ML19255A860
| ML19255A860 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Byron  |
| Issue date: | 02/11/1982 |
| From: | Roberts J NRC |
| To: | Chestnut S NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19255A856 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8203180120 | |
| Download: ML19255A860 (3) | |
Text
o' Q
lll 4
r>
UNITED STATES 8'
' g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.(
g n C W AbHINGT ON, D. C. 20555 3
6 FEB 111982 a...+
Note to Stephen H. Chestnut
SUBJECT:
LETTER OF JANUARY 29, 1982 FROM SENATOR CHARLES H. PERCY TO CARLTON KAMMERER DIRECTOR, OCA, CONCERNING AN ATTACHED CONSTITUENT'S LETTER (FILE NO. 2027150010)
Attached is a discussion of interim spent fuel storage options potentially available to the Byron Unit 1 and 2 plants.
The attachment is about 1.5 pages long double-spaced. The type is the Optical Character Reader (0CR) kind.
You can give this to CRESS and they can read it on their OCR and convert the text directly to magnetic cards. This should help you with any editing you may wish to do.
(If you make changes on this attachnient itself use a red, marker only or the OCR will not operate properly.)
If you have any questions, give me a call.
e4
// John P. Roberts
Enclosure:
As stated 0203100120 820224 PDR ADOCK 05000454 H
The present storage capacity of the Byron Unit 1 and Unit 2 spent fuel storage pcols is sufficient for LO years of operation.
Unit 1 and Unit 2 are expected to begin operation in 1984 and 1985
- fj
respectively.
The Department of Energy (DOE) has projected that it will' have its first geologic respository for spent fuel or high-level waste disposal in operation in the late 1990's with additional repositories following at three year intervals.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission in its Waste Confidence Rulemsking Proceeding (Docket No. PR-50,51) is assessing its confidence in DOE's ability to provide timely disposal of spent fuel.
The Commission is not considering in this proceeding whether light waste power reactor fuel will be reprocessed for use in breeder reactors or for other purposes.
Obviously, should the reprocessing option become available, it could provide another alternative for reducing spent fuel interim storage requi rement s a t reactors.
/{(\\ Dptions potentially available to Commonwealth Edison for additional interim storage capacity include:
(1) reracking the reactor spent fuel storage pools at the Byron siter (2) transshipment of the Byron spent fuel to other reactor sites where capacity may be availabler (3) rod consolidation (pin compaction),
i.e.,
disassembly athk' of spent fuel assemblies and storage of consolidated spent fuel rods in cans in the existing rack structure. (The potential storage capacity gain from this action could approach 100 percent.)
(4) construction of an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) to store Byron spent fuel either on the Byron site or at another locations (5) storage of Byron spent fuel in a federal government ISFSI (or AFR, as DOE calls it) should the government decide to accept spent fuel for interim storage.
This last option appears remote since DOE has renounced its policy to provide for interim storage.
Houever, there is still some activity in the Congress aimed at providing for such storoge so the option cannot be entirely ruled out.
In any case, the first four options cited are all available to Commonwealth Edison under existing NRC regulations.
Utilizing one or more of them, Commonwealth Edison could provide the capacity required for interim storage of the spent fuel generated at the Byron site until disposal or reprocessing is available.
L'_.
I.>
n s
,y.
DISTRIBUTION:*w/ incoming GREEN TICKET #11466
' Docket Fil es*-
TERA PDR*
LPDR*
EDO Rdg LB#1 Rdg.*
HDenton/ECase JKramer DEisenhut/RPurple MJambor p,4f g JYoungblood 6'
/
4, SChesnut s
MRushbrook*
7 pp. COVED RVollmer t
,' AR 0 2,1987" '
g P
OELD J
PBrandenburg (ED0#11466)*
11, 8y.,g.jemes '
LBerry trari ri,*** "
P LGoodhart Q
N S Rdg.
SCavan6 ugh SECY (3) (82-89)
RTedesco GCunningham JDavis LUnderwood SHanauer RMattson HThompson BSynder