ML20203F015

Informs That Staff Completed Review of Yankee License Termination Plan, ,supplemented 971218 & 980123. Inspection of Licensee Matls & Effluents Records, Recommended.Supporting Se,Encl

ML20203F015
Person / Time
Site:	Yankee Rowe
Issue date:	02/12/1998
From:	Jim Hickey NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To:	Weiss S NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
NUDOCS 9802270178
Download: ML20203F015 (6)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

MEMORANDUM TO: Seymour H. W;iss, Dir:rtor

)Q' i*

Non Power R:act:rs and DJcommissioning Project Directorate Division of Reactor Program Management FROM: John W. N. Hickey, Chief [0RIGINALSIGNEDBY:]

Low Level Waste and Decommissioning Projects Branch Division of Waste Management, NMSS

SUBJECT:

REVIEW OF THE YANKEE LICENSE TER'AINATION PLAN We have completed our review of the Yankee Atomic Electric Company's May 15,1997 (BYR 97-025), submittal entitled " Yankee License Termination Plan (LTP)," and supplemental i submittals dated December 18,1997 (BRY 97-083 and BYR 97c ' 1), and January 23,1998 (BYR 98 003). The basis for out review of the LTS is the requirements set forth in 10 CFR 50.82(a)(9)(l) and (ii),10 CFR 20.1401, and the Jidance in NUREG/CR-5849,

' Manual for Conducting Radiological Surveys 1 i Support of License Termination." Our review has determined that the LTP conforms with thy conditions set forth in 10 CFR 50.82(a)(9)(l) and (ii),10 CFR 20.1401, and the guidance in NUMEG/CR 5849. However, before approving the LTP, we are recommending that an inspection d the licensee's materials and effluents release records be conducted to deteM ine that the release records support the licensee's site characterization, and that the records confirm that no radioactive material or effluents were released from the site that exceeded allowable release limits. Our supporting Safety Evaluation is attached.

Docket No. 50 29 License No. DRP-3

Attachment:

As stated

Contact:

Larry Pittiglio, LLDP/DWM I (301)415-6702 [

,fgf'/

TICKET: LLDP 8012 Distributioni Centr-IFile i NMSS r/f LLDP r/f MBell PUBLIC RNelson LBell RJohnson J6eW ' A&

DQillenMd #'[

DOCUMENT NAME: S:\DWM\LLDP\CLP\YLTP 3 Llh

/ OFC NAME ikho/bg/cv

-E LLDP TC h on LEOP hickey N

DATE 2/b/98 2//L/98 2 //J98 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY ACNW: YES _ NO _

IG: YES _ NO _ Delete file after distribution: Yes _ No _

LSS: YES _ NO _

9eo227017e 980212 PDR ADOCK 05000029 W PDR h b3%p t.N UMFJMFIa %U;[

pa n o ug?

y  % UNITED STATES

.' B' NUCLEAR RECULATORY ~:OMMISSION D" '

' * 'E wAsniNotm, o c. rosswooi

% . . . . . } februa ry 12, 1998 MEMGiANDUM TO: Seymour H. Weiss, Director Non Power Reactors and Decommissioning Project Directorate Division of Reactor Program Management ,

l FROM: John W. N. Hickey, Chief r i

Low Level Waste and D(commissioning I

Projects Branch Division of Waste Management, NMSS

SUBJECT:

REVIEW OF THE YANKEE LICENSE TERMINATION PLAN We :tave completed oL,. review of the Yankee Atomic Electric Company's May 15,1997 (BYR 97-025) submittal entitled " Yankee License Termination Plan (LTP),' and supplemental submittals dated December 18,1997 (BRY 97-063 and BYR 97-064), and Januaiy 23,1998 (BYR 98-003). The basis for our review of the LTP is the requirements set forth in 10 CFR 50.82(a)(9)(l) and (ii),10 CFR 20.1401, and the guidance in NUREG/CR 5849,

' Manual for Conducting Radiological Surveys in Support of License Termination.' Our review has determined that the LTP conforms v.ith the conditions set forth in 10 CFR 50.82(a)(9)(l) and (ii),10 CFR 20.1401, and the guidance in NUREG/CR 5849. However, before approv!ng the LTP, we are recommending that an inspection of the licensee's release records be conducted to determine that the materials and effluents release records support the licensee's site characterization, and that the records confirm that no radioactive material or s#luents were released from the site that exceeded allowable release limits. Our supporting Safety Evaluation is attached.

Docket No. 50-29 License No. DRP-3

Attachment:

As stated

Contact:

Larry Pittiglio, LLDP/DWM (301)415-6702 j

l* ,

l THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS SAFETY EVALUATION SUPPORTING APPROVAL OF YANKEE'S LICENSE TERMINATION PLAN (LTP) l 1.0 DACKGEQ.UBQ The Yankee Nuclear Power Station (YNPS)is located on the east bank of the Deerfield River in Rowe, Massachusetts. The YNPS site is approximately 8,000,000 square meters (2000 acres) and about 40,000 square-meters (10 acres) have been developed for plant use.

l YNPS achieved entically in 1960, began commercial operation in 1961, and operated through 1991 with an average capacity factor of 74 percent. The nuclear steam system is a four loop pressurized water reactor designed by Westinghouse Electric Corporation. The original thermal power design limit of 485 MWt was upgraded in 1963 to 600 MWt. The turbine generator was rated to produce 185 MWe.

For economic reasons, commercial operations ceased in February 1992, after almost 31 years of operation. Defueling was completed on February 14,1992. Subsequently, a Possession Only License was issued on August 5,1992. As of May 1997, the majonty of the systems not required to support the storage of spent fuei have been dismantled and disposed of. The Spent Fuel Pool and other support systems associated with fuel storage have been electrically and mechanically isolated so that these systems will not be adversely impacted by decommissioning.

2.0 SITE CHARACTERIZATION The site characterization was submitted in the form of a detailed summary that provided sufficient information (ranges of contamination levels, specific locations, area maps, etc.) to assess the radiological and non radiological conditions at the site. The survey is sufficiently detailed to provide data for planning further remer*iation/ decommissioning activities, which include decontamination techniques, projected schedules, costs, waste volumes, and health and safety considerations.

Recommend adding the results of the Inspection Report that documents that the licensee's records support the site characterization and do not indicate release of radioactive materials from the site or effluent releases that exceeded the allowable limits.

The staff finds that the site characterization information provided or referenced in the LTP Section 2, " Site Characterization," reasonably represents the extent and nature of the contamination, is an acceptable basis for identifying areas requiring remediation, and meets the requirement in 10 CFR 50.82(a)(9)(ii)(A).

._ _ __ ._ _ _ =

Attachment

2 3.0 IDENTIFICATION OF REMAINING DISMANILEMENT ACTIVITIES The LTP discussed tasks associated with the remaining decontamination and dismantling methods; estimated the quantity of radioactive material to be released to unrestricted areas; identified the proposed control mechanisms; estimated person rem exposures; and radioactive waste characterization. The aicas and equipment that need further remediation are described in sufficient radiological detail to estimate the radiological conditions that will be encountered during ternediation of the remaining equipment, crimponents, and structures. The radiological status of each structure and component decontaminated or dismantled is identified, and the supporting dismantlement techniques are described.

The staff finds that the identification of the remaining dismantlement activities, and supporting information provided or referenced in the LTP, Section 3, " identification of Remaining l

Dismantlement Activities," adequately addresses the remaining decontamination activities, anu meets the requirement in 10 CFR 50.82(a)(9)(ii)(B) .

4.0 ELANS FOR SITE REMEDIATIO.N l

The LTP addressed the radiological controls to be implemented for the control of non-radiological and radiological contamination associated with fulther decommissioning and remediation.

The LTP also discussed or referenced how facility areas and site areas will be remediated to meet Nuclear Regulatory Commission release criteria. The LTP clearly indicated the residual release criteria being applied to each area. The LTP described the radiation and contamination levels expected upon release of the facihty for unrestricted use.

The LTP addressed the waste hat.dling procedures for minimizing the spread of contamination when transporting the waste. Radioactive waste was characterized by volume, form, and classification.

The staff finds tnat the plans for remediating the <*e provided or referenced in the LTP, Section 4, " Plans for Site Remediation," adequately address the radiological :ontrols needed to complete the remediction, and meets the requirament in 10 CFR 50.;2(a)(9)(ii)(C).

5.0 FINAL SURVEY Appendix A. " Final Status Survey Plan for Site Release" of the LTP described the methods and criteria thet will be used in performing the final survey. The final survey plan is based on the guidance provided in draft NUREG/CR 5849, " Manual for Conducting Radiological Surveys in Support of License Termination, Draft for Comment."

The residual radioactivity criteria for unrestricted release of the facility identified in the Appendix A are consistent with the guidelines of Table 1 of NRC Regulatory Guide 1.86 (i.e.,

5000 dpm/100 square centimeters average total beta gamma activity; 15,000 dpm/100 square centimeters maximum total beta-gamma activity; and 1000 dpm/100 square centimeters

l 3

removable beta-gamma activity), in addition, an average gamma dose rate criterion of 5 pR per hour above background at a distance of 1 meter from accessible surfaces in the facility buildings and outdoor areas was established, with any individual gamma exposure measurement not to exceed 10 pR per hour above background radiation, and residual concentrations of radionuclides remaining in the groundwater and surface water will not exceed 40 CFR Part 141.

Before release of the site, the licensee has committed to use NRC IE Circular 8107, " Control of Radioactive Contaminated Material" for all materials leaving the Radiation Control Area to ensure that radioactive materials are not inadvertently released from the facility.

As a condition of approval, the staff is requiring, in a license condition, a 30-day notification, before the licensee initiates a final survey, to allow the NRC to schedule in process inspections / surveys,if required.

The staff imda that the final survey plan in Appendix A, ' Final Status Survey Plan" of the LTP uses appropriate survey t.cthods and release criteria that is consistent with the Site Decommission Action Plan criteria and provides an acceptable approach for control of release of materials from the Radiation Control Area, and meets the requirements of 10 CFR 50.82(a)(9)(ii)(D) and 10 CFR 20.1401.

6.0 END_USE OF THE SITE The LTP discussed the controls to be put in place and the maintenance of the controls to protect the health and safety of the public while the facility is being remediated. The licensee has also committed to reduce the residual radioactivity to a level that wik permit release of the site for unrestricted use. The licensee will conduct final radiation surveys to demonstrate that the facility meets the unrestricted release criteria.

The staff finds that the end use of the site is acceptable and the description, as described in the LTP, meets the requirements of 10 CRF 50.82(a)(9)(ii)(E).

7,0 ilPDATE OF THE SITE-SPECIFIC COST ESTIMATE The cost estimate provided in Chapter 6 of the ;.TP focused on detailed activity by activity cost estimates, for each measurable activity associated with the decommissioning-including the cost of labor, materials, equipment, energy, and services. No credit for the salvage value of equipment was taken. The cost estimate included a cost estimate of $35 million to " green field" the site, and an estimate of $B6 million to support fuel storage. NRC does not consider theso to be part of the decommissioning costs.

The staff review was Msed on comparison of activities to be conducted at Yankee Rowe compared to the cost of similar activities conducted at other facilities. The staff used Means Labor Rates for the Construction Industry, and Means Building Construction Cost Data to support their evaluation. The staff reviewed labor rates, work difficuttly factors, and unit cost factors. Based on the staff's review of the cost estimate in the LTP and supporting references, the staff finds the cost estimate reasonable, and meets the requirements of 10 CRF 50.82(a)(9)(ii)(F).-

• 4*

8.0 - S.UPPLEMENT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPQRI The staff reviewed the licensee's proposed termination activities to determine if the activities resulted in significant environmental changes not bounded by the site specific decommissioning activities described in the PSDAR, and the previously issued Supplement to the Environmental Report.

The staff finds that no new impacts associated with those site specific termination activitir s were identified, and that Section 7,

• Environmental Change Associated with License Termination Activities' of the LTP meets the requirements of 10 CRF 50.82(a)(9)(ii)(G).

9.0 CONCLUSION

S AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the above discussions, the staff concludes that the Yankee LTP is acceptable and should be approved. However, the staff is recommending that an inspection of the licensee a release records be conducteri to determine that the release records support the licensee's site characterization, that the records confirm that no radioactive material or effluents were released '

from the site that exceeded allowable release limits, and that a license condition be added, requiring a 30 day notification, before the licensee initiates a final survey, to allow the NRC to schedule in process inspections / surveys if required. The staff concludes that the health and safety of workers and the public are adequately protected, the work will be completed in a reasonable time, and the funding commitment is sufficient to complete the decommissioning.

t

. = =

==

7%-