ML19330A571
| ML19330A571 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 06/13/1980 |
| From: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19330A563 | List: |
| References | |
| DD-80-21, NUDOCS 8007280593 | |
| Download: ML19330A571 (4) | |
Text
.
{}; s ?,.
v.
00-80-21 UffITED STATES OF AMERICA P
LUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIOI
.)
'0FFICE OF flUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATI0tl HAROLD R. DENT 0tl, DIRELTOR r
I 1
In the Matter of METROPOLITAft EDIS0tl COMPAtlY Docket flo. 50-320 4
l (Three title Island fluclear Station, l' nit 2) 1
DIRECTOR'S DECISI0il UilDER 10 CFR 2.206
^
In a petition dated August 9, 1979, the Anti-Nuclear Group Representing York I
(ANGRY) of York, Pennsylvania, requested that the Comission issue an environmental impact statement prior to issuing any authorization to vent radioactive gases from the containment building of the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit 2.
_ _ _ AflGRY was informed _by letters from the Director of fluclear Reactor,_ Regulation,
dated. September 6,1979, and from the Secretary of the Commission dated October 12, 1979, that AtlGRY's petition would be considered under 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission's regulations. A notice was published in the Federal Register, 44 Fed. Reg. 53593 (1979), that AtlGRY's petition was being treated pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206.
The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulatio1 issued a draft report in " arch 1980 entitled " Environmental Assessment for Decontamination of Three Mile Island Unit 2 Reactor-Building Atmosphere" (flVREG-0662). ANGRY was provided a copy of the Staff's environmental assessment. The assessment discussed five alternative methods for i
decontaminating the reactor _ building atmosphere and recommended that the building i
atmosphere be decontaminated by purging the environment through the building's hydrogen control system. Based on the Staff's estimate of doses to the public from releases during the decontamination by purging and on the Staff's estimate of Too7)M
.=p=-
-rm
g. y;,
-e, occupational dose, the Staff concluded that this action did not constitute a significant environmental-impact and that the environmental impacts for each of i'
the alternative methods would be less than those ansidered in the Tf1I-2 Final Environmental' Statement (1972) (reissued as flVREG-0552, April 1979). Accordingly, the Staff-did not propose-to prepare an environmental impact statement on the action to decontaminate the reactor building atmosphere.
Two' addenda were issued to the Staff's assessment. Addendum 1 referenced studies that have been undertaken on the issue of psychological stress. Addendum 2 considered a variation in the recommended purging method for decontamination of the reactor building atmosphere. The variation would involce more rapid purging 4
~
and would be permitted only under meterological c "'n hns favorable to atmospheric dispersion. Addendum 2 recommended that the reactor building atmosphere be de-contaminated by more rapid purging.using the reactor buiMing. purge system in conjunction with the building's hydrogen control system. The Staff again found i
that the more rapid purging would not result in a significant environmental impact i
and, accordingly, the Staff did not propose to prepare a separate environmental f
l impact statement on this action.
j Public ;omment was invited through May 16, 1980, on the assessment and the two addenda in notices published in the Federal Register.
See 45 Fed. Reg. 20265, 21760, and 30760 (1980). At the close of the comment period, approximately 800 responses had been received from various federal, state and local agencies and 1~
. officials, nongovernmental organizations and other individuals. The Staff has issued 1
a final report entitled " Final Environmental Assessment for Decontamination of the Three Mile Island Unit 2 Reactor Building Atmosphere" (flVREG-0662, Vol.1, May -1980), which discusses the Staff's assessment of alternative decontamination
- _ =. ~.___..
~
. methods and of various public comments submitted on the draft assessment. Upon review of these various comments and further Staff analyses of alternatives, the Staff again recommended that controlled purging of the reactor building atmosphere be authorized. The Staff reaffirmed its earlier assessment that this action would not have any significant adverse impact on public health and safety and that neither containment purging nor the other alternatives discussed in the assessment would result in any significant environmental impact. The Staff does not intend, therefore, to prepare an environmental impact statemen't on the purging _?eration.
The Staff's conclusion and reconmendation were discussed at Commission meetings on June 5 and 10, 1980. At the June 10th meeting, the Commission approved
the purging operation and determined that preparation of an environmental impact statement was not necessary. An appropriate authorization to purge the reactor building atmosphere and negative declaration have been issued by action separate from this decision under 10 CFR 2.206.
Copies are attached to this decision.
In view of the determination not to prepare an environmental impact statement on the purging operation, AtlGRY's petition is denied. Ai!GRY also requested that the Commission give 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> notice of its intent to authorize release of radio-active materials in the event that it authorized purging of the containment a tmosphere.
Since purging may not take place until 10 days after the authorization to purge is issued, this aspect of At:GRY's petition is granted.
A copy of this decision will be filed with the Secretary for the Commission's review in accordance with 10 CFR 2.206(c). As provided in 10 CFR 2.206(c), this i
1 decision will become the final action of the Commission twenty (20) days af ter issuance, unless the Commission elects to review this decision on its own motion within that time.
Axr G
[
Harold R. Denton, Director 7
Office of fluclear Reactor Regulation Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 13th day of June,1980.
Attachment:
As Stated
. XLL:_ ~: :_L:?_ L ;;zz_r
_ T r-~ ~
7_'
--~- r - _ - -
f 7590-01 f;UCLEAR REGULATORY C0:'MISSIO?l (Docket t!o. 50-320)
METROPOLITAl1 EDISO:t CO:: patly (Three Mile Island t!uclear Station, Uni _t 2)
ISSUAT;CE OF DIRECTOR'S DECISIO*1 U:: DER 10 CFR_2.206 On September 14, 1979, a notice was published in the Federal Register that a petition by the Anti-t uclear Group Representing York (At;GRY) was being considered under 10 CFR 2.206. A:GRY's petition requested that the Commission prepare an environmental impact statement concerning the venting of radioactive gases from the reactor building of the Three Mile Island fluclear Station, Unit 2.
Because this action will not cause any significant environnental inpact, it has been determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement. Accordingly, ANGRY's petition is denied.
A copy of the formal decision denying the petition is available for inspection in the Comnission's Public Document Room at 1717 H Street, fl.H., Hashington, D. C.
20555 and in the local public document rooms at the State Library of Pennsylvania (Government Publications Section), Education Building, Comnonwealth and Naln~ut Streets, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17126 and the York College of Pennsylvania, Country Club Road, York, Pennsylvania 17405.
A copy will also be fiied with the Secretary for the Cor:aission's review in accordance with 10 CFR 2.206(c).
As provided in 10 CFR 2.2V(c) this decision will become the final action of the Conmission twenty days after issuance unless 'the Commission elects to review the decision on its own motion within that time.
FOR THE fluCLEAR REGULATORY CC"MISSIO:1 Yi2Su
, A:-
Ougg@
~~ son G. Case, Act4ng Director S
ffice or I!uclear Reactor Regulation Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 13thday of June,1930.
__