ML19269C583
| ML19269C583 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07002623 |
| Issue date: | 01/09/1979 |
| From: | Spitalny B NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19269C582 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7902060162 | |
| Download: ML19269C583 (9) | |
Text
U';ITED STATES OF A!; ERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY CD': MISSION 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)
)
NRC STAFF RESPONSES TO CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY GROUP (CESG) INTERP,0 GAT 0 RIES OF DECEMBER 19, 1978 In accordance with 10 CFR Section 2.720(h)(2)(ii), the NRC Staff re-sponds to CESG's interrogatories of December 19, 1978 as follows: 1I Interrogatory 96 Provide the file on the 10 CFR 71.31 items which occasioned the memorandum for files by J.0. Mayor dated October 3,1978.
Answer No documents or " files" exist relative to the referenced memorandum.
Interrogatory 100 Is it necessary, as Duke appears to maintain, to so place spent fuel assemblies in the pool that rehandling must be done if the assemblies first in are also to be the assemblies first out?
Answer In a meeting held on June 2, 1978, between the Staff and the licensee, 1/ The affidavit of B. Spitalny is attached to the Staff responses.
The Staff is filing contemporaneous 1y its objections to certain CESG i erro 79020No/2atories.
L
L Duke made a presentation for the need to ship fuel which has decayed for only 120 days.
The enclosure to the meeting sunnary, which was for-warded to CESG by copy of the Staf f's letter of November 13,1978 to NRDC, explained the need for the shuffling of fuel between pools.
As the requirement for the decay interval increases, the amount of shuffling at Oconee also increases and, consequently, the occupational exposure is greater.
The major portion of radioactive and thermal decay occurs during the 270 day period following removal of a fuel assembly from the reactor core.
Extension of the decay interval to 1 year would increase the occupational dose and restrict the licensee's operational fl exibili ty.
For these reasons, the Staff determined that the reduc-tions in radioactive and thermal decay associated with a 1 year interval were not justified.
Interrogatory 101 Re Starostecki to Parker, July 21,1978, item 15, is the NRC Staff familiar with the location of West Charlotte High School in rela-tion to I-85 on the projected spent fuel route and of the popula-tion of that school?
Answer The Staff is familiar with the location and the population of West Charlotte High School.
Population centers were chosen by the Staff for use in the evaluation of exposure from hypotehetical accident con-ditions. The population of West Charlotte High School is presently 1679 students.
The population of West Mecklenburg High School is 1280 students.
Distances, in a straight line, which may be traversed by an aerosol plume from Interstate-85 for West Charlotte High School and for
3 West "ecklenburg liigh School are 1/2 and 1/3 miles, respectively.
In these cases, distance is the variable which plays a greater role in the calculation of doses than population.
The calculated dose for the individual and the total population is greater for West Mecklenberg than for West Charlotte High School.
Interrogatory 102 What other considerations than economic advantagc does the Staff take into account in the cost / benefit weighing of the proposed action and the several alternatives?
Answer The considerations taken into account by the Staff in the cost / benefit weighing of the proposed action and the several alternatives are fully presented in the Staff's EIA 1/ served on the parties on December 28, 1978.
Interrogatory 103 Has the Staff originated alternatives in addition to the five developed by Duke? If so, what are they?
Answer Duke Power presented six alternatives in their application of March 9, 1978.
The Staff has considered each of these alternatives in greater detail.
A full analysis of alternatives is given in Section 9 of the Staff's EIA.
1I " Environmental Impact Appraisal Related to Spent Fuel Storage of Oconee Spent Fuel at McGuire Nuclear Station - Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool", December 1978.
4 Interroga tory 104 Will an 15 r.onth cycle at Oconee result in a rerating of the Units? Will the burn be more complete?
If so does Staff have the appropriate source tenns for the spent fuel? Please provide if available.
Answer An 18 month cycle at Oconee will not result in a rerating of the units.
An 18 month cycle would extend the burnup of some of the fuel. The Staff's evaluation of this licensi'J action was performed with a source tenn for fuel with a burnup of 36,363 MWD /MTU.
In order for the Staff's evaluation to bound the proposed licensing action, the Staff has recom-mended that a license condition be imposed to limit fuel shipments to assemblies with a maximum burnup of 36,000 MWD /MTV.
The source term employed for the Staff's evaluation may be found in Appendix A.6 of the EIA.
Interrogatory 105 Provide the Sandia study on the hazards of spent fuel accidents in populous areas.
Answer The Sandia study, Sand 77-1927, " Transport of Radionuclides in Urban Environs: Working Draft Assessment", was transmitted to the parties by
~
E UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICEfiSING BOARD In the matter of
)
)
DUKE POWER COMPANY
)
Docket No. 70-2623
( Amendment to Materials License Stat-1773 for Oconce Nuclear
)
Station Spent Fuel Transportation
)
and Storage at McGuire Station)
)
AFFIDAVIT OF BRETT S. SPITALNY I, Brett S. Spitalny, am employed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commis-sion in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Fuel Reprocessing and Recycle Branch, as the project manager for the amend-ment to Materials License No. SNM-1773.
I have prepared, or supervised in the preparation of, the responses to Carolina Environmental Study Group Interrogatories numbered 96, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104 and 105.
These answers are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
f/
N4 8 Brett S. Spitalny '
Subscribed and sworn to before me this C 7N day of January,1979 f
'b 4
/ lb hotary Public My Commission Expires:
/,/972
,- O: We ? "tT R in the fin t ro si ir. :r m f s it.b t > 1n of fm 1 '?or f.:.rc M ;r 'rr.a M ann M'r-t "t It
.r r.
.iu r I n, u N *
"I:r -
u.
,..< 1 j
- 1 l... r t o f 's c v! s':.e s Ce e
- b(y-
- ;i.n j.. ; &it t ;n r l;,
- 1 l3r 1
}.-
- t3 n ts p; (,
p s
'ct-
<A h!t ;1m i d r.:
[, j d r(arl. Q M tr m rc ef regul*-
Ih:a t o i' ors
=
w<'M L
" < ' M nt f41 tr r< d
- g. s. ~
fro:. O n
.r t n +-1,,:rd:
f r t. m t b ; c ' ' w hv r e it is p r o-Mc Guire Urut 1.1 hc i rc ud rc c,m v, by Cemrnomm.!t h IWr r a b au-du-( d or ured. To md< :m;if y t hit, ' xnt M
thority to tranafa r and store = pent f ut l, the Cc m:m.' m h must ter uire NUCLEAR MGULAlORY f uel amont: Droden Uruts 2 and 3 and suc h I!cens es to rna rdain fir.ar.nal COMMlZION Quad-Cities Units 1 and 2. Itoth !!c(ns-protection nr.d to be ir.de mnified by tes are suking Price Anderson indem-(xerci3ing its de:crdioncry authority ll0 CFR Port 14SI nity protection for all such storage of U:Ar { 170 cf the Act This exercice of p nl uel at the dM! ant Icactor loca-disc retionary authority would result in WNCIAL PROTECTIOrJ EIG.MiiEMEN15 AND tions. The Commission considered a treating spent fuel produced at one re-INDEMN!1Y AGEti AEN15 sirnilar request by Carolina Power and actor site but stored at a different site p..n;fwee;on of Sper.t teettoe Fuet Stoeed at Light Company in August 1977. (See the same as spent fuel stored at the
, teactor Site Ddferent i, an the one where noticos in the September 6,1977 daily site of the reactor where it uas pro-e, won Genaroved edition of the FLMut. Hrcisin:a at 42 ( duced. Thus, irradiated f uel generated FE 44615-44617.)
by a reactor at one site whether stored AG ENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Com-Because the issue of receipt and by itself in the spent fuel pool of a re-rnission. '
storage of Oconee spent fuel at actor at a different site or commingled ACTION: Request for public comment McGuire is before the Atomic Safety with the second reactor's irradiated on Commission's decision.
and Licensing Board, the Commission fuel in that reactor's spent fuel pool is riot proposing either approval or dis-would be covered by financial protec-
SUMMARY
- The Nuclear Regulatory approval of the requests for the de-tion ar.d indemnity.
Commission has dccided to exercise its scribed fuel storage at this time. In Duke Power Company has requested cseretionary statutory authority under the Price Anderson Act and this notice, the Commission is seeking Commission authorization to store extend Government indemnity to public comment on both the specific spent fuel generated by Oconee reac-srent reactor fuel stored at a reactor requests for indemnification described tor Units 1,2, and 3 at McGuire Unit site different than the one where it above and also the generic issue of in-
- 1. Pursuant to this request, on July 28, sas generated in tuo specific situa-demnification of spent fuel generated 1978 (43 FR 32905), the NRC pub-tions.* The Commission s(eks public at one reactor but stored at another. If lished a notice of opportunity for comment on this decision and on the indemnification were to be approved public participation with respect to as requested by Commonwealth the application for amendment to Ma-general policy question raised by such an extension. Absent this action by Edison and Duke, it would only be terials License No. SNM-1773 (issued the Commission, this spent reactor when and if the requested fuel storage pursuant to 10 CFR Part 70) to autho-fuel would not have been covered.by were approved pursuant to Commis-rize the receipt and storage of Oconee Government indemnity in the event of sion lleensing procedures.
spent fuel at McGuire. Petitions to in-a nuclear incident at the site where Under the Price-Anderson Act (g 170 tervene and requests for hearing were of the At' mic Energy Act of 1954, as received.
this spent fuel was stored.
o amended (the Act)), financial protec-According to Duke's current pro.fec-DATES: The public comment period tion and government indemnity are tion of the predicted fuel burnup rates expires February 7,1979.
mandatory for production and utiliza-at Oconee, the first shipment of spent FOR FURTHER INFORMATION tion facilities, such as reactors, li-fuel to McGuire must occur in March CONTACT.-
censed under { 103 and i104 of the 1979 if Duke is to maintain its desired Mr. Ira Dinitz Antitrust and Indem.
Act. This financial protection and in-full core discharge capability at the nity Group, Office of Nuclear Reac-demnity covers the " licensed activity" Oconee station. An operating license for Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regula-which encompasses not only posses-decision, howes er, is expected to be tory Commission Washington, D.C.
sion and operation of the reactor fa-made before that date. In view of 20555; 301-492-8336.
cility itself but also certain ancillary these considerations, if indemnifica.
activities including (1) possession of tion of the storage of Oconee spent SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the new fuel (containmg special nucle-fuel at McGuire were to be authorized.
Most operating reactor licensees have ar material) bemg stored on-site for it would only be when and if an oper-increased, or are planning to increase, use in the reactor and (2) on site stor-ating license is issued by the NRC for s
the capacity of their onsite spent fuel age of spent fuel following irradiation McGuire Unit 1.
storage pools. In some instances where The second request, from Common-at that reactor.
the capacity of the-storage pools at Possession of spent fuel away from wealth Edison Company, seeks amend-the reactor site cannot be increased sufficiently to meet the ' licensees-the facility where it is generated, i.e.,
ment of the operating licenses and in-at a location where it is not used -in demnity agreements for Dresden Units
- teeds, fuel storage rnay be sought at Another location. One method of stor-connection with the operation of the 2 and 3 and Quad-Cities Units 1 and 2 ing spent fuel away from the reactor facility, is not a part of the ancillary to permit spent fuel transfer and stor-from which it is discharged is to store activity of possession and operation of age between the two sites. This inter-It in the spent fuel pool at a reactor at the facility. Hence, possession of such station fuel transfer and storage is another site, spent fuel must be licensed under stated by Commonwealth to be neces-The Commission has received two other provisions of the Act which au-sary both to postpone the loss of full requests, one from Duke Power Com-thorize licenses for possession and use core discharge capability at the Dres-pany and the other from Common-of the special nuclear and byproduct den site from 1979 to 1981 and to allow wealth Edison Company, to authorize material. After being transferred from expansion of the Dresden fuel storage the reactor site where it was generated pool for the storage of Dresden spent to some other site, this spent fuel fuel and possibly Quad-Cities spent
' Duke Power Company, Docket Nos. 50 would not be subject to the mandatory fuel at a later date.
269. 50-270. 50-287, and 50-369: Common, acalth Edtson Company. Docket Nos. 50-indemnity requirements of the Act, Both proposals to modify operating 237,50-249. 50-254. and 50-265.
providing that the Commission require licenses and indemnity agrecrmnts are l
~
FEDEKAt REGISTER, VOL 44, NO. 5-MONDAY, JANUARY 8,1979 s
g
\\
i
...... ~ ~ - -.
i rionoMD TULES l
m2 i
l Eri'ar in that the., at f M ; n : m t d Cc
. nh en 9 * D e ? Sc Od be nt to the O!fke of ??udcar lhtor I
to I,e stored at c( rtMn re xtor adlImt buc be cn preduced st Itwe r(rttors ih n
'lon, 118. '. uc hqr H( cu N or y cr3GTc hOtC BCingA The MitC Maf f N ht s es that it v.ould Comm sn. h:hau; ton. D C. W.55.
/.T1W: Chief. AntU ru:t and Indcmni-not be dmirab!c to have a situation ty Group. The ccmm nt period ex.
where sp(nt fuel centrated by one re.
pires February 7. H79. Copies of all netor and stored in the spent fuel comn.ents actised wiii be a.ailatie c.
Pais of a second reactor at a eirrerent for examination in the Comtnission's ;1 C O D E O'*
site would be unindemnifh d while the Public Docurntnt Room,1717 H Street spent fuel produced by the seernd re.
NW., Washington, D.C.
te
(
actor and stored at the sarr. f site would be indcmnified. If indemnity (5 U.S.C. 552; Pub. L B3-703. C8 Stat. 919, as,'
coverage were not extended to the amended by Pub. L 65-256,71 Stat. 576. as C
amended (4 U.S C.::10).
Volume spent fuel generated by the first reac-tor but stored at the site of a second Dated at Washington, D. C., this r"2 reactor and if an accident occurred in*
29th day of December 1978.
t' Titic 41-Fablic volving the fuel storace pool it would For the Nuclear Regulatory Com-('
Ma11agefnent be virtually impossible to determine E'
mission.
(Chapter 8) shether indemnified or unindemnified S AM UU. J. Cin tz,
' spent fuel caused the damans.
Secref ary of the Commissior.
The Commission's deGon to exer.
Cise, or not to excre',e. its discretion-IIM Doc. *lD-684 Filed 1-5-79; 8.45 aml
[
ary authority (pur' Jant to section 170 of the Act) to req; ire financial protec-tion and govermnent indemnity to be [4910-13-M]
M maintained by Duke Power Company DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIO and Commenwealth Edison Company f*
in the situations discussed in this Federal Aviation Administration h
notice involves a policy question. The
{14 CFR Port 39]
c}
Commission desires public comment on its proposed action to extend in-(Docket No. 78M'-26-AD1 demnity protection in the two situa-tions discussed in this notice.
AIRWORtHfNESS DIRECTIVIS In addition the Commission desires Boeing Model 737 Series Airplanes public comment on whether it should b1 m
c
, exercise its authority on a generic AGENCY: Federal Aviation Adminis-g basis to extend indemnity coverage to tration (FAA), DOT.
of ement Ug,
epent fuel generated at one reacter ACTION: Notice of Proposed, Rule-50"O 5" O' tut stored at the site of a second oper-making (NPRM).
r ating reactor upon the nquest of reac-tor licensees. The Commission believes
SUMMARY
- It is proposed to adopt an that such a decision wv11d be consist-Airworthiness Directive (AD) which
]
ent with the specific actions requested would require that thrust lever actu.
by Duke and Commonwealth. Having ated switches, which operate the ta.
established such a policy, the Commis-keoff warning system, auto-speed-sion would delegate authority for brake, and auto wheelbrake inhit;t R FORM To:
dent of Documents, Gos '
making such decimons except when circuits for the Boeing Model 737 -
such decisions warrant Commission series airplanes, be set to provide posi-N"E " "
action because of special circum-tive operation down to -65'F tempera-ture. This AD is being proposed be-s stances.
cause at low temperatures, in combina-
.W n d Should the Commission decide to ex.
i
, i ercise its discretionary authority and tion with reduced thrust and/cr.
engine derate, it is possible to set the ~
grant either or both requests for in.
thrust levers for takeoff power at a po-I s
Name -.-
N MAltlNG 1 ABIL demnification, it Will, pursuant to 10 sition insufficient to actuate the II
- 5"*" '#'
CFR 140.9, publish a notice in the FEp.
thrust lever switches. The result is ERAT. rec 1sTEF of its Intent to modify the indemnity agreements for the that the auto speedbrake or auto-.
c;ry and !
wheelbrakes.could be actuated during.
facilities involved. (See e.g., 42 FR the takeoff roll or go-around, causing
' 44617 September 6,1977.) In response an tmsafe condition.
FoR PROMPT sHIPutNT. P f
to a notice published pursuant to 10 I
CFR 140.9, the Commission will only DATES: Comments must be received I
consider comments pertaining to the on or before February 1,1979.
Tasotsi or poccursts aswisT rammc orrics implementation of the Commission's ADDRESSES: Send comments on the i
^0 40 2 policy decision through the language pr p sal in duplicate to: Federal An FICI A1. Bt'51NE55 proposed to modify the indemnity ation Administration., Northv est agreement (s). Comments addressing Region, Office of the Regional Coun-the policy issue set forth in this notice sel, Attention; Airworthiness Rules will not be entertained. Additionally, Docket. Docket No. s 8-NW AD.
Name....
should the Commission propose to ex-9010 East Marginal Way South. Seat-ercise its statutory authority in this tle, Washington 98108.
sma sMa area on a generic basis, it will pub!!sh a Notice of Proposed Rule Making in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION.
~' Cier and 5 CONTACT:
the FEDERAr. REcIsTER.
I. '
FEDERAt REGliTER, VOL 44, NO. 5--MONDAY, JANtJARY l.<4
/
e UNITED STATES OF A" ERICA 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 nereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF'S REQUEST FOR A FINDING PURSUANT TO 10 CFR 2.720(h)(2)(ii) REGARDING INTERVENOR'S INTERR0GATORIES TO THE NRC STAFF AND REQUEST FOR A PR0lLCTIVE ORDER," "NRC STAFF RESPONSES TO CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY GROUP (CESG) INTERROGATORIES OF DECEMBER 19, 1978 and " AFFIDAVIT OF BRETT S. SPITALNY" dated January 9, 1979, in the above-captioned proceeding, have been served on the followirg 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 9th day of January,1979.
- 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., Director Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.
Bodega Marine Laboratory Natural Resources 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
- Dr. 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 Building Associate General Counsel 730 East Trade Street Legal Department Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 Duke Pnwer 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
.
- Atomic Safety an' Licensing Appeal Board Mr. Charles Gaddy U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 2501 Washington, D.C.
20555 Davidson College
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 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 Y
,,C.
- , we s
Edward G. Ketchen Counsel for NRC Staff
-