ML19263B522

State of Il Contentions Re Amends to Operating License for Transport of Spent Fuel Between Units.Contentions Assert Applicant'S Submittals Are Insufficient.W/Affidavit & Certificate of Svc

ML19263B522
Person / Time
Site:	Dresden, Quad Cities, 05000000
Issue date:	01/02/1979
From:	Scott W, Sekuler S ILLINOIS, STATE OF
To:
Shared Package
ML19263B523	List: ML19263B522 ML19263B529
References
NUDOCS 7901180348
Download: ML19263B522 (9)

Text

_

fi , w Xuc pp

'l < s' , r, I

19 o,q 'L "C:

g *4hT j#f?Mf '

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

\\ h Mg J BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD M

<> *p he Matter of COMMONWEALTH EDISON )

)

(Amendments to Operating License for ) Docket Nos. 50-237 Transportation of Spent Fuel between ) 50-249 Dresden Nuclear Station and Quad ) 50-254 Ci tie r- Nuclear Station) ) 50-265 STATE OF ILLINOIS STATEMENT OF CONTENTIONS CONTENTIONS 1-9.

The State of Illinois incorporates by reference the attached contentions of the Natural Resources Defense Council and Citizens For A Better Environment, with the exception of contention 3 (b) *.

CONTENTION 10.

The License application and supporting documents are fatally deficient in that they do not include any transportation studies or plans, therefore it is not possible to properly assess consequences.

There should be a detailed description of at least: (1) the types of materials to be shipped; (2) quantities of materials to be shipped; (3) numbers of curies per shipment; (4) mode (s) of transportation;

• The State of Illinois has incorporated by reference Petitioners NRDC/CBE contentions in order to avoid unnecessary repetition of similar contenti rfand to present to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board rassible areas of consolidation. Each petitioner intends to independently develop each contention. The State of Illinois does not undertake to represent the interests of Petitioners NRDC/CBE in this proceeding.

790tisoS W

. (5) routing; (6) carrier, whether Commonwealth Edison or outside contractor; (7) estimated dose rates to drivers, motorists, bystanders; (8) emergency plans; (9) security plans; (10) any other information specifically required under NEPA (42 U.S.C. S4321 et seq.) or by the Council on Environmental Quality (4 0 C.F.R. 1500), the Department of Transportation, (49 CFR Parts 171-189), or the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (10 CFR Part 71), to make it possible to properly assess safety and environmental effects of the proposed transshipment.

CONTENTION 11.

Applicant's license application and supporting documents do not contain any information to show Applicant's intentions and abilities to conform with the various Department of Transportation regulations which have been designed to protect motorists or citizens living along the travel path. (See particularly 4 9 U.S.C. S1801; 49 C.F.R. 171-189; 46 C.F.R. 146; and 14 C.F.R. Part 103).

CONTENTION 12.

The Aoplication and supporting documents do not supply sufficient information to assure the State that the Applicant and its agents will be in conformity with state laws governing transport-ation of hazardous materials: Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 127 S1251 et seg.

A. The License application fails to provide information about the proposed transport system and emergency report system to be utilized in conjunction with it as required by the Illinois Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 127 S51251, 1253, 1255, 1256 and 1257, therefore Petition cannot be assured that: the appropriate state agencies will have knowledge of the radioactive

e materials shipment; motorists on the travel route will have appropriate warning; in case of accident the proper state and local agencies will be notified in the shortest period of time.

B. There is no discussion in the application as to the advisability of seeking a hearing before the Hazardous Materials Advisory Board to determine whether Applicant's shipment should be exempted from placarding under Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 127 S1253 (b) because the risk of sabotage outweighs the positive gains of placarding.

CONTENTION 13.

The Application and supporting documents do not meet the requirements of 10 C.F.R. Part 71.

A. The license application does not specify the type of license being requested under Part 71.

B. The application does not meet the minimum requirements of 10 C.F.R. S71.51 to provide a description of a quality ass;.rance program for the proposed transshipment nor does the Application discu_s the procedures which will be utilized to meet the standards delineated in Appendix F of Part 71.

C. The license application does not fulfill the requirement of 10 C.F.R. Part 71, subpart B, 571.21 that applications for licenses or license amendments "shall include, for each proposed packaging design and method of transport, the following information in addition to any otherwise required:

(a) a package description as required by 571.22; (b) a package evaluation as required by 571.23; (c) an identification of the proposed program of quality assurance as required by S71.24;

4_

(d) in the case of fissile material, an identification of the proposed fissile class.

D. There are no computations or computer simulations to indicate that criticality will not be reached during shipment (10 C.F.R. S71. 33).

E. The application fails to identify the type of package and mode of transport therefore it is impossible to evaluate the effect of the transport environment on the nuclear safety of the packages (10 C.F.R. S71.37).

F. The application f ails to identify the type of package and mode of transport therefore it is impossible to assess whether the spent fuel shipments will meet the standards for hypothetical accident conditions. (10 C.F.R. S71.36).

CONTENTION 14.

The license application and supporting documents are inadequate in that they fail to include any discussion or evaluation of the radiological effects of normal (accident free) transport.

"The principal unavoidable environmental effect (of transporting radioactive material is)... the population exposure resulting from normal transport of radioactive materials. Since the electromagnetic radiation emitted from a package cannot be reduced to zero by any finite quantity of shielding, the transport of radioactive materials will always result in some population exposure."

" Final Environmental Statement of the Transportation of Radioactive Materials By Air and other Modes" (FES) Dec. 1977, NUREG 0170,

p. xxiv.

It is possible to quantify radiological environmental impacts and health effects as a function of certain input data (geographical area, routes, types of packaging) with the aid of a computer model such as METRAN, used by Sandia Laboratories in their study of radioactive materials transport through urban areas " Draft, Transport of Radionuclides in Urban Environs" May 1978, Sandia 77-1927.

The proposed license amendment should not be considered until the application has been supplemented with an adequate discussion of means by which the Applicant plans to assess radiological effects of its transshipment. In making its report Applicant should specify whether it based its computer program on threshold or continuous low dosage standards.

CONTENTION 15.

The license application and supporting documents are inadequate as they fail to discuss or evaluate the probability of accidents, types of possible accidents and effects of accidents.

According to the U.S. Department of Transportation there were 15 accidents in Illinois in 1977 involving vehicles engaged in the transport of nuclear materials. These accidents ranged from package handling errors, to radioactive material spillage, to collission and overturning of trucks carrving radioactive packages. The Sandia report 77-1927 states:

Accidents involving vehicles moving the radioactive material can damage packaging and result in dispersal of the radionuclides and subsequent in-halation by or direct exposure to surrounding population.

Vehicular accidents can also damage or totally remove radiation shield ng and thereby produce higher than normal exposure by pencerating radiation (Sandia, 77-1927 p. 16).

Nonradiological impacts in the form of health effects can also result since many of the materials being shipped are hemically toxic. (Sandia 77-1927, p. 15; Chapter 7 pp. 249-266).

The applicants supporting documents include a letter in which it is admitted that if shipments between stations should be undertaken "the possibility of a transportation accident will increase as a result of greater exposure." (Application, reference (a) G.A. Abrell letter to D.L. Ziemann dated April 23, 1976), yet no transport or accident probability study has been done.

The proposed license anendment should not be considered until the application has been supplemented with an accident analysis.

The analysis should include at least an assessment of the probability of accidents and a quantification of both radiological and nonradio-logical impacts of credible accidents. (See Sandia 77-1927, p. 81 and Appendix E for examples of analytic models.)

CONTENTION 16.

The Application and supporting documents are inadequate in that there is no discussion of the economic impacts of transshipment and possible disper;al of radioactive materials e.g. effects on land use, decontamination costs, income loss, evacuation costs, consequences of inadequate insurance coverage.

CONTENTION 17.

The application and supporting documents are in error. S4.1 of the licensing report incorrecs states that the application raises no unresolved safety problems. The application is premised on the use of the spent fuel pools at Dresden 2 and 3 as storage

facilities for fuel from Dresden I and Quad Cities. The application makes no mention however of the application presently pending before the NRC to increase spent fuel storage capacity at Dresden 2 and 3 by installing Brooks and Perkins Stainless Steel Boral racks in the pools. NRC investigations have uncovered serious problems in the use of Brooks and Perkins racks at Monticello and Browns Ferry. These problems involve swelling of the racks to such a degree that fuel cannot be introduced. Extraction of fuel from racks which have become swollen may also prove to be a problem. The potential installation of similar racks at Dresden prior to the institution of transshipment creates a safety problem, the solution for which is yet to be found.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, WILLIAM J. SCOTT Attorney General State of Illinois BY:

SUSAN N. SEKULER Assistant Attorney General Environmental Control Division 188 West Randolph Street Suite 2315 Chicago, Illinois 60601 OF COUNSEL: (312) 793-2491 RUSSELL R. EGGERT Ch19f, Northern Region Environmental Control Division SUSAN N. SEKULER Assistant Attorney General Environmental Control Division 188 West Randolph, Suite 2315 Chicago, Illinois 60601 (312) 793-2491