ML20148D878

Responds to to M Masnik.Informs That Tnp Cooling Tower Could Be Released from Site 10CFR50 License Prior to Decommissioning of Rest of Plant If Several Conditions Were Met

ML20148D878
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	05/28/1997
From:	Thonus L NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Bohne F AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
References
NUDOCS 9706020175
Download: ML20148D878 (2)

Text

V

- ^

May 28, 1997

~

Mr. Fred Bohne' 824 35th St.

Astoria, Oregon 97103

Dear Mr. Bohne:

Your letter of May 12, 1997, to Dr. M. Masnik was referred to me for a response. You asked in your letter whether the Trojan Nuclear Plant's cooling tower could be released from the NRC license prior to the completion of decommissioning activities elsewhere on the site.

The Trojan Nuclear Plant cooling tower could be released from the site's 10 CFR Part 50 license prior to the completion of decommissioning of the rest of the plant if several conditions are met. Portland General Electric (PGE),

the licensee for the Trojan Plant, would have to perform a scoping radiation survey. The licensee would then propose a detailed release survey that would require prior NRC approval and would be based on the results of the scoping survey. The licensee would then conduct the survey and provide the results of the survey to the NRC. The NRC may perform an independent confirmatory survey. If the results of the surveys confirm that the residual radioactivity with the cooling tower was below the NRC site release criteria, then the licensee would be permitted to remove the cooling tower from the 10 CFR Part 50 license.

Depending on the proposed use of the cooling tower, the licensee might be required to perform a structural safety evaluation to assure that the modified

tower could not fail and damage the remaining safety related fuel storage structures. PGE would also have to provide a method to physically isolate the cooling tower from the unreleased por'. ion of the plant site.

NRC regulations does not prohibit such a course of action.

Sincerely, Original signed by: M. Mesnik for Lee H. Thonus, Project Manager Non-Power Reactors and Decommissioning Project Directorate Division of Reactor Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation DISTRIBUTION:

Docket File 50-344 SWeiss OGC (015-B-18)

PUBLIC MHasnik MWeber PDND r/f EHylton Region IV TMartin LThonus M

PDND:PMfp P OfLT PDND:SCg PDND:(A)D LThonus J Tton SSBajwa  % MMendonca 5 # 7/97 9 7/97 5 /'27/97 5 /,25/97 i 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY DOCUMENT NAME: A:\B0HNE -g O gQOObb 9706020175 970528 u mascopy PDR ADOCK 05000344 W PDR

3

. tW'%

s

[f 4 UNITED STATES j

2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 8 May 28, 1997

%, % * *

• p Mr. Fred Bohne 824 35th St.

Astoria, Oregon 97'103

Dear Mr. Bohne:

I Your letter of May 12, 1997, to Dr. M. Masnik was referred to me for a response. You asked in your letter whether the Trojan Nuclear Plant's cooling tower could be released from the NRC license prior to the completion of 4

decommissioning activities elsewhere on the site.

The Trojan Nuclear Plant cooling tower could be released from the site's 10 CFR Part 50 license prior to the completion of decommissioning of the rest of the plant if several conditions are met. Portland General Electric (PGE),

the licensee for the Trojan Plant, would have to perform a scoping radiation survey. The licensee would then propose a detailed release survey that would require prior NRC approval and would be based on the results of the scoping survey. The licensee would then conduct the survey and provide the results of the survey to the NRC. The NRC may perform an independent confirmatory survey. If the results of the surveys confirm that the residual radioactivity with the cooling tower was below the NRC site release criteria, then the licensee would be permitted to remove the cooling tower from the 10 CFR Part 50 license.

Depending on the proposed use of the cooling tower, the licensee might be required to perform a structural safety evaluation to assure that the modified tower could not fail and damage the remaining safety related fuel storage structures. PGE would also have to provide a method to physically isolate the cooling tower from the unreleased portion of the plant site.

NRC regulations does not prohibit such a course of action.

Sincerely, 916 771 .,

Lee H. Thonus, Project Manager Non-Power Reactors and Decommissioning Project Directorate Division of Reactor Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation