ML19211A781
| ML19211A781 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Maine Yankee |
| Issue date: | 11/04/1979 |
| From: | Gammill W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Garrett E AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7912200655 | |
| Download: ML19211A781 (4) | |
Text
.
L Qw L jo UNITED STATES y*g g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.p WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 o
f s
November 4, 1979 Docket No. 50-309 Emil G. Garrett, Lt./ Col. USA Ret.
P. O. Box 91 Stockton, Springs, Maine 04981
Dear Colonel Garrett:
This letter is in response to your October 31, 1979 letter requesting information regarding Maine Yankee's spent fuel pool.
In light of your question #7 regarding public participation in the proposed issuance of an Amendment, you were contacted by telephone on November 16, 1979, by the NRC Project Manager assigned to Maine Yankee to permit timely Not1fi-cation of the applicable Federal Register Notice and an awareness of the November 23, 1979 deadline for filing a request for a hearing as stated in that notice.
Verbal responses to the nine questions specified in your October 31, 1979 submittal were given during the telephone comunication. The enclosure summarizes the responses.
We trust this information is responsive to your request.
Sincerely, bL,/
et William P. Gammill, Acting Assistant Director for Operating Reactor Projects Division of Operating Reactors
Enclosure:
Response to Maine Yankee's Spent Fuel Pool cc: Mr. Robert H. Groce Licensing Engineer Yankee Atomic Electric Company 20 Turnpike Road 1631 067 Westboro, Massachusetts 01581 7912200b'
1 Enclosure RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS CONCERNING fiAINE YANKEE'S SPENT FUEL P0OL 1.
License Amendment No. 11, issued October 31, 1975, authorized the replacement of the original storage racks with racks that increased the maximum allowable storage capacity from 318 assemblies to 953 spent fuel assemblies.
2.
Yes, the lack of adequate away-from-plant storage or reprocessing will probably not be resolved in the early 1980s.
Currently, spent fuel is not being reprocessed on a commercial basis in the United States.
With the NRC decision to terminate the generic study on plutonium recycle use in mixed oxide fuel (GESMO) in December 1977, [42 FR 65334] in deference to the President's non-proliferation policy, commercial reprocessing has been indefinitely deferred in the United States.
Nuclear Waste Management is an area which is receiving attention at many levels of government. Additional sources of information include:
a.
Report to the President by the Interagency Review Group on Nuclear Waste Management, Report TID-29442, March 1979. Available from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), Springfield, Virginia E2161.
b.
Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Handling and Storage of Spent Light Water Power Reactor Fuel, NUREG-0575, Vo.
1, Executive Summary, August 1979. Available from NTIS.
c.
Regulation of Federal Radioactive Waste Activities, summary of report to Congress on Extending the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Licensing or Regulatory Authority to Federal Radioactive Waste Storage and Dis-posal Activities, NUREG-0527 Summary, September 1979. Available from NTIS.
3.
There will be no " generic environmental impact statement" required since the proposal will not authorize a significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of effluents nor a significant increase in the potential for accidental releases. A negative declaration will be issued as part of the licensing amendment. An environmental impact apprasial will be prepared in support cf the negative declaration.
(Refer i.o 10 CFR 51)
Please refer to reference 2.b, page 3-4 for a discussion of compact fuel pin storage. The disassembly procedure is mentioned as a possible alternative but at the time of issuance of the report, the concept had not yet been aporoved.
1631 068 m== =
-2_
4.
The NRC requires and Maine Yankee's submittal of November 22, 1978, considered the alternatives that could alleviate the current need for additional spent fuel storage capacity. Consideration was given to availability, environ-mental impact, cost and benefits. Options considered include; shipment to a reprocessing plant, shipment to an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Facility, shipment to another reactor site, increase the size of the existing Maine Yankee Spent Fuel Pool, replace the existing spent fuel racks with even more tightly spaced racks, construction of an additional on-site storage pool, and shutdown of the reactor.
5.
In order to accommodate Maine Yankee's current schecule, approval cf the compaction scheme was requested by early January 1980. The pro-posed storage scheme is currently under NRC review.
If the review is favorable and approval is granted in January, this would allow the utility to proceed with the compaction scheme prior to the discnarge of fuel during the next scheduled refueling outage in April 1980.
Accomplishing this procedure prior to fuel discharge would be in accer-dance with the philosophy of limiting radiation exposure as low as reasonably achievable since freshly discharged fuel near the working area would increase the probability of occupational radiation exposure.
6.
At this time, the Commission has not received femal requests from other utilities to utilize the compaction concept as outlined by Maine Yankee.
7.
The request is being reviewed by the Commission's technical staff in the same mar.ner as any other licensing action.
Due to the high public interest in such actions as spent fuel pool modifications, a notice of the proposed issuance of amendment to Maine Yankee's Operating license was published in the Federal Register in late October 1979.
The Federal Register Notice outlined the actions the oublic may take to participate in the. actions. As specified in the Federal Register Notice, a Petition for Leave to Intervene has been filed on November 23, 1979, by the e in-profit corporation, Sensible Maine Power. November 23, is the closing date for filing petitions to intervene in this action.
8.
Please refer to our August 24, 1979 response to your letter of July 11, 1979, specifically response 1.
At the current time, Maine Yankee is authorized to store a maximum of 953 spent fuel assemblies. There is approximately 1/2 ton of heavy metal per spent fuel assembly for a total of 476.5 tons. Maine Yankee may request authorization to increase the total spent fuel inventory at the site in the future. The Comission will review any spent fuel inventory request in accordance with criteria in effect at the time of the submittal prior to authorizing an increase in spent fuel inventory.
The information regarding radioactivity inventory contained in our August 24, 19/9 response is determined sufficient to satisty your concerns at this time, (as per your agreement during the discussion of November 16,1979).
1631 069
.. r I
9.
The review of the proposed amendment on spent fuel pool storage will include an evaluation of related issues such as criticality considerations, spent fuel cooling, fuel handling, structural and mechanical design and materials considerations, occupational radiation exposure and radio-active waste treatment. Unresolved issues that do not have an impact on the spent fuel modified storage proposal are not included as a part of this amendment review.
However, tne asymmetric LOCA loads review you mentioned 1s being completea as an independent action. The status is described in the NRC Meeting Summary dated November 2,1979.
Copies of the Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company's submittals and Commission correspondence is available for your review at the Wiscasset Public Library Association, High 5 veet, Wiscasset, Maine.
1631 070
c.c3c n.
e EMIL G. G ARRETT LtJCol. USA Ret P. O. Box 91 Si Lio. S t.,g., Mme 04 sal g
Tel. (207) 567.3300 31 October 1979 U.S. Ihclear Regule. tor / Connission 3rian K. Grines
..ssistant Director for Engineerin; and Projects i":shingto n, D. C.
20555
Dear "r. Grimes:
a
,e
.. a, a,, -.- : -- -
.r,. + o e
+0 4 - g. -m - <o.o, v w,
. e. a o -., 3 1,o,. 4 o 2
h;s raquested :20 cp;rovel for ::odified Spent Pael Mn Storage 2 : hine Tenhee.
I en ver/ interested in this issue 2nd rould appreci?.te it very rach if you ::ould prov4.de ne the fo31orin.; information:
1.
Did Li:ense 1.nendnent ::o.ll, issued Oct. 51, 1975, es::blish c linit to the enount of spent fuel that could be stored in the '~eine Yankee spent fuel pool ?
2.
The rac,uest lis';s the follori..; ste:enent,e a reason for the re'.ne::5d hnnge
" re nor celieve :h:t neither reprocessin~ nor
- .cto diswasal et a repository or stors;e at 1 govern s.: facility can be ralied upon to correct : Icek of storage s;sce during. the 19CO's."
Is this : valid stc enent ?
.e. 4,, o~-...o
.w
..s,,.'. o &. ~ 4.-,.2 u. 4,.... ~ 3 -a,- 4 -e.no..u.
,. o.-
.e co.~-..u. 43c.
a.
.a
- a --- - -
f ar c generic ertiro.nen:21 imp;0t ste enent ?
4.
Till ti.e :20 require :"C.?C to consider other options such c.s transfer of spent fuel to other re:ctor sites or constraction o.' 2 ner spen; fuel pool at the 1:2.ine Yo.nkee sit e ?
5 Since refuelin~ diccharge cape.bility will not be lost until 1987 -
wh-t possible basis is there for the request that :20 approve.1 be gr.nted not later than December 3,1979 ?
6.
Ens the :30 received or do they enpect to receive sinil r requests from ot'.er raclear st-tions ?
7 Ant is the 2dninistr:tive procetdure that the :20 n'.ll use in co"..si'e 4.~
. k. a '.'_7
=-
.t e.r '. ?.
'~. d. ' i
'b..e -a b e e.
~^'4-
'. a d.'v., o.-
. - =
y.--
2nr other opportunity fo5 7 01i0 input ?
8.
Should the reques be q:ro red - har n:37 ne -ic tons of henv7 ne:01 could be stored -t ::cinc ? 2se by 1996 end that r?.id be the r-dio-Y
..c '.4 ~. =-... / -.'.'. o, '.. ~ur*.~- 4 l n.
%, T.
o (001 J 00
.7911060A@
1631 071
~.
9 Till the :E0 corsideration of the request incluie r21sona.ble eve.lu. tion t'.1t nicht inpact on spent fuel storr.ce? Such c.c of other iscue:
c the unresolved issue of 2.cyanetric loss of 00:1:= c.00idelt loric ?
I r.ould.. recie.te it if you rould pl.ce my mne on the distri'oution liet for correspondence e.nd docune:2s rel ting to this istue.
Yours truly, Y
/J ?- h
[
1631 072 DETSRaiyy
....