ML20027C866
| ML20027C866 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 09/24/1982 |
| From: | Snyder B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Kanga B GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8210270328 | |
| Download: ML20027C866 (7) | |
Text
c DISTRIBUTION:
DecketTNoS50-320P NRC PDR Local PDR DCS TMI HQ R/F SEP Q p gg TMI Site R/F BJSnyder Docket No. 50-320 LBarrett 0 Lynch TPoindexter WTravers RWeller RBellamy (TMI Site)
AFasano (TMI Site) ltr. B V,. Kanga, Director JWeibe (TMI, Site)
Three ftile Island Unit 2 LChandler, CLD GPU fluclear Corporation IE (3)
P.O. Box 480 ACRS (16)
Route 441 South LBell fliddletown, PA '7057
Dear Mr. Manga:
We have conducted an environnental and safety review of your proposal to perfom an extended containnent building decontanination effort.
In our review, we have evaluated the potential environnental inpacts, the inpact of the decontanination act' Ities on the waste generation rate and the inpact on the health and safety of the public and the workers. Ile find both the scope and the expected ir,racts associated with your proposed decontanination effort to be within the scope of activities already assessed in the PEIS. lle also conclude that adequate protection is being provided for both the public and workers' health and safety. Based on our evaluation, we find your proposal to conduct an extended decontanination effort acceptable, subject to our approval of the procedures used to inplement the decontanination effort. The rationale for our approval and a discussion of our evaluation is attached.
Sincerely, Bernard J. Snyder, Progran Director Three !!ile Island Progran Office Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc:
J. Barton L. King J. Larson Service List (see attached)
Enclosure:
As stated
~
8210270328 820924 PDR ADOCK 05000320 P
PDR TM O'
-. v NRfI
..,I..M..I.P0 rNRR TM$PU:NRR TM TkI
- - - - ~ ~ -
~ ~
omce >
.f.B,9,[........,,R,@p,1,,1,',er,,,,,,,,,,,Q,L
_da_, ___,B,,5, _ 7~ ~ ~
,b,g,,,
e,[, _ _
sunuaue>
...M.3M?....... -. 9/.Q /02..... 04.... 202. -
30k/OL ~ - ~3/ 50L-~
- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~~--~
oare >
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY um mi-mm nne ranu aia peo) nacu oua
SERVICE DISTRIBUTION LIST 10cnald C. Haynes Regional Administrator. Region !
J. B. Liberman. Esquire J.S. Nuc1 car Regulatory Consission Dauphin County Office of Emergency Berlack. Israels. Liberman 531 Park Ave.
Preparedness 26 Broadway King of Prussia. PA 19406 Court House. Room 7 New York. NY 10004 Front & Market Streets John F. Wolf. Esq., Chairman.
Harrisburg PA 17101 Walter W. Cohen. Consumer Advocate Administrative Judge 3409 Sh:pherd Street U.S. Envirereental Protection Agency Department of Justice Strawberry Souare.14th Floor Chevy Chase MD 20015 Region III Office Harrisburg, PA 17127 ATTN: EIS Coordinator
'Dr. Oscar H. Paris Curtis Building (Sixth-Floor).
Edward 0. Swartz Administrative Judge 6th and Walnut Streets Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Philadelphia, PA 19106 Board of Supervisors Londonderry Township
. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission AFD #1 Geyers Church Road.. '
' Vashington. DC 20555 Thomas M. Gerusky. Director Middletown PA 17057 Bureau of Radiation Protection
. Mr. Frederick J. Shon Department of Envircreental Resources Robert L. Knupp. Esquire
. Administrative Judge P.O. Box 2063 Assistant solicitor Atomic Safety,and Licensing Board Panel Harrisburg PA 17120 Knupp and Andrews U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Connission
~ P.O. Box P Washington DC 20555 David Hess 407 N. Front Street Office of Envirormental Planning Karin W. Carter Department of Envirornental Resources Harrisburg, PA 17108 Assistant Attorney General P.O.' Box 2063 Robert Q. Pollard 505 Executive House Harrisburg. PA 17120 Chesapeak Energy Alliance P.O. Box 2357 609 Montpelier Street Harrisburg. PA 17120 Willis Bixby. Site fianager Baltimore. MD 21218 U.S. Department of Energy Dr. Judith H. Johnsrud P.O. Box 88 Middletown. PA 17057-0311 John Levin. Esquire
, Envirornental Coalition Pennsylvania Public utilities on Nuclear Power Herbert Feinroth, Acting Deputy Commission 433 Orlando Avenue DirectotInf Coordination and P.O. Box 3265 State College. PA 16801 Ho.v v4bu v3, Pn t w to Special Projects. NE.550 Honorable Mark Cohen George F. Trowbridge. Esq.
U.S. Dept. of Energy 512 E-E Main Capital Building Shaw. Pittman. Potts and Washington. DC 20545 Harrisburg PA' 17120 t
(1800MStreet.NW Trowbridge William Lochstet Washington, DC 20036 104 Davey Laboratory Pennsylvania State University Atomic Safety and Licensing University Park. PA 16602 B:ard Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Connaission Randy Myers. Editorial The Patriot ~
Washington, DC 20555 812 Market Street Atomic Safety and Licensing Harrisburg, PA 17105 Appeal Panel U.$r Nuclear Regulatory Cornission Robert B. Borsus Washington DC 20555 Babcock & W11com Nuclear Power Generation Division Suite 220 Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Connission 7910 Woodmont Ave.
Bethesda, MD 20814 s
ATTN: Chief Docketing & Service Branch
.'eshington, DC 20555 Judith A. Dorsey 1315 Walnut Street Suite 1632 i
Mr. Larry Hochendoner Philadelphia. PA 19107 Dauphin County Commissioner P.O. B;x 1295 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1295 Linda W. Little 5000 Herwitage Drive g
N
- John E. Minnich. Chairperson Raleigh. NC 27612 Nuphin County Board of Conveissioners Marvin I. Lewis Dauphin County Courthouse 6504 Bradford Terrace Front and tiarket Streets Harrisburg PA 17101 Philadelphia, PA 19149 Jane Lee 183 Valley Road Etters. PA 17319
I s e RATIONALE FOR APPROVAL THE CONTAINMENT BUILDING EXTENDED DECONTAMINATION ACTIVITIES On November 21, 1979, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced its decision to prepare a programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS) on the decontamination and disposition of radioactive wastes resulting from the March 28, 1979, accident at Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2.
The final PEIS was issued on March 1981.
In the Commission's Policy Statement on Cleanup of Three Mile Island Plant issued on April 29, 1981, the Commission states that "under the Policy Statement, the NRC staff may act on each major cleanup activity if the activity and associated environmental impacts fall within the scope of those already assessed in the PEIS." In keeping with this policy, the NRC staff has performed an evaluation of the expected environmental impacts of the licensee's proposal to perform an extended decontaminatior, effort of the containment building and compared those impacts with the environmental impacts of those reactor building decontamination activities evaluated in the PEIS.
t On September 23, 1982, the licensee submitted a proposal delineating the scope and purpose of a major containment building decontamination effort l
at the TMI Unit 2.
The licensee indicates the primary purpose of the
?
i extended decontamination activities is aimed at reducing the radiation levels attributed to surface contamination and to reduce the concentration ofairborneradioactihity. The principal areas to be decontaminated l
l
during this effort will include the reactor building dome, major equipment, floor, and vertical and horizontal surfaces on the 305' and 347' elevaticns of the reactor building and the surfaces and rails of the polar crane.
In addition, the decontamination effort is to include the enclosed stairwell, ventilation duct internals, and the elevator shaft down to the 305'0" level. Due to the high radiation levels in the enclosed stairwell and the elevator shaft, special radiological controls will be necessary. As a result of the decontamination experiment conducted in March of 1982, it was shown that water flushes in various combinations of pressure and temperature decreased airborne radioactivity and removed particulate deposits. During the extended containment building decontamination effort, the techniques which appeared most effective during the decontamination experiment will be used to decontaminate the building further.
In addition to water flushes, mechanical scrubbing, and localized chemical cleaning may be used. Strippable coatings will be used to control the spread of contamination and to decrease airborne activity. As a result of the extended containment building decontamination activities, it is expected that surface contamination and airborne radioactivity will be reduced in the reactor building.
Water previously processed through the SDS and the EPICOR-II System will be used for flushing during the decontamination cffort. After flushing, this water will be collected in the reactor building sump via the built-in draining system, and will be reprocessed using the SDS/EPICOR-II systems.
The staff has conducted an environmental and safety review of the proposed containment building decontamination effort. Based on the review, the staff makes the following findings and conclusions:
1.
The decontamination effort is expected to reduce contamination levels in the reactor building. The proposed extended decontamination effort is within the scope of activities discussed in t he PEIS (Chapter 5) pertaining to the gross decontamination of the reactor building.
o
- 2.
Average airborne radioactivity concentrations in the reactor building are expected to be reduced as a result of the extended decontamination efforts. This is based on the measurements of airborne radioactivity made during the previous decontamination experiment in the first quarter of March 1982 which involved activities similar to those proposed in the extended decontamination effort. Breathing zone air measurements made during the decontamination experiment indicated that airborne radioactivity was reduced. The effluent monitors did not detect any increase in partic-ulate effluents during the initial gross decontamination operation. The staff has evaluated the offsite environmental impacts resulting from the ventilation of the reactor building atmosphere during the reactor building extended decontamination. Based upon actual past TMI-2 reactor building experience we expect offsite releases and radiation doses to the public resulting from the containment building decontamination to be within the scope of the impacts assessed in the PEIS. Additionally, the rate of radioactivity releases in airborne effluents is expected to be well within the technical specification limits of TMI-2 as discussed in Appendix R of the PEIS.
i 3.
The cumulative occupational dose expected to be incurred during the containment building extended decontamination is 180-550 man-rem. This is based on measured radiation levels in the reactor building, estimated cumulative occupancy time by personnel performing the decontamination (man-hours), as well as personnel dose data obtained from previous entries into the reactor building. This estimated occupational dose is a small fraction of the occupational dose discussed in the PEIS for activities
. related to reactor building decontamination. The corresponding potential health effects are, therefore, also well within the scope of those provided in the PEIS.
4.
The staff has reviewed the proposed plans and engineering features aimed at reducing occupational doses and releases to the environment expected to be in place during reactor building decontamination and found them to be suitable for providing adequate assurance that the experiment will be conducted consistent with the principle of maintaining radiation doses as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA). The staff will continue to closely monitoryouroYerallALARAprogram.
5.
The activities associated with the reactor building extended decontamination effort will not affect the safe condition of the reactor coolant system or the fuel. Radiation monitors, including the airborne effluent monitor, will be operational to assure that the reactor building ventilation can be secured and decontamination terminated prior to exceeding technical specification limits for offsite releases of airborne radioactivity.
6.
Low level solid wastes, such as contaminated, disposable, protective clothing and compactable trash, of approximately 800 cubic feet will be generated. Water used during the experiment will be collected in the reactor building sump and reprocessed by the Submerged Demineralizer System and EPICOR-II System for reuse or storage onsite. The volume of wastes from the SDS and EPICOR-II Systems generated as a result of the extended decontamination will be less than 200 cubic feet, including spent liners. As such, these solid wastes are a small fraction of the wastes estimated in the PEIS to be generated as a result of reactor buildingdecontaminationactihities.
4.a m
5-Based on the abohe ehaluation and findings, the staff concludes that the containment building extended decontamination, as proposed, is safe and isexpectedtoresultinenhironmentalimpactswithinthescopeofthose actihitiesdiscussedinthePEIS. Therefore, the extension of the decon-
~
tamination effort is acceptable and can be conducted with adequate assurance for the protection of the public health and safety subject to -the staff's approhalofthelicensee'simplementationprocedures.
O t
4 f
n-.
m
- - _ _ - - - - -