Decommissioning, Sundesert Nuclear Plant, for the Natural

"'  :.Res.011rce:s -.D,efens.e .Coun_cil,,~ *Ju~y .15:~ _197*7 _

  • '17.... -*::*rr-e'S;ti:mony- .by- *:u~. * ::G.1 ,.~Brl'.de'ribatµJ~h d:i£.f;*o:r:e . :tbe. <Ve+/-mon:t. ..:S:tate . :.E::0ar d .
    • o.fdleal:th; ."5.ubj:e:ct.;::'0peration 0£ *'Vermont Ycin'k:e:e'-:Nu-cre:ar*~p1ant

~::an"d ~:Tts I:mnac.t on .Publi*e .He-.al*th :*and Safety; D.cto:b:er ~6,. 1'97.7.

<Testimony by *n. G. :Bridenbaugh *b.e£ore '.the *u ..s~. Nuc].:e*ar Regtilator.1

  • Gorr.rnj:s*sion, Aton1ic .Safety. and LicenBing .Board., subj e.ct, Defi-

.riencies *~*Cl* Safetv Evaluation of Non-Seismic Ts sues, Lack of

.. :c:. . T' ... -;

.!.ler .; .. ~..; ..,...__

....ni:.'-*-'- * ..; *di*n o o £ .s*.a £ e.ty.,* . nia

=.. ..r-.---n. *. *bl*o *c* * ..:NllC

. anyon ';\- *. 1 .e.a.L

. *~ *u

. ni* t s, 0

.-

.,:19.1- .':l\e:stimo:n:y ..:by_ :1J.* _.G. :Brirl:enbarigh *;b;e:£ore **_:the "'.N*orw:egi:an *:Go1!llnis:s-ion

-~on}Nu.cl:.ec.r*2m*1-er.,* :subj::ec-:t.,:;::Reactor S-afety/R:i'sk;**.nctoher. .Z6.,. ,.:1977 ..

20~ . ::T~e*stimony by .D. C . .Bridenbaugh before *t:he :Louisiana S ca~e Le'gis-

.latur.e .Gomu"'li.ttee . .on Na:tural .Res.o_ur:ces., subject, Nuclear .Power Plant .Deficiencies Impacting on Safety & Reliability, .Baton Rouge, Louisiana, February 13, 1978..

HONORS & AWARDS

~: , -.,::S:i:gma ::T.au -- .'.E"onorary .:'Engineer:in:g* :.Fraternity ..

General Managers Award, General Electric Company, 1960.

l,.

.... L

., *-ERDA '76-43., 1\1.ternatives *for "Managing Waste "from :Reaptors ,and .

  • . *: "*:Post..-;Fission
  • 0p9ration5 in , the 'LWR Fuel* .Cycle, .
Appendix B {Part l)
  • ~-*.:Volufnes'T:through .5.,'. 'May.r- J.916.

(Section 17 of Volume. 3 contains :extensive*:.infonnation :on ~.lllterim

...:storage ...of :.Spent .:ftiel .eJenents.)

. .: 2- * .: *:~tJPL".[7--'69 ,~':'Im 'Analysis<Of :.the Iecbriica1.. *status :of .*High* Level . * *

  • '. : _~Radioactive Wast~ in .Spent Fuel . .Managert-ent Systems. (I:ece.IP.ber , .. J.977)

. ('lhis .. *is*a *surtma:ry.* ~of .**state-of-the-art::cantaini.ng .:a..~long section . *

-.on .spent :fuel ;storage.-)
  • 3 *.
  • _:' *:BNWL22.;.;s6; :Behavior *'of'.::Spent ;'uel :i.J:i :~r-c90id storage ./(September,

.. '. 1976) b:/ .A'.:B *...Johnsen.

('Ilri.s report shows that *there has been limited, i.e., less than ten years experience, with storage in water-cooled and discusses erosion rates.) *

4. ARH-2888, Rev. Retrivable Surface Storage Facility Alternative Concepts, Engineering Studies (July,* 1974).

('Ihis *is' .an.Atla."ltic .Richfield-Hanford ...report with contribution

... ' :'.franJ'.Ky.ser.*Engi_'TJeerS,.. \:This ;idiscusses<ml:h'1'Vater.-risoled *;and **ai't- *

    • . ** -y:;:!:cool~d  :"conCE'.P'tS:./.D

('It***'-""

'"O!""'ta L~- * :::>* :5'<T""l"M~"r'l7*

~-.-*- .

..o., --*spen+/-

..t...U. .... i..--_z *, .... :, . . .fuel . . .storage*

.' . * .capacity

  • . . . . .,;data

' ~***)

..:~ :06~ ,.. :.* .25+/-:.atus:*;:Of :ZN-..icl-ear:::Fuel .:Be.processing., *:$pen:t* ::Fuel* '~lo:r;age :*and

- .... -~-i*gh*..... - -

T ,,,..

.~w-..l.

=** T.'T;:; -+-0

  • f.-;~-

Di"sposal * .

. Crver:view a.'1d surn:'a..,ry ;dra:f:t report. July Il, 1978 by .:the .California

- ... ~.E...-:i.ergy .. Ccrn~ ;=;si-an

. 7.. 1'JUREG 0116 ': Environmental Survey* of* the :Reprocessing a:hd Waste

<:Management Portions of the um. Fuel Cycle (October, 1976)

_(This. is. a background :*report *for the current s-3--table. on the

  • *.enviro.'1..rnental cost~*of.:nuclearwaste_in* :the .licensing .of.~di':vidual
  • * '.:'nuclear: ~.reactors.) *
  • * ':'.' _:;--"~13~*:*_-.?"°-,~::.NOREG*;B2I6. , '3:Publi:c*1>Ccnm=rits'.:-arid"Task:::-Force*:*ResponSes tRegarffi:ng;"the *
  • ..... * * * *- Envir6:rn:rental SW::Vey of the *Reprocessing and Waste Managerrent Portions of the UlR Fuel Cycle* (March, 1977)
  • 9.

NtJREG .0404, Draft Generic En*"-:i.ronrrental Impact Stat.e!Tent on Handling

.and Storage-:of Sf:nt Light \*;ater Power Fe.actor Fuel, (..March, 197.8)

Proj.o :No ** *M-4. :.see .also* Corrrrents of the People of the State of. Illinois

- on .NUREG 0404. * .These* .app:ar as Part 2 of Apr;:endi..x .B, infra.

_10. ERDA 77-25 :~977 :to*,1986._.il"ffi Spent .Fuel Disp:Jsition Care.cities, 1977

.: .,oedition.. _-. :~. :*is-~.a. :sUrvey *of spent -,fuel storage *capacity_ at

  • ->operating.:nuclear_* plants.

""?i:-'.i'J':llUl.A D * \.t"CU. 1- Z..J

, ,s~:ri;g~~-~e;;J{~,~~~1~~ci~~;i*;~~~i. . ~*~-:-~!~,-

..;GENERIC 'ENVIRONNENTAL IMP.AC'!' .STATEMENT ON 1IAL'1DLD~G

    • "*AND STORAGE. OF SPENT LIGHT .WATER POWER REACTOR FUEL

. ::r* N 'T*:,R '.QD *u *c 'T "I *o. 'N

.::In'..:.159"1.S>the..'Nnc~ *'-Re:~ '.C:o:mmis:s+/-on.~&ir.ected *:+/-ts

  • J'St'az£ ;to ...aeve1op**:a*.:~Generlc'**,:Enviro*mnental*. "Impact..Statement* :on

"/Spent :.;Fuel-. .Sto.ra_ge. , *::to :ana.lyze .-a:l.ternative *.methods *of -:handling

  • ::,;spent~,:1ight .water* :power -;r,*ea*cto.r' '£:ue1 .:and to :c:qnsider.*other *a:ite::t:",.. .

.* *nati.ves which would ~resu*it in a<reduei:ion in the .amount of*.sp.ent

"* "-**. **.:fuel* :-cr.eated.. *'. ::::See :.~edera'.l:h~gl:st:er; ..:Septeniber. ** 1.6., . :1975-.* .. (.4.0 .. F..*lt.

44801).

In March of 1978 the staff released a Draft Generic

.:. Envi:i:rimnen"ta'l'.,:Impact Statement :on +/-he .Eandling*.and Storag.e .of

. *:.. <~i.'Sp.en+/-::.:'Jiigh.t~:/l~ .:cP:m'l.er-:'ZfReac:tor*::.'Eue*i~*. : ::n.1.he' 5f.o&:-'.l:owµg~.::;c.o~;ts.

  • _.:  :.-::::are*:,:~s:-.:+/-bm3ttea-. ~ibY. *:the *.*:-s+/-:ate****;o'f <::r:r:r+/-no+/-s,/.';Qh+/-o.; **:New*::Y:o:i:~ .:~Ti:d

-. *_*1.vi.s:cons+/-n:*.;:on:' b=-h:i:i'J *-r>><*:.0£ .the:.citizens ..o'f :* :these; ::s:tates :_pursuant

.**~':to~*_:.the ,'r:eqtie.st: ;'0£*'.i:he '.Nlic:lear

  • Regu'latory *coinmi*ssi'on ***:*;eor 'cowme!rts *

":GENERAL CO~lfillTS

  • '-*, *.*** : *-*.-..;*"::The<.:::'aevel:cpment5:~o:f:"itheo/iGeneri:c***~Emfiromnent'aT*.:1:mpact

.*:St:ate.l'!!;ent .~-0ri :sp:ent 'fuel .by. :+/-h:e*;Nuclear ::Re,gtilatory* :com..rni*s:s+/-on:.*nas

.. /*:been. *d*one*:~.in:. a*.::way

  • whi'Ch *.-e£.£ectiv:e*1y. :c:+/-r:c.umvents .:.the *. entire****,NE:PA

'pr:ocess.* * .:.:Under ':l\lEPA.~t.he *:env+/-r.onmenta1.::consequen:cesx:;o:£~:a-::.proposed

.... * , -~~:. ,, *,:;a:cti:on***'.milst.:,be '.:consi...dere:a :.pr1or :'.. to.,.'.linile:rtakfug.;c:such ***:a: ~:pro.c:efr:u+,e..* . .,

The GEIS attempts to avoid such a choice by casting the alternative to continued generation of spent fuel as being limited to shutting

--down ~existing nuclear plants :and instead bu'ilding **coal fired

.i

-::,plants..:** -*.-.'~Thi*s.~.:app.ro-ctcll.*.:.no:+/-.*:o:n:ly .:+/-ncor.r.ect_ly:,+/-gno:r:es v..i:able

-* *.,and :Prec.luding .additional- nuclear ~lanp; .:from. coming on . line .but

  • . *_ * ---:::co:ns'iders<**:the ":::eniiizonn:e.n:tal<cons':equ:ences :*of .-.::the: .11and.llng * :.o:f .
  • =:*spent'.:£uel .:only after 'maJor 'federal. a~ions: hav~ng a ..s.+/-gni*fica~t
    • .*+/-mpaCt*con:*:::the :~:envi:rolunetit :.J1ave:.:'taken :.place.
  • {hereinafter -11 DGEIS 1 ' ) pre*sents many-questions 'in *a *rule making proceeding which are adjudicatory in nature~ There is today only one facility which accepts spent fuel, GE Morris, and NUREG 0404 attempts to resolve many site specific, adjudicable
  • .* ._:*:issues ,::rega.,.'l'"fil71g ---~:e.cd*Jtpm:;t )PI *.'.Jtlli*s.,0i.fa:ci.].:J.,ty*ion :.:tiu~. ihea:lth
    • ::-t:l~m,?i.sa~"e~y::I'10'.f<~e-;JP~J:-;:n1)£:~:'.tb:a+/-?;,az:ea;d'Il: ;-;a:-~>e,~'lria'ke=:J:Pa::oeceeaJ.~g-

..-:~e*:.-nr:a.It. G.e:naric* ':Env+/-r.onmental *:Tmpa-ci;* S:tatement

._{does :_:n:o.:i::. ;a:aaZ.ess ::the. *:a:eve1opment * .0£ . an :*,,in:ter.im :s.torage *:Policy

-~-en.*:;-w:oold.:a37.o+/-a*.tne**:cr:eat+/-on :0£ *i,n-a*ependent <spent *-:fuel.

,, :r::s:tqr:a_g:e. *.+/-ns:tal:laticns.*_ .~:(~er:e+/-nafter ~~'.ISFSI'.~:s-":) -~- *_+/-hraugh *:+/-he <use

._;*+/-ncrea:S:ed*..reliance ::U?OnLalternativ:e :.energy sour.ces. * ..The

  • avoidanc.e \0£.. ISFST'*s. 'reduc:e*s: *transportat-ion r:isk.,
  • av.o1'ds .:the
environmental .w"id :safety .. harms .from .the: .creation of . ad-dit+/-o:na:1

,_ *-:-.'~.::£aci :J i-~:s.;:;::conta*i *ni *n"g:;*.raai:oa:ctive ::~ma:ter+/-.al;,,:}nelps.::o::to;. 2:m+/-n:imiz-e

  • the significant and potentially escalating cost of decommissioning
  • .and *decontamination ::o.f
  • *- .3* -

~nuclea.r ...£:acilities, and *ave.ids the

.... ::r+/-:sk .0£: :turlii:ng -~.'£.ac11'1:tie*s .. designed .*::for. i.xrterim :.or .:indep:endent storage into long-term storage £acilities.

  • * ',The :,D:GEIS .:fails .:to. explore *arid figure *into *.its £uel
  • ...s.torag.e . :analysis., all .credible __ .options .:£or. compacted* :a*t-:reactor

. ~storage Jhere'imffter_. *.."AR<S:.torage") .1 i.nc:luding: .2-~t1.ered .. stacking,

  • *f:ue1 * .~sassembly and .. :s.torage *of. *rods --.and .*other* .more* .compact con.figurations. The* DGEIS does not deal .with the problems associated with the possible conversion of an*ISFSI into a long-term spent fuel disposal facility.

The DGEIS does not analyze the costs, and environmental

  • *.harm*:a-s>s:ocia+/-ed. '.:::vi.ith*~:cth:.-;decdmnfrss+/-onin:g . .;and'. +/-h:e***--aecon:+/-.amina+/-:+/-on*
  • ._ :'.'.o:f :::rSFSI'~::s .*

'The *:DGE.:LS *:does :not *ser".io.usly .. consider. :en*ergy . conserva-

,*tion as ..a* means .0£ '.reducing .the** :s:uantity* o:f spent £uel. .Furth.er.,

  • it .ha:s not *con:sd:de:red *the .*impact a *sp-ent fue*1 policy which relie*s
up.on .~.st.r.
LTJ:gent_.:.con:s-.a.-r:va*tion ..:Jneas.w:es *:;iv:o:ul.d *.:have ::upon *the

."C!:evelopment ,:of* .:a na:ti*nrra:l *::energy ",cons.ervation _*. po.l*i*cy .*

-.The DGETS does. not seriously co.nsider alternat:i.ve energy. sou.re.es .other than* coal-  :.It d:ismisses the potential of

  • .. *.alter.native. ;£ue,l...s.o..ur.c.es* 'in *:*one :'sentence,** .re£er;encing *.several
  • pre~viou*s :NRC<reports ::0£ **que*st+/-on:aD:le :sriffi:c:iency~ * *-*:The referenced NRC Reports underestimate the potential of solar, hydro-electric,

,:o.Tl, .. c.o.a.l. gas'i£icat'ion., .;wind., .. arid geothermal* *.power 4

  • F.urth~,,

there is no analysis of the*impact a *spent nucl.ear fuel policy

.which .relies . upon alterna.tiv.e .energy. :so.urc.es would :hav:-e *.on .the

. *:.'development ~0£ 'such*.aTternative ::energy .s:ources.

  • The-.:D.GEIS*,as.s,UIO.es.:tbatAiry ...storage i:s. '.a .viable alter-
nat'iv:e :but -.provide:s *no analysis .to :support *this statemento

.Ther.e.is .no .analy:sis .. of the *poss.ihiJ.ity:tha:t *.an .,.ISFSI might become de facto a long-term diBposal :facility. In view of the*lirnited experience of the nuclear industry with wet storage of spent fuel and certain questions raised by all sides

,ab.out ..:hazards ... asso.ciated "with .. long-term fuel* :storage {.f:or

  • . **- * .......,"""~......~':'!.-=. ":"C""""'*.,_.""'~-:s* ....

'*"*~~~r..;.a.;..-:~-*-" """'!.:..LJ.:.'--_....,_..1.*

  • ~,.-*:i....o~,~ ~the'
Q.J.1 ....... *'--~--

....;.;..,,....oi-e,,.......'i.*-u- ',,~,:.r:- ,...;*i.*.,,_,.,.a_,.,*o*

. :-:...i.:;J..1.*,.L..: t~***~~~-,..-,,::..L. .. 4',,,a. *i'-* :;J. .. y "**cladd.;

' *.~. , . *

    • ng.'

..* J

-*~!t.hoere**::.i.s-,*lnor-e *:man. a -.r:emote***::chance. ::thait .:onc.e ;spent *:£:u*el's -.are

, :stor,ed. £or *a "Cer:taL'"l *nurnber* 0£ years ..they" may not .he ..capable. of *

. bei:~g ..no:ved *wi:thou:t**.signi:ficant*.:envi:ronmental .harm.* . T£ .that

    • :p~o,ss'ihi:li:ty .*i*s :not *.c:eEmed* ].:'ik'ely .t.lie * :nGEIS **.must * :at .least ~aevel*op
  • ,_.~disposal *::fa~ci.liti e*s.. -

The~e is *no :analysis of *th*e .use :of* transshipment and compacted .storag.e *as .. in:terim .. solutions .to provide short-term

-. _,*.r.eli*.ef... *£.r:om :the .f.ueJ. ;.storag.e . ,pr.ohlem ..unti.l .:th:e .creati:an ,.0£ <a 0

-..*Vi:cibJ::e 'nat:Lonal *policy *on long.-'term. storage.. It.-.:is, no+/-* :s:tiff*ici.ent to dismiss transshipment as merely a means for postponing the

  • **- .5**-

.*,pr.oblem *,_.sin-c.e :all. *Spent fuel *storage* techniques discussed *.are e

  • /merely. inter.irn
  • solutions .

. .The ..options of .con+/-inuing *to *operate *existing .reactors .

_

  • but ~0£ .:not. *::pe.rni:itting *rea:'9+/-ors :.under :construction~ from comi*ng :*.on .

line or :of not granting additional.. construction. permits* ,have not

  • been .*considered.

- :There .ls. no compar.ative*analysis *.under the "Saf.eguards Considerations Section", Chapter 5~, of the relative* vulnerabiTi ty of AFR storage, no discussion of the. environmental consequence of sabotage attempts and no economic analysis of the impact of

  • physical .protection measures on stora*ge co.st. Further, dis-

. c:ussi~o.n '0£: ;+/-he ..:£m":v.+/-ronmenta:l *.d..J.-n:p:ac+/- .:o:f :;safeg:uar:a: :failur:e sho.U:ld

  • . :he:':.analyzea.
  • Th.e *1JGEIS ::econo:mJ..cs ~analysis :does *not .addre*ss re.la~tive cos,ts.:o.f . signi*fi.cant -:.con.s.ervation .. techniques ..s.u£.f:icient :to reduc.e
    • energy *a:e..~ana *:.to:::.:a ]:~vel.*:f:o :which*.th'e *,spent *-fuel *,.rhi*ch *is created
  • ....:can-. .b.e;,:s:t.ored:.<.:i..'"1.-.A::~ .:.st.or.age. ::.£ac51:+/-tie:s *-:v.-* -~::the.:;:costs*-.-,'f~or .:generating nuclea-r *.*waste .:at .l~evels.:proj'e.cted~*.in .the 'DGEIS... :costs. to :store :f~U:el and* decommissioning . ~d . decontaminati.on * .under each alternative should also.:be analyzed.
  • ..The.* :economic* £:ea:s:iblli::ty :;of ;;ea:ch.*a1ternative *.must .*be examined. The DGEIS does not analyze the issues surrounding the choice between centralized and decentralized storage technologies.

SPECIFIC COMMENTS ES-3.. .A _gr:owth ,projection 0£ .4l4 GWe by the year 2000

-*- .6 -

  • *~;:may* no:t .be *::a. realistic ,.'figure . . in* vi.ew -'Of. :the .postponement .or

_*--**. ***,:*:deTay *>o:f :many. nucl;e.ar*;:pl*an:ts_ . _*'The*~GESMo-:1 proceeding raised rna_ny questions about the validity of this *~super. low" growth

_;:projection *

. .ES-4.. .The *statement is *made that *.fU:ll core :discharge

.. -.,capability.*is "not -.a.,-sa£ety matter.. " *The .basis .ror *.this state-

. ment is :.n_o+/- *:s:ubs::tantiated ..in_,_*the .:text.. 'Has . a . :detailed fault

.. tree .analysis or similar failure mode analytical technique been utilized to verify this position? Given the current con-ditions of storage space and shipping cask availability, how long might i t take to recover from a refueling-out;=-=age-type

.~.acci::dent:...th.at .:mi:ght ... reqnir:e . .:unloading_ ;:the ~.core. ;and: c:ompl,e:te drain-

-_.**plac.a'?.:. j?~.p:ar:t *:.from :b.11:e :.fact- :that *fai.ll * *core . di*s:Cbarge ;cap.a-

. bili:ties .:do :not .appea:r /to have been f.ully addressed ..as .a 'saf'ety.

'£rorn an operational flexibility standpoint. :Therefore,* i t should

  • :di:schar;ge*.may ,be. *required' :£.or *rout+/-m~ .repair,*.ma:.intenanc:e, *-and

.inspection :which. might *:otherwise be .discouraged.*

.Tab:l:e ES-2 does ~not .expli*citly state the .basis ..upon w}lj,.ch.-..i:t.,*,makes- its: *~comp:act :-s.tora.g:e '..analysi:s.

ES-5. The NRC 1 s conclusion that at-reactor storage capacity expansion c.an take place "without significant effect on health and safety"prejudges the conclusions of its generic environmental impact statement on that qµestion a*nd the importance

....... 7 *-

io:f .:in'dividual :,l*+/-:censj.ng .:Proceedings .:in. assessing .whether .a ~parti:c.ular

.:*: e:xpans:i:on* ::'.can- :b.e* :O'one ;:1dtho:u:t **.:n:arm.:*:to. :h'E:alth :;*or ..*;sa£:ety.*

.-:..The ~:Exxon .licenSing ~proceeding .has ..been .::terminated .

.* .:Thi:s *.::has* :not.**b:een *explic+/-tly* :stated .*

ES-6. ..The  :'statement:is:~made.~*that :General *:Elect.tic's oper.ati*on: *of the* *processing~ :pJ.:ant at.* Morris as ..an,.independent

  • 'he *operated with adequate protection of the health and safety of

... the public. The statement is misleading. The Morris operation has operated on an extremely small scale (handling only several hundred ..tons of fuel) .for a short time period in terms of probable

  • *nor ..+/-s* .. it:.:re:a-.s.onab'i:e ..to a-ss:ume. that .an ~J:.SFSI wo.uTd .be :con:s*:tructed
      • .. General* *Electric* Company {Docket No .*
  • 7.0:-l30BJ regarding .the

-.~-.-~.::::.li:.ea1+/-t.L~ano<:sa£e:ty .-::asp:ects .;,o£:*+/-h.e .::1'1orri:s***'£.ac.+/-l.i:ty .*

.There .is ..no analy.sis ~0£ the ;signi£icant _costs:.~and potential dangers. :associated :with .the .decontamination 0

~nd the decommissioning :0£ indep.ende*nt:*:spen:t .£:uel .stora.ge *.ins.:taTl.a:tions ES-6,7. The alternatives of transshipment of fuel from

  • one react.or to another and of a reduction in nuclear power genera-tion are dismissed on the bases that transshipment provides

.:only temporary _,relief <and .nrrclea*r *power generation ..:restriction

-- .'8 *-

.*.:r:equires £ull :r.eplac;ement *by .'-coal :fired power plants.. I t *do.es

  • *. -  ::n:o~t :::app:ear.~th:at * *thes:e *altern'at+/-ves *or *:.::combinations
  • thereo£ *have

. been. gi:v"'..en .a .. real :.evaluation., especially* i.f AR and AFR spent

  • *,*::fneJ.:~"st*ora:g:e**.:i':s ;r.~gard"ed"!'on:iy.*ian .. :an* '.interim.>solution *. *.For example, al.tern<;ttives such as transshipment could provide .essen-tial' .:short term**relie'f from ... the .fue*1 storage problem .until. the formulation of .long-term policy so as to avoid the.creation 0£

- 1

. addi~tional 'fa*cilitie*s which are IDerely ~ interinl'" - .:'The* :alterna~

tives to continued nuclear power generation 0£.combinations of

_. co11servation, load* management, plant conservation, alternative energy sources, etc., appear not to have been addressed at ali.

  • . 'ES .. .The ~statement. is *::made ..that. ~phys+/-ca.l ;security
    • >at-rea:ctor :and .a*way £ram :reactor *sites.. *lvhil:e the .same regulation;:;

...app_ly, * :i::t .is.<gu.estion:able. whether the security "at a !=imall ISFSI

_..:at ,.a.. :re:mo:te. '.lo.cation. would ..J:ie :.a:s ..:,e££ec.t:i:v~e as :.:rn:i ght '.be.* £ound .a::t *

  • a ~'lar,.,.- **1"'-,cl*e*""

~*'= ..... u ..,.. "oo-'-,Qr

i,-._
:~ . ....., -
  • ,-.en°ratlng £acil; ty.

~':::'** - . ., - - . -'- . ** *In *addi. ti.on, each

  • '.. . ,.":-~"
    • -r:c-.~:s~-- ..-~e=*+/- ..... ..,~ ..

.....:'.....~, =: es: *:1*'c:.1.*::~""'"""""'ne~ -~* .  :"l"'* ..~*o ... *~....,.-,a*l***

.. z- .;i.:i:::..i ..\,.;I

-:;i ..

  • ... :nu~:e ar ...

.. *~*

'"-a**r.g:e-'-,

  • .._. .,=or" ..~=... ....... s.*ts* -

...i..: ,.:*,,,..,..*ro,,_;.;.

  • .. Comparait:1vely,,**'construct'itin* o.f an 'TSFSI*i;.fill *have. a**gre:ater *inpa.ct
  • on *:the* need for .. s:ecurity and .-_thereby be *more costly than will
  • expansion of an existing facility.
  • _,::To _*,;say*~+/-hat .the **:env:ir.onmental***~impact .of *:'ind~.p:endent "facilities is about the same *as that Q'f *at~reactor storage assumes that these. facilities will not become long-term disposal sites. . It also assumes that *the . same requirements of* geologic, seismic and hydro logic* integrity will apply to ISFSI' s as

"*currently applies *to reactor si*tes.

.There :is. :the , upwarranted .assumption .that. ::conser:Vation

.*:or* '.a:lterna:tiv:e *.:energy ..:systems .:ar:e* .not <<vi*able .

. ~:zs-8 .. .* .. Tabl'e ::ES-.3:-:pr:ov+/-:de:s . :a :.*compari:s+/-on ;o'.f .Potential

:excess JIIOrta1ity: *:of .nti*clear :v.. *:coal *power generation. :. 'Presenta-

.:tion -0£ the mortality .s.tatis.tics £or :nuclear to* three decimal

  • . places :implies a .great deal :more .:certainty than can be sta tis-

.-- _ti:cally .:justi:f.i.ed- .::rn .:contrast, ::pr:esenta.,tion of*~coaJ. :mor:taJ.ity figures for power generation as ..a .range* of 3-lO 0 deaths .per

.86WY(e) is more realistic. Major accident cases appear to be omitted from the nuclear column. Nuclear mortality appears to

  • be underplayed and coal mortality over-stated*. For example,
the..:bnp.ac+/-. .*:0£ ;r.adon. ,,r.-elease .£rom ..minin,g ..:operations . .is understa.:ted.
  • *:;sect':i:on **4.* ;1.*:2- * * ~h:e* **econ*omJ::c *.t:al:ctilations 'in.** *:th'i:s
  • ~paragraph* :do. not *consider :o.ther :energy* systems *and. c.onservatione

".Th,ey ;assu.."ne that .t..11:e only real_ -option :is *to *closce *nuclear power

  • * '.;:iS:e~dnn ...:.4. .~.l'_..3_ *. :~:Tb:EI:e :,::i0:s::::n'O*:analy.s+/-.s*:.~0£*:.:::the *,:comm:+/-+/-+/-ment
  • .of* .res*ou:r:c,es .£or* 'all *'*viable ,:option~s**:.:+/-ncluding **alternat+/-v.e* *:*energy
  • sources ... other .than- coal, ,*conservation, .and ~centralized v .. :de-
centralized S,Pent'.*£.uel* storage.
  • Se:cti:on A~.1.4~ . <I£ -;.a ::sllb:s:eg.uen:t '.determ:inat:ion ..:+/-*-s .'.made that movement of spent*fuel from an ISFSI*for environmental reasons would create significa~t harm such a facility could

'become *a *de facto long.- term disposal facility. Thi*s would *have the effect of limiting future options.

  • Secti,on 4 .. *1-S~
  • Statements -regarding *the .importance of

..:a* .nuclear .po:wer .. energy.:b:as.e *are ..unsubstantiated *

.:'Es-9. 'The *need :£or. ll!ore '.def*ini:t+/-ve *reg.ulat+/-ons **for

  • ,.ne:w .* *~:stor;ag:e ..on,J,y*" *: :£.aciliil:es. *is .:i*ndica+/-ed.. * ::'The .:pl:anned *.::regtila-

.**t:Lon*s. 10 *cm. 72 *and *;:a-ssoci*ated regulatory guides 'should be expedited if, in fact, early commitment.to AFR facilities is

.::to :'1>e *.ma:ae.  :.The ':find+/-ngs :0£ : this* :.environmental impact state-

.,:ment.:sho:uld.*.'be*. !nade .. eon*ditional...upon: the*ear1y.: ..1..ssuance . o.:f .*such

  • regulations.

Consideration was given to modifications that might be requ~red to 10 CFR 51, including the S-3 table. The DGEIS in-

  • .dicates no modifications are necess.ary, including no changes

.*.*result, :in changes r .::this :"fa*ct ;should be* :noted.*

  • .£S-.9.o ..L'"l ;p*~ragr.aph :5..0 :no* analysis ..is .:ref:ere*nc:ed *.*in the .*text to *support .*the statement that increased spent* fuel

~* :ment~ * * 'T.her.e* :..is :.:s.J.grii.f.i.cant. V.idence *:that .*the

  • cr.eati:on~.*0£ :I:SFSI'.s 0

will .~create.increased .:enviromnental*.harm. through increased .trans-

  • po.rtation riskc.. Spent fuel will have to be transpo.rted *over lon:g distances* in ..the transpor.tation . of* un:irradiated ** :f*:uel.. *.-also

/* . *::sp:ent ;£uel *:tr.a*nspo:r+/-at:.io.:h *::is '.TIO:t.,:s.ubject **to *the same *safety "Stan-dards in transportation as unirradiated fuel because i t is ex-empted by 10 CFR 73 sec. 73.E(b) from the safety requirements of 73-30-73-36 and 73.72.

  • -.ll- e
    • :Es-;10.
  • Paragraph 7 .* 0. .The analysis ~fails- to :adequately states that a terrorist .attack by- .well armed ~a.nd_ trained terrorists

.1*977 -:report, 1'.ruclear Proli£erati.oh Safeguards .:considered -a*s

-* credi:ble

  • the -use_ of .missiles and .anti~..tank weapons* by terrorists.
  • Keeny et al., in the .report 0£ the .-Ford Foundation, Nuclear Power Issu~s Arid .Choi.ces
  • 11977) ._cac:Y..nowle,ges the .,possibility :of +/-he

-. __-use *:of missiles - and* ,atomi::c::: .:,weapons *in *a *terrorist -a tta*ck.

Section 8 .. 1. The .ihtroductory paragraph states that dry storage technology ass.umpti6ns are based on the existence o.£ ag.ed spent £uel. This .:assumption is *not .clear in the +/-t:Xt*

._....;:E~r.th:ez,,, **::!'.the .:+/-n+/-ro.ducto:ry: *p.ar.ag~:ph .*:s*tat:e*s +/-l:ra't -*:storage* :-o"'f :*spent

- _._---"zu'el,.* ana*:_;w*a:ter *pc.als .:is--:a:*.::::\*ie'll ;:e:s:tab1d.-shed ;technoJ=ogy.* *. . -:on- *the

.con+/-ra:r~r,

  • the nuclear ..:industry's: experie.rice-, .with storage ~of :spent
  • ..:£:ueJ. .:*en ,wa'ter...podl:s is-:limi.ted .and,, . only about 25 .years old. We do , no't- know "wha+/- t..~ ~long-t:erm ~consequences *Q"f  ::such storage are.

0

  • are* bas:ed~*is -that: spent *'fuel storage ::s:it:uat+/-.on :is ** 11.mana_geable"

- provided that nt.'1.e planning. for .-AFR ..storages *is_.,initiatea in a timel_y f.ashi.on." - How Jl.i."'l.ffianage*a:ble :does the :situation become :i£ Af.R-initiation "does.noct.'.o:c.cur -.in . .:a- :-"tiniely ,:fa;shion? 1 ' '.:Wha.t +/-:s

  • _:*the.:de'f:initi'on >0£ *'"timely fasnion?"

ES-12. The storage of spent fuel in water pools is stated to have an insignificant environmental impactr primarily because of the high resistance to corrosion attributed to

  • .~:tlr:caloy,. This ~::find+/-ng.avo+/-ds'
  • - T2 -

addres.sin:g *the *:uncertainties

.*. **expre:ssed .ln <One** 0£ *::the k.ey :*r:e£:erenc:e -reports,** BNWL 2255 ,

.... B.ehavior :..0£ -.spent Nuclear .:FJiel ..:in Wate:r Pool* .s~torage." While

    • t:nd.:s.':repor.t, *::does *.£1nd*th:at .mprospe:cts:*:are *.'favor.able *to .extend

. : stor~:ge :o:f -spent .nuclear 'fuel in water pools" it*also indicates

+/-ha+/- "detailed* :systemati:c ,:examinations of .fuel* bun.dle materials

. have. *11ot. been .conducted .specifi.cally to define storage . behavior,

  • because: *o'£. the expectation :that the fuel* be reprocessed .after relatively short residence. 11 It goes on to state that "however, i t is not how cleCl.r how long. pool storage of spent fuel may be extended. If storage times of this spent fuel inventory are

-.~pected *to* extend .into t.':le 20 .to. 1*00 .Year . frame, there is an

..,o;,,.,_.,...~==i-,,..,;...,.,.g * ~-~n**,...,.,,,~

.. ,~~;~-*,i. . * --..;

......,,_~.,e-

'-*=*J..,;.,._ ..1;.. ..***':'-*:o

.. Loe . . . . . . ,,,.,,..,....,_~..a.= ,_. , , *,:e*,.._.,,.,.,,.r.*

-:a*e::;-=*~*~*";1"\""". ~**"n' ,Wl:... .. *.~:any*

.. . . ...*'s':l*"*:O*

. ,.., . ;d*:e*g~

""""  ;::i.a....

. '. *"-=U  ;.;""n d,....,....,

  • . ~m~chani'sms :a:re** op:era+/-i:y:e.~*:

11

    • ~Th:i:s* *~:e.chnica3. *uncerta'.:inty has**not
    • he.en. *address.ed . by .the DGEIS ..

to support the :S.taten:ent .that :the use of :dry storage is environ-Finding 7. The.* key :finding seems to be *that the costs

.and :the excess mortality -rates and environmentaT .*impacts *of coal-

.fired! :power *generation .are much '.hi*gher than those .fo= nucl*ear

  • ~:Power. *~This. :may
  • be .. ::tr:ue,*:pro.vl:d:in:g. *the :sqenarius -.:ev:al:uated .::ar.e.

in fact the C'nly scena*rios viable and providing that major nuclear power accidents can be successfully avoided, and that additional

.serious problems do not 'deve*lop, (such as non-linear low level radiation effects, substantial changes to the occupational

.. .e *- . l3 -

...*.:.radi;a;t"ion .. limi.:t:.s., . . ,e:tc .* .)"'. . .Some ...indi*cati*.on *.that *~1Jncertain;ty ceXioSt'S

  • a:1fd.**+/-nat: continuin*g *evaluation* .i:s * .:necessa:ry should :be* made.~

.: F.in:ding .B.. . .Thi:s ...:£+/-nd+/-ng..,should *:.state . th:a+/- th:e :.su:f'fici:ency

  • ?o~£ .the*:*s-*3_ .table ..is ::c.urrently :b:ei.nrg* .challenged:*:and -~con:s*equently

.lD ** CFR 51 .may ,have to be .changed .*

      • S-2.  :".I:t <is
  • now .obvious '.that* *the *".national .objective of
an. operational and .geo'log'i:c *:depos'itory *-for* high .level :nuc lear 0 waste and possible disposal of spent fuel by 1985" will not be attained. The recent DOE Task Force Report has indicated that 1989 will be the earliest date such a depository could be estab.lish.ed. Therefore, the amount 0£ spent £uer which would be
  • s.;.:3.. Finding A. *A-s .pr.ev+/-ously :infilca:ted., .the long .term

. *corrosion *.res*.;:s;tance of*' zircaloy has :no+/-..been adequately tested.

,and :.since:* t..~e ~length '~0£.--time  :*o*f-.::the*:interi*m- :storage*. 'has *not cbeen

  • (:h} <developi-.ng >s:ensi.ti:v.e monitorirrg :techniques tO *identify. 0
  • Teakers *and- :encapsulate .all.leaking. £uel* elemen_ts where potential leakers shou1d .be analyzed.
:Fj;nd:ing_ :6.*. * ::F.+/-n:d+/-ng-.6'. :indicates ,:that *:Mo:rr:is .and Wes+/-

Valley are licensed under 10 CPR 70. Part 70 regulations address the requirements for record keeping of special nuclear materials and to license such *nuclear waste 'facili*ty *under such *a *procedure is a manipulation of those regulations.

-.14 -

l-2. *:As *previ:.ons.ly indicated,, there .i.s *a..* serious '_questi_on

.iO.f whe:the*r . *;qpe:r:at.i:on* ,0£ **.a _reactor .:;without .TCR.. i~s*.".:de.si*rable.

Further, a geologic repository seems out*of the question by the

.... :.:mi:d-:*T9.8D ':s- * ..The ~.r.ec.en+/- .:DOE .Task *.:F.o:r.ce . Report ::indicates +/-hat

    • a *basi.c *waste "management poTicy i's* just* now beginn+/-ng *to *be

.£ormulated.~and *that 19.89 *would .*be.the .earliest such .a -.facil'ity

  • could *. be .:established.

T...;:3.. *Alternative 3 *

  • The* option* of ha.lting new plant construction rather than closing down existing plants is an option that should be considered. Further, there is no justification for assuming that coal is the only replacement energy source.
.Table .:l.$.1.. J.T.able .. l-:1 "aces .no:t.:cons:'ider "the :.option 0£
  • .*additional. *:*corrstr.uction *:perm+/-ts.*
  • i-4.
  • Th:e .scope *o-f the asses*sment :is .indicated .to .*con-

. ::;-i:der ".7'1-re iltipact *o:f .*:s.tor.age'--*0£ .'.Spent ::f:ueJ: *througn the *end .0£ *the

.* *:c.en+/-.~..f-  :~Con:s:ider:a::ti:on .*:s..rrauld .:be .giv.en *:ta *.the. po.s:s.ibili.ty. *that

  • - - -_~,*:sa£eg.uarde'd :storage . 0£< :-spent J:uel .nray *Cdeve'lop ..:i.n*to _*:a
  • 11 -perpetuaT" requirement-

,-Alternative 3. Coal .i:s listed here as .an "example" of an .-alte:rrra.tive ,energy. :S.our.ce,, but *on *page .1-3. and elsewhere ..in

.the.:::te*xt it.:0is *1+/-*sted as the.alternative energy source.

2-2. Paragraph 2.2. If no reactors were permitted to

  • come on line after 1985 this would have an impact on the generation of spent fuel through 2000. (See coITL~ents about ES-3 regarding

.~growth *proj.ection) ...

  • 2~-4.. .:In .the ~des-cr.ipt:ton* .0£ :demand <for storage *.'capacity, an assumption of the 70% capacity .factor £rom the period of

. *I:~r86 ,th:rough ..2o:no *.d:s. :S:tated-:and ".an :annua:l dis*charg.e 0£ -fue.l*'by the *:reactors was estimate-a .to* be 22.*4 MT *per GWe. *con page 2-3

+/-he ~can:nuaJ. :discharg.e .of 'fuel by ..the reactors. is* es.tirnated to

.*.be ~3.0 .MT per GWe) ..* * .The capa_city. :£actor .assumed i~ probabl;y. con.:...

.. s.erv:ative- :in ,:t.'1-ie :calculation but. the 'dis~ha-rg-e .quantity is *non-conservative, particularly if *design exposures are not achieved for reasqn -of unanticipated fuel failure mechanism, etc. The recent.DOE Task Force Report assumed a discharge figure of 26 MT per GW.e. Ho*wever 1 uncertainty of the total installed capacity

.. *:2--6. * :.Table .. 2 .* 2.. :storage :Capa:ci*ty *is "Jni.slea:ding, :'it

  • . pre..s-ep.ts avai.labl.e .ba:sin. storage *capacity without :compact .storage .

.A*s .::infilcat:ed .in.* ether *s.ec.tions .*of ~t.he* .D:GEIS *{spec:i£ically Table

'3. 4 on page 3-9) compact storage .is a £act -at many reactors *and

. I t *is not *..reaTi*stic .to.. a-s:sume **th*at .only l..'5 cores* :Of- storage capacity will be provided .£or reactors . coming on line after 198:5 .

.The storage *capaC:ity *:will probably .be much larger.

3 and ,2. - *csee --previous ...commen+/-s on .. limite"d--alterna-

.tive*s *assessed) .

  • Tl:re remaining spent fuel capacity at each individual facility sho~ld be listed and analyzed on a geographic basis.. Alternative 1 does not examine the option of even more compacted storage at reactor sites. Testimony presented at

-. l - 1.6 -

- he*a*ri.ng.s ~held *.:at the ::.Cal~Lf:ornia Ener.gy .:cornm:iss*+/-on ... in .Harch,; .1977

  • '{Rribins:t:~n ;.:of .. Nuc:l-ear. c:s.er:v.+/-ces .'Corporation) ... i:ndica:te-d . that :at-reactor storage*compaction is probably feasible by more dense

. . .ra'.cking :and.pn :_do:ub1:e-.deck.r.acking . so*.j:ha:t.:intrim .:s+/-o.rag,e.:-0£ _a

    • reactor':s * ,40*-year *:discha:rg:e :a:f. :*spent .. 'fuel nrl.'ght *be: 'f"eas.ible .in

.. exis.tin_g-. 'AR *,poo.ls.. Volume .2 *0£ .the. g.eneric environmental. impact

-*;:.statement ;indicates :'{page D-:4:3)_ :that tw.o--t+/-ered stacking 0£ fuel

raC
.~s  ::is ..a *po:ssib.le .method :at *.reproces:sing pl-ants. W'rriJ.e these i

t* ___

  • alternatives present .certain :problems .th:ey .do not*.appear .to have I

I been considered by the DGEIS at all for reactor storage pools.

Another alternative for more compact storage is a possibility of fuel bundle disasserrtbly and storage of rods in more conpact

config
u:rati.ons .*
  • . -.- ~3~'.3 .* * :: ':T.abJ::e l;..;J. .::-Sh'OilJ.ff- :.al:so .J:ncl--uoe- ::anci:;l:y*s:i-s *':f:or '.::1,+/-:s'ting additi*onal -.£uTl :capa:c:i:ty with- compact storage. *Such :a change

~together w'ith. :the *use ".o'f*:'tran.Sshipment .could .reduce* or eli:ninate

any* ~==-a.--
-::o.r*.;::_2R::stor:ag:e **until_*ca£.ter *:tbe year .2:000-.
an *:opti:on *- £*o:r :*:compa'cted *storage_

3-B.. . The :third.paragraph .indi,cates that ;PWR can increase at-reactor storage .capa.city _ by a -£actor 0£ 3 through

...:*:th.e:_US'e *of- compa:c:t -.storage.*. :Tabl:e _J_.4_. on *pag.e ~-~9 J:rowe.v.er.r i*ndicates that -on*e Te actor, *Three *Mi le Ts'land 'Number l **has

  • achieved a compact storage factor of 4.36.

3-10. The use of bora1 as a neutron absorber for more compact storage is .described. Has boral been subject to long-term

e -*J.7 e qua.li£i*cati_on 'tes.t:iiig. :.under. the :.conditions. *of , open-pool .spent

  • .:-f.uel':storag,e Ihi*gh**oxy.gen :content).'? *.where .is*::such ':a*.quali£.+/-ca-tion testing documented? Boron carbon is subject to swelling.
  • *. -~Proble1ns *::o£ <sweiling.*:Jla1re .been  :~erienc.ed .*.?Lt .Connecticut. Yankee.
    • 1v~.ith **swel'ling *:0£ .the. boron :carb1de -waTls of the sp:ent :fuel storage .racks. ..These .. fil.££icultioes sho'uJ.d .be -examined.
  • _,3-13. 'The *char.acter+/-zation .of .Morris. and West Valley as ISFSI's alone ii? misleading.

3-14. Paragraph 3.1.3.3. The paragraph in the middle of the page points out that "in general, the safe storage of irradiated fuel depends on maintaining the integrity of the

. ,£ue2.:::cTa'dd:i:ng .<:a:s*..:::.:t!re*.*:.p.ri:ma,:ry <b:arxi::er ..to the :rel::e:a:.Se :0£ :rad:i-.o-

  • nutli'.des.*'" *._'Th:i*s *::s+/-a:t"Errren+/- -,,ei:p.p'has+/--.z:.e~.  :~the* nece:ss+/-ty **to -con:aue't

- complete and thorough *.testing of the .long-.term .:corro*si*on res.is-

. :tan.ce .of £.uel clad .m:ateri.als commented. 'On pr.eviously. Addi-

  • .:+/-5..:on:ally". :the  :::srite"T"rr::.n+/-**~:faiJ:s ..+/-o:.::a:na.J,:.yze-::the :,p.o..ss.i:bili.ty ;_:tr.w.+/-
no :me+/-ho"d ,;,0£ dealing with the spent :fuel* :'storage prob1em may
  • ** * -~he' ~::fotrna*:* :Whi'ch _,_j:;s*-,;sup:e:r.ior. :::to **;:w:et~pool ~ys+/-ora;ge *.;and -,+/-h:e*r.e'fnre
ISFS'I 1 *s .could -.become* *:de .. facto *.long-term -storage :fa.ciTi ti:e s
  • 3-14 *through .24. As previously _dis.*cussed, *.dry storage

.of *spent .fuel :is .. not .a -demonstrated .techno.lo.gy .. *. T.here .is no

,.e*vi'd:ence **.:to Y.supp.ort :the.: *conc:l.us+/-on ::that** :the *cenvironmenta.l **+/-mpact from dry storage facilities will be equivalent to or less than those from pool storage facilities.

3-27 through 34. This description on transshipment

- 'l8 *-

  • po.s:sib:ilities*.::i.s .d:i£.fi*cult. to £ollow a-nd*adds .little. to *the 'DGEIS-
<Transs:hipment :c.ould :.be .*used .a i*nter*im solution *to spent 'fue*1 storage capacity.problems .and could also be used, to resolve full
  • ':core *di.s*cha:rge
  • capab:i"lity problems *that* mi'.ght ari*.s:e .at *:special plant situations *. Further, .the *analysis fails ..to. consider*:t."le

.possibility oT .:incr.eas.ed**..storage. capaci.ty making :transshipment

  • viable and the *fact +/-ha:.t those. r.eactor.s which are on line after

'J.9\86 *w.i1i.:have.-additional .. storage -*capacity_ * .. There£or.e* sp*ent

  • 'fuel**pool's -for* reactors other than those listed in Table 3. 5

.. _will. be available .for transshipment. There is no analysis of the increased transportation risks and other harms associated with transshipment.

  • .*. .:3~3.6.:.. * * :Par.agraph..;J;.33.. **:,:rhe *:three .:s:entence ~con:s+/-dercati:on
  • 10£ *:alternative.**en:ergy**::snurces **and .conservati*ori made *on pag:e 3.33
  • .ha:rdly .*s.eems :.c.onsi.ste.."'1.t':with .the..Commission .dire'.ctive .in . the

- * .<='ede;.,-;::,*1

~ ,.,~~, . - -* .::.~ ...... ;-~-::.,.."

  • cne-~--~-:.i_~ ... =ptember

-1 . --~:~.';' ' . - .,.6 **1-9"75

. .....L. :1** ___- . _, .. *--:(4'0' F'R ~*

1_ - * * * *

  • 11 2801*)* that* al-'-cr.na
  • - . * - ' ' * .s...:-~ - -

tives to t..1-ie pres*ent :system be 'examined.. Further., .the .ref.erence-s

..-~.rited, :i:n :,support *:are .::some:Wha.t .:*:guestinnabla. *.:The .;S*ta"'F.:f _.:c.i+/-.:es :.a

.::*Ford *Fou..ridation :study (:Ford --Fo'lindation, "A* :T.ime '.to Choose

  • America's *Energy Future, 11

.Energy .Policy* Proj.ect, Balling.er

  • Publishing Co., Cambridge, 1974) .as *evidence that :conservation
  • will .not ~have *a material. impact on. *.the need .for . elec
    tri.city.
    • . ..'.Hm'lever ~ - :that. ~study :est+/-mate.s .:that :+/-he* growth .*in <electrical needs could be cut by more than 50 percent through increased conservation. Further, the Commission's statement that conserva-tion will not be a reasonable alternative contradicts principle nll.l-Tiber 6 of the National Energy Policy \*lhich states that

) . *- .1.9 -

  • .conservation .:is. *.essential. to .an _energy program in .the .United States.
"The"::conclusion *of *tlre.DGEIS that conservation and alter-

_nativ:e .. energy :sourc.es are .not .viable .£ails to take into* account

.~c*onclu;s+/-o.ns- ,as .*.ti;tese *.*ma:da **by .o:t:b:er *£cede.ral government. agencies such*as the Council.on Environmental Quality. The CEQ predicted

in*.*a recent --study .that .curxent ... energy .:consumption *can **be reduced

. 20 to 40 per ..cent th):".ough consery_ation and that 'i£ :conserv-at:Lon "Tneasures were taken .by the year 2000 solar techn6logy .could meet *25%

  • of our energy needs and 50% of our energy needs by the year 2020.

Solar Energy: Progress and Promise, Council on Environmental Quality, *April, 1978.

Chap~er: A. _,:Chapter A- J:ai'ls ":to. discuss .the .envi.ron..rnent:aJ.

  • . :c*:effec+/-s :;on ~:"decotn:.'"Iiissi:oning":arid~~;ae.contanii'na.ting ,a'dd1+/-Tonal
  • nucl.ear
    • £a*cili:t+/-es:, .c;iry ::stor:a:ge;<centr.aTiz:ed v. proli£.era:ted .:storage,

.and..::t."'J.e .degr.ee. *0£ tra.11Sshi:pment of *spent fuel.

. 4- l- . ?I'her .i:s *.no analysis* *n'f *the 'Statement that eners-.f .

. :demand . w:'i l l . .c.ontinue :to ,.:increase :at .the ~:r.ate . projected.

  • 4- 2,_ - ..'P.aragraph A .* .1.T.2. * ~~The hea'lth *and. environmental aspects .of ..a .. loss o.f .:cooTing .water accident sho~uld '.be analyzed.

(See section 4 * .2.3.8).

4~3,. *.In "th:e .*l:a:st**:par:a:gr:aph-*:on .the ..p.age, .. a:l:ternat.ive coal utilization technologies are dismissed due to the uncer-tainties involved with projection into the future. Several technologies such as onsite gasification or liquifi~ation appear to show promise and their potential should be seriously analyzed.

I * . - - _4-4

  • through
  • 27. This .section .descrihing s.ev.ere

,.env.ironmental . impacts o'f. _.:coal <<.fi;.red .power :p'lants .;is *.exc:1::ed'ingly

.lengthy and out .of pro_;>ortion to *the amount of space allocated

- ~-::to*:+/-he--'*:de$_cription:~o:£ .:1rraj*.or .Jiu:cl-ear :pl-~+/- .a~cidents.

  • ___ _:rt ..des-cr.ibes

-.the worst *of .coal :and *the *best :*0£_ nuclear. - *If :the worst _coal acc.i*dents are_ to be *_described,_ the catastrophic -nuc.lear accidents

.should -;also ...be_ .consi'dere'd.

--4-2'6 *through *27. The *socio *econorni*c --analysis :i*s inadequate and lacks a data base. For example, there is no analysis that socio-economically a- community would find an ISFSI to be as acceptable as a power plant .

. _.A:-28.. ..The ..;bald statement .that :the replacement :of :nucl*ear

--~<e:ner:gy -,with'_*ccoal **'.\efill .-.r.:esfilt +/-n.'Jiigher*,;u:tili.ty.-:b.ill:s ~-l.acks*;. su'b-

-st.antiation.

<"Chapter 5 .*. -*_The --S-a'feguaras--consideration.-.sec.tion i*s

  • -* --short. *and-.'s11mild-~be -.exp:andBd. 'For--exai.-nple, *no .compar+/-*son --0£
v.aryin:g ;safeg:uard:s .reg.uir.ements £or. ::s::uch .a.lt.ernative .:considered

-~has -been :done. 'Furth:e*r.,*- 'there has* heen:.:no --:a*nalysi's *o_f-*--whether security *ha:zards are -greater .at *.c.entralized or decentralized nuc:;lear £acilities *_nor .is_ .there any analysis of .the adequacy of thes.e_ security_ requirements .

.:~Phy:s+/-cal":pro+/-e'.ct+/-:on :.*o'f*-spen:t :£:u-el. a:t_ spen:t <£uel.~s:torage sites is implied to be the same as for physical protection at reactor.sites. -The regulations are not clear but the physical security requirements for reactors (10 CFR 50.34) probably would not be applied to AFR's. In view of the probable remote location

- .. 21-

0£ . .an AFR, conside:rati.on -should he* _given .::to .:add:itional ;*:se*cur.i:ty

- -_ -requi-.r.ements. .*For : example., .1:s- .i+/- .de:sirable - to require a ":hardened" 0

. '.£a:cility* to ..:insure ::t..l:l:a+/- *.0££-,site .*as.s.i:s:tance. response time .is

.:a.dequa:te*?- _*::rn-. :addi.tion., ,*w+/-th -_ the< co:nunon *pooling; _::o:f  ;.fuel -.:from**

many dif£erent licensees., accountability should *also be reevalu-

  • - -ated.

- - .6-4.. _,*.T.he .:case ,~exampl-es -:express .re*sults .in .percentage increase in storage* capacity and costs. These comparisons are meaningless since they cannot be related directly to the total light water reactor problem. They should be expressed in tons 0£ .fuel or a percentage of spent fuel on an annualized GWe basis.

to J:i.gure ..in ~comparativ-e :d-.e.co:m_rriiss.ion:ing . and. d:econtamination costs .in .its .analy.sis.

_*:7 --'-

_ 'The .:.:b:as+/-s :£or: .a:sses;si:n:g .:.the.:3:mpa.ct ~-.o:f ::spen+/- :.£ueJ.

  • -storage .ori.J.y .. thr.ough .:the year 2:00 O .is not. :clear_
  • _7-*4. - - Paragraph 7~*2.A~ _- 'This- s.*ectI*on: f arls *to :-state anythi:ng.. ~The section ignores the potentia'lly *vast irresponsible
  • *co.mrnitment .of resource-s *.to the nuclear waste problem over thousands of years ..i£ a saf.e alternativ_e .is no.t developed.
  • - 'lO-. * - .The method *;Q'f .d:isc.o:unting ,the ::co:s+/- *:o-f .perpetual AFR storage after 25 years is a questionable accounting technique

. in -v:iew ,of the .large degree of .uncertainty on in£ la ti on, not to mention possible societal changes in periods that far in the future.

I ** ,.. I

- .. 22 -

. ~Volurne. 2_.Appendices. )Page *.B-34.

  • If, . in .fa.ct, (as

_in*dicated -in .. the.:l-ast paragraph) *2*..round -trips o*f :.177 .fill each were .. made .*in* £0.ur .hours :t.ili th - .a +/-ruck. __shipping ..cask." *.conditi.ons must :hav:-e 'he*en so }:ideal Ji.. e .* ,, n'othing in .cask :or* .. nonradioactive

  • material) . that any .genera.lization
  • ba:sed .on this example is
  • .un.realis.tic.

PEOPLE .*OF THE. STATE :OF.* 'ILLINOIS.., . .CITIZENS *oF ~.THE :STATE *oF-DHIO,

.. WILLIAM . J. 'SCOTT WILLIAM *J. BROWN Attorney General Attorney General State of Illinois State of Wisconsin

, // ~ 1l. J f-.) *I '

  • / * ,. .,_. ,. .. .

(_::J /n I ' "-

'BY : .

,--~\__9//

[_.,;:.~.:.... _"*}t

,, ... / .

. BY. \ - . *..: \..,\-..!._, *, \

  • 1 ( :" . "'

J ; I A~.... I., ~ *-:.:.

  • 1 I

DEll...!.'i HANSELL .COLLEEN K. MIS SL I

  • .c.As:sistant. *Attorney-. General ** -:As:s.istant.A:ttorney * :Genera*1

. _:*~vi_:r.omnental<Contr.ol :nivi:sion <State *0£

  • :::TB*8 :'1vest *::Randolph .Street 3-0. *East 'Broad Street

.. Slii.te 23T5 *seventeent.'ri T:l*oor

. _Chicago, Illinois 60:6Dl Columbus, Ohio -4345 I312J 793-2.49.l J614], 4*86-.27 66

_ :.P.EO.PLE .. .OF .THE .:S:.TATE ..O.F'.'..'.NEW .. YOR..~,

BRONSON C. La.FOLLETTE LOUIS . J .... LEFKOWITZ

. ,At+/-orr..:y .,Ge...-i.cral *-.Attorney Ge!ieral

    • ..:state ..:0£ .Wi:s.:corrs+/-n * >!State ...o:f New .Y.o:rk Dr,_'\ '\ r (\

/ .*\ ; : I . (. *1

, A-\

/~.

BY: \ (~.v...c/rl

  • I i\ 1 t 0..:_..;}-V\ c. . s. *BY:_,,,...

~

( *\:\ -~*"""\ (~.5.)

. PATRICK WALSH

  • .Assistant .]._ttorney .General

" JOHN.\ SHEA

\

As_siJtant Attorney General

.State of Wisconsin State 0£ New York

Department .o.f .Justic.e ... 2 World Trade :Center

>..Ma:dJ.:son,. :w.i:s.consin 537.0:2 '.New Y o'rk; *.New *York

  • ' '[608] 266-8987 [212] 488-75'62
  • B,ELA.TED_GOO.BESpoNDmCE e

.* :

  • UNITED:-STATES OF. :AMERICA .....

~-:\NCJCI.EAIL"l~Gi:JIA'IOBY *._:ccx-EISSION  :. Ol

)

)

. PDBLic**-sERVICE ..EI.ECTRIC :ANO. .J . ".r:ocket No.':50~272 GAS . COMPANY ) .* _Proposed Issilance of

) Arrendrrent to Facility

  • =::(Salem .Nuclear ::Generatµig. ) Operating License No. DPR-70

.. *station, Unit No. 1) .)

I he:reby certi£y that copies of Intervenor's Responses to Licensee's In~rrogatories . were maileq to per5ons on attached service list by *

. *...... --::-4-* ,_,,,,.,. .... "-i..~ -'.T__,,__~.

i;:i......._,_....

....,..~~~-_....._,1.UC.~~~,

5,--""'"'" ..,--;;:, ~ *..-*.T.V'\~ta*
i,.a........, ...
uJa..1.:~, '.'.l:"'"'""'- ge***.-p""e*""""'~**ri.

--*: "'-' ~-1--..

  • ..:.firs*t. .,.,..l. ass.**.., : **"-'"--::.~

-~ *. u.~.

    • 2-0th*

.  ::.~*-.*-.**

. =lt)**.-tfr~

~- :

-, .- -~ *R.* Ym.LIAM .. POT.!ER

-*:DEPOTY DIRFx:'IDR

~Counsel .. for .. Intervenor

SERVICE.LIST G:u:y. L. Milhollin, Esquire .Barry Srni:th 1 Esquire

..Chairrnan, .Atcmic _safecy:and , Uffice .of .*::the::E:Xccutive .

~ ~Licen5:ing *Board . * . Legal .Director

. _.1815. Jefferson Street u.s. Nuclear Regulatory 'Corrrnissi6n

.:Madison, 1~consin: 537ll -Wasrungtop, D.C.. 20555

Mr*... Glenn.04 .Bright :Mark L.. First, Esquire

¥.ember, Atomic Safety ar..d .:naputy Attorr.ey General

.. Licensing* ,Board Panel

  • J:epar:t:n:en.t 0£ Law and U.S. Nuclear IegulatoryCorrrnission
  • Public Safety Washington, D.C. 20555 36. W. State. Street Ti:enton, :New Jersey 08625 Dr. James C. Lamb, III M:?rrber, Ata.-nic Safety and Richard Fryling, Jr. , Esquire Licensing Board Panel Assistant General Solicitor

.313 hboclhaven

  • Road Public Service Electric

. Cbap=>-1 Hill, .N.C. . 27514 and Gas Ccin"pany

.80

  • Park -.Place

.* .. *,}.1ewark,....:New_;Jersey. ::07l0l

- **rri..,_ _::....; . 7'-* * *s

.. *:_,:::~~Ji*:,=-l:OI'IU:Cc: a:ze.._~ *::CW.U.

=-+.'.7 --.:i T:"ice!\..sing::;t>.~-al :Board

  • u.s *. Nuclear *p..egulam.cy *:ccmnission *Eleanor G. 'Colel!ian Nasr...L~-ton, n._.c*. 20555 *Alfred C. .Coleman

. 35 11K 11 Dri\.""e Pennsville, .New Jersey -* "08070

. _:.C:'12'-i ~"1-1 .* Atctrd c Sa::fety a-r:ia:

. Lice:.""JS:ing J3oa_.,.-Q U .so Nuclear *Peg-cl.ator.f Conmission Office of the Secreta?:"J Washi..'"1g:T..on" .D-C. 20555 * .D:x:keting _and .Service Section

  • .D..:S. ~Nuclear .Regulatozy

'Ccrrrn:i.:ssion

    • -**Trev o,.- *.J....
  • .-o .*.*eon*lrlt.--*f.'

~ - *D...

-**Esqu.;......,,.

.J..** 1 , ~~

-.:washington.,. *o :c. ..-20555 Suite 1050 l747 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.

Washington, D. C. .20006 .Carl Valore, Jr., Esquire

S35 Tilton Road
  • .. :Northfield., . New .Jersey 0.8225 Ruth Fisher
'lhe. .S).:JiicPeople** - :Alternare* '.EP.ergy-Advocates 0
Dale :Bridenbaugh

.* -,.*:South f:Ie..~., .N:w Jersey .. 08245  :'M.H.B * .Tchnical-Associates 366 California Avenue Sandra T. Ayres, Esquire Palo Alto, California Cept. of the Public Advocate 520 East State Street Trenton, New Jersey 08625

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML19029A750&oldid=2503589"