ML20246B151
| ML20246B151 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 04/28/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20246B071 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8905080420 | |
| Download: ML20246B151 (6) | |
Text
'
' ( p =nec %jog UNITED STATES
- [%
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g %)g ry WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
, % ..a ... /
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATING TO THE RENEWAL OF POSSESSION-0NLY LICENSE N0. DPR-9 DETROIT EDISON COMPANY ENRICO FERMI ATOMIC POWER PLANT, UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-16 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Action Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit No.1 (Fermi 1) is a 200-MW thermal, sodium cooled, fast breeder reactor that operated from August 1963 to September 1972. Fermi 1 is located in Monroe County, Michigan on c 1120 acre site that includes Fermi 2, an operating BWR. Detroit Edison is the licensee for both plants.
All fuel, the Uranium-238 blanket material, and the sodium have been removed from Fermi 1 except for some residual sodium (about 550 gallons) that remains in solid form at low points in vessels and piping. The Fermi 1 license, No.
DPR-9, was amended to possession-only status on September 5,1973, and Fermi 1 was placed in a safe storage, "SAFSTOR" status. By letter dated May 17, 1985 as supplemented by letters dated July 23, 1986, September 15, 1986, September 25, 1987, September 15, 1988 and December 22, 1988 DetroitEdison(thelicensee) proposed to renew License No. DPR-9 for 40 addit %nal years to be consistent with the projected final shutdown of the adjacent Fermi 2. The operating' license for Fermi 2 expires on March 20, 2025.
The Need for the Proposed Action The granting of the proposed amendment would allow the licensee to retain Fermi 1 in a SAFSTOR status for an additional 40 years. This would assure that the final decontamination activities at Fermi would not interfere with the operation of Fermi 2. The proposed delay in final decontamination of Fermi 1 would also reduce the gama radiation exposure rate to workers by a factor of 100 and reduce the volume of radioactive waste by a significant amount.
Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action We have evaluated the proposed 40 year extension of the Fermi 1 license and the licensees supplemental Environmental Report with respect to the requirements of 10 CFR 51.45b.
8905080420 890428 ~
PDR ADOCK 05000016
% PDC
i Unavoidable Impacts During the SAFSTOR period Fermi 1 will continue to occupy a small (less than 2 acre) restricted area within the Fermi 2 controlled area and will therefore not be available for unrestricted access (Figure No.1). Some of the Fermi 1 build-ings are used for Fermi 2 activities such as the office building outside the Fermi 1 restricted area. Also the machine shop in the Fuel and Repair Building that is inside the restricted area is used for dosimeter calibration because of the low background radiation.
i If the structures and components inside the Fermi 1 restricted area were decontaminated to levels acceptable for release to unrestricted access, the Fermi 1 license could be terminated but the property would still remain within !
the Fermi 2 controlled area. It would therefore still not be available for public access.
Alternatives Comparison The three alternatives for decommissioning are SAFSTOR, ENT0MB and DECON.
Each alternative as it relates to Fermi 1 is discussed below:
- 1. SAFSTOR SAFSTOR is the alternative in which the facility is placed and maintained in a condition that allows it to be safely stored and subsequently decontaminated to levels that permit release of the facility for unrestricted use. Fermi 1 is in the SAFSTOR status now and no changes other than routine maintenance are anticipated for the 40 year period of time requested by the licensee.
During the 40 year period of SAFSTOR the amount of Cobalt-60 present at Fermi 1 (primarily in reactor internals) will decrease from 275 curies to 1.4 curies.
This decrease in Cobalt-60 will significantly reduce exposure to workers that do the decontamination work as the potential exposures at Fermi 1 would primarily ;
come from the Cobalt-60. ;
There would be a significant reduction in the volume of radioactive waste produced if decontamination is delayed the additional 40 years. The staff estimates in NUREG 0586 (Final Generic EIS on Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities) that the amount of low-level radioactive waste produced during decontamination of a light water reactor would be reduced by a factor of 10 with a delay of 50 years after. shutdown. We expect a similar impact for Fermi I since the additional 40 years to 2025 would total 53 years of SAFSTOR since Fermi 1 was shut down in 1972. Data from the licensee (letter dated July 23,1986) demonstrates that many areas of the facility that are now contaminated im excess of levels currently acceptable for release for unrestricted access will likely be accep-table for release without decontamination in the 40 years. Therefore, we conclude that the delay in decontamination at Fermi I should significantly reduce the volume of radioactive waste produced.
I
1
- 2. ENTOMB ENTOMB is the alternative in which radioactive contaminants are encased in a 1 structurally long-lived material such as concrete. The entombed structure is l maintained and surveillance continued until the radioactivity decays to a level j that permits unrestricted release. Long-lived radionuclides present at Fermi 1 l l such as Nickel-63, Nickel-59 and Niobium-94 in the reactor vessel and vessel l internals would not decay to levels acceptable for release to unrestricted '
access in any reasonable (100 year) period of time. Therefore, ENTOMB 1s not ;
a viable alternative at Fermi 1. j
- 3. DECON 1
DECON is the alternative in which the equipment, structures and portions of l the facility containing radioactive contaminants are removed or decontaminated i to a level that permits the property to be released for unrestricted use shortly after final shutdown of the reactor. .
l This alternative could be selected now but would result in exposurt. rates for j workers that are considerably greater than those that will exist at the end of l the proposed 40 year extension of the license. Also, since there is another l facility (Fermi 2) on the same site, an immediate DECON of Fermi 1 could ;
adversely impact operations at Fermi 2. ;
Local Short-Term Uses Verses Long:: Term Productivity The site is now being used for power production with the continued operation of anadjacentnuclearpowerplant(Fermi 2). The licensee has stated that there are no plans for this site other than electrical power production for the next 40 years. Therefore, there is no confi.ict between short term uses verses long term productivity of the site.
Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources The proposed 40 year SAFSTOR period followed by dismantling would not involve the commitment of any significant amount of resources. Conversely, there would be less volume of radioactive waste to dispose of at the end of the SAFSTOR period than with immediate DECON because of radioactive decay. With less volume of radioactive waste, the required burial space at a low-level waste burial site would be reduced.
Access Control to Radiation Areas All buildings and structures at Fermi 1 that retain residual radioactivity above levels acceptable for release to unrestricted access (Regulatory Guide 1.86, Table I) are within a protected area. Access to this protected area is controlled by use of security guards, security fences, locked doors, and radiological procedures. In addition, access to the residual high level radiation in the reactor vessel is prevented by the shielded and sealed primary system.
The Fermi I protected area is within a larger Fermi 2 controlled area. Access to th: larger controlled area is maintained through the use of security guards and a security fence.
l 4- l l
Environmental Impacts - Public More than 95 percent of the residual radioactivity (477 curies) is in the form of activated metal in the reactor vessel and its internal components. The reac-tor vessel is surrounded by a steel containment structure. Since these radio-active components are metal and are contained within a sealed, dry, primary system, there is very little likelihood of this radioactivity being released to the environment during the SAFSTOR period.
The residual sodium (about 550 gallons) remains in solid form at various low l Joints within the primary system and other pipes and tanks. Carbon dioxide i las been used in the primary system and other systems to passivate the residual i sodium. This residual sodium contains only 1.0 millicurie of Sodium-22 and 5 millicurie of Cesium-137. A release of significant radioactivity from the ,
residual sodium is very unlikely because of the small amount of radioactivity !
that remains and the fact that nearly all of the residual sodium is sealed {
within the Fermi 1 systems. {
At the present time 7550 gallons of slightly contaminated water (6 millicurie i each of Cesium-137 and Cobalt-60) is stored in the waste water tanks in the FARB. In its letter dated December 22, 1988 the licensee committed to the removal and processing of 95 percent of this water by May 31, 1989. Following water removal operations two tanks will retain a small amount of water, 400 gallons in the Mark 15 Tank and 200 gallons in the Mark 9 Tank. The licensee intends to retain this amount of water to assure that level indicators will function and can be checked for operability.
The licensee has shown in its analysis that an accidental release of all 7550 gallons of waste water would result in water concentrations at the Monroe city water intake that are about 10 percent of the concentration limits of 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B Table 11 for normal operational releases. When the licensee completes its removal of 95 percent of the waste water, the potential offsite exposures from an accidental release would be reduced by a factor of 20. We have therefore concluded that the continued storage of about 600 gallons of slightly radioactive water at Fermi 1 will not result in a significant environmental impact.
Potential Exposure to Workers l Requirements fur access to protected areas are specified in the TS. Workers doing inspections, maintenance, or monitoring enter areas that have radiation dose rates of no more than 15 millirem / hour since the highly activated reactor components are sealed within the shieldeo reactor vessel. Therefore, there will be little potential for significant worker exposure during the extended i SAFSTOR period. ]
4 The 40 year extension of the SAFSTOR status will reduce dose rates from activated components by a factor of more than 100. There# ore, the total person-rem dose to workers doing final dismantling of the facility will be f reduced significantly.
t L ,
p* l Potential dose to workers that are involved in inspections, monitoring, and
. maintenance at Fermi 1 is estimated to be no more than 2 person-rem per year.
c .
Very small quantities of radwaste,. less than 25 cubic feet, are estimated to be produced each year of. protective clothing, used mops, filter papers, and ,
radiation swipes. The person-rem exposure and the amount of radwaste produced each year are insignificant with respect to the amount that would be produced at an operating plant and do not represent a significant environmental impact.
Alternative to the Proposed Action The alternative to issuance of the license extension would be to deny the application and require immediate dismantlement of Fermi 1. Immediate dis-mantlemnt would result in a greater radiation exposure to workers, greater radioactive waste volume, and a higher potential for a release of radioactivity to the public during handling and transportation of the radioactive material because of the higher levels of radiation present. It might also adversely impact on Fermi 2 operations.
Alternative Use of Rescurces This action involves nci use of resources not previously considered.
Agencies and Persons Consulted The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's request and did not consult other agencies or persons.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The staff has reviewed the proposed license amendment relative.to the require-ments set forth in 10 CFR Part 51. Based on this assessment, the staff concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the. human environment.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I
This environmental assessment was prepared by Peter B. Erickson, r'roject Manager, Standardization and Non-Power Reactor Project Directorate, Division of. Reactor Projects III, IV, Y and Special Projects.
Dated: April 28, 1989
,' . Figure 1 Freility Pirn N < .
n .
d GATE }
o FUEL AND REPAR -
- . V sum -
HP BUDG SLAs -- - DOOR
~ "
GATE X 3 -
i i \
~-
800441SLDO f DOOR - /
j( f COWLEX ,
H f
, S h3 "
~ + =
l I
N" PROTECTED kREA
~Q ; : l i
I I O
n _ _
L . .
e:t .
m These external doors and gates to be permanently closed.
i I