ML20135H338

Order Revoking CPPR-138

ML20135H338
Person / Time
Site:	Clinton
Issue date:	09/11/1985
From:	Thompson H Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	ILLINOIS POWER CO.
Shared Package
ML20135H336	List: ML20135H335 ML20135H338
References
NUDOCS 8509230041
Download: ML20135H338 (6)

Text

_. -

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COPNISSION In the Matter of ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY

)

Docket No. 50-462 (CLINTON POWER STATION UNIT N0. 2)

)

ORDER REVOKING CONSTRUCTION PERMIT I.

Illinois Power Company (IPC) is the holder of Construction Pennit No. CPPR-138 which authorizes the construction of the Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 2 in Dewitt County, Illinois. The permit, as issued, expired on October 1, 1981.

II.

On October 14, 1983, IPC announced by a news release that it was cancel-ling the Clinton Power Station, Unit 2.

By letter, dated April 9,1985, IPC formally advised the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission of the cancellation of the second unit of its Clinton plant and requested that Construction Permit No. CPPR-138 be rescinded.

On May 17, 1985, IPC f.iled a Motion to Terminate Proceeding (Motion) with the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) on grounds of mootness and requested the Board to authorize the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR),

4 f[2g[ $

g y

A J

i ~

to rescind the construction pemit, CPPR-138, issued for Clinton Power Station (CPS) Unit 2.

On May 29, 1985, the People of the State of Illinois (State) filed an answer to IPC's Motion (State Response), stating that it did not object to the tennination of the proceeding, per se_, but requested the Board to order an environmental, safety, and cost assessment of IPC's proposed method for remediation of the Unit 2 excavation area. On June 6, 1985, the NRC Staff (Staff) responded to IPC's Motion (Staff Response) stating that it had concluded, that IPC need not fill the Unit 2 excavation at this time.

However, the Staff set forth certain actions for environmental protection that it proposed to require of IPC as a condition to the licensing of CPS Unit 1.

On June 11, 1985, the ASLB issued a Memorandum and Order (Requesting Add-itional Infonnation on Unit 2 Excavation) indicating that it wanted additional information about the Unit 2 excavation before rendering a decision on IPC's Motion and that it believed the information needed could be obtained from certain photographs discussed in the Staff Response. The ASLB had concerns about possible safety matters associated with the unfilled excavation and noted that the Staff Response did not address safety matters. Therefore, the ASLB ordered the Staff to provide it with copies of the photographs arid indicated that copies should be made available also to any party that wished to examine them.

On June 13, 1985, the Licensing Board issued a Memorandum and Order (Concerning Request for Photographs), stating that it would make the photo-graphs available for inspection by the parties upon request, provided that such requests were filed with the ASLB by July 1, 1985. No request to inspect the photographs having been received, the ASLB rendered its decision on IPC's Motien on July 11, 1985.

i 1

i

. 4 III.

The Unit 2 site lies entirely within the CPS Unit 1' exclusion area on property owned by IPC and is not visible to persons located outside the exclusion area. The excavation is approximately 40 feet deep, 350 feet wide, and 1350 feet long at'the top, and approximately 280 feet wide and 900 feet long at the bottom.

One side of the excavation abuts the radwaste, control and diesel buildings for Unit 1.

Portions of the north and south sides of the excavation are covered by a revetment composed of a grout intrusion blanket. The remaining portions of j

the north and south sides, and the east side of the excavation, are sloped and are stabilized by herbaceous vegetation.

The ASLB was concerned that a person might be injured by accidentally falling into the excavation. However, this concern was satisfied by the photographs provided by the Staff, which showed that the slope of the excavation's sides j

is everywhere less than 45* and hence, not steep enough to constitute a signi-ficant hazard. Also, while there is a road running along the east rim of the excavation, IPC has committed in the FSAR to construct a berm on the three i

exposed sides of the excavation which should prevent a vehicular accident,

l and the ASLB concluded that the excavation, if lett unfilled, will present no significant hazard to the health and safety of the public or of plant personnel.

l l

1 I

.o

. Because of the cancellation of Unit 2, the ASLB agreed with the Staff that the Unit 2 excavation will be considered as part of the Unit 1 site. The ASLB Order noted that, as a licensing condition of Unit 1, IPC will be required to submit an Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) which, upon approval, will be appended as Appendix B to the Unit 1 operating license. The EPP will require IPC to provide the Staff with a detailed analysis of data and a proposed course of corrective action should harmful effects or evidence of trends towards irreversible damage to the environment be observed. Additionally, the EPP will require IPC to prepare an environmental evaluation before engaging in any adcitianal construction or operational activities which may have measurable environmental effects that are not confined to on-site areas previously disturbed during site preparation and plant construction.

If the evaluation 4

indicates that the activity involves an unreviewed environmental question, prior approval of the activity must be obtained from the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

If the activity involves a change in the EPP, the activity and change in the EPP will require an appropriate license amendment.

The Staff has determined that the Unit 2 site is presently stabilized and presents no significant environmental impact and the construction of the berm around the excavation will provide a satisfactory means of ensuring continued environmental acceptability and also will provide protection against a vehic01ar accident at the excavation. There does not appear to be any immediate need to fill the excavation, and the ultimate disposition of the excaeation can be deferred for future consideration.

Should the excavation later require further redress, such action can be required pursuant to the EPP for Unit 1.

1

[

(

l

. IV.

4 For the reasons set forth above, and pursuant to the directive of the ASLB to the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation in its July 11, 1985 Memorandum and Order, Construction Permit CPPR-138 held by Illinois Power Company is hereby revoked.

This Order is effective upon issuance.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION kO!

Hu

. Thom son, r.,

rector Di i ion of Licensing Off ce of Nuclear Re or Regulation Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this lith day of September 1985.

(

9

. IV.

For-the reasons set forth above, and pursuant to the directive of the ASLB to the Director' of Nuclear Reactor Regulation in its July 11, 1985

. Memorandum and Order, Construction Pennit CPPR-138 held by Illinois Power i-

. Company is hereby revoked.

This Order is effective upon issuance.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Hugh L. Thcmpson, Jr., Director Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i

Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this day of 1985.

' DISTRIBUTION Docket Files NRC PDR Local PDR PRC Systcm NSIC LB#2 Reading BSiegel TNovak JSaltzman, SAB OELD, Goddard Cittles HDenton EHylton-AToalston W> iller,LFMB JPartlow BGrimes Edordan EButcher, SSPB LHarman JRutberg TBarnhart(4)

Inez Bailey l

ServiceList(w/ State &LocalOfficials,EPARegion,&ShollyStateOfficial)

I

• Dreviously concurred:

/DU D/DL [

LBfg/DL/LA LB#

/PM LB#2/DL/BC OELD Ai s

C)M) ton E

mk

• WButler

• Goddard 'Pn vak HTho@ son o

/ 6/85 5

8/26/85 8/27/85 CP/q/85 9F/l/ /85 f

I i

i l

l

-