ML19259A934
| ML19259A934 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07002623 |
| Issue date: | 12/21/1978 |
| From: | Ketchen E NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7901110286 | |
| Download: ML19259A934 (10) | |
Text
-
P(jy b
^'
OC(13 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ROOy HUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of DUKE POWER COMPANY
)
Docket No. 70-2623
)
9 R
(Amendment to Materials License
)
q, SNM-1773 for Oconee Nuclear Station
)
Spent Fuel Transportation and Storage )
$1 $@
.g at McGuire Nuclear Station)
)
9
/
h e.h'#
1 g
NRC STAFF RESPONSES T0 cf7 CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY 8
q GROUP (CESG) INTERROGATORIES o,
a The NRC Staff's responses to CESG's First Set of Interrogatories with accompanying affidavit are attached.
Respectfully submitted, S 'L.i 7,/6_. %.
q : Edward G..Ketche6 s
Counsel for NRC Staff Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 21st day of December,1( 2.
7901110.18(3
McGuire SNM-1773 Docket No. /0-2623 NRC STAFF RESPONSES TO CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY GROUP (CESG) INTERR0GATORIES 1
Question 1 Produce a copy of the application for license to store Oconee Nuclear Station fuel at the McGuire Nuclear Station, filed March 9,1978, at the offices of Intervenor's attorney, set out below.
Antwer:
An application was submitted to the office of the intervenors' attorney at the onset of the review. Additionally, the intervenors' attorney was notified by letter dated 09/15/78 from the staff with regard to the availability of all pertinent documents at the local PDR.
Question 2 State the capacity of the Oconee storage tanks, and the contents thereof.
State the rate of production of spent nuclear fuel at Oconee.
Answer:
The first paragraph, section 1.2, page 1-1 of the application states the capacities of the shared pool for units 1 and 2, and 3 as 336 and 474 assemblies, respectively.
The units 1&2 pool presently contains 221 assemblies, and the unit 3 pool contains 324 assemblies.
Under normal conditions, each unit at Oconee will discharge at the average rate of 62 assemblies per year with a high of 68, and a low of 56.
Question 3 Why is it not possible to build further storage tanks at Oconee? Fully identify any hazards that may exist or other barriers to this construction.
Answer:
There are no provisions for the expansion due to construction, of either of the fuel pools at Oconee. Therefore, any additional storage space which is constructed will be required to be built in compliance with regulations similar to those set forth for the treatment of an independent spent fuel stora51 installation (ISFSI).
- h. Duke has considered this alternative, as discussed in section 18.3.2 on page 18-1 of the application.
Independent studies have been performed by contractors and several utilities resulting in average figures of 5 years to design, license and construct such a facility at an expenditure of $10,000/ assembly not including shipping and maintenance costs.
This question does not address an increase in capacity due to reracking the pools.
It is technically feasible to rerack the units 1&2 pool; however, it has not been chosen due to economic, environmental and time considerations.
Questien 4 State whether applicant has considered building storage facilities close to the Oconee facility.
If so, state the results of this study, including sites considered and the reasons for the rejection.
Answer:
The answer to number 3 #s applicable.
Question 5 Produce copies of all tests run on the trucks which will be used to transport spent nuclear fuel.
Include in this request, any studies done on spent nuclear fuel casks.
Fully explain the experimental design and quality control assurance. State whether there have been any attempts to seek out the most vulnerable aspects of the casks and trucks.
State all details of the transportation system which applicant seeks to use.
(Insofar as these matters or any others are covered in the applicaticn, answer this interrogatory with specific reference thereto.)
Answer:
Trucks which are used for the transport of spent fuel are not required by the NRC to be tested. The carrier, however, must comply with the applicable sections of the NRC's (10 CFR Part 71) and the D0T's (49 CFR Parts 170-189) regulations.
By letter dated May 30, 1975, from Duke Power Company to the NRC, Duke Power Company became a registered user of the spent fuel shipping cask Model No. NFS-4 in accordance with the general license provisions of paragraph 71.12(b) of 10 CFR Part 71.
The NFS-4 shipping cask (NRC Certificate of Compliance No. 6698) complies with the regulations set forth by the NRC in 10 CFR Part 71 and by the Department of Transportation in 49 CFR Parts 170-189, Subchapter C, Hazardous Materials Regulations.
The safety analysis report fer the NFS-4 cask may be exar.iined, along with all other pertinent in'ormation, in NRC Docket File 71-6698 at the Commission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
/
The environmental impacts of transportation of spent fuel are discussed in WASH-1238, " Environmental Survey of Transportation of Radioactive Materials to and from Nuclear Power Plants," Table S-4 in 10 CFR Part 51, which serves as generic transportation analysis cited in each environ-mental statenent for reactors, provided the specified conditions are observed, NUREG-0170, " Final Environmental Statement on the Transportation of Radioactive Material by Air and Other Modes," (December 1977), and in an ongoing study of transportation of radioactive materials through urban areas (see SAND-77-1977, Sandia Laboratories' working draft assessment). A number of other studies, which are not NRC documents, are also available.
In particular, we note the draft report by Battelle Northwest Laboratories, "An Assessment of the Risk of Transporting Spent Nuclear Fuel by Truck." This report is available form Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Battelle Boulevard, Richland, Wasl1ington 99352 and also available for inspection and copying at the NRC. Washington, D. C.
20555.
The conclusions of the environmental statement NdREG-0170, which was undertaken in an assessment of the NRC's regulations on transportation was that under the present regulatory system, the risks are so low that shipments of all radioactive materials may continue in all modes.
A spent fuel cask is senerally cylin2ical in shape and about 20 feet long.
The basic components includa a steel inner vessel which contains the fuel elements and spacers or neutron absorbers for protection against accidental criticality.
The inner vessel is surrounded by several inches of shielding (dense metal for attenuation o' gamma radiation) encased in a steel jacket. Several inches of hydrogenous material (such as water) for attenuation of neutron radiation surround the gamma shield. A steel outer jacket completes the package.
The cask may also be equipped with sacrificial impact limiters to absorb forces involved in impact accidents.
The closed inner vessel is filled with the primary coolant (air, blium, water) to aid in the dissipation of heat generated by radioactive decay.
The designs of packages used to transport spent fuel are regulated by the Department of Transportation (D0T) and by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
The NRC reviews the designs for certification of compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 71.
The review addresses the capability of the package design under both normal and accident conditions to retain its radioactive contents, to shield the external environment from the radiation of its contents, t) dissipate its internal heat to the external environment at a safe rate, and to prevent the accumulation of a critical mass of fissile material.
In addition, the package design is reviewed with respect to quality assurance in acceptance, operations, and maintenance.
Standards for these aspects are also pre-serioed in 10 CFR Part 71.
p s
. These casks are designed to withstand, without release of radioactive material in excess of the regulatory limits specified in 10 CFR Part 71.36(a) (2), a severe accident damage test sequence to simulate the effects of severe impact, puncture, fire and immersion in water as specified in Appendix B of 10 CFR Part 71. The test sequence includes:
- 1) a free fall from a height of 30 feet onto an unyielding horizontal surface, striking the surface in a position for which maximum damage is expected; 2) a free drop of 40 inches striking (in a position which is expected to cause maximum damage) the top end of a vertical cylindrical steel bar, 6 inches in diameter and at least 8 inches long, mounted on an essentially. unyielding horizontal surface; 3) a thermal test in which the cask is exposed to a heat input equivalent to that of an oil fire (1475 F for 30 minutes); and 4) immersion in water to the extent that all portions of the cask are under at least 3 feet of water for a period of not less than 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />. These test conditions make up the design basis accident for a spent fuel package, meaning that package designs which meet the criteria under the above conditons are considered to provide adequate protection to the public and operating personnel in transportation accidents.
Spent fuel casks have been subjectcd to many tests and analyses to find the most vulnerable aspects of the pa:kage design. To obtain NRC approval for use, drop tests must be performed or analyzed for orientations of the casks which would produce the maximum damage, as specified in the regulations.
Recently, the DOE sponsored full-scale testing of casks mounted on trucks by colliding the trucks with concrete abutments or speeding locomotives.
In these tests the casks were not damaged signi-ficantly and conclusions were drawn that the abilities of the casks to contain and shield their contents were not impaired in the tests (see Robert M. Jeffersor
" Statement for the Senate Subccmmittees on Science, Technology, u.id Space and Surface Transport." August 16,1978).
Available from the author at Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185 and also available for inspection and copying at the NRC, Washington, D.C.
20555.
Question 6 State the expected date(s) of operation of the McGuire units.
State the rate of production of spent nuclear fuel of these units.
State the storage capacity at the McGuire station.
Calculate when the storage facilities will be fully occupied, except for the storage of a complete core, assuming that no long term solution for the storage of nuclear wastes is found.
4
's
. ' Answer:
As stated in section 1.1, page 1-1 of the application, the fuel loading schedule for McGuire is January 1979 for Unit 1 (recently changed to February) and September 1980 for Unit 2 with commercial operation dates for Unit I and Unit 2 of July 1979 and March 1981, respectively.
The rate of production for each unit will be 64 or 65 assemblies (1/3 core where 1 core is 193 assemblies) per year.
The storage capacity for each unit at McGuire is 500 assemblies.
After the storage cf 300 assemblies from Oconee at McGuire, it will take until late 1984 before McGuire 'would jeopardizs tne integrity of its full core reserve.
Question 7 State the amount and the rate of transportation of spent fuel that is proposed to be transported from Oconee to McGuire.
Answer:
Duke's application for amendment is being limited to the shipment of 300 assemblies from the Oconee site to McGuire.
The shipments are proposed to be made at the maximum rate of 1 per day.
Question 8 State the route or routes which have been considered, and if there are more than one, indicate applicant's preference.
State what efforts have been made to identify hazardous intersections on this route, or routes.
Identify all hazardous intersections.
Answer:
The proposed truck route from Oconee to McGuire is:
S.C. ii' to U.S. 123 to S.C.15J to Interstate 85 to Interstate 77 to N.C. 73 Routes may be selected by the applicant by remaining within the guide-lines set forth by the Department of Transportation regulations, appropriate
.y.s
. to the mode of transport in 49 CFR Parts 170-189.
The applicant has indicated they may substitute U.S. 76 instead of U.S.123.
Under Commission regulations, identification of hazardous intersections is not required.
Question 9 State what' efforts have been made to determine the hazardous qtolities of the intersection of 1-77 and 1-85.
Include any studies of the rate of accidents at that intersection known to or available to applicant and staff.
Answer:
The last paragraph in question 8 is applicable.
Question 10 Give all information known to applicant or staff concerning the amount of radiation from an intact transportation vehicle containing spent nuclear fuel casks.
Answer:
By DOT regulations 49 CFR 173.393(i), external dose rates from a package of radioactive material transported on a nonexclusive use vehicle are limited to 200 mrem /hr at the surface of the package and 10 mrem /hr at three feet from the surface of the package (which is the meaning of a transport index of 10).
Information on the environmental impacts of shipments assumed to exhibit these limits is included in the documents cited in response to question 5 above.
No inspection reports have been received which indicate external cose rate measurements for spent fuel
. asks which exceed these limits.
For shipments of other materials, the external dose rates are well within these limits.
Independent measure-ments taken by the applicant reveal that the dose rate external to the cask, from spent fuel which has decayed 270 days, will be well within these limits.
. ~.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSIflG BOARD.
In the Matter of DUKE POWER COMPANY Docket No. 70-2623 (Amendment to Materials License
)
SNM-1773 for Oconee Nuclear Station
)
Spent Fuel Transportation and Storage )
at McGuire Nuclear Station)
)
AFFIDAVIT OF BRETT S. SPITALNY I, Brett S. Spitalny, am employed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Fuel Processing and Fabrication Branch, as the project manager for the amendment to materials license SNM-1773.
I have prepared, or assisted in the preparation of, the responses to the questions asked by Carolina Environmental Study Group in its first set of interrogatories.
These answers are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
f%n+ W SM-4 Brett S. Spitalny Subscribed and sworn to before me this4/Eday of December,1978.
bM O
a c.
Notary PUblic My Commission Expires:
c,g
/, y cj Q,
A UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
DUKE POWER COMPANY
)
Docket No. 70-2623
)
(Amendment to Materials License
)
SNM-1773 for Oconee Nuclear Station
)
Spent Fuel Transportation and Storage )
at McGuire Nuclear Station)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF RESPONSES TO CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY GROUP (CESG) INTERR0GATORIES" and " AFFIDAVIT OF BRETT S. SPITALNY" dated December 21, 1978, 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 21st day of December,1978.
- Robert M. Lazo, Esq., Chairman Ms. Brenda Best Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Carolina Action U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1740 E. Independence Blvd.
Washington, D. C.
20555 Charlotte, North Carolina 28205 Dr. Cadet H. Hand, Jr., Di rector Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.
Bodega Marine Laboratory Hatural Gasources Defense Council University of California 917 - 15th Street, N.W.
P.O. Box 247 Washington, D. C.
20005 Bodega Bay, California 94923 Mr. Jeremy Bloch 9Dr. Emmeth A. Luebke Safe Energy Alliance Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 1707 Lombardy Circle U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Charlotte, North Carolina 28203 Washington, D. C.
20555 Shelley B lum, Esq.
W. L. Porter, Esq.
418 Law Guilding Associate General Counsel 730 East Trade Street Legal Department Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.
Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 Debevoise & Liberman 700 Shoreham Building 806 Fifteenth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20005
. '5
...
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Mr. Charles Gaddy U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnission P. O. Box 2501 Washington, D.C.
20555 Davidson College Davidson, N.C.
28036
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Connission Washington, D. C.
20555
- Docketing and Service Section U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Mr. Jesse L. Riley, President Carolina Environmental Study Group 854 Henley Place Charlotte, North Carolina 28207 Richard P. Wilson, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General State of South Carolina 2600 Bull Street Columbia, South Carolina 29201 Cl 1 i,)
y Edward G. Ketchen Counsel for NRC Staff
.