ML19326A788

Notice Re Intent to Prepare GEIS on Handling & Storage of Spent LWR Fuel

ML19326A788
Person / Time
Site:	Crystal River, West Valley Demonstration Project, 07001729, Barnwell
Issue date:	09/10/1975
From:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:
Shared Package
ML19280A178	List: ML19280A177 ML19326A787 ML19326A788
References
NUDOCS 8003040737
Download: ML19326A788 (2)

Text

~

O enct.osune no. 2 corices sensei fpleint. i.!!!ed. General. Nuclear Services'

.. AONS) proposed plant in 'Barnwelt H

'* South Carolina.1s-under construction

and is the subject of pending proceedings befort the Commission - regarding the

,Econtinuation, modiacauon or suspension Jof the construction permit from an en -

vironmental protection standpoint, and

' the possible issuance of an operating -

cense (docket no. 5G-332), as wou as a related matter (docket no. W1729). *..,

• On May 8.1975, the Nuclear Ressla-tory Commission published a notice 1i.

'.the FEDERAI.' RzstsTrn setting forth its

' provisional views that, subject'to con,

• sideration of comrnents '*(1). s' cost-beneSt analysis of alternaute safeguards

-?,

• SPEAT FUEL STORAGE.

programs should be prepared and set l

draft and final environmental

.' Intent To Prepa'ri' Generic Environmental.-forth in impact statements before a Canminaion impact Statement on ' Handling and decision is reachef. on wide-acale use of

. Storage of Spent Light Water Power Re-mixed oxide (recycle plutoclum) fuels

. in light water nuclear power reactors,-

& actoe Fuel,,.

.. From the enrir days of the nuclear (2) there should be no addational Ucenses -

power industry in this country, electric granted for,use of mixed oxide fliel in cutiuties planninst to construct and oper light water. nuclear power reactors ex *

' ate. light water nuclear power reacters cept for experimental pu. poses (3) with Tcontemplated that the used or spent fuel ' respect to light water nuclear power

• discharged from the reactors would be reactor fuel cycle activities which depend '

chemicany reprocessed to' recover the for their justiScation on wide-scale use remaining quantities of fissue and fer, of mixed oxide fuel in light water nu.

. tDe materials (uranium and plutonium), ' clear power reactors, there should be no.

'and that the materials so recovered additions!!! censes granted which would swould be recycled back into fresh reactor. foreclose future safeguards options. or Jfuel. H was contemplated by the nuclear

• resuls in unnecessary "grandfathering%

-industry that spent fuel would be dis. and (4) the granting of Ucense.s would charged periodica37 from operati.sg re... not be pre 9 uded for fuel cycle activities 1

factors, stored in onsite fuel storage pools.-for experimental and/or technical feast,

r.for a period of time to permit decay of bCity purposes..

s

• • 5.f -d'.*7. - !., g radioactive materials contained within 9 In light of the status of the'three '

Ithe fuel and to; coo!l and penodicauy" planned commercial reprocessing plants.

Tahlpped offsite for reprocessing. Typical- 'in the Ucited States, as outlined above,'.

.ly, space was provided in onsite stcrase the earliest that spent fuel reprocessing *

' pools for about one and one-third nu 'could begin on a commeretal basis,if au..

clear reactor cores. Assuming a four-year thorized, would be late 1J75. This as-:

• Teactor fuel' relcad cycle, such onsite sumes that, the pending. Ucensing

• storage lpools were planned to hold as proceedings are completed and Ucenses average of one year's discharge with suf-issued by this date. Howeveri the spent Scient remaining. capacity to hold a com-fuel pools at a number ~of reactors may plete core should unloading cf all of the soon be Sued..and stiU other reactors fuel from the reactor be necessary or wt:1 have their pools Sued before the end desiracle because of operational dimcul 'of 1973. Accordinglyi even if 11mited re<

ties. Under normal operating conditions, processing should begtn in late 1976. there

'an average of Sve years' discharge could would stul be a. shortage'In ~ spent fuel

'bo accommodated before the pool; sere, storage capacityy

,, Gry J.. -L. -

1 The existing pools aP the 'GE7and'.

'S11ad.

~.

7. Persons planning to conduct commer* NFS reprocessing plante have some re Y

,,clal' reprocess!ng of spent reactor fuels ' aining margint.1 Ucensed. storage ca?

m

,provided'sufRelent stcrate capacity for pacity which may be able to accommo '

the spent fuels at their facilities to allow date the fuel discharges from some

,some operational Sexibility. Typically, reactors; any increases planned at these -

'several' spent fuel core reloads. Three.. plants may not be suScient for indus space has been provided or planned for.

' commercial' reprocessing. plants have 'in the future. Consequently, there 15 the possibuity of a future shcrtage in-11.

been planned for operation in the United ' censed spent fuel capacity regardless cf States. 'Ibe on!y such plant that has the outcome of the. proceedings on the actuany operated. Nuclear Fuel Services, May 8th notice.

4

-m..

w' was shut down in 1972 for extensive,. The Commission has $t ' ro'mulgated (NF5) plant at West Valley, New York.;

p any ngdauen whleh speciSes a given

.slterations and expansion. There is " size for on site reactcr spentr fuel pocis-pending proceeding before the Nuclert however. proposals by reactor licensees Regulaterricommission (Comm4ston)- to signiScantly change the mumer of on NF5s application for a permit to spent fuel storage or spent fuel pool size construct these siterations and expan-would be subject to licensing review by alon. (docket no. 50-201). The second

' plant. General E ectric Company's Mid. the Commission. In the event that a A

D qD west Puel Recovery Plant at Mor:is, II. particular on site spent fuel pool should r

f tnots. has never operated and is in s' becon2e S: led. and no alternative form bc cJ U-d decommMieted conditio". The -third of spent fuel storage could be found, o.

P80!tAL GIG 1575R V0t. ee. NO.140--RUE $ DAY, $sPTEMsic 16, le75 A 0 0 3 0.40 73

• $)2 NOTICES ment as a suitable vehicle'for such An.Ch% had too[

ed1Wi$

the reacto'r would be eventuaHy forced mind: on the one hand, the geheric im :

to shut down and ** store" the last spent ;'eatmination.Ectice is hereby given thata generic environmental imp

.Ireacscr fuelin the reactcr pressure ves- " ment 'on the handling and storage of tincation. for, a fait accompil: cm.the?

sel Whde no serlous adverse conse-

'quences to the public heilth and safety, spent Ught water pos er reacter fuels will other hand, the public interest cons

~

' the cornmon. defense and security, or *be prepared by the Commission...The - eraMons associated with such a deferral "the environ =ent wculd likely reJult, the statement w!!! focus on the time period abould be carefuur weighed..The Ccmn i

' reactor shutdown would, of course, re-betwaen now and the mid 1980's and,will mi.;. ion has concluded that there should?

be no such general deferra!, and.tpat*

1 Wave the plant from service and this in, address:+(1) The magnitude of the-possible these related licensing actions may con-r

~ turn eculd adversely afect the electrte shortage of spent fuel storage capacity:. tinue during. the period required ifod

-uttuty's abiUty to meet electrical energy

.needs, or force the utility to ope.ste other.

~(2) The alternatives !ct dealing with : preparation of the. generic statement '

')lants that areless economical to cperate. the problem-including..but not neces-subject to certain conditions" or which have greater enMron=entalim-sar!!y n:nited to*

J.

' pact, and thereby adie.sely afect the.

(a) Permitting the expansion of spent considered the foucwing speciSc factcrs:"

a fuel stocage espacity at power reactors; (1) lt is 11hely that each individual 11- :

• puhuc interest..

There appur to be a number of pos.

(b) Permittmg the expansion of spent censing action of this' type would have;

• ihie alternatives for increasing. spent fuel storage capacity,at reprocessing a ut.ility that is tadopendent at tho utcity fuel storage capacity including, among plants:

.of.other licensing actions of thif type:'

s otten. things, increasing the storage ca-(c) Licensing of independent spent (2) It is not Hkely that the taking of

• pacity at present reactor sites, and con ' fuel s*,orage faciuties; any particularJicensing action of this

~

struction of Independent spent fuel (d) Storage' of spent fuel from one type dudng the time frame under. con-storage faciuties. The shortage of spent or more reactors at.the storage pools of alderation would constitute a commit.

fuel storage capacity Mil occur at ind!.cther yeactors; -

ment of resources' that would tend -to e'an.. (e) Cidei.cg that generation of spent signiScant!T foreclose The alter =stivss-Ividual reactors. and the Co could adequately address the issues in. fuel (reactor c;eratipn).be stc; ped or 'available with respect to any other in-

^

• volved on 'a case ty-case tasis. within }estricted:.

~.

"dividual Dee.nstng action of this type, t.d

~

• the context of individual Ucensing re-(3) A cost beneSt analysis of the al, (3; It is Ukely that any environmental:

? views. Indeed, the Commission has not, "ternatives Ested in t2), along with any impacts associated with any individus M

.to date, found it necessary,'in the dis-other reasonably -feasible alternauves, licecsing action of this type would be*

charge of its licensing and related reg.1 including:

such that they could adequately be ade latory functicts, to develop any overall (a) Impacts on. puhuc health and dressed within the contest of the indi-:

, program of action to deal with the prob.aafe:.y and. the commen defense and v! dug Meense application without ov 7

looking any cumulative environmental'

-i.

glem.The Commf ulon dees. however.have security;

= the ' discretion to deal with issues of this..(b) Entronmental. social, and eco-impacts;

~. M r.

T % ~ t _-

type cm-s generic basis through the ex-nomi It is 11k5!y! th'at any tkhnida$

ercise cf its rule =aking authority and/

-(c);ccsts andbenents;.

(4)

Cc=mit=ents of resources;

\\ issues that may arise in the course of n-(d) Impucations regarding options review of an individua4 %.nse appuca.

,cr the issuanca of a generic" enurcs-Imental impact' statement. Rulemaking available for the inter.nediate antiong-Uon can be rescIved utc a that cond 1

". ~ F'

$roceedings and/or the issuance of a ' term storage of nuclear waste Insteriais;. text; and

~

f genede environmentalimpact state =ent ' (e) Relationship between local short*

(5) A def al oIs~rYere restricticn Imtght.as appropriate, serve a.s the con -. term uses of U e environment and long-licensh:g actions of this type would red

. ext'for the promulgation of more. de-term productivity;;.

w

- - sult in substantial harm to the pub"

• ptn!tive ' criteria regarding sire and de-(4) The impacts of possible additional interest. As indicated such a restrictid

,, ign cf rpent fuel pools and/or the U*

transportat2on ci spent fuel that may or deferral could result in reactor shut;'

,s

c ensing of independent spent fuel storage downs as existing spent fuel pools become gfae

hties, and for censideration of pes-. be required should one or more of the 23d It now ap t altenauves be adopted -

. afble redston of the fuel cycle enMren-

-(51 More definitive standards and cd-' fuel pools of'as many as ten reactors'

.. mental..mpacts set forth in 10 CFR -ter!a to gove n the,Ucensing of cne or

• could be alled by mid-1973. The.ie terl '

. ) :1..e) in Ught of add. onal spent fuel i

reactors represent a tctal of about 6 mil <

,;storsge and attendant transportation. more of the alternat!ves for d;aling w th. Ilon tilowatts of electrical ene the problem; and erating capacity. The removal of these.

ist Poss!ble amendments to 10.CFR Teactors from serdee could reduce the I

fu I s'.c age on he cpti f5120(e)a.~....~ N..' x" a.

jcres$ed*P' s s.,.. s c.

e.

t31de'serMce margins to a peint whers, E.sva11able for inter =ediate and 1cng termstcrate of nuclear waste materials could ; If appropriate, rulemmg pr able suvice wouM be in Mpardy, cr-s within' this. cn items (5) and (6) Es*ed above, or on.J. orce the mes u uly mon heavily em,

nrottably be evnmMed a

. other issues related to. the handling sad econoW or mom.p Teontent D 2 ^ " e*a -r 7 M -:55 One grouffof' interest d orgah!za'tienCstcrage of spent recctor fue!.%rin be ini-efogen mpose eco-} l Defense Cocncil,-.ttated on or aboizt that' time of Issuance p

d

[Slerra Clubi and BusinessnierE for the - of the ' draft seneric,enpronmental im- [.n

-Cfatural

• Resources

,g 1

Public Interest) has requested the Com-Fact staternent.

r...

%nission to prepare a generic environmen ' iThe C'ommlu!on'hh'aldgiven' careful.'ce g cti in ded a

o te talimpactstatementon thehandungank corsideration v the. quest 2on whether possible' shortage cf spent fuel storage

,stcrage of spent reactor fuel and related licensing actions intended to ameUorate capacity'~ duringithis in+Jrim # od s

a matters (letter to L. V. Gessick !' rom a possible shortage of spent fuel storage cmp W an Q on-,

dAnthony Z. Roisman. dated May 15.1975, capacity, including such~ actions as the.-

• * #*# ***='U Peopy 'on $1e at the Commissicn's Pub!Ic ' issuance of operating license amend " "U "

8"" "E# # N

' Document Room.1717 E ' Street, NW ments to permit increases in the storsaw

• E Washington. D C.)

7. capudty of reactor spentfuel pools or e

n ral nc Wh!!e the Commissics beneves. as ear. reprocessing plant spent-fuel storage sions with mpect to the Sie fac2rs M' 11'er indicated, that the Inacter of spent pools, or the I! censing of independent set fcrth above, t:ay not St the factual

_ fuel storage capac:ty can adequately be spent fuel storage facilities, should be U

' l

- addressed on a case-by-case ba.sts withts. deferred pending cornpletion of the ge = circ =nstances of tions* the Sve facurs w1D be sp;Ued' the ccetext of individual Ucensing re. neric envircemental impact statement.

and WM Mn Se m--.

j t

we J

. views. It also believes that, from the Such 's deferral was requested in the. ten of 0.ew statemew o{ nations..,in appraisals standpoint of longer range policy, this letter on behalf of Natural Resources naching licensing determ.

maater enn prontably be examined in a Defense Councu,8:erra Club, and Bust-

. g. ;

broader context. It viewa the preparatJon nessmen for the Public Interest noted. Dated at Washington, D.C. this 10th -

In considering t.us matter, the day of Septe=ber 1975.

I

.of s generic environmustalimpact state-. above.

t FICIIAL Reol57Ee. VOL 4J. NO.18c TU15 cay, 5f PfEM8Et 16, liFFS

,-.,7