ML20151B642
| ML20151B642 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07003055 |
| Issue date: | 05/26/1988 |
| From: | Rouse L NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20151B579 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8807210053 | |
| Download: ML20151B642 (6) | |
Text
._
- b' 7590-01 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL LICENSE NO. SNM-1981 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, ET. AL.
BURKE COUNTY, GEORGIA DOCKET NO. 70-3055 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering the issuance of Special Nuclear Material License No. SNM-1981 to the Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe Power Corporation, Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, and City of Dalton, Georgia (the applicants) for the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Unit 2, located in Burke County, Goorgia.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Action:
The proposed action would authorize the applicants to receive, possess, inspect, and store special nuclear material in the form of unirradiated fuel assemblies.
In addition, the license would authorize the applicants to receive, possess, inspect, and use fission chambers containing enriched U-235. -Because the fission chambers are sealed and contain only small amounts (gram quantities) of nuclear material, storage and use of these materials will pose no threat to the environment.
Therefore, hhh kDO C
2 the discussion below will be limited to assessing tha potential for environmental impacts resulting from the handling and the storage of new fuel at Vogtle, Unit 2.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
The proposed license will allow the apolicants to receive and store fresh fuel prior to issuance of the Part 50 operating license in order to inspect the fuel and to finalize fuel preparation needed to load the fuel into the reactor vessel.
Actual core loading, however, will not be authorized by the proposed license.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:
Once at Vogtle, Unit 2, the new fuel may be temporarily stored in its shipping containers prior to placement in the designated storage locations:
the new fual storage racks and the spent fuel storage racks located in the fuel handling building.
No more than 40 loaded shipping containers will be temporarily stored at one time in the receiving area of the auxiliary building.
This temporary storage of assemblies in their shipping containers will present no significant environmental impact or significant radiation exposure to plant workers.
Upon removal of the fuel assemblies from the shipping containers, they are inspected and surveyed for external contamination.
The fuel is then transferred to its designated location.
Criticality safety in the storage locations is maintained by limiting interaction between adjacent fuel assemblies.
The staff has evaluated the new fuel area and t'.e spent fuel pool and found both to be critically safe for all conditions of water moderation and/or reflection.
The design of these storage locations, combined with plant procedures, will ensure
_=
>~
3 acceptable-protection of the general public and plant personnel either under normal or abnormal conditions.
Since the fresh fuel assemblies are sealed sources, the principal exposure pathway to an individual is via external radiation.
For a' low-enriched uranium fuel bundle (<4 percent U-235 enrichment), the exposure rate at 1 foot _from the surface is normally less than imR/hr; therefore, it is estimated that the exposure level to workers handling the fuel would be less than 25 percent of the maximum permissible exposure specified in 10 CFR Part 20.
Because of the low radiation exposure levels associated with the requested materials and activities and GPC's radiation protection procedures, the staff concludes that fuel bandling and storage activities can be carried out without any significant occupational dose to workers or radiological impact to the environment.
Only a sma amount, if any, of radioactive waste (e.g., smear papers and/or contaminateo packing material) is expected to be generated during fuel handling and storage operations.
Any waste that is producea will be properly stored onsite until it can be shipped to a licensed disposal facility, l
i In the event that assemblies must be returned to the fuel fabricator, all packaging and transport of fuel will be in accordance with 10 CFR Part 71.
The package used for transport of the assemblies meets NRC approval requirements for normal conditions of transport and hypothetical accident conditions.
No l
9
,7 p_
my.-
,.r
4 significant external radiation hazards are associated with the unirradiated assemblies because the radiation level from the clad fuel pellets is low and because the shipping packages must meet the external radiation standards.in 10 CFR Part 71.
Therefore, any shipraent of unirradiated fuel'by the applicants or any other authorized party is expected to have an insignificant environmental impact.
In the unlikely event that an assembly (either within or outside its shipping container) is dropped during transfr.^, fuel cladding is not expected to rupture.
Even if the cladding were breached and the pellets were released, an insignificant environmental impact would result.
The fuel pellets are composed of a ceramic 00 that has been pelletized and sintered to a very high density.
2 In this form, release of UO aerosol is highly unlikely except under conditions 2
of deliberate grinding.
Additionally, U0 is soluble'only in acid solution 2
so dissolution and release to the environment are extremely unlikely.
Conclusiori:
The environmental impacts associated with the handling and storage of new fuel at Vogtle, Unit 2, are expected to be insignificant.
Essentially no effluents, liquid or airborne, will be released and acceptable controls will be implemented to prevent a radiological accident.
Therefore, the staff concludes that there will be no significant impacts associated with the proposed action.
e 5
Alternatives to the Proposed Action:
The principal alternative would be to deny the requested license.
Assuming the operating license will eventually be issued, denial of the storage only license would merely postpone new fuel receipt at Vogtle, Unit 2.
Although denial of the special nuclear material license for Vogtle, Unit 2, is an alternative available to the Commission, it would be considered only if significant issues of public health and safety.
could not be resolved.
Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of resources not previously considered in connection with the Commission's Final Environmental Statement (NUREG-1087) dated March 1985 related to this facility.
Agencies and Persons Consulted:
The Commission's staff reviewed the applicants' request of January 22, 1988, and did not consult other agencies or persons.
Finding of No Significant Impact:
The Con. mission has prepared an Environmental Assessment related to the issusnce of Special Nuclear Material License No.
On the basis of this assessment, the Commission has concluded that environmental impacts created by the proposed licensing action would not be significant and do not warrant the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement.
Accordingly, it has been determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact is appropriate.
- 0-g I,
6 S'
The Environmental Assessment and the January 22, 1988 application related to this proposed action are available for public inspection and copying at the Commit,siun's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, NW., Washington, DC..
Copies of the Environmental Assessment may be obtained by calling (301) 492-3358 or by writing to the Fuel Cycle Safety Branch, Division 6f Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commicsion, Washington, DC 20:i55.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this
$(
day of 'W/
1988.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f
db$u
- 0. Vn4 Leland C. Rouse, Chief Fuel Cycle Safety Branch Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety, NMSS
_ _