ML20210A290

Submits Environ Assessment Accepting 850612 Application & 850829 Suppl to Permit Dry Conversion of UF6 to UO2.Finding of No Significant Impact Appropriate

ML20210A290
Person / Time
Site:	Framatome ANP Richland
Issue date:	10/07/1985
From:	Crow W, Kodali K NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To:	NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
Shared Package
ML20210A283	List: ML20210A278 ML20210A284 ML20210A290 ML20210A295
References
NUDOCS 8511140429
Download: ML20210A290 (3)

Text

... - .

> .~

DCT 71985 DOCKET NO: 70-1257 LICENSEE: Exxon Nuclear Company, Inc. (ENC)

FACILITY: Richland, Washington

SUBJECT:

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - DRY CONVERSION OF UFs TO UO 2 Introduction By application dated June 12, 1985, and its supplement dated August 29, 1985, ENC requested authorization to permit the dry conversion of low enriched (< 5%

w/o U-235) UFs to UO 2 . The proposed dry cr>nversion operations may result in an increase in effluents from the ENC facility. Accordingly, pursuant to 10 CFR 4

Part 51.21, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has prepared this assessment of the resulting impact.

Background

Since 1974, ENC has been authorized under Special Nuclear Materials License No.

SNM-1227 to manufacture low enriched uranium fuel for light water reactors.

Under an Agreement State License, ENC developed-and demonstrated the dry conversion process using small scale equipment and depleted uranium as feed material. A pilot plant was then constructed for additional testing of the dry conversion process using depleted uranium as feedstock. Test runs of the pilot plant have proven the dry conversion process to be successful. Therefore, ENC' proposes to operate the pilot plant using low enriched uranium feedstock for the dry conversion' process.

The Proposed Action The proposed action is an amendment to License No. SNM-1227 to authorize the dry. conversion of low enriched UFs to U02 . ENC will use the existing pilot plant and effluent treatment facilities for the process. The maximum through-

- put for the proposed dry process line is .l.0 MTU/ day, however, total throughput capacity of the facility will remain-unchanged.

-Need for the Proposed Action ENC plans to manufacture a few demonstration bundles, using the UO 2 produced by this process, for placement in reactor cores. This-will allow ENC to deter -

mine the behavior of.the dry converted oxide under actual operating conditions and gain customer acceptance of the product.

Should the dry converted oxide prove acceptable, ENC plans to install the process at its Lingen, West Germany, fuel fabrication facility. 'The decision whether

'the dry conversion process will replace one of the two wet process lines at the ENC's Richland facility will~be made at a later date.

851114(>t29 ' 851107 PDR ADOCK 07001257 c PDR.

. .. .i l

2 OCT 7 1985 l

)

Alternatives to the Proposed Action.

Alternatives to the proposed action include complete denial of ENC's. application.  !

, This would;not present an important advantage because current plant emissions are well below standards for environmental protection. The slight increase in i effluents that may result from the proposed action as discussed below can be accommodated without violating these standards or significantly increasing

[ environmental impacts. Denial of ENC's application would be considered only if

, significant issues of.public health ~and safety could not be resolved to the l satisfaction of-the regulatory authorities involved.

1

.Envi ronmental Impacts of the Proposed Action '

i-

'~

A. Construction' Impacts 3-The facilities for the dry conversion process are already committed to ,

fuel fabrication activities. Thus, there will'be no significant impact

as a result of the dry conversion process.

B. Liquid Effluents Liquid process waste, as a result of the dry conversion process, will i consist of hydrofluoric acid which is neutralized by ammonium hydroxide, and potassium hydroxide scrubber solution. The uranium content of these wastes is less than 1.0 ppm. After processing through the ammonia recovery system to recover aqueous ammonium hydroxide, the waste is sampled and

i. discharged into the sewer. The discharge will meet the State.of Washington Waste Discharge Permit'3919 and 10 CFR Part 20.303 requirements. Therefore, the' environmental impact is minimal.

, - C. Gaseous Emissions I Equipment for the dry conversion process will be housed within the existing

UO2 plant. Gaseous' emissions will be

treated by existing scrubber and

. filtration systems. Projected releases of uranium and fluorides are approxi-mately .08 uCf/yr and 1.83 kg F/yr,- respectively. These' releases are not expected to significantly_ change _the release: rate of air effluents.from present operations. Therefore, gaseous ~ emissions-.are expected to have'an insignificant' environmental impact.

D. Solid Waste Solid waste will be general contaminated trash,'such as papers,-filters, clothing,_ etc.

These items will -be packaged into approved containers for

? disposal _offsite.

i E.  : Accident: Analysis.

. Operation lof the dry conversion process results in the formation of .

~

concentrated hydrofluoric _ acid which is very_ toxic and corrosive. .A. leak

.could result.in.the release of=HF to the' process area floor. However,

..n A , #

+-

a-. ...Lw.

. =. .

3 OCT 7 1985 since all operations involving the dry conversion process are housed in the UO 2 building, such a spill would be confined and. neutralized within the process area and would have an insignificant effect on the environment.

Conclusion Based upon the information presented above, the environmental impact associated

. with the dry conversion process at ENC's Richland facility is expected to be insignificant. Increases in liquid or airborne effluents as .a result of dry conversion operations, can be accommodated without significant impact to the environment. Therefore, in accordance with 10 CFR 51.31, a Finding of No Significant Impact is considered appropriate for this action.

M

• Kishore Kodah

~

Kishore K. Kodali Uranium Process Licensing Section Uranium Fuel Licensing Branch Division of Fuel Cycle and

1. • * *

• Y' Original signed bi Approved by: W. T. Crow W. T. Crow, Section Leader OFC: FCUP pp;;-  :-  :  :

FCUF(__,:FCUF____

y ._g.

NAME:KKodali as:VLRarpe :WTCrow -  :  :  :  :

' DATEp9/ 3/85- :5PCd>85

/ $9/d/85  :  :  :  :

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY l

l

~

u 1

'l

~- . ; .. .

$ s - .r-- %.,, 7 y