ML20215L246

Application for Amend to License SNM-1107,authorizing Free Release of Industrial Products,Specifically Hydrofluoric Acid Solutions,Per Proposed Condition 4.8.D Kaczynski Describing Similar Program Encl.Fee Paid

ML20215L246
Person / Time
Site:	Westinghouse
Issue date:	04/20/1987
From:	Nardi A WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP.
To:	Crow W NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
References
28121, LA-87-19, NUDOCS 8705120151
Download: ML20215L246 (11)

Text

{ ~/ p-.jjgj e

~

s, t

j

'REIURN 10 39.6.-SS W

axmo

.USNRG i

LA 87-19 APR 231987 ) ;12 9-Westinghouse Water Reacto ;

3' pj3lurgh Pennsytvania 15230-0355 rnss Electric Corporation Divisions N SECU M b

DOCKET CLERK d

.6 4/

\\@

G N'S April 20,1987 R.ECEIVm c hPy D f

f +9j 4,g,ffycIf8$cui4rc 19g7 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission iA co ATTN: Mr. W. T. Crow Uranium Fuel Licensing Branch t f 9.

//

[*'.Sle,,

X'C Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards G'4#'.#

l Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety

-%3 Washington, D. C.

20555 Gentlemen:

SLBJECT: Anendment Application, SW-1107, Docket 70-1151

REFERENCE:

U.S.N.R.C. " Environmental Review" Dated October 25, 1979 Westinghouse Electric Corporation Commercial Nuclear Fuel Division hereby submits an amendment request to License Sm-1107 to - authorize the free release industrial products (specifically - hydrofluoric, HF, acid solutions)ofin which the conditions specified in the enclosed new Section 4.8 are met.

The proposed use of HF at Western Zirconium is similar to that at Brush-Wellman in that the HF remains in aqueous form throughout the process, and the uranium is eventually precipitated in a lagoon with zero-discharge except for evaporation.

l Attached is a letter dated April 15, 1987 from Dr. Donald Kaczynski of Brush Wellman affirming that their process has not changed since the above referenced WC " Environmental Review" was performed.

Note that this-letter references a maximum enrichment of 5% in U-235.

We believe that the higher -

enrichment does not modify the environmental analysis as documented in the October 25, 1979 NRC Environmental Review.

j Westinghouse believes that this industrial use will have no significant adverse effects on members of the public or the environment since there are no pathways for the uranium to be introduced into a human ingestion chain.

The above referenced NRC " Environmental Review" is site specific to Brush-Wellman and indicates that "it is not expected that the proposed l

program has significant impact on the environment."

A check for $1501isincludetFto cover thq,gosts o bthis application.

app u ain...

l Chcc%Gc.f g glV.

hmun (23 G

~

p

'A

-[f4 37 2ciVcc.....

7*'

m Daic Check hce'd.

O/-

y M

1 Dy. M ' * ' "

p 8705120151 870420

_0

[

PDR ADOCK 07001151 O

C PDR g.

cu

(

J

Pag 3 2 April 21, 1987 Westinghouse intends to begin transfer of the liquid IF solutions from our Columbia Plant to the receivers as soon as possible. We would be pleased to discuss this matter further with you and your staff as you may deem necessary.

Please - contact Mr. Edward Reitler, Manager, Radiological and-Environmental Engineering (803) 776-2610, Extension 3247 if you have any questions.

Very truly yours, hr A. J. Nardi, Manager NES License Administration WP1434E:3p.2

J TABLE OF CONTENTS Section

- Pg 4.

Authorizations and Exemptions Table of Contents.

4.0-1 4.1 Release for Unrestricted Use 4.1-1 4.2 Authorization for Use of Materials at Offsite.

4.2-1 Locations.

4.3 Record Storage 4.3-1 4.4 Exemptions from the Requirements of 10CFR70.24 -

4.4-l' 4.5 Nonradioactive Industrial Waste-

4. 5-1 4.6 Possession of Licensed Material at Reactor 4.6-1 Sites 4.7 Leak Testing Sealed Plutonium Sources' 4.7-1 4.8 Disposal of Aqueous Products 4.8-1 4

Docket No. 70-1151 Initial Submittal Date:

4/30/83 Page No.

iii-License No. SN4-1107 Revision Submittal Date: 4/20/87-Revision'No.

9-

}

7, SCHEDULE OF REVISIONS ~

LPage.

Revision-Page'

-Revision' Number

' Number

- Number' Number I3.2-5' 2

.3.2-6 2

3.2-7 2

3.2-8.

3 3.2-9 3

3.2-10 2

3.2 3 3.2-12 3

3.3-1 2

3.3-2 2

3.3-3' 2

4.0-1 3

4.1-1 3

4.2-l' 3

7 4.31-2 4.4-1 3

4.5-1 2

4.6-1 2

t 4.6-2 2

4.7-1 8

4.8-1 9

i d

i)

Docket'No. 70-1151 Initial Submittal Date:

4/30/83 LPage'No.

vil-i License No. SNH-1107 Revision Submittal Date:',~nr20/87 Revision No.

9 e

f p>--e-,

e e

7

~

t v

+p y

,9--

N

.s

. REVISION RECORD Revision ~

Date of-

' Number-Revision' Pages Revised Revision Reason 1

'12/12/83 1.9-52'through 1.9-76

' Respond to NRC questions inclusive,.2.2-10, in NRC letter _ dated 2.2-11, 2.3-1,~4.8 April 6,1983.

2 3/26/84 All pages. resubmitted.

Respond to NRC questions.

as Revision 2.

See in NRC. letters dated submittal letter-.

January 26,"1984 and' attachment for de-February 23, 1984.

scription of changes.-

3 1/4/85 All pages resubmitted Respond to NRC

.as Revision 3.

See re-questions.-

vision lines in right hand columns of each page for. specific changes.

4 6/25/85 New pages 2.2-12 and Lic'ensing of uranyl ~

-2.2-13 and-revised nitrate storage tanks.

pages 2.3.1 and 2.3.2.

See revision lines in right hand columnstof~

each page for specific changes.

5 5/14/86 2.5-1 and 2.6-1.

Update of Emergency Plan Section.

~

. 6 8/8/86.

2.2-3 Added criteria ~

for positive pressure 3

gloveboxes.

7 9/22/86 2.5-1 Update of

. Emergency Plan Section.

8 4/1/87 4.7-1 Added criteria for leak testing sealed-plutonium sources.

9 4/20/87 4:8-1 Added criteria for disposal-of aqueous products.

Docket No. 70-1151 Initial Submittal Date:

~ 4/30/83 Page No.-

-vili License No. SN4-1107' Revision Submittal Date: 4/20/87 Rev'ision No.

9-

SECTION 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS tAuthorizations and Exemptions P_ age 4.1.

Release for Unrestricted Use 4.1-l' 4.2 Authorization for Use of Materials at Offsite 4.2-1 Locations.

4.3 Record Storage 4.3 4.4 Exemptions from the Requirements of 10 CFR 70.24 4.4-1 4.4.1 Isolated Areas 4.4-1 4.4.2 Low Concentration Storage' Areas 4.4-1:

4.4.3 Shipping Package Storage Areas.

4.4-1 4.5 Nonradioactive Industrial Wastes 4.5-1 4.6 Possession of Licensed Materials at Reactor Sites 4.6-1 4.7 Leak Testing Sealed Plutonium' Sources-4.7-1 4.8 Disposal of, Aqueous Products 4.8-1 1

J l

1 i

t I

Docket No. 70-1151' Initial Submittal Date:

4/30/83' Page No.

4.0-1 License No. StN-1107 Revision Submittal Date: -4/20/87 Revision No.

~9-

.1c.

?4.8-l Disposal of Aqueous Products' 4.8.1 Hydrofluoric-( W )-Acid Solutions Pursuant to 10CFR20.302, authorization to transfer ~ aqueous HF acid. solutions containing trace quantities of ~ uranium ' to nonlicensed (WC or ; Agreement State) - facilities J specified in 4.8.1.1 is granted provided. the conditions - in -4.8.1.2 are also met.

4.' 8.1.1 Receiver (s)

BRUSH-WELLMAN, INCORPORATED WESTERN ZIRCONIlN South River Road P. O. Box 3208 Elmore, Ohio 43416 Ogden, Utah 84409 4.8.1.2 Condition (s)

The W acid is transferred and used in such a manner that the

~

minute quantity of uranium does not enter into any human ingestion chain.

Prior to such

transfer, each' shipment will be representative 1y sampled and analyzed and the following maximum permissible concentrations shall not be exceeded:

Uranium:

less than or equal to-3 PPM (by weight)

Uranium-235:

less than or equal to 5% U-235 (by weight)

HF:

less than or; equal to 50%

(by weight) 4.8.1.3 Quantities The estimated volume of this aqueous hydrogen-fluoride solution is. less than 50,000 gallons per year.

With a maximum permissible uranium concentration of 3 - ppm and a maximum enrichment of 5% in U-235, the' maximum quantities of uranium and U-235 in the 50,000 gallons that. would be transferred would be approximately 334 grams uranium and-17 grams U-235 based upon the following:

Density 9.8 pounds per. gallon Concentration 50% HF, 3 ppm U Enrichment 5% U-235 These quantities are insignificant, especially since the uranium and U-235 are not removed from the solution during Docket No. 70-1151 Initial Submittal Date:

4/30/83 Page No.

4.8-1 License No. SW-1107 Revision Submittal Date: 4/20/87-Revision No.

9 j

its use' and since thy solution is :not to be used in manufacturing a product for human ingestion.

4.8.1.4 Brush-Wellman See attached letter dated April 15, 1987 from Dr. Donald Kaczynski to Mr.

Edward Reitler and

-previous.NRC

" Environmental Review" dated October 25, 1979.

4. 8.1. 5 Western Zirconium Dilute W is used to pickle zirconium products in aqueous -

baths where the HF is diluted by approximately 9 to 1 with nitric acid (i.e., nine parts nitric acid to one part HF).

Following the pickling step, the zirconium products are rinsed with deionized water.

It is expected that the uranium will remain in the aqueous phase to the next -step in. the process (neutralization) where slaked lime is added to 'the aqueous waste.

Other Western Zirconium aqueous wastes are added to this stream prior to neutralization, resulting in a total dilution of approximately 1,000 to 1.

Neutralized wastes are transferred to evaporation only lagoons for long term storage.

These lagoons are curren(ly licensed with the State of Utah.

There are no pathways for the uranium to be introduced into a human ingestion chain.

The zirconium products are used in the nuclear fuel cycle or in the chemical processing industry.

i i

e Docket No. 70-1151 Initial Submittal Date:

4/30/83 Page No.

4.8-2 License No. StN-1107 Revision Submittal'Date: 4/20/87~ Revision No.

9-

a..

m

~

n.n 2

~k BRUSHW[HLLMAN I"n*,"e'"f"o*"n 7

ENGiNEEREO MATEAIALS

. Phone 419/862-2745 '

y Apri1.15,-1987 Mr.-Ed Reitler e

Westinghouse Nuclear Fuel Division L

Bluff Road' Columbia, SC -29205 2

Dear Mr. Reitler:

4 The extraction plant owned and operated by Brush Wellman Inc. in

- Elmore, Ohio consumes large quantities of aqueous hydrogen fluoride each year.

In June of 1979, Brush Wellman's Dr. ' Ken Walsh, Asso -

ciate Director of Technology, assisted General Electric in obtain-

~

i ing a NRC -license to transfer about 100,000 gallons of dilute

, hydrogen fluoride for exclusive use by Brush in the production of-beryllium pebbles. The maximum permissible concentration of.

F

uranium in this aqueous hydrogen fluoride was set at 3 ppm with a maximum enrichment of 5% in U-235.

i l

The extraction process for beryllium used by Brush Wellman is 4.

identical to that used in 1979. We do not' foresee this process changing in the future. The reduction process converts metal fluo-rides produced from the aqueous hydrogen fluoride to pebbles or 4

' metal. Uranium is co-reduced along with the beryllium in this' process and ends up in the final metal product. The fluorine is converted to magnesium fluoride, an. insoluble solid waste which is

[

disposed in waste treatment lagoons. All lagoons.are. maintained at a pH of greater than 8 such that metals present in aqueous wastes are precipitated.

+

\\

~

As beryllium is :a toxic substance,'all extraction processes' are -

carefully ~ controlled such that airborne contaminants from the peb'-

. ble making process are eliminated; In addition, as long as the

. concentration'of-uranium in the aqueous hydrogen fluoride-is kept

. below 3 ppm,' 7 ppm based on HF, the uranium which ends' up in our,

beryllium metal. products will not pose 'any problems.-

f L.

TELEX 810 490-2300 -

TELEFAX 862-4177.

.. : [..,

._..s,

,- - _. _ --- ;:_ - _.- - ~.

,-,_a-

... a.

a _,

i

- kr Mr. Ed Reitler -

April 15, 1987

- Additional constraints are put upon;our acceptance of aqueous hydrogen fluoride by our acceptance specification. Don Faron is in charge of testing batches of acid here at the Elmore plant.

I-understand you have sent him a sample to test.

The use of-dilute (less than 70%) hydrogen fluoride in our beryllium-making operation causes us to incur higher costs.than if we were to use concentrated hydrogen fluoride. This, in turn, means we cannot spend as much to get it to our plantsite. Our past

-acceptance of dilute hydrogen fluoride was ~ encouraged by tight supply. This is no longer a factor in our acceptance of dilute hydrogen fluoride._ I question whether in the past we ever fully considered the added costs we incurred when we used dilute hydrogen fluoride in our process. How this material:is priced will deter-mine whether we use it or not. William Dairy is the purchasing specialist at our Elmore plant in charge of HF purchases.

If you have any further questions that you need answered'to assist you with your licensing, please -feel free to contact me.

I have assumed the duties of Dr. Walsh who retired last year. Providing terms can be agreed upon, and that your dilute hydrogen fluoride meets our quality specification, I see no reason why we cannot use.

it. Our process, coupled with our lagoon treatment system, is identical to that found acceptable to the NRC in 1979.

Sincerely,

,0,.

Dr. onald J. Kaczynski Supervisor, Chemical Metallurgy Beryllium / Mining Division

/eh y

e;e'-