ML20085M519

Response to NUMARC Questions Re Technique & Use of at-reactor Storage.Document Undated

ML20085M519
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	11/11/1991
From:	PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC
To:
References
RTR-NUREG-1437 AR, S, WM, NUDOCS 9111110105
Download: ML20085M519 (13)

Text

,, _ . - - . _ .. __ _ _ ._ _

• ATTACitMENT 2 LIMERICK GENERATING STATION

1. Which of the following gairrent techniques for at-reactor storage are you using and how?

A. Reracking of the spent fuel pool - Not currently in use.

D. Control rod repositioning - Not currently in use.

C. Above ground dry storage - Not currently in use.

D. Longer fuel burnup Limerick 2, Cycle 2 will be the first 24-month operating cycle.

2. Do you' plan on continuing the use of these current techniques for at-reactor storage of spent fuel during the remaining time of your operating license, or do you expect to change or modify them in some way?

24-month cycles will be the norm throughout the operating lifetin.e of the Limerick Units (planning for the transition to extended cycles at Unit 1 has begun). Higher enrichment and smaller reload batches will be incorporated as feasible.

3. Which of the following techniques for at-reactor storage do you anticinate using until of f-site spent fuel storage becomes available, and how?

A. Rcracking of the spent fuel pool The pools will be reracked to their maximum capacity. This will permit storage through approximately 2011 at Unit 2 and 2012 at Unit 1, depending upon the final rack, design.

B. Control rod repositioning Control blades will continue to be stored in the fuct pools prior to disposal.

• C.- Above ground dry storage Depending upon developments in the Federal waste storage effort, expanded storage capacity may be needed in 2011. The method will be selected in 2008; current economics favor concrete storage casks.

D. Longer fuel burnup Planning for the transition to 24-month cycles han begun. Longer burnup and smaller reload batches will reduce the overall spent fuel burden.

9111110105 911111 PDR NUREO 1437 C PDR PAGE 1

• .ATTACllHENT 2 LIMERICK GENERATING ST.ATI.ON

~...

Will the techniques described above be adequate for continued at-reactor storage fo the operating lifetime of 4.

or the plant, including a 20-year period of-license renewal, are you developing other plans?

At Reracking alone accommodates discharges through 2011.

' that time, if shipments of spent fuel to the DOE have not begun, either dry storage or fuel rod consolidation must be implemented; the method will be selected in 2008, based upon the development of the technology and its licensing acceptance. Dry storage is readily expanded to accommodate further delays in the Federal > repository program.

5. Do you anticipate the need to acquire additional land for the st.orage of spent fuel for the operating lifetime of If the plant, including a 20-year period of license renewal?

so, how much land? When would this acquisition occur?

Where?

Approximately 165,000 ft2 of landThere will beisneeded forland sufficient life-of

-plant fuel storage at Limerick.

insido'the plant protected area boundary, as well as other nearby Company holdings beyond the immediate plant vicinity.

construction activity 6/7. onsite, Do you anticipate any additional or immediately adjacent to the power plant, associated with the continued at-reactor storage.of spent fuel for the operating-lifetime of the plant,briefly If yes, including a describe 20-year period of license renewal?

this construction activity.

Yes. The spent fuel pools must be reracked prior to 1999 (the pools are joined; the work will be performeda indry common.

storage Depending upon the Federal repository program, facility is likely to be needed. , .

+

4 s ,

PAGE 2

. _ - - _ _ . .- - - -. .= . .

• ! ATTACilMENT 3 This paper is the PEco Hadiation Control and Chemistry Section's response to the NUMARC industry ~ survey request for Low-Level radioactive waste management data dated May 25, 1990.

B. Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Ouestions:

1. We plan to have sufficient capacity for waste storage for storage for 5 years after the closure of the existing disposal facilities. The need for extra storage capacity before the compact facility is operational will be evaluated at a later date.

2. We have no contingency plans for continued LLRW disposal if we are temporarily denied access to the existing disposal sites.

We do plan to store our waste on-site after the closures of the existing sites and before our compact facility is operational.

One of our plants has an existing facility which could handle S years of LLW. The second plant has approximately 3 months of capacity and if necessary we could (hesitantly) pursue inter-plant LLW shipments.

3. Our waste streams include the following:

, , __ 1 and filter media which is dewatered through a drying process and simultaneously packaged for disposal. This provides a volume reduction of approximately 1.4 to 2.

Dry Active Waste (DAW) which includes contaminated trash, disposable protective clothing, discarded tools, piping, steam cycle components, and reactor core components. The trash and PCs are sent to waste processors to be sorted and either incinerated, compacted or frisked clean and released. The piping, tools and steam cycle components are also sent to waste processors to be decontaminated and, if possible, released.

The reactor core components are loaded in liners and disposed.

Miscellaneous Wastes which inc'ludes contaminated oil and LOMI reagents waste. The oil is either incinerated or filtered to remove the radioactive impurities and released. The LOMI waste was solidified and disposed.

1989 statistics reveal the following breakdown of waste stream volumes:

resin 63%

DAW 311.

miscellaneous 61 The following breakdown of the management of our DAW stream are estimates because actual data is currently not available from waste processors:

1 PAGE 1 l

ATTACitMENT 3 A. compaction 55%

B. segregation 0%

C. decontamination 51 D. sorting 35%

E. Incineration 51

4. Our plans for future LLRW management include reducing the volume of resin waste and hence its contribution to the total volume of waste, no solidification, and using the best available technology to provide maximum source reduction e (volume minimization) and volume reduction.

The anticipated breakdown of our waste streams is as follows:

Resin 60%

DAW 351 Miscellaneous St The following breakdown reflects the anticipated volumes by percentage for management of our DAW stream:

A. compaction 20%

B. segregation O' C. decontamination St D. sorting 35%

E. incineration 40s

5. We do not anticipate the need to acquire additional land for the storage of LLRW for the operating lifetime of the plant.

6. Two of our BWR units are scheduled to have the condenser tubes replaced in 1991. The other two BWRs units may have the same work done before the end of the century. The tubes may be sold rather than disposed.

l 7. We do anticipate additional construct 1rn activity at one of our sites to provide for additional storage capacity.

8. Storage area (s), whether a building or outdoor pad, are being considered for the resin, DAW, oil and any other miscellaneous wastes not stored in the fuel pool.

9. Detailed license renewal planning has not been undertaken which would identify any such waste streams.

! PAGE 2

_ . - - _ - - ~ _ _ _ . . _ . _ - . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . . . - . _ . . - _ _ . _ _ . - _ _ _ . . _ . _ . _ _ _ -

1 1:,

• ATTACllMENT 4 RESPONSES TO NUMARC AQUATIC RESPONSES QUESTIONS A. PEACH BOTTOM

1) The Final Environmental Statement of PBAPS -permitted once-through-cooling until November 1, 1975; thereafter a closed cycle cooling system was to be required.

However, with the - Section 316(a) Demonstration Report submittal and subsequent negotiations -with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and EPA, the requirement was changed to add additional cooling towers and establish a water temperature <and_ plant power level operating criteria for;the towers. . The ' operating criteria were established to -maintain cooling water discharge temperatures,below the upper sublethal temperature for the most sensitive fish species.

Operationally, the intake screens backwash was changed to use condenser affluent from the first cooling tower bay to prevent freeze up in winter.

2) PECO entered into a Consent Order / Agreement with the.

Pennsylvania Department - of Environmental - Resources on sewage plant discharges of oil and phosphorus. These were periodically out of compliance. Alum addition resulted in compliance with the NPDES requirements.

3) As ' indicated in response 1, the major change as been the real time management operation of the cooling towers as an open loop system instead of closed loop cooling.

4)- The effects on aquatic resources at PBAPS have remained relatively stable- during operation. As a result all Appendix B requirements have been deleted for both water quality- and aquatic biota. There are currently no

.offsite monitoring programs,being carried-out for water quality or aquatic biota.

5)' Impingement has;not changed over time except for plant startup due.to new water circulation patterns. 'Af ter fish became accustomed- to _the' new- patterns impingement returned to a constant level. : The major impingement.

occurrences are coincident with fall flooding conditions

(>200,000 cfs)'. In'these-cases young-of-year fish are impinged._ _In addition, large number - of young gizzard shad are impinged in the winter. This is a cold water-phenomenon as.the shad'are almost dead'before they are impinged.- Impingement - has never been considerod' a problem a PBAPS, _The numbers of fish being impinged are much lower that the yearly angler harvest from Conowingo Pond.

Entrainment consists of zooplankton and larval fish.

Larval channel catfish and white crappie were entrained )

PAGE 1 I

I

' ' ATTACllMENT 4 at first; now larval gizzard shad are the predominant species.

6) The primary change that has occurred during the operation of PBAPS has boon the continuing rostoration of forts for American sh&d in support of the Company's conowingo liydroelectric plant. As a result of the restoration efforts, gizzard shad are abundant in Conowingo Pond and almost 16,000 American Shad were caught and transferred upriver. In addition, the Pennsylvania Fish Commission has stocked tigor muskio and white perch /stripod bass hybrids in conowingo Pond, partly in an ef fort to control gizzard shhd.

Due to warmer water plume in conowingo Pond from PBAPS and resultant year around open water and available fishery, bald eagles have returned to the area, using it as a resting and feeding ground.

The silt rehandling basin for dredge spoils was not actively used for soveral years. It has become a votlands-type habitat. A family of river otters immigrated from the Chesapeake Bay in 1989, but did not survive in close proximity to an industrial location.

7) The main use of Cotowingo Pond is for a recreational fishery. There is no commercial fishery on the pond and there are only small areas available for swimming and boating (unrelated to fishing). The warm water plume from PBAPS has significantly increased the fishery for recreational fisherman especially in the cooler water months of early spring and lato fall.

8) Other sources of impacts on aquatic resources includo ,

Muddy Run Pumped Storago Station, Conowingo flydroelectric Station and lloltwood Generating Station (mixed-hydroelectric and coal plant) . In addition, there are significant inputs of runoff from upstream farming activities and industry along the Susquehanna River.

9) A copy of Section 316(a) Demonstration Report is enclosed. An open cycle cooling system was accepted by regulatory agencies.

B) Limerick

1) The major change to the Limerick intake system operation has been the temporary substitution of dissolved oxygen limits in place of temperature water limits for the consumptive use of Schuylkill River water. There have been no modifications or changes in the intake or discharge systems to mitigate impacts that were not PAGE 2

• - ATTACllMENT 4 anticipated in the design of the plant.

2) There have been no known fish kills as a result of Limerick operations. There have been periodic violations of the NPDES permit conditions due to periodic storm drain overflows and sewage plant problems. The sewage plant status is currently being reviewed to determine if it should bo increased in size, or if Limerick should tie in with the municipal sewer authority.

3) There have been no significant changes to the NPDES permit since MS became operational.

4) Continuing non-radiological environmental monitoring of the Schuylkill River identified essentially no change in the aquatic resources as a result of MS operations.

Water quality and macroinvertebrate communities were similar throughout the study period. Observed changes in the fish community were judged to be independent of plant operation and similar to natural variation observed prior to MS operation.

Asiatic clam (Corbicula) have been identified in the Schuylkill River downstream of MS and in the Delaware River upstream of the Point Pleasant intake. It is expected that the Asiatic clam will infest the Schuylkill River in the area of LGS in the near future due to the pumping of cooling water to LGS via the Point Pleasant Diversion.

5) Impingement and entrainment have had minimal effect on fish populations in the Schuylkill River. Populations of several species, including swallowtail shiner and spotfin shiner, that have freely drifting eggs or larvae were exposed to entrainment, yet successful recruitment of a new year class still occurred. Natural river flow and temperature conditions probably are far more important regulators of year class formation that entrainment.

Only very small numbers of fish have been impinged during LGS operations. For 1989, only 34 fish were found to be impinged; for 1988, 141 fish were impinged, 39% of which were alewives, a stocked forage fish in upstream impoundments. The majority of the impingement has occurred in the winter, coincident with higher river flows and lower water temperature than at other times of the fear.

6) Since LGS began operations in 1984, there has been little evidence of either habitat enhancement of degradation.

As indicated in Response 4, it is expected that the Point Pleasant Diversion will speed up Asiatic clam infestation of the Schuylkill River in the vicinity of LGS.

l' AG F 3

ATTACHMENT 4

7) MS operations have had essentially no effect on the i recreational uses of the Schuylkill River, including  !

fishing (there is no commercial fishery) . It is expected that the Point Pleasant Diversion will increase the recreation fishery of the East Branch Perkiomen Creek (EBPC) due to increased and stable water flows throughout the year. The diversion commenced operation in September, 1989 and is still in startup phase. The Pennsylvania Fish Commission stocks trout in the EBPC in the spring of each year. Due to the higher flows in the EBPC in 1990, the Fish Commission provided an additional late-season stocking in 1990.

t

8) The Schuylkill River is subjected to a variety of industrial uses including electrical power plants upstream and downstream (Titus and Cromby), inputs from mine water and raw or poorly treated sewage, siltation from coal mining activities, and nonpoint source runoff.

Much of the land upriver of MS is developed, or used for agriculture. Overall, Schuylkill River water quality ranges from poor to good with the river near LGS having the best water quality.

9) No-Section 316(a) and (b) Demonstration Report for LGS because regulatory agencies agreed that the plant would not be violating any thermal limits and the best available technology was being used.

PAGE 4 l

- - , - _ - - - - - . ~ , , - - . . _ . _ . - - . . . ...~_ - - . - .

, .y.. .

ATTACIMENT 5 Enclosed _is Philadelphia Electric Company's response for the peach Bottom - Atomic Power Station regarding the socioeconomic section of NUMARC's Survey on license renewal.

Q1. To understand the importance of the plant and the degree of its socioeconomic impacts on the local region, estimate the number of permanent workers on-site for the most recent year for which date are available.

A1.' Permanent workers on site = 1082 Q2. To understand the importance of the plant to the lccal region, and how that has changed over time, estimate the average number of permanent workers on site, in five-year increments starting with the issuance of the plant's Operating License. If possible, provide this information for each unit at a plant site.

A2. 1973-1974 500-520 workers 1979 600 workers 1984 1100 workers 1989 1082  : workers Note: Above values are totals for site.

Q3. To understand the potential impact of continued operation for an_ additional 20 years beyond the original licensing term, please provide for the following three cases:

A) a typical planned outage; B) an ISI outage; and c) the largest single outage (in terms of the number of workers involved) that has occurred to date an estimate of additional workers involved (for the entire outage and for each principal task), length of outage, months and year in'which work occurred, and cost.

Also, estimate occupational doses' received by permanent and '

temporary workers-during each principal task.

A3. See Attachment 1 ,

Q4. To understand the plant's fiscal importance to specific

' jurisdictions, for 1980, 1985 and the latest year for which data are available, estimate the entire-plant's taxable assessed value and the amount of taxes paid to the state and to each local taxing jurisdiction.

A4. See Attachment 2 PAGE 1

,.- - ' ATTACllMENT 5 i

TYPICAL ist LARGEST PLANNED OUTAG E OUTAGE *

' OU TAG E TO DATE ADDITIONAL WORKERS 870 PEOPLE 300 PEOPLE 1530 PEOPLE INVOLVED _

LENGTH OF 33 MONTHS 90 DAYS 16 DAYS OUTAGE U/2 REFUEL U/2 MID-CYCLE U/3 PIPE RPL.

DATES 3/13/8 7 3/3/90 3/87 5/25/87 3/19/9 0 12/89 ,

COST 5.1 M 1.6 M 30.7 M EST. DOSE FOR ALL 250 MAN REM 23.21 MAN REM 1300 MAN REM WORKERS i

RESPONSE TO QUESTION #3 Attachment 1 PAGE 2

.- . . ~ . . _ . - - . - . _ _ . . . . ~ . . . - . - - _ . - - - . . _ . _ -

. + +

! -' ATTACitM5;NT $

e iL

[_

STATE TAXES PAID ($1,000) r 1980 1,545 ,

1985 1,344 1989 1,781  ;

h LOCAL- TAXES PAID ($1) 1980 722 1985 895 i

1989 5,000 TAXED ASSESSED VALUE ,

1980 S31,520 1985 $31,520 1989 S331,242 RESPONSE TO QUESTION #4 ATTACHMENT 2 PAGE 3

. . . _ . . . . . . ._. . , - _ . _ . _ . . _ . _ . , ._.. _. _ . . _ _, . . , _ . _ . _ . _ . . . . . . , _ . . ._. _ ~. . . _ _ . . . _ _

____ _ ._.__ _ _ - - . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ __.___._m.___.__.__...__

.,--. o ATTACitMTNT 6 liUMARC SUllVEY SOCIOEC0!10H1C QUl:ST1014S AllD AliSWERS i FOR LIMERICK GE!1ERATI!1G STATIOli UllITS 1 Al4D 2 Q1. To understand the importance of the plant Snd the degree of its socioeconomic impacts on the local region, estimate the I number of permanent workers on sito for the most recent year for which data are available.

A. - M of 5/90, there woro 1238 permanent workers dedicated to the site (Total, Units -1 and 2) .

Q2. To_. understand the importance of the plant to the local i region, and how that has cMnged over time, estimate the '

average number of permanent workers on site, in five year increments starting with the issuance of the plant's operating Licenso. If possible, provido this information  !

for each unit at a plant sito.

-A. - As of 8/85 (Insuance of Unit 1 0.L. ) , there worn approximately 1500 permanent workers dedicated to the nits.

- As of 8/89 (Issuance of Unit 2 0.L.), there were approximately 1325 permanent workers dedicated to the niin.

Q3. To understand the cotontial impact of continued operation for an additional 20 years beyond the original licensj.g term, pleano provide for the following throo cases:

A) a typical planned outaget B) an ISI outago; and C) the largest single outage (in terms of the number of workers involved) that has occurred to dato, an estimato of addition.al workers involved (for the entiro outago and for each principal task), length of outage, Also, months and year in which work occurred, and cost. l' estimato occupational dosos received by permant and tempcrary workers during each principal task.

-A. Soo attachment (1 page)

(Part B not applicablo) ,

Q4. To understand the-plant's fiscal importance to specific jurisdictions, for 1980,: 1985, and the latest year for which data arn availablo, estimato the entire plant's- i taxable assessed value and the amount of taxes paid to the stato and to each local taxing jurisdiction.

A. YEAR TAXABLE ASS'D TAXES PAID ($)

VALUE ($) STATE LOCAL 103,560 8,450,000 11,624

^1980 1985 91,630 22,197,000 13,765 1989 .91660- 37,130,000 16,617 ,

110TE: TAXABLE. ASSI:SSED VALUE IS CURRE!4TLY UllDER REVII:W BY Tile TAXIliG LOCAL AUTil0RITY. i PAGE l-

p.

.

• 1. -

ATT/.CllMENT 6 4

ATTACllMEllT I'

(Q3.A) (Q3.C) I TYPICAL PLAN!1ED LARGEST SIllGLE OUTAGE OUTAGE l

l

$ OF ADD'L WORKERS 900 -1072 l OUTAGE , ,

LEliGTH. 75 DAYS 125 DAYS OUTAGE-TYPE U/1 REFEUL U/1 REFUEL,U/2 TIE-Ili START DATE 9/7/90 1/11/89 FIllISit DATE - 11/21/90 5/21/89 TOTAL COST $28,000,000- $38,000,000 TOTAL EST'D-DOSE FOR 175 MAN-REM 225 Mall-REM ALL PERSolillEL t

PAGE: 2-

_ _ . _ ~ , , . , _ . . , . . _ . . . . , _